Committee of Supply – Head K (Ministry of Education)

Resumption of Debate on Question [4 March 2019],

"That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Estimates to be reduced by $100." − [Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng].

Question again proposed.

The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Ms Low Yen Ling.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Ms Low Yen Ling): Chairman, my colleagues have spoken about the changes we are making in our education landscape to give all our students the best chance to reach their fullest potential and to support Singaporeans in lifelong learning.

Even as we make these bold moves, MOE will continue to invest in our strong fundamentals that have been critical to our success.

Bilingualism is an integral part of our national identity, and our mother tongue languages (MTLs) are a cornerstone of the education system. A strong grounding in our MTLs will enable us to engage with the region more effectively. At the same time, we want to help our students stay connected to their heritage, and gain a deeper sense of rootedness.

Chairman, please allow me to say a few words in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] We are progressively refreshing the MTL curriculum to cater to students with different studying needs, thus giving them the confidence to use the language effectively and encouraging them to use their Mother Tongues in real-life situations.

As Ms Tin Pei Ling mentioned yesterday, we cannot do this alone. Support from the parents and family is extremely important.

To this end, we have built in a daily life element into our primary school Chinese curriculum to involve family members in the activities and use Mandarin in their daily lives. For example, by preparing a "sunshine breakfast" together, students and their family members can learn how to describe the cooking steps and the ingredients needed in Chinese.

This new curriculum has been well received and we will continue to make improvements as we go along.

MOE will continue to work with the various MTL promotion committees, as well as our media and community partners to reinforce MTL learning and use of our MTLs, both in schools and the community.

One example is the National Schools Xinyao Singing and Song-writing Competition. The competition aims to ignite students’ interests in learning Chinese through Xinyao music. Students are encouraged to draw inspiration from their Chinese lessons and incorporate them into their song-writing.

The programme benefitted 10,000 students last year, building up students’ passion for the Chinese language and confidence in using it well.

(In English): We appreciate Mr Chen Show Mao and Mr Faisal Manap’s suggestions for our students to learn more languages, whether Malay or other ASEAN languages. However, mandating the study of the Malay language as Mr Chen suggests, would mean taking a compulsory third language for some, and that means additional learning load. MOE's approach has always been a balanced one, which is to make taking a third language optional. We thus introduced Conversational Malay and Chinese in 2005, to allow interested students to learn these languages at an enjoyable pace. Today, about 25,000 students are enrolled in this programme.

For students who wish to gain a deeper understanding of Malay or Bahasa Indonesia, we have also introduced the Regional Studies Programme (RSP) for them. We note Mr Faisal’s suggestion to extend the RSP to include more languages, but we should take a calibrated approach as there are resource challenges in opening up more third languages. Notwithstanding this, there is definitely value in having students gain a deeper understanding of the culture and language of other ASEAN countries. Students can do so through student exchange or immersion programmes, which are also available to students who are not enrolled in the RSP.

Chairman, in today's fast-changing world, MOE is committed to developing our students holistically to enable them to navigate the future. Participation in co-curricular activities (CCAs) help our students grow in their character and develop their lifelong skills. CCAs provide our students opportunities to discover their interests and talents, while picking up the ability to adapt, be resilient and overcome challenges.

Mr Louis Ng and Miss Cheng Li Hui asked about the allocation of CCA places. All CCAs are designed to provide students opportunities for growth and self-discovery. When allocating CCA places, all schools carefully consider the students’ interests and options within their available resources and facilities, as well as the CCAs’ optimal size for meaningful engagement between the teachers, instructors and the participants. With these considerations and limitations, some CCAs are allocated based on the students’ strengths, besides their interests. We understand the concerns behind the CCA selections and MOE is studying the current school-based CCA selection process for ways to improve and better support the potential of our students.

To support students in CCAs with few members, some schools have come together to pool resources through combined CCA sessions. For example, Greenridge Secondary, Fajar Secondary and Zhenghua Secondary have made arrangements for their Scouts to train together, as a combined inter-school troop. And starting this year, MOE will also be working with Sports Singapore (SportSG) and the National Arts Council (NAC) to offer Athletics and Ethnic Dance to Secondary school students whose schools do not offer these CCAs. Now, depending on the outcome of this pilot, we will explore offering this in other CCA areas.

Miss Cheng Li Hui also asked about environmental education in schools, which is key in our larger effort to develop students holistically so that they can become engaged citizens with a passion for the world around them. Lessons on the environment are integrated into various subjects and students engage these issues through problem-solving and inquiry, as well as discussing real world case studies. For example, in their Science lessons, Primary school students discuss what causes pollution, deforestation and global warming, and reflect on how their actions can impact the environment. Beyond the classroom, students have the opportunity to reinforce their learning through excursions, field work as well as through their CCAs. Many schools have environment clubs where students take part in various projects and activities, and partner the community to promote sustainability.

Chairman, as we continually seek to enhance our education pathways to build up the next generation, we hope that their learning journey will prepare them well for the future.

The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Mr Chairman, our schools remain committed to preparing our children to learn for life, but we cannot do it alone. We call on parents, industry and community partners to complement our efforts.

To address Mr Gan Thiam Poh’s question, I will begin by speaking about MOE’s partnership efforts. Launched in February, the Guidelines for School-Home Partnership clarifies how schools and parents can work together to develop the child in various domains, such as values, physical, mental, social and academic. MOE launched these guidelines as, over time, the partnership between schools and parents has evolved into a broad range of practices and expectations. Some of these, such as helicopter parenting and over-servicing by schools, can be detrimental to building critical 21^st century skills and competencies, in particular the resilience and confidence of our children. The guidelines serve to provide greater consistency of practice within and across schools, and many parents are supportive of them.

Besides schools and parents, our community and industry partners also play a part in preparing our children for life. Project Mi was a values-in-action project organised by student leaders in Bukit Batok Secondary School that involved the collection and distribution of rice to low-income households. While student leaders from NTU mentored them in the project, the Bukit Batok Citizens Consultative Committee assisted in identifying the low-income households and parents provided the manpower and transport required for the delivery of rice. Through this partnership, students had the opportunity to meet community needs and become more confident, self-directed and responsible citizens.

Beyond being sound in values, our students will also need to be mentally strong and resilient to be well prepared for the future. In response to Ms Anthea Ong, mental health and wellness education is important work that we have been doing in schools. From Primary school, we teach social and emotional skills to equip our students to overcome challenges and handle the demands of life, educate them on common mental health conditions and clarify inaccurate perceptions of mental issues. In addition, we have introduced a training programme in schools which equips students to be peer supporters to help identify distress among their friends and be supportive. Through co-curricular activities, outdoor camps and community service, opportunities are also provided to develop resilience and confidence.

Nonetheless, mental health is a complex and multi-faceted issue that is of global concern. There is no single solution and hence a many-hands approach to addressing this is needed. Such an approach benefited Haisan, a Secondary 3 student from Northbrooks Secondary School. Haisan was facing family challenges which affected him mentally and emotionally and this led him to skip school frequently. Haisan’s teachers and the school counsellor conducted home visits and referred him to the Enhanced Step-Up Programme (ESU), a programme by MSF that provides support for at-risk students. Together, the school and the youth worker from the programme helped Haisan to process and manage his social and emotional stress, helping him become more confident, emotionally stronger and resilient. Haisan has since developed positive relationships with his family, teachers and peers, and is now contributing actively in his school’s Dance CCA and Special Interest Group, Music Circle.

Mr Chairman, we need to recognise that the complexities of the world today means that we cannot educate our children in silos. It is when we work together with mutual trust and respect that our children benefit most.

Let me share a personal anecdote. When my son was in Primary school, my wife and I encouraged him in his initial interest in debate. Along the way, we had the pleasure of meeting his teachers who guided the teams, staying till late in school to train them. As parents, my wife and I would bring him out to dinner after training and competitions, or the occasional pep talk for motivation. We even celebrated losses. It was never about the winning or losing of his debates but about the process of learning and the camaraderie built with his teammates. Neither did we nor he expect this journey to span eight years of debating, but the close support from teachers, coaches and the debating community, as well as family helped him to tide the tough times and relish in ones of joy. Today, he continues to share this joy by coming back to spar with his juniors.

Mr Chairman, developing our children's passions requires support and commitment from parents, schools and the community. It may not be for us to say where they shall find their passion but that is something solely for them to discover.

The Chairman: Minister Ong Ye Kung.

The Minister for Education (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mr Chairman, I thank the Members for their cuts and I thank my colleagues for answering most of the questions. I will now address the last set of questions. After my speech, there will be a joint segment. Some Members of the House asked me yesterday why are issues concerning housing and Workfare being posed to MOE. That is because we have a joint segment where MOE, MND, MOM and MSF will address the issues on UPLIFT and inequality.

We have been implementing significant changes to the education system over the past several years. This is despite our system being very highly regarded around the world and producing good student outcomes.

11.15 am

In our current position, it is easy to feel complacent and tell ourselves: “Let us tinker at the edges;” that would be a mistake. We must keep evolving, adapting, to ensure the system is fit for the future and, where necessary, take bold steps.

Where we can build new pathways, we will. Where appropriate, we will invest resources to improve our infrastructure for education. But at our advanced stage of development, the defining changes are about processes. This is the most complex because we dive into the source codes of the system, recognise trade-offs, optimise them and even find ways to break out of them.

For example, we have to balance between the joy of learning and the rigour of education. Our students need proper paper qualifications to open doors to jobs – but they also need to pick up skills which they need to progress in life and in their careers, and these are not so easily credentialed. So, we are recalibrating the balance wherever necessary.

In this context, I will talk about the following today:

First, a programme to further improve our education infrastructure.

Second, an update on the SkillsFuture movement – Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat has spoken about this, and I will focus on how SkillsFuture has led to building of new pathways in our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs).

And finally, I will talk about how we will introduce greater flexibility in our secondary school system to help develop every student's strengths.

