Committee of Supply – Head I (Ministry of Social and Family Development)

The Chairman: Head I, Ministry of Social and Family Development. Mr Seah Kian Peng.

Building a Strong Social Compact

Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head I of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

The Government has put in place many schemes and services to support Singaporeans in building strong families. The danger is that many may not know about these schemes – we tend to think that if people need help, the burden is on them to find out about the avenues available and whether they qualify. They could of course come to see the Member of Parliament to seek advice and help.

But people who need help often are stressed for time – even if they had the ability, they would not have very much time to go through all the different schemes, let alone see the Member of Parliament. How can the Government make these services more accessible and streamlined, so that families are better supported, and can strengthen the bonding with their families?

To this end, I have three related questions:

First, for Singaporeans who for various reasons have no home to go to, what help can we render to such individuals or families? How do we ensure homelessness is not an issue in Singapore?

Second, at COS last year, the Ministry announced initiatives to strengthen social service delivery and provide more holistic support to those in need. What is the progress of this effort? I must say I always find odd that our Social Service Office are closed on weekends. Would the operating hours of SSO be reviewed?

Third, social needs are growing in scale and complexity, and the social service sector provides many support programmes to help vulnerable individuals and families overcome their challenges. How will the Ministry continue to ensure there is funding available to run these critical programmes?

In answering these three questions, I want to say upfront that I know the Government has many schemes in place already. The deeper question I want to ask is – do people find the scheme easy to understand? Can they generally understand the rules?

Let me ask this specifically: one of the most important actions we can think when building a strong social compact in my mind, comes from all Singaporeans sharing a universal dream – a dream of fresh possibilities – that if we are down and out, we have a chance to climb up and do better. If we are doing well and strong, we lend a hand to those who need it.

And one of the most inspiring and practical ways in which we strive to do this, is the relatively new Fresh Start programme which allows families to buy a two-room Flexi Flat on a shorter lease and they can get their housing loans of up to $35,000 and HDB Concessionary Loans. But there are strings attached – as there should be.

Strings that means test – to ensure that the rich do not benefit from a scheme meant for the lower income. Strings on stable employment, to ensure financial sustainability as well as to incentivise people to look for jobs.

That is already complicated enough. But the scheme itself has 11 key features – including the fact that there is a minimum occupation period of 20 years. The 11th key feature says that 10% of the flats will be allocated to people who fall under a priority scheme. What are these priorities? There is a link to the seven schemes – the PPS, MGPS, PCPS, TCPS, ASSIST, TPS and SPS. Parenthood, multi-generation, married child, third child, divorce or widowed parents, tenants and seniors. And these seven then are multiplied across three different flat types.

I think I shall stop here. Because I think I have shown that the schemes are useful but also very complicated. Not easy to navigate for anyone.

I make the point about the complexity of HDB rules not to ask for them to be made fewer, but for their application to be simpler. I suggest the MSF and MND to set up a joint scheme and produce a magic mix – someone who is part social welfare officer, part housing agent, part financial consultant, and above all, an expert in navigating through the rules.

This someone, let us call him or her, Officer X, could be sited in the community relations department of MSF or HDB. Their home ministry could be the MSF or MND. They should take as their model the IOs of MCI (information officers of the Ministry of Communications and Information), where they develop domain expertise in housing matters, but also speak to the specific needs of the ministries and agency where they are sent. I shall say more about this in my cut on MND. If anything, Minister for Social and Family Development who is also the Second Minister for National Development is best placed to make this happen.

Another area which I hope Officer X can help in relates to rough sleepers and homelessness.

This is yet another example of complex needs – people who sleep in public places such as void decks or pavilions. Some of them are not known to any social service agencies, or had declined Government assistance. We cannot force people to do what they do not want. But prolonged sleeping in the public not only jeopardises their health and overall well-being, it could also affect their ability to reintegrate and return to stable housing.

What does the Ministry feel about this group of people, and what are we doing about the root causes of their resorting to sleeping in public places? What is the Ministry going to strengthen support for homeless people who declined assistance?

Question proposed.

Future of Public Financial Assistance

Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson): At a recent post-Budget dinner, a gentleman approached me to lament how he thought the middle class, like him, was unfairly treated. He said that he is the sole breadwinner in his family comprising him, his wife and two children. He lives in a condominium. His household per capita income is $2,500. Comparing to his friend who lives in a HDB flat but with a higher capita income, his friend receives Government payouts whilst he receives none. It is not uncommon to hear similar lamentations, even HDB residents sometimes asked us why certain neighbours received financial assistance or more Government benefits when the said neighbours are cash rich or already were supported by extended family members. These anecdotes called into the question the concept of fairness and social equity. How can we redistribute wealth more fairly and justly? How do we ensure that those who genuinely need help get help?

As Singapore evolves, as our population ages, as we become more educated and increasingly data-driven, how might our Public Financial Assistance system evolve too? With the increasing availability of data, how would the Government use data to deliver public assistance in a more precise and personal matter? Is a more precise and personalised public assistance an idea that the Ministry will consider?

Supporting Single Mothers

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): As the local Member of Parliament, I hold regular daily phone discussions in a WhatsApp group chat comprising myself, my grassroots ComCare lead, the Social Service Office General Manager, the Family Service Centre social workers and heads of the local Senior Activity Centres. Almost daily, we discussed families in need and nudged each other to join efforts to solve the problems of families presented to us.

Sir, the demand for social services in our increasingly ageing, stressful and at times complicated society is on the rise – challenges of the elderly lonely; the single-parent family; the widows; the orphans; families of parents who are incarcerated; abandoned parents; disabled parents; disabled children – there is just that much bandwidth that each well-meaning volunteer, Member of Parliament or social service staff can cover.

There is a strong need to strengthen our current social services delivery system in anticipation of these rapidly increasing needs. The current Social Services Network delivery system needs to be extended and resourced further.

6.15 pm

I would like to ask the Ministry to consider adopting features of the Municipal Services Office (MSO) model which might be relevant. The MSO was started to improve Government’s overall coordination and delivery of municipal services relating to estate management which involves currently more than 10 agencies. It is led by a Minister-level leader no less, and uses technology apps and data analytics to drive proactive problem solving. Annual resources are invested each year into the MSO to drive productivity and template solutions for recurring problems.

I feel strongly that there is potential of a similar, albeit modified, MSO model in the social services landscape. Create a mother of all Social Services Offices (SSOs) with mini SSOs in the network to lead and coordinate partners, such as the Family Service Centres (FSCs), Senior Activity Centres, HDB, MOE, PUB, Town Councils and the CDCs, using technology, data analytics and the like.

Will MSF study the MSO model and adopt the relevant principles and features for a similar SSO model led by the Minister himself? Will MOF allocate more funds to resource a stronger social services delivery system for the MSF?

Supporting Single Mothers

Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Sir, over the years, we have made headway in supporting our mothers and children from single-parent homes. Now, all mothers are given the 16-week maternity leave, as well as a Child Development Account. These enhancements show that the Government is prepared to make changes to support our young families.

But because our single mothers also have less resources compared to a two-parent family, they would need more help. Many would have to work full-time. They face higher cost pressures in the child’s early years because infant care and childcare costs are higher than Primary school fees. This is when the Baby Bonus cash gift is timely to provide better care for our children. Can MSF consider also extending the cash gift to our single mothers?

In addition, even though many of our single mothers work, they do not enjoy parenthood tax rebates. These tax rebates can go a long way in meeting current needs and saving for future purposes. By providing the Baby Bonus cash gift and parenthood tax rebates, we are closer to being child-centric and more complete in our support to young families, regardless family structures or circumstances.

Working Elderly Singaporeans

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Sir, I would like to touch on the issue of two groups of elderly Singaporeans which have been receiving much attention among many Singaporeans and many have also expressed concerns about them, particularly in the last 10 years. The first group of elderly who are doing strenuous jobs, such as conservancy work, collecting of eating utensils and cups at hawker centres, and trolley attendants. The second group, elderly who go around collecting empty aluminium cans, discarded cardboards or any other recyclable items which can be exchanged for cash.

Sir, anecdotally, it seems that the number of elderly for these two groups has risen in the last 10 years. The questions that many Singaporeans have in mind in relation to this issue are:

(a) Why are our elderly who are supposed to be enjoying retirement in their golden age still doing such strenuous jobs and collecting recyclable items?

(b) Are our elderly doing such jobs because they need to do so or is it just a matter of choice?

Different views and perspectives have been shared on these issues, in particular, on social media. Some are of the view that these elderly want to have additional pocket money. Some mentioned that these elderly are doing so basically to occupy their time as well as to keep themselves fit and healthy, while many others opined that these elderly are in need of cash for their day-to-day sustenance. The discussion on this issue has been surfacing from time to time in the past years, with some turned into an emotive one.

Sir, I would like to ask whether the Ministry has conducted any studies to find out, first, whether there has been an increase or decrease in the number of elderly engaging in such strenuous work and collecting activities; and, secondly, what are the reasons for them to do so? Is it due to needs or wants?