First, infrastructure developments, specifically for Junior Colleges (JCs). Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Murali Pillai asked about this.

Four pairs of JCs were merged this year. The transition relatively smoothly, thanks to the tremendous effort from all stakeholders – teachers, students, parents, alumni members and advisors on the ground.

They designed new uniforms and school crests, composed new school anthems, and held numerous activities to get students from the merged JCs to get to know each other better. Great effort was made to preserve the heritage of the component JCs that merged, including the adoption of merged names.

I congratulate the four merged JCs for starting a new chapter and wish them greater achievements ahead. But more changes are to come, MOE will need to trouble them a bit more, and I seek their understanding. Because a few of the merged JCs were amongst the oldest Government JCs, with campuses that have gotten somewhat outdated. We have been progressively improving the building infrastructure of our ITEs and Polytechnics, and our old JCs deserve new campuses too.

So, we will start a multi-year, multi-phase JC Rejuvenation Programme. When choosing which JCs to start with, we considered several factors: the age of the JC, the state of its existing facilities and also the availability of holding sites while we build new campuses. We also considered whether MOE would need time to engage stakeholders for co-funding arrangements, because that would apply to the Government-aided JCs.

The first phase, starting in 2022, will involve rebuilding three JCs, and upgrading one. So, three SERS, one MUP; for those of us who remember what MUP is. They are as follows:

First, in the East, Temasek JC. It has the oldest campus among the Government JCs, 43 years old. We will temporarily house the JC at the former Tampines JC site, which is now vacant, and rebuild Temasek JC’s existing campus. Once complete, it will move back to the existing site.

Second, in the West, and maybe this will address some of Mr Ang Wei Neng's questions yesterday, Jurong Pioneer JC, which is now located at the former Pioneer JC site. Prior to the merger, Jurong JC was one of our oldest Government JCs, 35 years old. We will build a new campus at the site of the former Jurong JC. Once completed, Jurong Pioneer JC will move there. We chose this permanent site for the merged JC because of its convenience and accessibility. As Mr Ang Wei Neng mentioned, it is near the Jurong Lake District and will be served by the future Jurong Region MRT Line.

Third, in the North, Anderson Serangoon JC, currently located at the former Anderson JC site. Prior to the merger, both were old JCs, Anderson JC at 36 years old, Serangoon JC at 31 years old. After merger, we decided to locate the merged JC at the former Anderson JC site because it is next to Yio Chu Kang MRT station and its facilities can better accommodate the merged JCs. The same consideration is still valid in deciding the future permanent site of Anderson Serangoon JC. This means that at some point in the next few years, we will need Anderson Serangoon JC to move temporarily back to the former Serangoon JC site, and move back to the current site when the new campus is completed. This is not ideal because it involves two moves instead of one. We may also have to make additional provisions at the former Serangoon JC site to accommodate the merged JCs temporarily. But we will plan the transition so as to minimise hassle to students and staff.

Finally, Yishun Innova JC, now located at the former Yishun JC site. Prior to the merger, Yishun was also one of our oldest Government JCs, 34 years old. We will give the former Innova JC site a significant upgrade, since it is not old enough to be rebuilt. Once completed, we will move Yishun Innova there. We chose this as the permanent site because it will be served by the new Thomson-East Coast MRT Line.

Phase One will be completed by around 2025. We are already planning for Phases Two and Three, involving upgrading the fourth of the merged JCs, Tampines Meridian, and also Victoria JC and the older Government-aided JCs.

The new premises will support the evolution of JC education, where lessons are now a lot more interactive and learning is more holistic. So, instead of just the classrooms we have today, we will have seminar rooms which are modular and flexible, to support more interactive pedagogies. We will make the campuses more digitally-enabled. We will have facilities that encourage sports and CCAs, such as indoor sports halls which will be designed so that they can be also be open for community use too. The JCs will have campuses that are fit for the future.

Next, I will give an update on new pathways in our IHLs, as part of the SkillsFuture movement. Our objective is to have a more flexible system of education upgrading that is not overly dependent on past academic results, but takes into account the varied strengths of our people, to help develop and fulfil their potential in many different varied paths.

Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked about the progress of aptitude-based admissions. Indeed, admission systems are moving away from an over-emphasis on past academic grades. NUS, for example, has recently announced that they are looking out for Polytechnic students with entrepreneurial experiences. Starting this year, NTU will expand aptitude-based admissions for 40 of its 111 degree programmes. It will involve interviews and the showing of portfolios.

In a similar vein, we introduced aptitude-based admissions at ITE and the Polytechnics, through what we call EAE, the Early Admission Exercise. EAE, since it was implemented, has sparked a host of education and career guidance activities in secondary schools. Students now go through personality assessments, speak to industry practitioners and counsellors, and visit companies for their learning journeys, in order to discover their interests and strengths. This is a good thing because self-discovery is actually a very worthwhile investment of time and effort in Secondary school.

EAE will be rigorously run. The IHLs will require candidates to not just declare their interests and passions but demonstrate them, through portfolios, activities outside of school, or showing that they have knowledge of a particular subject that is outside of the education curriculum. Interviews will have to be skilfully conducted.

Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked about appeals. It is inevitable that with EAE, the Polytechnics will receive more appeals from applicants, which the Polytechnics will have to evaluate objectively and independently. The rise in appeals is inevitable, because EAE involves qualitative judgement and assessment. This is essential, and we must learn how to adapt to this and do this well, if we want to shift away from an over-emphasis on academic grades, and inject more flexibility into our IHL posting system.

This year, admission to Polytechnics saw a record number of EAE applicants at almost 14,000 – 10% more than last year. We expect the final enrolment through EAE to stabilise at around 20% of total Polytechnic intake.

So, in response to Mr Zainal Sapari, with EAE well-established, this year, it will be expanded to working adults for the first time, with consideration given to their current and relevant work experience, and not just their previous school examination results.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked if current procedures for application to Polytechnics disadvantages ITE students. The answer is no, because although ITE students apply after "O" level students, they belong to separate queues, and each group has separate places set aside for them.

The way we deliver higher education has also shifted, with new work-learn pathways that champion "learning by doing".

In 2017, we launched the ITE Work-Learn Technical Diploma. These courses provide ITE graduates with a skills-based apprenticeship pathway to attain a diploma. Last year, ITE launched four inaugural programmes, and enrolled more than 100 students. So, in response to Mr Ang Wei Neng’s question, yes, ITE will expand the programme. This year, ITE intends to launch another 10 programmes, and it is already planning even more programmes next year. The ITE Work-Learn Technical Diploma will become a major programme in ITE.

"Learning by doing" is also championed by our Polytechnics and Universities. Today, we have more than 100 SkillsFuture Earn-and-Learn Programmes, and these have collectively placed 3,300 trainees into various industries.

Our Universities have launched a total of 16 SkillsFuture Work-Study Degree Programmes, admitting over 150 students. One of the work-learn programmes that I found especially meaningful was the one for social work, at the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS).

Those in the social work industry are very proud of their profession, and so they require Social Workers to be degree holders. However, that impedes the career prospects of students who went to NYP to do a Diploma in Social Work. Many of them go to NYP to do this diploma out of passion but, ironically, cannot be certified as social workers. They should be given the opportunity to also pursue a career in this field.

Hence, MSF and SUSS developed a pathway for this group of diploma graduates. Now, they can start work in the sector as Associate Social Workers. With good performance, they can be admitted into a Bachelor's programme in Social Work at SUSS, delivered in work-learn format. The students' prior education and working experience will be recognised, which means they can complete the degree programme in one and a half years, upon which they will then become certified Social Workers.

11.30 am

SUSS can do this because of its unique role, as a University catering to working adults. Some years ago, I informed the former President of Singapore, the late Mr SR Nathan, that a few AUs were keen to name one of their faculty after him. He said that if this was to be done, he would like it to be a faculty of UniSIM, the precursor to SUSS. When I asked him why, he said: “Because it is a university for someone like me.” Today, we have the S R Nathan School of Human Development at SUSS.

To Assoc Prof Walter Theseira’s question, MOE will certainly support all AUs and encourage sharing of resources, where practical. When MOE says: “Every school is a good school,” we do not mean that every school is the same, but that each has its own unique strengths, and is good in its own way. And whether a school is good or not depends on how well it fits the student, not whether it is popular or branded or highly ranked. The same logic applies to our AUs.

Finally, I will talk about how we will introduce greater flexibility in our secondary school system, by further expanding Subject-Based Banding (SBB).

Mr Leon Perera talked about the importance of cultivating resilience, and a "can-do" spirit in our young. Ms Denise Phua and Dr Intan talked about moving away from an unhealthy tuition culture.

How students, parents and teachers behave, what they focus on in education, are result of deeply ingrained incentive structures in our labour market, our education system, and the way that our society recognises success. I think we cannot tackle these cultural issues with another promotional campaign, adding new stories into our syllabus, or adding more to our curriculum. We could do all that, but it would not fundamentally shift the underlying culture, which is deeply ingrained.

Having said that, we are not helpless either. With the evolution of our education system, and the broadening and rebalancing of how we measure success, we can shift the current culture. And indeed, we are starting to see changes. This is why we launched the Learn for Life Movement last year.

The Movement is a holistic, comprehensive, multi-year plan to evolve our education system for the future. So we have two movements today – Learn for Life for school education; SkillsFuture for lifelong learning. There are a few major thrusts under the Learn for Life Movement, and MOE has launched two of them.

The first is to balance rigour and joy. If learning is just stress and no joy, there will be little chance of sparking passion and self-motivation that drives lifelong learning. This is why we are revamping the PSLE scoring system, introducing applied learning into schools, and cutting down on the examination load.

The second thrust is UPLIFT, or the Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce. MOE has established an inter-agency taskforce called UPLIFT led by Second Minister Indranee Rajah, to tackle the challenge of inequality. She will talk about the work of UPLIFT later.

Today, I will explain the third thrust – "One secondary education, many subject bands".

As Members know, our Secondary school system comprises three streams – Express, Normal (Academic) or N(A), and Normal (Technical) or N(T). Ms Denise Phua, Mr Ang Wei Neng, Mr Charles Chong, Mr Louis Ng and Dr Intan have raised concerns about the streaming system. In fact, I want to acknowledge Ms Denise Phua and Dr Intan, who have actually raised this concern for many years now. This year, Mr Louis Ng joined the call.

Let me first explain the background of streaming.

Streaming was implemented during the "efficiency-driven" phase of the education system in the 1980s and 1990s. We were concerned about the huge number of dropouts who could not read or write at the end of Primary school. We had to move away from a one-size-fits-all education system because if students sat in class, could not catch up, and did not understand their lessons, they would lose interest and drop out.

Through streaming, we customised education according to the learning rates of our students. It has successfully reduced school attrition rates from about one-third of every cohort to less than 1% now. The introduction of the N(T) stream contributed significantly to this outcome. Till today, we are benefiting from the legacy of the "efficiency-driven" education system.

I urge Members not to casually juxtapost social stratification with streaming because without reducing attrition rates through streaming, social stratification would have been far, far worse.

Over time, parents and students also began to see the benefit of learning at a pace and rigour suited to their academic abilities. Today, for students whose PSLE scores allow them a choice between two streams, there are many who in fact prefer a stream where they can study at a more comfortable pace, and gain confidence as they feel that they are a "bigger fish in a smaller pond".

However, there are downsides to streaming, too. There is always some margin of error, especially if streaming is done at a young age. Further, in its original form, streaming assumed that students needed a certain pace of learning in all their subjects, whereas many students, in fact, have uneven strengths across different subjects.

Finally, more importantly, and raised by many Members, entering a stream that is considered "lower" can carry a certain stigma that becomes self-fulfilling and self-limiting. Students can develop a mindset where they tell themselves, “I am only a Normal stream student and this is as good as I can be.” It becomes self-fulfilling. I thank Mr Ang Wei Neng and Dr Intan for sharing their personal experiences with this.

We have been grappling with this trade-off – between customisation of education and the downside of stigmatisation. That is why, over the years, we have made significant changes to the streaming system.

A major transition took place in the mid-2000s, when MOE phased out streaming in Primary school over a period of four years. As Members would recall, we used to have three streams in Primary school – EM1, EM2, and EM3.

The first step was to merge EM1 and EM2, since the only difference between the two streams was the standard of Mother Tongue Language (MTL).

Later, MOE shifted to customising learning not at the stream level, but at the subject level. We introduced different standards for the subjects – Standard and Foundation for English, Mathematics and Science; Higher, Standard, and Foundation for MTL. We called this Subject-Based Banding (SBB), and started it since the mid-2000s.

Hence, by 2008, instead of having three streams, we had a single Primary school course. Within the course, students could learn subjects at different standards, based on SBB.

There were skeptics at that time who asked, “What is the difference between streaming and SBB? Itis old wine in a new bottle. 换汤不换药 – you merely changed the labels of EM1, 2, 3 to new subject labels called Foundation, Standard and Higher, that is all. It is the same!"

There is a big difference. Streaming separates education into different courses and we put students into each course. Each course is like a big jar. You put all kinds of cookies into the jar and then you close it, and you label it "pineapple tarts". So, all the goodies inside, whatever they are, get labelled as "pineapple tarts", accurately or inaccurately.

SBB changes this fundamentally. Essentially, we break the jar, students come out of it, take subjects of varying difficulty, based on their academic ability. Taking one or two subjects at the Foundation level is not tantamount to labelling the child. And equally important, it encourages students to find their strengths.

Since we introduced SBB, many students who would previously have been in the EM3 stream ended up taking one or more subjects at a higher level. So, this way, we continued to reap the benefits of customisation of education, but minimised the downsides of labelling.

This is much harder to do for Secondary school, because there are so many more subjects involved. More than a decade ago, we started a form of SBB in Secondary schools, by allowing students in the N(A) and N(T) streams to take up to two subjects at a higher level starting from Secondary 3, if they had done well in those subjects when they were in lower Secondary. It worked well.

In 2014, we formalised a bolder form of SBB in 12 Secondary schools as pilot schools. N(A) and N(T) students in lower Secondary could take English, MTL, Mathematics and Science at a more rigorous standard, if their PSLE scores or school examination results for these subjects justified it.

The results of this new pilot have been encouraging. About half of the N(A) students in the pilot schools took up subjects at the Express-level. If we break down this number, 25% of N(A) students took one Express level subject; another 11% took two subjects, and over 10% took three subjects or were laterally transferred to Express stream. So, 25% plus 11% plus 10%, adding up to roughly half of the N(A) students. If we had included MTL, the numbers would be even higher. The numbers for N(T) students taking N(A) subjects are also largely similar.

As of now, the two batches of students who have participated in SBB in the prototype schools have completed their Secondary school national examinations. How did they do? Their results show that Normal and Express stream students, taking the same "O" level examinations, perform comparably.

To illustrate, for the national examinations in 2018 last year, 25% of Secondary 4 N(A) students who took "O" level English got A1 or A2. How about Express students? It was 24%, one percent less. For "O" level Mathematics, 26% of N(A) students got A1 or A2; Express students, 50%. For "O" level Combined Science, it was N(A) students, 33%; Express students, 34%.

I think the Normal stream students have held their own. Our surveys also showed that students, parents and teachers overwhelmingly welcome this. Given the positive outcomes, last year, we expanded SBB nationwide.

We are now ready to take a further, major move. It will involve a few significant policy steps over the next few years, let me explain the process.

There will be two important milestones – 2020 and 2024. Beginning in 2020, about 25 pilot Secondary schools will implement Full Subject-Based Banding, Full SBB, with more schools joining in subsequent years. How is Full SBB different from vanilla SBB today? There are three main differences.

11.45 am

First, we will allow lower Secondary school students to study more subjects at a higher level – not just English, MTL, Maths and Science today, but also Geography, History and Literature. Chemistry and Biology will only be available in upper Secondary. As it may be difficult to ascertain the level suitable for students using just their PSLE results, MOE and schools will develop guidelines and assessment mechanisms, including using Secondary 1 year-end examinations.

The second difference is: we will also allow students of Express and N(A) streams the flexibility to take a subject offered in N(A) and N(T) streams respectively, to broaden their learning and experiences, or in instances where customisation will help the student. Express students today are already exposed to technical subjects, such as Design and Technology. In time, Express students may take subjects offered in the Normal stream, such as Mobile Robotics.

The third big difference, beyond the academic aspects, Full SBB will also give pilot schools an opportunity to reshape the social environment in schools to benefit their students. Day-to-day practices in schools play a big part in shaping a child’s self-confidence, sometimes more than the academic curriculum.

I learnt this from Mr Tan Chor Pang, the principal of Boon Lay Secondary. Mr Patrick Tay knows him very well. The late-coming and absenteeism rates amongst Normal stream students in Boon Lay Secondary had not been healthy. However, Chor Pang observed that when it came to CCA, all the students were very engaged. So, in an unprecedented move, he figured, let us just change the way we organise clases. After all, Boon Lay Secondary has a smaller school enrolment. He re-organised form classes according to CCAs rather than academic streams. Almost immediately, absenteeism and late-coming rates fell drastically.

I was fascinated by this unorthodox practice and decided to visit the school and speak to teachers and students. I found out that, every morning, students would gather in their CCA groups – which is their form class – for morning assembly. They also underwent Character and Citizenship Education classes, and learning journeys, together as a form class based on CCA. For academic lessons, they then break out into different classes based on SBB.

So, I asked the students: “Why the big reduction in late-coming and absenteeism rates when the principal changed the class organisation?” The students were frank. They told me that many of them had personal and other family problems. Teachers and counsellors could help, but they also needed peer support, especially from their seniors and friends in their CCA. Now, they look forward to attending morning assembly, because this is when they meet their friends and seniors from their CCA groups.

One student told me: “Now I can pour my heart out to my seniors every morning before assembly, even if it is for 10 minutes. But to do so, I must come to school, and come on time. In fact, 10 minutes earlier!”

Another Normal stream student told me something quite profound. He said that in the past, during morning assembly, a teacher might admonish a noisy class and say: “4N(T), keep quiet!” Immediately, all the N(T) students felt that they were singled out. Today, the teacher would say: “NCC, keep quiet!” and the Normal stream students feel: "Okay lah."

The students who have gone through almost two years of the new form classes in Boon Lay Secondary have recently completed their national examinations. Across the school, results had shown improvement. MOE will need to study their results further, but there is now a genuine belief that the social environment of the school can positively influence a student’s academic behaviour and performance.

I also visited another school, Edgefield Secondary, which had decided to re-organise form classes to include students from all three streams starting this year – not by CCA, but mixed form classes with students from all three streams. Each Secondary One form class goes through about half of their lessons together, for subjects like Character and Citizenship Education (CCE), Design and Technology, Art, Music and Physical Education, where there is little need to customise lessons based on academic abilities. The other half, comprising academic subjects – English, MTL, Maths and Science – are grouped according to SBB.

It has only been a couple of months, but feedback has been generally good. The students I spoke to have no basis for comparison, so they all say it is very good, and they are very happy, as expected. The teachers noticed that students were helping each other more frequently in class, and students from the Normal stream were stepping forward to take up leadership roles during group work or project/team work.

I chatted with several students at the canteen. I asked them: "You all think this is great. But how about your parents?" They said their parents felt it was okay. One student said "My father thought 'This is Awesome'."

The principal, Mr Lee Peck Ping, told me that, a handful of parents were concerned that this might slow down learning in class. Peck Ping painstakingly explained how SBB worked, what students are learning together as a form class, and how classes for academic subjects are still banded based on the learning abilities of the students. Through this explanation, he managed to address the concerns of most parents.