Sir, findings from such studies will allow Singaporeans to have a better and more realistic understanding of the matter. More importantly, Sir, recognising the root cause will enable policymakers to formulate more accurate and effective remedial actions in addressing this issue, assuming there is a need to do so.

The Chairman: Mr Darryl David, you can take your two cuts.

Helping Families with Multiple Challenges

Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Mr Chairman. First cut is on families facing multiple challenges. Challenges and issues experienced by families in need are never one-dimensional and often encompass a set of intertwining problems that cannot be solved in a piecemeal manner.

An example of this would be a family with school-going children whose sole breadwinner has had to quit his job to look after a bedridden dependent. Under such a situation, the policy approach is to support the family with short- to mid-term ComCare assistance and to try and place the breadwinner in employment. We need to question, however, if this is the right approach because the breadwinner will not be able to hold on to a stable permanent full-time role due to the need to look after his dependents. The children of the family are likely to perform less well than their peers in school due to the need to juggle school with care-giving duties when they are at home.

We should adopt a more holistic approach to resolve complex social challenges individuals and families face so that we can help them get back on to their feet and to live a life of dignity. Does the Ministry have a holistic intervention plan to help individuals and families that are facing a complex set of challenges? How can the Ministry help improve their life circumstances beyond just giving short to medium term financial assistance?

Skills Framework for Social Service

Mr Darryl David: Next cut. Social workers have come a long way since its early beginnings in Singapore. With a more complex operating environment, changes in the demographics in our population, evolving family structure, income disparity and rapidly changing social environments, the training given to social workers needs to be strengthened.

The National Social Work Competency Framework (NSWCF) lays out the competencies at various levels of specialist knowledge. It serves to define the knowledge, skills and attitudes required by social work professionals to deliver quality social work practice. The competencies will also help to increase awareness among service users, policymakers and those who fund our social services and the effort of social workers. The Framework will also help chart professional development and career progression.

MSF recently launched the Skills Framework for the Social Service, to help social service professionals plan their careers. Can MSF further leverage on this framework to drive and enhance skills development in the sector?

Vulnerable Children and Youths

Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Chairman, over the years, I have encountered families who find life a struggle. Major causes of instability include divorce, lack of finances, and mental health issues that affect one’s parenting capacity and the ability to work. Children and youth in such families are subject to crisis, sometimes on a daily basis. They do not eat well and grow up with a maturity well beyond their years. It is thus very encouraging that the Government commenced the KidSTART programme three years ago, targeted at children from low-income families. The three-year pilot was expected to benefit about 1,000 children living in the pilot regions of Kreta Ayer, Bukit Merah, Taman Jurong, Boon Lay and Geylang Serai. We are told that, under KidSTART, the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) coordinates holistic services for families, and monitors and supports child development from birth onwards.

Last month, the Minister for Finance mentioned in his Budget Speech that more than 900 families had received support from KidSTART since 2016. Could the Ministry elaborate on whether the Government is encouraged by the outcomes and whether KidSTART will be rolled out progressively nationwide?

On the topic of youths, I welcome the Ministry’s announcement last month that it is proposing amending the Children & Young Persons Act (CYPA) to increase the cut-off age for protection from 16 to 18 years. This will put us in line with the Convention on the Rights of the Child which Singapore has signed. I would like to ask for elaboration on how this will be implemented.

First, when is the amendment to the CYPA expected to be tabled before Parliament?

Secondly, what are the changes needed by MSF, MHA, the Courts and the media to operationalise the changes regarding the crime cases involving such youths?

Lastly, will there be any changes to the scope and resources for young offenders’ rehabilitation?

At-risk Youth

Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Chairman, the digital age has revolutionised the way we live, work and play. However, it is not without its dark side. Young and impressionable youths are easily influenced by social media, sometimes going to extreme lengths to get more "likes" and "follows". The presence of the dark web is also concerning if there is a lack of adult supervision and, sometimes, even with adult supervision.

Managing our youths’ exposure to social media and the Internet is important, as they are the most susceptible to undue online influences. Statistics recently released by MSF have also shown that cases of children beyond parental control have reached a 10-year high. This is a worrying trend. I hope that MSF can look at how to better protect this vulnerable group, in particular, those that belong to at-risk groups.

While latest figures have shown a drop in the percentage of youths that re-offend within three years of their incarceration, from 20.3% to the current 16.7%, this is still a high figure. I would like to ask what plans does MSF have to better help youth offenders reintegrate into society.

To help at-risk youths break away from the vicious cycle of crime, the National Committee on Prevention, Rehabilitation and Recidivism was set up in April last year to look into how we can intervene upstream and adopt a more preventive and integrative approach towards at-risk youths, young offenders, as well as their families. Can MSF provide an update on the committee’s work thus far?

The Chairman: Assoc Prof Daniel Goh, you can take both your cuts.

New Homelessness

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, there may be emerging new types of homelessness in Singapore that are not about destitution and need for shelter. The Destitute and Shelter Support Branch (DSSB) oversees 10 welfare homes that care for and rehabilitate destitute persons. The aim is to provide a temporary place for the destitute persons to stay where they are trained to become self-reliant so that they can return to their families.

But the problem is that there are homeless persons who can care for themselves, who are practically self-reliant. In a survey done by volunteer group, SW101 and a VWO Montford Care, a little over a year ago, of the 180 people found living on the streets one night in Singapore, two-thirds have a job, more than a quarter own a flat and a quarter were married. Further investigations by TODAY's journalist found that many slept on the streets not out of destitution. They were homeless because they had personal relationship issues and were estranged from their families but because they were unable to purchase HDB flats or adapt to sharing HDB public rental flats with strangers.

These homeless persons will not be amenable to being sheltered and rehabilitated in DSSB-managed welfare homes. Their sense of independence would be too strong and, in many ways, they are already self-reliant in the very struggle of keeping a job whilst sleeping on the streets. Reuniting them with their families is a noble aim, but it will be necessary to provide dedicated counselling and mediation resources to achieve this. There is a need for MSF to study the homeless Singaporeans found on the streets today to understand these new types of homelessness. Beyond understanding the homelessness, the aim should also be to re-design the DSSB's work to help return these homeless persons to their homes and families.

Adoption Support Subsidy

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: Second cut, adoption support. Chairman, compared to the decade before, the number of children adopted in Singapore has halved in this decade. For example, 352 children were adopted in 2014 compared to 731 children in 2004. Restrictions on international adoptions by some countries, such as China, explained part of the drop. But fewer unwanted pregnancies and higher abortion numbers have also been cited as reasons. I believe many Singaporean couples wishing to adopt would like to adopt babies born locally rather than engage in overseas adoption due to the risks, legal problems and medical issues involved in an overseas adoption.

I believe many are also willing to pay for the medical, delivery and post-natal care costs for birth mothers as a gesture of gratitude and honour. But there is an information gap that separates would-be birth mothers and adopting parents. Single women with unwanted pregnancies do not have the full information available to make the proper decision to abort or to carry the foetus to full term for adoption. Some may be aborting due to financial concerns related to full-term pregnancy and delivery. All these reasons reduce opportunities for prospective adopters to adopt Singaporean babies.

The promise of state support for medical, delivery and post-natal care costs will help bridge the gap. Actually, to call the support "subsidies" may be wrong, as the costs can be clawed back through an adoption fee charged to prospective adopters who are willing to pay in the first place. Needless to say, this will help boost our country's birth rates. I recognise there may be psychological implications and other issues for would-be birth mothers and prospective adopters. So, this suggestion should be thoroughly studied with the well-being of the child as the central concern of policy.

Promoting Adoption

Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah): Sir, there are couples who are childless who would love to adopt children, raise them and care for them. There are also would-be mothers who, due to very difficult and stressful situations, contemplate aborting their pregnancies. Would MSF please take up my suggestion of actively informing pregnant mothers, who are considering terminations, of the loving and nurturing option of giving their baby up for adoption? This is a win-win-win formula because, one, it would give the baby a shot at life in a loving and nurturing family environment; two, the pregnant mother benefits from a wider and longer list of options for her to consider; and, three, the adoptive parents benefit from fulfilling their wish to raise a child in a loving environment. Our organic Total Fertility Rate (TFR) will also increase. So, the economy stands to gain, too.

6.30 pm

Enabling Masterplan

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Sir, the Enabling Masterplans of Singapore are five-year plans developed by representatives from the people, public and private sectors to improve the lives of persons with disabilities or special needs in Singapore. Important changes had been introduced as a result of these Masterplans.

Although much publicity has gone into releasing, especially the latest Third Enabling Masterplan (EMP3), not many people within or outside the special needs community know about it. Of those who are aware of it, many have no idea what is going on mostly, save the adhoc good news that is coming out from the Ministry.