He told me that a small number of parents were still worried, and felt that had they known, they would not have sent their children to Edgefield Secondary. And I understand the concerns of these parents. But Edgefield Secondary was making the right trade-off, to develop students both academically and socially. It was, in its own way, taking the lead in reshaping our existing culture for the better.

Schools, such as Boon Lay and Edgefield, are important trailblazers and I thank them. After several years of progressively implementing SBB, and with good outcomes both academically and socially, the time is right for us to move to Full SBB.

Implementing Full SBB will be a multi-year transition. We should not underestimate the challenge of this move. There are major operational challenges, such as time-tabling. Schools will need time to learn, adapt and innovate.

By the start of 2024, we will be ready to take the next step, which is the most crucial. Two things will happen then.

One, we would have rolled out Full SBB and the new ways of organising form classes across the education system. The pioneering practices in Boon Lay and Edgefield will become the norm.

Two, to reflect the reality of Full SBB as a more flexible, single course, we will enrol the first batch of Secondary 1 students, who will graduate with a common Secondary school certificate. This common certificate will combine the current "O"-"level, N(A) and, N(T) certificates. It will list the subjects completed and the standard band of each subject – very much like what Dr Intan described yesterday. And we are not unfamiliar with this concept. It is actually similar to the A-level certificate for JCs, where the certificate states the subjects and the standards they are completed in – whether it is H1, H2 or H3.

For Secondary schools, we will use G1, G2 or G3. "G" stands for "General". G1 will roughly correspond to today’s N(T) standard, G2 to N(A) standard, and G3 to Express standard.

Singapore and Cambridge will co-brand this new certificate. We are both strong international brand names in education and, by working together, we will enhance the recognition and value of the certificate.

With Full SBB implemented, form classes re-organised across the board, and a combined Secondary school education certificate, we would have effectively merged Express, N(A) and N(T) into a single course. [Applause.] The Express, N(A) and N(T) streams, together with their labels, will be phased out. [Applause.]

So, from three education streams, we will now have "One Secondary education, many subject bands." We will no longer have fishes swimming down three separate streams. We will have one broad river, with each fish negotiating its own journey.

I am sure that there are many questions on how all this will work. Some of them will need to be addressed as we implement the changes, but let me answer a few key ones.

An immediate question is whether we will still keep Secondary 5. It is a key concern amongst students and parents, because for N(A) students today, attaining the “O” level through Secondary 5 helps them to access Polytechnics and JCs.

Our plan is that by 2024, all students will enrol into Secondary 1 and go through a four-year curriculum for all subject bands. At the end of Secondary 4, these students will attain the common certificate with various subject permutations. Some will have six G3 subjects and one G2 subject; some will have five G3s and two G2s; others, maybe two G3s, three G2s and one G1 and so on.

This will require us to undertake a review of our post-Secondary posting system, so that students taking a combination of G1, G2 and G3 subjects can be fairly considered for ITE, Polytechnics and JCs. Our review will recognise students’ particular strengths that make them suitable for specific post-Secondary courses.

The year 2024 is a few years away, and we will use this time to undertake this review. We will also explore other alternatives to a fifth year in Secondary schools, like the current Polytechnic Foundation Programme (PFP), to help students bridge over to Polytechnics or JCs.

Another question is “Currently, the great majority of Secondary schools admit students from the Express, N(A) and N(T) streams. Now it is one course. How will the Secondary school posting system change?”

MOE has thought this through and concluded that it is better not to disrupt the current posting system. This means that secondary schools should continue to admit students across three PSLE scoring bands, even though the streams have been merged.

Educationally, this approach is both practical, reasonable, and sound, because the transition from Primary 6 to Secondary 1 is a fairly major one, and a significant one for all students. We need students to start off right. PSLE still serves as a useful initial gauge of the subject bands that each student is most suited for at the beginning of Secondary 1.

So, students admitted in the first PSLE scoring band will initially take mostly G1 subjects, those in the second PSLE scoring band will take mostly G2 subjects, and those in the third PSLE scoring band will take mostly G3 subjects. Admitting students across three PSLE score bands will allow schools to offer subjects of all bands.

But once in Secondary school, students can discover and further develop their strengths and interests, and Full SBB will enable them to diverge into various paths, taking a combination of subjects across different bands.

There is also an important social consideration. Admitting students from different PSLE scoring bands into the same Secondary school will ensure that our students get to make friends from diverse backgrounds. Indeed, one of the key objectives of education is to forge a cohesive society.

12.00 pm

This leads to the third question, which is then what will happen to Spectra and Crest, which currently take in only Normal (Technical) students, or schools with specialised programmes, such as NUS High School, the School of Science and Technology, and Integrated Programme schools that take in only Express stream students today? Will MOE mandate that they take in students across all three PSLE bands?

There is value in having certain schools take a whole-school approach in implementing specialised programmes. Every education system in the world will have schools that cater specifically to different segments of students, such as those with high academic ability, strengths in specific areas, or who much prefer a more hands-on, vocational, and technical training.

Such a diverse education system can complement the plan to move beyond streaming. We should maintain and balance diversity across schools and within a school, to allow us to better cater to the educational needs and strengths of different groups of students.

The downside is the lack of mixing in these more specialised schools. These schools have to make a special effort to recruit students from all backgrounds, wisely using their Direct School Admissions (DSA) mechanism. They will have to ensure that students participate actively in inter-school mixing opportunities, such as combining school CCAs, Outward Bound School camps, or Values-in-Action projects, where week-in, week-out, students from different schools get to mingle together. I can see many of the principals from the specialised schools working very hard to do better in this aspect.

There is also scope for these specialised schools to offer more subject options. Spectra and Crest should offer more Normal (Academic) subjects compared to today, and could possibly also offer a few Express-level subjects. Similarly, in time, it will also make sense for the schools that take in only Express students to offer some subjects at the Normal (Academic) or Normal (Technical) level. After all, customisation of education, and catering more flexibly to the varied interests and abilities of students, will benefit them.

Mr Chairman, let me conclude. The emphasis of our education system has evolved over the years. Four decades ago, we made major progress in customising education to reduce student attrition. From two decades ago, we have been redesigning the system to develop the varied abilities of our students.

What is the focus now? In the digital era, knowledge has become very accessible. One smart phone and you can access all kinds of knowledge. But skills carry a premium. Skills – both technical and soft – are what make us human, and inoculate us from being replaced by computers and robots. But skills take a lifetime to acquire and hone, and one must be driven by passion to do so.

Skills. Passion. Growth. In this phase, more than ever, we are centred on the need to learn for life, to prepare our students for the future.

The third thrust of our "Learn for Life" movement: "One education system, many subject bands", is another step in this direction.

We are able to take these steps now because of the work done in the past. So, in a way, whatever I have announced could have been anticipated. In fact, many Members of Parliament who urged for the phasing out of streaming, made reference to the SBB, and saw this as a natural extension of all the work that we have done.

And this has to be our attitude when it comes to education – never complacent, always anticipating the future, figuring out what needs to change next, planning it out, and implementing at a pace that takes into account the trade-offs, complexities, and the immense impact any changes will have on our students. We should never stay frozen for long periods, only to make sudden changes years later. So, any change that can be compared to the slaughtering of any animal is probably a bad idea.

I am confident that "One Secondary education, many subject bands" will benefit many students. Let me share a personal story.

I grew up in a Chinese-speaking family. When I was young, the only books I read were Chinese comics. I entered Primary 1 not being able to understand English very well, much less reading and writing. My late mother, a Chinese teacher, tried to teach me, but her English was also very limited.

Then sometime in Primary 3, I had a eureka moment. I still remember it vividly. I figured out that if "b-a-r" reads "bar", "b-e-r" reads "ber", then "b-a-r-b-e-r" – I can put them two together and it becomes "barber" – the guy who cuts my hair! So, I had figured out phonics – in Primary 3.

From then on, I could start to read some English books. My first book was "The Three Musketeers". I could read the words and sentences, but I had a problem because I did not know what they meant. So, in Secondary school, my English standard was what my classmates would describe as "cannot swim". This affected other language-dependent subjects such as History and Geography. How did I pass? I memorised large chunks of text. And in the exam, I kept my fingers crossed. If I had spotted the exam questions correctly, then I would regurgitate what I had memorised. If the exam questions came out wrong, I regurgitated anyway.

But if I were in Primary school today, I would probably have been put into a Learning Support Programme (LSP), which would have done me a lot of good. In Secondary school, it would also have been better for me to be placed in a less demanding band for English, which would give me time to pick up the basics, and then upgrade to more demanding band if I could meet the standard. I should have done G2 or G1 English.

There are some students who are very strong in every academic subject. But most, like myself, have uneven strengths, and specific weaknesses. It is just the way humans are. The challenge of our education system is to cater to that.

That is the central purpose of this change. Put to rest the mistaken notion that there is a single, dominant path to success that starts from a very young age. The school system will become far more flexible than today, so that we can customise learning to the student, to give them time to blossom at different points in their lives, while anchoring the belief that we can grow and get better. Beyond schools, the IHL landscape offers even more varied pathways for the student to develop and grow based on his talents and his strengths.

In making this change, we are developing a child with the knowledge that the pace of his or her learning changes with time, all the way to adulthood. We are acting on our conviction that our students benefit most when there is diversity across schools and within schools. Above all, we are guided by our belief that no child's fate is fixed, and in an environment that encourages growth and development, and holistic education, they will fulfil their potential to be sons and daughters of Singapore that we can be proud of. [Applause]

The Chairman: Second Minister Indranee Rajah.

The Second Minister for Education (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Chairman, several Members have raised the issues of inequality and social mobility. As these cuts span the work of several Ministries, they will be addressed in a collective response by myself, Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling and Minister Desmond Lee.

The Government is committed to tackling income inequality and ensuring social mobility. We will do so by building a society of opportunities for all. We will ensure that education continues to be a key lifelong enabler for all to progress, irrespective of starting point or background. We will help those in the working world upgrade their skills and learn new ones, so they can access employment opportunities at all stages of life and have good incomes. We will support lower income families in their aspirations towards home ownership and provide extra support for Singaporeans from disadvantaged backgrounds.

This cannot be achieved by the Government alone. It requires a whole-of-society effort, with government agencies, employers, community, families and individuals working together as one.

In education, we have built a system where opportunities are available to all. We have many schemes to assist disadvantaged students and their families at every stage of education. However, some still struggle. For those who do, the difficulties are real, as highlighted by Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar, Mr Charles Chong, Mr Murali Pillai and Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap.

The question then is: how we can help them overcome their challenges, so that they can benefit from the help that is available and realise their full potential. With this in mind, MOE set up UPLIFT – the "Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce". The Taskforce's aim is to deep-dive into problems and issues faced by underperforming students from disadvantaged families, understand what exactly is preventing them from doing better, identify gaps to be filled and devise practical solutions.

To get to grips with the real issues and causes, the Taskforce has engaged people at the frontline – those who work directly with and are most familiar with the problems faced by disadvantaged families. To date, we have engaged over 200 contributors, including school leaders and staff, students, parents, social workers, Self-Help Groups (SHGs), community partners and volunteers. Their insights, have been extremely valuable in crystallising the issues and shaping our recommendations.

We have identified four key issues that need to be addressed.

First, long term absenteeism, as mentioned by Miss Cheng Li Hui and Mr Leon Perera. In 2017, about 1.1 per 1,000 students in Primary schools and 7.5 per 1,000 students in Secondary schools were absent for 60 days or more without valid reason. The overall proportion of each Primary 1 cohort who did not complete Secondary education has remained low, at less than 1% in the last five years. However, the numbers, while small, represent a discernible group that needs help. The reasons for absenteeism are varied, but most often, it is tied up with complex family issues. There are existing efforts to address this issue. For the pre-school sector, ECDA engages some of these families through the KidSTART pilot and Pre-school Outreach programme, where the professionals conduct home visits and work with families, including to improve pre-school attendance for the children.

In our schools, we monitor students' attendance closely and actively engage parents when students are absent without reason. Student Welfare Officers (SWOs) and school counsellors are trained to identify early warning signs, and reach out to students who show signs of disengagement from school to provide timely interventions and support. However, as the root causes often lie in the family situation, we will have to direct more efforts in that area.

Second, the lack of a structured and supervised environment outside of school. Typically, when a child comes home after school, there is a proper routine – lunch, some rest, a quiet environment and time set aside for homework, and thereafter play. However, many disadvantaged children do not have such an environment at home.

Third, children who under-perform due to lack of self-confidence, motivation and resilience. These students feel disconnected and isolated from their peers. Their perception of what they can achieve is constrained by difficult circumstances, and they struggle with self-esteem or other underlying emotional issues that hinder them from doing well. In the UPLIFT engagements, my team met Santhya, a student from ITE College Central.

Santhya was disengaged when she first started ITE. She became depressed, lacked self-confidence and began having an anxiety disorder. Her teachers engaged and encouraged her, to build up her self-confidence. With family support, she sought professional help. Fortunately, Santhya had the motivation and resilience to overcome her depression and anxiety disorder. She did well in her Nitec course and is now pursuing a Higher Nitec in Engineering with Business. She is also part of the Student Council in ITE College Central. The question is: how we can help others like her find the resilience and motivation to overcome their challenges.

12.15 pm

Fourth, parental support. Many parents in the target profile struggle to balance work and caring for their children. They love their children but they feel inadequate in their parenting skills and do not know how to establish control or strike the necessary balance. They typically also face multiple issues – financial difficulties, split families, unstable housing arrangements and in some cases, domestic violence, or a lack of caregiving for younger and elderly family members, resulting in the older children becoming substitute care-givers and hence unable to focus on their education.

To address these four key issues, UPLIFT has identified the following six strategic areas of focus:

(a) strengthen after-school care and support for students;

(b) build the students’ mental and emotional resilience;

(c) strengthen parental engagement and support;

(d) implement practical solutions to absenteeism;

(e) enhance collaboration between schools and the community; and

strengthen coordination across these initiatives.

As there are many different aspects to UPLIFT, some initiatives can be done earlier, while others will take more time to develop. We will progressively announce the various initiatives as and when they are ready. One has already been launched, that was the UPLIFT Scholarship announced by Minister Ong Ye Kung in December 2018.

Today, I would like to announce two more initiatives.

MOE will strengthen after-school care and support for disadvantaged students through our school-based student care centres (SCCs) in Primary schools and after-school programmes in Secondary schools.

During my recent visit to the SCC in Lian Hua Primary, I met Syed Al-Hafiz, currently in Primary 5. He lives with his elderly grandmother, and his neighbour, Uncle Tan accompanies him and his siblings to school every day because his grandmother is occupied with looking after his younger siblings. Hafiz initially had trouble adjusting to school and used to misbehave. Under the care of his teachers, Uncle Tan – the neighbour – and the SCC staff, Hafiz responded positively. The SCC provided Hafiz with a structured after-school environment for him to develop good habits and daily routines. He is now doing well and is happy to come to school. Hafiz’s experience shows that community support coupled with the right care environment and encouragement, can make a big difference.

Given the positive outcomes of MOE’s after-school care, we will adopt a three-E approach – we will expand current provisions, increase enrolment, and enhance programmes to strengthen motivational support, resilience and holistic development.

Expansion. There are currently 170 SCCs in Primary schools. Enrolment in school-based SCCs has increased from 3,000 in 2012 to about 25,000 this year. MOE is on track to having a SCC in all 184 Primary schools by next year.

Enrolment. With increased SCC capacity, we can take in more children.

Schools will therefore make a more concerted effort to reach out to parents whose children would benefit from attending SCCs, especially those with no alternative care arrangements, and facilitate their enrolment.

We are studying the difficulties that disadvantaged families may face in enrolling their children into SCCs. One issue highlighted in our engagement is the affordability of student care for low-income families. Today, children from low-income families attending registered SCCs receive subsidies for their SCC fees, through the Student Care Fee Assistance scheme (SCFA). Nonetheless, some students on MOE’s Financial Assistance Scheme could still have to pay more than $100 per month.

MOE and MSF will therefore be reviewing the affordability of SCCs for low-income families.

Enhancement. Many Primary schools work with their SCC vendors to take full advantage of the after-school hours to develop their SCC students holistically, for example, through enrichment and character-building activities. Parents and students have given positive feedback about such programmes. We will continue to build on these efforts and will introduce additional programmes aimed at strengthening students’ resilience and improving their socio-emotional well-being.

Next, Secondary schools. As Miss Cheng Li Hui mentioned, the transition from Primary to Secondary school has to be smooth, especially for disadvantaged students. Currently, Primary school counsellors or Allied Educators share transition support strategies with parents, as well as information of students with higher needs with their Secondary school counterparts. The Secondary schools then ensure continuity of financial support, provide academic bridging and extend other forms of additional support to those who need it.

Since 2014, Secondary schools have piloted after-school programmes for students who need more support and supervision. The schools provide a room for the students, which they can use for self-study and various activities after school. The activities and programmes could be run by teachers, community partners or volunteers. Students are also mentored by teachers and external youth workers. These programmes have strengthened social-emotional support to students and improved their connectedness to their learning, peers and school.

Greendale Secondary School was among the 60 Secondary schools that piloted after-school programmes, with very encouraging results. They adopted The Scaffold Programme (TSP) in 2016, in partnership with SHINE Children and Youth Services.

One Greendale student who benefited from TSP was Fida’iy. Fida’iy displayed anger management issues at first and was disruptive in class. His family was also going through difficult times. His teacher recommended he join TSP. After attending TSP’s programmes, and with guidance and counselling from his youth worker, Jie Xi, Fida’iy learnt to manage his emotions better. He developed a good relationship with Jie Xi, who was also in regular contact with his family to help create a supportive and conducive home environment. Fida’iy is now a positive influence in class.

MOE will expand and enhance the after-school programmes from the existing 60 secondary schools to 120 schools by 2020. The consolidated after-school programmes will be known as GEAR-UP. Through GEAR-UP, schools will work with community partners to provide customised support and after-school engagement, and strengthen our students’ social-emotional competencies and social skills. These programmes will be especially helpful to students from disadvantaged families, who will benefit from customised support and care.

The issues faced by disadvantaged students are multi-faceted, and not all the interventions or assistance can or should be school-based. Many other Government agencies also provide assistance, as do community based organisations such as the Self-Help Groups, grassroots organisations, VWOs and individual volunteers.

Community partners play a crucial role in uplifting our students. One example is Care Corner. They offer a range of services to support children and youth from disadvantaged families such as after-school care and support within the community and programmes to build students’ motivation and resilience. Ulu Pandan Stars Programme is another volunteer-driven initiative which mobilises more than 100 Secondary to tertiary student volunteers to provide academic coaching and mentorship to over 70 students from disadvantaged families in Ghim Moh. The programme engages and involves parents in the learning process and collaborates with schools to support students’ learning needs.

One clear theme that has emerged from all the engagement sessions is the need for better coordination to tap community efforts and resources more systematically.

Ms Tan Bee Keow and Ms Joy Lim of the Singapore Children’s Society said that the locale-based engagement sessions gave them a clearer sense of local needs, and a more complete picture of the programmes by other community partners in the same neighbourhood. They expressed a wish for a more coordinated approach among agencies to ensure that the children’s needs are well-met and there is no duplication of services.

We agree. MSF is taking steps to strengthen social service delivery and coordination amongst agencies and community partners. MOE is also supporting MSF’s efforts to tighten local coordination among schools, Social Service Offices (SSOs), Family Service Centres (FSCs), other community organisations and VWOs. This involves strengthening outreach and case management for families who need it, for example, by improving data sharing and coordination of complex cases.