There are good reasons why the Enabling Masterplans have to be living documents, with regular reviews, reports and communications with all its key stakeholders, including the rest of Singapore society.

First, there is a need for the MasterPlan to incorporate the latest developments impacting the special needs community. Such changes may cover healthcare, housing and transport measures, for example, which provide more benefits or challenges to persons with special needs.

Second, there is a need to update the Plan to take in new relevant ideas. Caring for the care-givers of persons with special needs is a good example. At the recent parliamentary motion on strengthening support for care-givers, I had proposed a five-step approach to support care-givers on the ground. The five steps are to identify, individualise, integrate, implement and inspect the care-giver support system. The response from the ground was favourable but how it is being considered in the EMP3 is unclear.

Third, there is also a need to co-opt more people and organisations to co-shape and implement much needed solutions listed in the MasterPlan. It is much easier and sometimes more enjoyable to comment and criticise the system. But inputs are more realistic and balanced when the critics themselves also lend a hand at implementation, to experience and to help address the challenges of execution.

Sir, there is also a need to coordinate efforts under the MasterPlan to give more impact. Take disability awareness, for instance. We have The Purple Parade under our CDC; we have the See The True Me by the National Council for Social Services; and other awareness efforts by DPA and many other worthy VWOs. Surely, there is a way to stitch an alliance so that the overall and sub-messages on supporting inclusion and giving can reach out to more people more impactfully?

Finally, Sir, I believe there is a need to encourage specific disability groups to similarly develop their own enabling masterplans. The overarching EMP3 may be a tad too general and there are some who cannot identify nor feel a sense of ownership in these macro strategies and plans. But the overall MasterPlan is a good launch pad to have different disability groups think about their own vision, gaps, strategies, solutions and seek more partners for their efforts.

Sir, the Enabling Master Plan is significant. I hence seek not only an update on the latest EMP3 in this House. I also ask for a more comprehensive plan, both online and face-to-face, by the Ministry to regularly review and report to the special needs community and to the rest of Singapore.

Early Intervention

Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Earlier this year, MSF announced enhanced early intervention for children with developmental needs. This was a welcomed move. Indeed, early intervention for children with developmental or special needs is crucial and support that is customised to specific needs can make a whole world of a difference. It is sometimes easy to put all children with developmental needs in one category. But there are many different types of developmental delays – physical, cognitive, sensory and many different needs.

If an issue is identified early and targeted intervention is given, there is great potential for the child to overcome his or her challenges and live and function normally. My son Ayden has Down’s Syndrome and, as I was looking up for information about the ways to support him, I found many examples of people overseas with the condition who have excelled in different fields. There are those who are undergraduates, those who have given TedTalks, those who are sportsmen – many who are contributing members of the communities they live in. I want the best for my son but I will love him regardless of his abilities and achievements. It is nice though to know that the possibilities for him and people like him are endless. It all comes down to early support and intervention. It is, therefore, important that we put in effort to curate the best support and curriculum for our children with needs, to ensure the best possible outcome.

I would, therefore, like to find out more details about how the customised early intervention would be implemented. How can we ensure that our children will receive the specific support that they need for different developmental needs? In addition, how can MSF ensure that the quality of the early intervention is kept on par with international standards?

Families with Special Needs Children

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Foreign Affairs and Trade and Industry (Dr Tan Wu Meng): Mr Chairman, in my maiden Adjournment Motion as a back-bencher, I spoke about how important it is that we always "see through the eyes of our people". If I may, please allow me to share three stories of my Clementi residents' journeys – three stories, three journeys, three questions that speak to policy and what the Government and society can look at.

First, how do we, as a society, ensure continuity of support for our special needs students who transition into mainstream schools? One of my Clementi residents, Ms N, not her real name, is a young lady with cerebral palsy. She gets around with a wheelchair. We have met N and her mother. When N was younger, she went to a school for special needs students with cerebral palsy. But more recently, N has moved to a mainstream school. This was an achievement for N. She and her mum are proud of her achievement.

But as N's mother shared with me, it also brought unexpected challenges. Previously, N's special needs school provided the transport arrangements. But in the mainstream school, N discovered there was difficulty finding these specialised transport arrangements. Her mum looked around and found out that private transport for N and her wheelchair would cost $750 to $1,000 a month. N can take public transport, but it takes two different buses. She has to change bus in between. During rush hour, some drivers will not wait for her and it can take multiple buses before N can find a bus to board. And when the weather is rainy, when it rains, it is even more of a worry for N and her mother.