To further close the gap, MOE will set up the UPLIFT Programme Office (UPO) within MOE. The UPO will be a dedicated team to support and strengthen the interface and partnership between school and community partners. It will help in a number of ways.

First, it will work with schools to identify disadvantaged students and map their needs, to facilitate community-based outreach to the families, and matching to suitable community programmes or assistance.

Second, to help schools better leverage community assets and volunteer networks to support after-school activities or holiday programmes for these students, UPO will match trusted partners and volunteers to schools, working with the SSOs and SG Cares Community Network, as well as tap on retired educators who wish to volunteer.

Third, UPO will set targets, monitor feedback and track the outcomes of the various UPLIFT initiatives over time, to establish accountability and evaluate which pilots should be scaled up.

In the first instance, UPO will focus on supporting school-community coordination in selected pilot sites which have higher numbers of students and families fitting the target profile.

UPLIFT has other initiatives in the pipeline, but this will get us off to a good start.

Let me end with a story about the power of strengthening resilience and motivation. Zhi Xian struggled with low self-esteem when he joined Assumption Pathway School (APS). Compounded with family and financial issues, he became rebellious and disruptive. Zhi Xian’s teachers supported him through counselling and constant encouragement. He was paired to cook with his teacher during certain culinary classes. This allowed the teacher to directly mentor and encourage him. He slowly built up his motivation and self-esteem, and became more confident. He was part of the school team that won the bronze medal in a culinary competition. He also started counselling and mentoring his peers. Zhi Xian went on to clinch the 2018 Award for Best Culinary Skills student in APS. He is currently enrolled in ITE’s Nitec in Asian Culinary Skills, and continues to strive hard and give his best.

For us, every child is precious and we want each and every one of them to achieve his or her fullest potential. This is especially so in the case of those from disadvantaged backgrounds, since they face more challenges than others.

Together, we can build a society of opportunities where every Singaporean can do well, succeed and progress, irrespective of background.

The Chairman: Minister of State Mr Zaqy Mohamad.

The Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Earlier, Minister Indranee has shared about MOE's effort to ensure that every child has a start in life to fulfil his or her aspirations. I shall now touch on how we uplift Singaporean workers.

With your permission, Mr Chairman, I have asked the Clerk to place a handout on the Members' seats. The outcomes, if we look at the handout, show that we are moving in the right direction.

Between 2012 and 2017, lower-income workers have had higher income growth than the median workers. Wages of workers at the 20th percentile grew by 24% cumulatively in real terms, while incomes at the median grew by 21%. Individual income growth also translated into increased household incomes. For low-income Singaporean households, this grew by about 26% cumulatively in real terms, higher than the 24% for median households.

Significantly, the employment rate for residents remained high at about 80% even as income grew.

But these outcomes did not happen by chance. They arose from multiple layers of support to upskill our workers, uplift their wages, while keeping unemployment low and employment high.

What this means is that we must stay focused on three key strategies.

First, we must maintain a thriving economy with a tight labour market, and constantly look out for opportunities to create better jobs. Full employment is the best way to ensure the welfare of our workers.

Next, we must strive for quality growth based on productivity improvements that all Singaporeans can benefit from, including our lower income workers.

Third, we support our lower income workers at both broad-based level and within specific sectors so that they can progress with the rest of the workforce.

12.30 pm

My speech today will focus on this third thrust. MOM will elaborate on the first two thrusts during our COS debate later.

The Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme is a broad-based measure that tops up the salaries of our lower income workers and helps them save for retirement.

As announced by the Minister for Finance in his Budget speech, from January 2020, we will enhance Workfare by raising the qualifying income cap from $2,000 to $2,300 per month; and increase the maximum annual payouts by up to $400. With these enhancements, we will disburse almost $1 billion of annual Workfare payouts in 2020, benefiting close to 440,000 Singaporeans, including self-employed persons.

Sixty-four-year-old Mdm Goh Geok Kee will be one such beneficiary. Auntie Geok shared with me that she has been cleaning our MOM Service Centre and receiving Workfare for the past seven years. Many of her co-workers also receive Workfare. With this year’s Workfare enhancements, Auntie Geok’s Workfare payouts will boost her income by about 25%. Auntie Geok told me that as long as she remains fit, she would like to continue working.

Mr Zainal Sapari suggested removing the age differentiation for WIS. We designed Workfare for more payouts to go to older workers like Auntie Geok who have less runway to upgrade their skills and save for retirement. We hope to encourage more older workers like Auntie Geok to be more economically active.

Our younger workers have greater potential for income growth, and can be better supported through upskilling efforts to improve their human capital.

Workfare also helps workers save more for retirement. Mr Zainal proposed increasing the cash component from 40% to 80%, and decreasing the CPF component from 60% to 20%. The cash component today is in fact higher than when Workfare first started. In addition, whenever the Government provides extra Workfare bonuses, such as this year’s Workfare Bicentennial Bonus, these bonuses are generally paid fully in cash.

I understand Members' desire to look after the workers' immediate needs. From 2020, the enhanced Workfare payouts will give all workers higher cash payments for daily needs. But their needs in retirement still matter. We worry about how they will cope when they eventually stop work.

We also want our lower income workers to benefit from the higher interest earned in CPF. Compounded over time, the savings will help them have more in retirement. We will also help the Workers who need financial assistance, through ComCare and other schemes.

We will continue to review Workfare regularly to help target groups like Auntie Geok and her co-workers.

Most Workfare recipients, including Auntie Geok, also receive other Government support to help meet their living needs. Over 90% of our Workfare recipients receive U-Save rebates and additional cash assistance under the GST Voucher scheme. Four in 10 receive medical and dental subsidies under the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS). Those with children also receive childcare and student care subsidies, if eligible. Nearly half receive three or more types of Government transfers each year. Notably, 75% of our Workfare recipients own their homes. I think this is a very laudable statistic to remember.

Forty-nine-year-old Mr Gunasegaran s/o Sellayya is another good example. Mr Guna works as a supervisor, managing eight other cleaners. Mr Guna has been receiving Workfare monthly. GST Vouchers and U-Save rebates help to offset his daily household expenses. Mr Guna owns a three-room flat that he lives with his family. His two elder daughters receive MOE Financial Assistance. Each gets a waiver of standard miscellaneous fees, free textbooks and school attire, and public transport credit. His youngest son receives the Kindergarten Financial Assistance (KiFAS). Mr Guna enjoys 99% of kindergarten fee assistance, paying only $1 monthly for kindergarten. Mr Guna’s retired mother also has a CHAS Orange card and receives subsidised care at CHAS clinics.

So, Mr Chairman, our approach of providing multi-layered support is more responsive to the varied needs of our lower income individuals than any single minimum wage or living wage. The cost of wage supplement is fully borne by the Government, with no cost being passed on to employers or consumers. Importantly we achieve significantly faster real median income growth, and ranked high on employment rates compared to other developed countries.

Beyond transfers, we also support skills upgrading to help lower-income workers achieve sustainable wage growth, and progress along with the workforce. The Workfare Training Support (WTS) Scheme encourages lower-income workers to upskill to access better jobs with higher wages as the economy transforms.

The tripartite partners have introduced the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) in the Security, Landscape and Cleaning sectors as a targeted intervention to address the market failure of “cheap sourcing” and support sustainable wage increases.

Since implementation, workers in these three sectors have seen positive real wage growth. Between 2012 and 2017, full-time resident security guards, landscape maintenance workers and cleaners benefitted from larger real wage increases of 23%, 36% and 44% respectively, compared to 21% for the median resident worker. Over 70,000 resident workers have benefitted so far.

Dr Intan asked whether the PWM can be extended to more sectors. Ultimately, improving productivity is key to sustainable wage growth. PWM helps to mitigate effects of market failure from “cheap sourcing”. We will hence be extending the PWM to the lift maintenance sector that similarly experiences depressed wages due to outsourcing. We also encourage employers in other sectors to adopt the principles of progressive wages and skills and provide clear progression pathways for their workers. On a voluntary basis, employers and unions have also established PWMs in public transport and healthcare. We will explore facilitating more of such voluntary PWMs.

Mr Zainal suggested reviewing the PWM training requirements to specify compulsory modules. As Chairman of the three Tripartite clusters, the Member would be aware that the tripartite partners have agreed on the training requirements in the PWMs, including specifying mandatory modules and giving employers flexibility to send their workers for other relevant training. We have also been enhancing these three PWMs with wage enhancements and bonuses. Together, the tripartite partners are fully committed to improving the lives of our lower-income workers.

Beyond improving wages, MOM also works closely with our tripartite partners to improve our workers’ well-being. I will cover this in MOM's COS debate.

Mr Chairman, we have had a decade of Workfare. The handout highlights key outcomes of Workfare, and how Workfare and the multiple layers of support have uplifted families like Mr Guna’s and Auntie Geok's. Over the last 10 years, 830,000 Singaporeans have benefited from $5.5 billion of Workfare payouts. We achieved good income growth while keeping employment high. Our lower-income workers continue to upskill, and as I mentioned earlier on, looking at home ownership, they also continue to grow their assets.

Let us build on what is working well for Singapore and stay on the task of uplifting Singaporean workers like Auntie Geok and Mr Guna.

The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Ms Sun Xueling): Mr Chairman, I will speak on home ownership which is central to providing stability and progress for families in the long-run.

Home ownership gives Singaporeans a stake in our country, and gives each family a permanent place to call their own. Also, households can use their CPF to pay for their mortgage, giving them a home and an asset, instead of using cash to pay rent.

That said, some families run into difficulties such as job losses, and are unable to own a home for some time. We work closely with MSF to ensure that they are not left without a roof over their heads. Those who lack family support and alternative housing options will be assisted with public rental housing.