Mr Chairman, as more of our students with special needs make the transition to mainstream schools, we should look at how to maintain that continuity of support, so that the transition is not unnecessarily jarring. I know our MOE and MSF colleagues have been looking into this, and I am sure they will continue finding ways to make things even better. So, can the Minister share about what progress has been made, what support is available, and how we can help parents of special needs children learn more about these programmes and how to access them when the children transition to mainstream schools?

Sir, the second question is: How do we help adult Singaporeans with special needs, especially when the parents grow old and pass on? Mr L, not his real name, is my Clementi resident. He has been ill the past few years and recently lost his battle with cancer. I met his widow. She herself is not in good health and needs a wheelchair to get around. They have a son who is nearing 50 years old, with special needs and a limited ability to take care of himself. Mrs L spoke to us. She says she hopes her health will hold up. But she is understandably worried about what will happen to her special needs son, once she herself passes on.

Mr Chairman, as our population grows older, there will be more seniors in our community who have grown-up special needs children still needing that extra care and support. So, can the Minister share about how we are coordinating across agencies and community partners to better support our seniors who are worried about their special needs children and how we can support the adult children when the parents become too ill to act as care-givers, or when the parents pass on?

Sir, the third question is on how we can strengthen respite care support for care-givers of special needs children. During my home visits in Clementi, I have met Mdm T, not her real name. Mdm T has a grown-up daughter with special needs who had been very ill, a while back spent some months in the hospital. Mdm T's family has a domestic helper who has been with the family for nearly 20 years. Mdm T wants her domestic helper to have a vacation once a year. But at the same time, the family has been worried about how to arrange care-giver support when the domestic helper is away. Mdm T shared with us about how it is not straightforward at all to arrange a temporary domestic helper for short durations, such as for a period of two weeks. But, Sir, these arrangements can be crucial to help prevent care-giver burnout, whether it is a domestic helper or a family member providing the care.

So, can the Minister tell us what efforts are being made to make respite care more accessible to parents with special needs children – whether young children with special needs, or grown-up adult children with special needs?

Mr Chairman, these 3 stories are of Clementi families whom I have met in the constituency which I look after. But we know these stories are not unique to Clementi. And as we see through the eyes of our people, each story speaks to a broader policy question or a wider theme, a wider principle. So, I look forward to hearing from our Minister on what we can do together – Government, community, society – to help parents with special needs children, as the children grow up, and as the parents grow older.

Support for Those with Mental Issues

Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Chairman, according to projections, our population is expected to reach 6.34 million by the year 2030, out of which 28% would be senior citizens above the age of 65. These numbers are expected to grow and, by the year 2050, almost half of our population would be above 65.

One of the key challenges of growing old is deteriorating mental capacity. Based on a longitudinal ageing study conducted by NUS Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, one in five elderly above the age of 75 shows signs of depression, and a Well-being of Singapore Elderly (WiSE) study led by IMH revealed that one in 10 elderly above the age of 60 may have dementia.

Coping with mental wellness issues during old age is thus a growing concern. What support measures has MSF put in place to help those without mental capacity, particularly those with little or no family support?

Improving Lasting Power of Attorney

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Mr Chairman. I declare my interest as a practising lawyer. In recent years, the Government has been encouraging people to sign Lasting Power of Attorneys, in short, LPAs. LPAs are to be executed before an LPA certificate issuer who can come from three categories of professionals: one, medical professionals who are accredited by the Public Guardian; two, registered psychiatrists; and three, practising lawyers.

6.45 pm

I would like to suggest that there should be a clause in the LPA Form 1 where both the donor and donee declare to their best knowledge, at the time of the execution of the LPA Form 1 by the donor: one, whether the donor has any known prior medical condition; and two, whether they are aware of any medical reports issued in respect of the donor, which relates to the issue of whether the donor has the mental capacity to execute the LPA.

This will encourage donors and donees to be more forthright and make any relevant declaration before they sign the LPAs.

It will also help to protect the LPA issuers in cases where donees may deliberately withhold such information when the LPA issuer is approached to witness the execution of the LPA. Failure to make the relevant disclosure should provide the LPA issuer with some protection in cases where the LPA is disputed by another relative or by way of adverse inferences drawn against say any donee with questionable intentions.

The qualifications and training of the three types of professionals who are authorised to be LPA certificate issuers are different. Having such a clause will also provide further assistance to the LPA issuers in their assessment whether a donor is in a position to execute the LPA.

Good Start in Life for Children

Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar): Brain development is highest during the first four years of life. The brain is forming important neural paths to help develop the child's ability to perform and function and learn well. One US study showed that the quality of children’s early childhood experiences affects how well they learn; and the early years set the stage for the rest of their lives.