Members have asked how we help tenants to attain home ownership. We agree that public rental should only be temporary for tenants who are work-capable, and are therefore increasing support to help tenants progress towards home ownership.

As highlighted by Mr Saktiandi Supaat, the Fresh Start Housing Scheme was designed for this purpose.

We introduced Fresh Start in 2016 to assist second-timer rental families with children to buy a 2-room flat. Families on the scheme can get a grant of up to $35,000. Beyond direct financial assistance, we seek to ensure that the families can sustain home ownership independently. We also work with MSF to check-in with the families regularly to ensure that the family situation remains stable.

To provide Mr Ong Teng Koon with an update, as of last month, 74 families have joined Fresh Start, of which five families have collected their keys. These numbers may seem small, but for those who benefit from the scheme, the help provided means a lot and we want them to succeed in their home ownership journey.

This is why we regularly review ways to enhance Fresh Start, and to intensify support for those who are already on the scheme. I will share more details on these enhancements at MND's COS.

Through Fresh Start, we have gained a better understanding of how best to support our tenants in their journey towards home ownership. For example, some needed advice on budgeting for a flat purchase. Others shared that they appreciated the face-to-face support from the Fresh Start team.

As Members can imagine, it is a manpower-intensive effort, but such individualised efforts are well worth it. We are heartened by this, and want to scale up our efforts. I am pleased to share that we will set up the Home ownership Support Team (HST), a dedicated team in HDB to help our rental households towards home ownership. We want to provide stronger, personalised hand-holding for families who are ready for home ownership. The HST will help tenants navigate home ownership policies and processes – from discussing the options that would best meet their needs and budget, guiding them through the purchase, and checking in to ensure that the family remains on track for key collection. We have learnt that having someone to consult, and more importantly, to provide the human touch, is important for our tenants. The HST will be set up later this year, and will start reaching out to families with potential for home ownership.

Home ownership may not be an immediate goal for some tenants who may first need to address more complex challenges such as family conflict. Our priority is to help these families stabilise. Hence, we will be providing spaces for MSF to establish social service hubs near rental flats to offer localised programmes and services. Once these families have stabilised, we look forward to engaging them, for HDB to work with them on their journey towards home ownership.

I have met many rental tenants who aspire towards home ownership. Some shared with me that they are working hard, and saving up diligently to buy a flat for themselves and to give their families a better future. We are heartened that last year about 1,300 households moved into home ownership. These numbers have increased steadily in the last few years. We want to keep this up, and will work hard to partner our tenants in their efforts.

Mr Chairman, in Chinese, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Home ownership allows every Singaporean to live and work with peace of mind and to grow with the nation. In spite of this, there are families that face difficulties in life such as unemployment, and are unable to afford their own flat.

MPs have asked how we can help households living in rental flats to buy their own homes. I would like to share with you that as of last year, 1,300 families have bought their own flats and moved out of rental flats. We will continue these efforts and do more to help rental flat tenants own their homes.

We noticed that some tenants in rental flats require budgeting advice when buying their own flat, some are grateful for the face-to-face counselling and assistance provided.

I am glad to announce that HDB will establish a Home ownership Support Team or HST, which is a dedicated team to help tenants in rental flats kick start the process for home ownership.

First of all, the HST will help tenants understand the policies and processes of buying a flat, and discuss suitable options for them after considering their needs and budget. The HST will provide guidance through the process of the flat purchase and ensure that everything proceeds smoothly, up to the collection of keys.

We realised that having someone to provide information and advice, and more importantly, the human touch, is very important for these residents. Before buying the flat, some families would need to resolve complex challenges, such as family disputes. Therefore, our priority is to help these families stabilise.

Hence, we will be providing spaces for MSF to establish social service hubs near rental flats to offer localised programmes and services. Once these families have stabilised, we will help them embark on the journey of home ownership.

The Chairman: Minister Desmond Lee.

The Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Chairman, may I have your permission to present two slides in the course of my presentation and also a little bit more time to complete this joint statement.

The Chairman: Yes, please. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]

Mr Desmond Lee: Thank you, Sir. Mr Chairman, my colleagues have described some of the further measures that we will take, to give our children a good start, uplift our workers and support families living in rental housing.

I will update Members on our efforts to provide stronger and more integrated support for Singaporeans with complex challenges. These include enhancements to ComCare, setting up of Community Link or ComLink for families in rental flats and Localised Community Networks to support youth at-risk.

ComCare is a key component of our social safety net. It complements the support provided by family, community, and other Government assistance. We regularly review our ComCare schemes at MSF with inputs from our stakeholders.

ComCare Long-Term Assistance (LTA) supports those who are permanently unable to work due to old age, illness or disability and have little or no income and family support. Most of our beneficiaries are elderly Singaporeans and they receive monthly cash assistance for living expenses and household bills; assistance with medical bills, medical consumables and one-off essentials; and access to Government-funded social services such as Senior Activity Centres and befriending services to stay engaged and connected.

Over the last 10 years, MSF has reviewed and adjusted these rates every two or three years. The last was in 2016. Minister Heng Swee Keat has announced that we have completed our latest review. So, from 1 July, we will increase the cash assistance that beneficiaries on ComCare Long-Term Assistance will receive to meet their basic living expenses. For example, single-person households will receive $600 in cash assistance each month, an increase of $100, and larger households will receive higher amounts.

In addition to ComCare Long-Term Assistance, the Government has enhanced wraparound support for seniors in recent years, so that our seniors can age with better assurance.

You will see a picture of Mdm Jaya, pictured here together with Priya from SSO@Hougang and Moses from Fei Yue Cluster Support. Mdm Jaya suffers from polio, and lives with her sister in a HDB studio apartment. Since 2016, she has been receiving ComCare Long-Term Assistance cash assistance. Sunlove Home Help delivers meals to her every day, as part of MOH’s Meals-on-Wheels programme. She receives cash supplements through the Silver Support Scheme and we assist her with her medical bills and medical consumables. She further benefits from the Pioneer Generation Package, which provides additional help with her healthcare costs. Mdm Jaya spends time at the Fei Yue Senior Activity Centre (Hougang) every day. Fei Yue Cluster Support officers also visits her every year to check on her well-being and we hope such wraparound support will help Madam Jaya and seniors like her live and age well in their golden years.

Sir, apart from ComCare Long-Term Assistance, we provide ComCare Short-to-Medium-Term Assistance, or SMTA, to help families tide over difficult times and regain stability. For example, those whose breadwinners are temporarily unable to work, looking for jobs or earning a low income may receive temporary support through SMTA. We have similarly reviewed ComCare SMTA to keep pace with living expenses and changes in expenditure patterns. So, from 1 July this year, new SMTA beneficiaries as well as those who have their assistance renewed should expect an increase in their cash assistance. Amounts will vary depending on their needs and financial circumstances.

These are part of our efforts to strengthen social assistance for the vulnerable, which Dr Lily Neo and Mr Seah Kian Peng asked about.

Beyond enhancing our social assistance schemes, we must continue to strengthen the ways in which families receive help. Families facing complex situations often require support beyond financial assistance. And it can be challenging for them to navigate the system and interface with multiple agencies and VWOs. To achieve better sustained outcomes, we are working to provide more Comprehensive, Convenient, and Coordinated assistance, and I will share more at MSF’s COS.

I will move on to the second significant area of strengthened support which concerns rental families. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Ms Sun Xueling had earlier described some of MND’s efforts to help families living in rental flats.

We will also do more to enhance support holistically for these families and, in particular, work with a network of partners to help them and their children overcome early disadvantages and do better as they grow up. In July last year I sketched out plans to set up social service hubs at or near rental flats. Dr Lily Neo and Mr Seah Kian Peng have asked about our plans and over the past few months, we have been consulting our partners.

MSF, together with MND, will be launching Community Link, or ComLink for short, at or near rental flats to offer more integrated and coordinated support, and customised programmes and services for families living there. ComLink will provide an accessible focal point in each community. The SSO and officers from other social services will work together and proactively support those in need. Community partners can also come together to assist these families more holistically through the ComLink. For example, we may bring in parenting workshops and night-time student care or childcare, if such needs are identified in the community. Most importantly, ComLink will develop a sense of community and mutual help, with neighbours supporting one another in their journeys.

We will start with four sites – Jalan Kukoh, Marsiling, Kembangan-Chai Chee and Boon Lay – over the next two years. We chose these sites because of their profile of rental families with children. ComLink is expected to benefit around 1,000 families in these estates. At each of these sites, dedicated spaces will be available for community partners to run programmes catering to the needs of the families. This is a photo of one of the programmes provided at the existing space in Jalan Kukoh which we are using. ComLink will provide proactive, collaborative and community-driven support to these families. The SSOs have brought community partners like the grassroots, Government agencies on the ground and VWOs together in local implementation workgroups to better understand each community’s specific needs. These implementation workgroups will be engaging the families and the local community to better understand their aspirations and their needs. We want to design programmes and services alongside them. And we look forward to working with partners to serve the community.

Apart from families living in rental housing, we also look into the needs of children and young people who may be derailed because of family issues, such as financial difficulties or family conflict. Their parents may also be absent or unable to care for them. These are stressful situations that can affect the children, including the level of motivation and learning in school, which Minister Indranee has been looking into under UPLIFT.

Without proactive early support and intervention, some of these students may underperform or start to skip school and yet, these are young people with potential and promise; and we want to ensure that they have the best chances in life.

Today, there are many organisations doing good work on the ground, but there is room for us to do more and work closer together. We will therefore embark on a Localised Community Network pilot, to see how we can better support these young people. We want to intervene more proactively upstream, and partner the community and grassroots more closely to support youths with complex family circumstances. This is part of the work of the National Committee on Prevention, Rehabilitation and Recidivism (NCPR) formed by Minister Josephine Teo and myself last year, to develop and implement a coordinated and integrated approach to prevent offending and re-offending, and strengthen rehabilitation, including for children and young people.