Singaporeans have to adapt in this globalised and fast-changing world to stay ahead. Our Government emphasises the importance of entrepreneurial spirit, resilient workforce and lifelong learning to succeed as a country. Our pre-school is a good place to start to equip our next generation for this reality.

Can we ensure that we develop our young’s curiosity and avoid rote learning in our school education? In the pre-school curricula, can we emphasise on unlocking creativity, inspiring curiosity, building character and igniting a true love for learning. The aim is to meet today’s realities with tomorrow’s possibilities.

Could our Government facilitate more co-working places with childcare facility to help young parents balance their working and care-giving roles; this is especially helpful for parents with infants and toddlers.

Can Government ensure that early education is accessible and affordable to all children and especially children from disadvantaged background? Government provides generous subsidies for early childhood services, but the application process can be difficult to navigate. How can MSF smoothen the subsidy application process and make it simpler?

MSF mentioned better integration of social services and holistic support for residents. What does it mean for residents? How will MSF ensure that children with developmental needs can receive the support they require?

The Early Childhood Industry Transformation Map (ITM) was launched last year by MSF. What initiatives will MSF implement under the ITM to improve the productivity and working environments of operators and early childhood professionals?

Free Childcare for Low-income Parents

Ms Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, children from low-income families, like all other children, deserve access to high-quality formal childcare services and early childhood education. Though their parents could pay as low as $5 a month in childcare fees, they face multiple hurdles in accessing the maximum level of subsidies, including having to meet certain requirements for work. Also, those in informal or ad hoc jobs may have difficulty meeting and/or producing proof of work due to the sporadic nature of their jobs.

The current subsidy system incurs a high administrative cost. A significant amount of paperwork and back-and-forth between childcare operators, MSF, parents, and social workers is involved in appealing for the maximum level of further subsidies. The extra paperwork involved is often a disincentive for operators to enrol low-income children.

Whether these children from low-income families can access such child care services should not be dependent on the employment status of their parents. Can the Ministry allow all parents who earn less than $2,500 or per capita income of less than $650 access subsidised childcare for free, regardless of the mother’s employment status?

Childcare Subsidies for Non-working Moms

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, during our Motion on Education for Our Future, the Speaker asked who is the best teacher and where is the best school. We parents are the best teachers for our children and our home is the best school. And the most important time for us to be teachers and for our homes to be a school is during our child’s formative years.

As such our policies should not penalise parents who are not working so that they can be there for their child.

Why do we provide less subsidies to families with non-working mothers and more subsidies to families with working mothers? The Government previously said that non-working mothers need less childcare but we need to remember that the fees for half-day childcare is not half of the fees for full-day childcare.

I am not asking for families with non-working mothers to have more subsidies. I am asking for it to be fair, for all childcare subsidies to be dependent on the household income and not whether the mother is working or not.

Diversity in Early Childhood Education

Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, during the Debate on the Early Childhood Education Centres Bill, I opined that when forming and enforcing regulations, we should recognise the diversity in early childhood education as one desirable objective.

Regulations should be enforced flexibly so as not to erode the viability of smaller centres that are providing good quality care. We are still learning things about early childhood education. There should be sufficient space for innovation research and experimentation within reasonable limited to ensure minimum standards.

These are the contexts for my questions and suggestions which are as follows:

Firstly, I would like to ask for an update on the pace of licensing by the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) under the Bill passed in 2017, anecdotally it appears that the pace is slow.

Secondly, I would like to ask how many centres have been unable to secure licensing?

Thirdly, how many pre-schools have closed down or been acquired or merged since the Act was passed?

Next, will children with high functioning or borderline special needs have their needs met in the remaining schools. My assumption is that many boutique or niche schools have had to change their operations significantly to cope with the requirements of the new Act. Is the Government monitoring outcomes on this front and what are the results so far?

Next, what is the situation for insurance for pre-school centres catering to children with special needs? Some insurers do not cover children with special needs, so pre-schools may seek to reduce their liabilities by not accepting children with special needs. This should be looked into.

And lastly, Sir, it has been over six years since the Starting Well study by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) commissioned by the Lien Foundation ranked Singapore 29th out of 45 countries studied in terms of early education sector quality. How has Singapore fared in such international benchmarks recently? And is this something that the Government monitors to obtain regular independent assessments of early education outcomes? It should be.

Pre-school Sector Work and Environment

Mr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio): One of the key strategies identified by the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) is to raise productivity for the pre-school sector. Improved and streamlined work processes should be able to help pre-school educators devote more time to care for children.

An idea in 2017 was the Smart Solutions rolled out by ECDA together with industry partners. Comprising an integrated package of IT solutions, I understand it is supposed to help with productivity at the childcare centres. Have there been many operators who tapped on the available Government grants to defray part of the costs for adopting IT solutions? Have these solutions been helped to ease administrative duties such as children’s attendance and temperature taking, parent-teacher communications and other work at the childcare centres?

Another was centralised meal catering by the Association of Early Childhood and Training Services, ECDA and industry partners to provide healthy meals to pre-schoolers. Has the intended outcome been achieved?

More recently, there was also an e-procurement system to help pre-school operators order commonly-used items from a curated catalogue of approved vendors selected. Smaller operators can also enjoy cost savings through volume aggregation. More importantly, it allows centres to free up time and manpower to focus on delivering quality care and development of the children.

We have good tools to support our pre-school sector to become more productive, and in turn, improve the working environment for the early childhood educators. Does the Ministry have detailed plans and timeline on assisting more pre-school operators to leverage technology and tools such that the adoption rate of these improvement solutions become more pervasive across the sector? Finally, will there be training support given to pre-school educators to enable them to find the time and permission from the owner to attend relevant training?

Early Childhood Education

Mr Darryl David: Mr Chairman, the rise of dual-income families has resulted in many initiatives to ensure the provision of quality early childhood education. This indeed helps to cater to needs of young families. It ensures that our children start out on the right footing in their education journey, guided with the expertise from competent early childhood education professionals and committed operators. Early childhood teachers are instrumental in spotting developmental issues in children. Above all, high standards in early childhood education allow for social mobility so that every child has a fair chance to succeed.

At the 2018 Committee of Supply debates, the Ministry of Social and Family Development announced the launch of the Early Childhood Industry Transformation Map (ITM) to improve the early childhood sector. This will help provide more innovative services and productive processes. Measures have also taken to ensure that early childhood is affordable and accessible to everyone. Effort is also being made to ensure the recruitment of quality early childhood educators. By 2020, the number of early childhood educators is projected to reach 20,000.

What initiatives will MSF implement under the ITM to improve the productivity and working environments of operators? What other initiatives will be launched to ensure the career progression opportunities for early childhood professionals to reflect the evolving complexity of their roles?

Empowering Women

Ms Rahayu Mahzam: Recently, the Straits Times published an opinion piece from Katherine Mangu-Ward in the New York Times. She argues that in the quest for women’s rights, a fixation on numerical goals can lead to a false sense of clarity and certainty. There may be different views about the importance of numbers and setting quotas but I think the point she makes about how we should not lose focus of the more substantive work of changing perceptions is important. I feel that beyond setting numerical goals, it is important to get the whole community, men and women, on board to change cultural mind-sets and progress together.

The struggle by women for equal opportunities and due recognition has gone on for very long time in human history. Although there has been progress, there is still some way to go in addressing many issues. In Singapore, boys and girls have equal access to education, husband and wife are treated as equal partners in a marriage and in principle, men and women have access to opportunities to work in various fields. However, we still see fewer women in certain professions and positions, we still see women leaving the workforce or struggling to juggle different roles and there is some way to go to close the wage gap between men and women.

There have been various efforts to look at how to support and empower women, as well as to increase women representation in various fields. How can we meaningfully build on these efforts and encourage a change of mind-sets within the community. For example, the Diversity Action Committee has made good progress in increasing women representation on corporate boards. How will the newly formed Council for Board Diversity build on these efforts? What other initiatives are there to champion women and empower them to progress?

Strengthening Gender Diversity

Prof Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): Sir, the proportion of women in top corporate appointments and board of directors still lags behind their representation amongst professional groups and other leadership roles. Women provide critical contributions and a diversity of views. There is sufficient evidence-based data today to show that positive value that women bring on. Even as we are an Asian Society, meritocratic performance of women must be upheld, acknowledged and celebrated.

Having more women on board can help companies entrench a stronger and more well-rounded HR policy and can help attract potential women leaders boost their development and performance. Diversity in corporate leadership has also been shown to promote better governance and sustained business performance.

Can the Ministry provide an update on: the work of the Diversity Action Committee (DAC) and the BoardAgender, and also an update on the code of corporate governance for SGX-listed companies to disclose their board diversity policies? Are there local data to support and show the improvements that have been made over the years?

The Chairman: Minister Desmond Lee, would you like to adjourn the debate?