For this pilot, we will work with schools and the MOE UPLIFT Programme Office (UPO) which Minister Indranee announced earlier, to identify these children and youths early, and provide timely social service support and intervention.

By facilitating fuller data sharing between the relevant Government agencies, we hope to gain a better understanding of the challenges they face at home, in school or elsewhere. And in doing so, we hope to help them resolve or cope with the issues they are facing. The pilot also complements UPLIFT’s efforts to support students who exhibit long-term absenteeism or emerging attendance issues, arising from challenging family circumstances. For these students, we will strengthen and coordinate support, by bringing together relevant Government agencies, schools, VWOs, community organisations and volunteers to help their families holistically, so that family members receive support in relevant areas and do not have to approach multiple agencies on their own.

We will pilot this Localised Community Network model at Boon Lay and the broader Jurong West, starting this July. This is also one of the four sites for ComLink, thus allowing families involved in the pilot to also be supported under ComLink if they live in rental housing.

ComLink and the Localised Community Network pilot are part of our efforts to strengthen the way in which families receive help, and strengthen the overall social service network. The Government will continue to invest in and strengthen our system of social support. But with the needs of families becoming more complex, it is encouraging to see more community organisations and volunteers joining us in our efforts to uplift families. To ensure that such goodwill and resources translate into a more impactful and sustainable improvement, we must work together to organise and integrate our community efforts better.

Mr Chairman, over the past year, public consciousness about the challenges of income inequality and social mobility has been raised through a series of thoughtful books, articles, forums and programmes. These include Channel News Asia’s documentary entitled, “Regardless of Class” narrated by Dr Janil Puthucheary; books by academics such as Assoc Prof Teo You Yenn’s "This is what Inequality Looks Like”; and the volume edited by Prof David Chan on “How Working Together Matters”; the dialogue with Prof Tommy Koh and Deputy Prime Minister Tharman at last year’s Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) Conference; and subsequent dialogues involving Prof Koh and Mr Lim Boon Heng on minimum wage; op-eds by practitioners, policymakers and academics such as Dr Sudha Nair, Senior Minister of State Maliki Osman, and Assoc Prof Walter Theseira – to name a few – and forum letters by members of the public.

Mr Mohamed Irshad asked for the Government’s views on the positions taken in Prof Chan’s and Prof Teo’s books, and I presume by extension, the views on inequality articulated by other academics and commentators in the media.

This is not quite the right platform for a full exposition and assessment of the broad range of issues raised. The Government has in fact set out its views and approach on inequality and social mobility earlier, in particular, in Prime Minister's Parliamentary reply, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman's interview with the Straits Times and MSF's Occasional Paper entitled “Improving the Lives of Low-Income and Vulnerable Families in Singapore”.

So, let me make a few broad points to close this joint segment.

First, we welcome the diversity of views and ideas on inequality and social mobility. It gives us the opportunity to see fresh perspectives, step back and challenge our own assumptions, so that we can continue to make our system better. It also focuses and asks on how each of us can play our part to help uplift Singaporeans in need.

Second, we are encouraged that many more people are volunteering and giving generously. More companies are asking how their giving can be made more impactful; we can achieve greater impact if we better harness our collective resources and complement each other's efforts.

Third, there are many causes of inequality, not just a single cause: from differences at birth in people's abilities, to differences in resources that parents can invest in their children; from differences in educational outcomes, to the way technology and market forces shape wages of different groups of Singaporeans; from the difficulties and derailers that life's circumstances present, to issues of individual motivation and mindset; from lack of awareness about help schemes and support services, to challenges in navigating the system and accessing these opportunities and schemes.

1.00 pm

Because there are multiple causes, our solutions must be multi-faceted. We must tackle inequality practically, rather than ideologically.

So, where inequality is caused by differences in how much resources families can invest in their children, we put in significant investments to narrow the gap and give children from lower income households a good start in life, for example, through pre-school.

Where there is structural income inequality, we put in place structural measures to mitigate this. For example, the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) in specific sectors, the Workfare Income Supplement which has just been enhanced, the Silver Support Scheme and permanent GST Vouchers and Transfers.

Where mindset and motivation are an issue, our social workers seek to counsel, nudge and inspire.

Where life circumstances derail and anchor people down, we try to intervene where possible upstream, to help to solve these difficulties and challenges in their way.

And where complex and interlocking problems consume a family's attention and ability to access opportunities, or respond positively to social interventions, we find ways to strengthen and integrate our social support for them.

Fourth, we are committed to tackling the ''unfinished business" of inequality, to borrow the words from my colleague, Minister Ong Ye Kung.

We will keep studying fresh ideas and approaches, both here and abroad. We do not assume we have all the answers. We do not. We will try out pilots, experiment and partner community groups working hard on the ground. This is what committees and working groups set up by Government, like UPLIFT and M³ and others, seek to do – to examine issues closely, to identify gaps and close them, and work with our community partners to identify workable solutions we can implement on the ground.

No system or solution is perfect. And few if any policies come without trade-offs or unintended consequences. When new ideas or philosophies are offered, we need to see how they have worked in other societies and carefully consider the fuller implications and trade-offs, so that good intentions do not lead to counter-productive results.

Mr Chairman, the important work of building a society of opportunities for all extends well beyond our four Ministries, to the whole of society and to all Singaporeans. In fact, if you listen throughout COS, you find in many Ministries, there will be schemes and programmes, thoughts and ideas that they will implement that address the issue of inequality and social mobility.

None of us got to where we are today on our own efforts alone. Along the way, we were offered opportunities, second chances or a helping hand. Similarly, we should pay it forward. Our society is stronger and more resilient when all Singaporeans come together and we look out not only for ourselves, but for our families, neighbours and fellow Singaporeans in need. And as we do this, we ensure that all Singaporeans have the chance to pursue their dreams, regardless of their background and starting points. And this is the society of opportunities that we aspire towards.

The Chairman: Ms Denise Phua.

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Thank you. Chairman, I want to direct my questions to MOE. I want to thank Minister Ong Ye Kung. Thank you for finally slaying sacred cow of streaming, and of course, not without very good prior examination. He might not want to call it "cow" but I would just call it that. Slaying it is a very bold and wise move and I want to congratulate and commend the work of you and your team. So, thank you very much for that.

I want to ask if the Minister can consider also the other features that I have mentioned, for example, the Gifted Education Programme (GEP), which has been around for a while. I wonder if the Minister can comment if that is also a feature that can be examined and then relooked at. I think there is just merit to having students who are gifted academically to also mix with students who are taking subjects at G1 or the former Normal level. I believe it makes for very good social mixing. I wonder if Minister can consider that as well.

My second supplementary question is to Minister Indranee on the special education needs support in mainstream schools and IHLs. I truly appreciate what the Minister has shared. I know that in MOE, from Director down to the Allied Educators (AEDs), they have done a lot of work, and I want to honour what they do as well. But there are, indeed, real genuine capacity and capability issues that are felt on the ground. I wonder if we can study the issues first, and seriously look at how we can increase the number of AEDs and special needs officers, and overall support in both mainstream schools and IHLs. Also, to look at a proper skills-based training roadmap for them, because to deal with so many types of disabilities and that kind of numbers is really not easy. And at the IHLs level, because they are all quite autonomous, for the Ministry to consider resourcing and supporting them through a common platform where they can get together to share best processes and practices in order to make the efforts more effective and impactful. For your consideration, please.

Mr Ong Ye Kung: I thank Ms Denise Phua for her view which is a valid one. In a way, the GEP is a similar but smaller issue compared to the SBB issue that we were considering. So, this year, there are GEP centre schools – Nanyang, Nan Hua, Rosyth – that have already started mixed form classes for GEP students. So, just like SBB that I mentioned earlier, they spend 50% of the curriculum time together for various subjects. Only when it comes to Mathematics, Science, English and Social Studies, they then break out into their GEP classes. So, I think changes are already happening. We note her point. This is exactly the same balance that we are trying to optimise and we will continue to work on that.

Ms Indranee Rajah: Mr Chairman, I thank Ms Denise Phua for her clarification. Indeed, the numbers are large. What I can say to Ms Phua is that we will continue to do more to see how we can support the students with SEN in our schools. It is not just a question obviously of the AEDs but also the teachers, the peers and building up an environment that is generally supportive. So, we have made quite a lot of headway in the last few years and we will continue to do so, and we will certainly take her suggestions into consideration.

The Chairman: Dr Intan.

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have two clarifications, one for each Minister.

First, for Minister Ong. I also spoke about SOTA and Sports School. Since we will eventually abolish academic streams by 2024, will there be plans to eventually take students beyond just the Express stream for both SOTA and the Sports School? And the second question is Crest and Spectra. Eventually, is there still relevance for Crest and Spectra to just have Normal (Technical) students? Will they be absorbed as a mainstream school, where they can admit students from across all abilities?

For Minister Indranee, just a couple of questions on special education needs. Are there plans to let all pre-service teaching programmes in NIE to also include at least one module on teaching students with special needs? Because at this moment, I think only specific groups of pre-service teachers are trained to teach students with special needs, so will there be plans to let all pre-service teachers be trained to manage students with special needs? And beyond just resources that are under teaching or schools, what about increasing awareness amongst students themselves? Are there plans, for example, to include awareness about students with special needs in common subjects for all students, for example, in Character and Citizenship Education lessons so that they know how to manage classmates who have special needs?

Mr Ong Ye Kung: First on Singapore Sports School and SOTA. Sports School already takes in students from all three streams, actually, and they also have tied up with Republic Polytechnic so that some of the students, when they finish, they go to Republic Polytechnic and continue sports-related education.

SOTA takes in Express stream students plus those in the Option Band where they can opt for both Express as well as Normal (Academic) (NA). And the reason is because SOTA offers an International Baccalaureate (IB) programme. So, there is also a responsibility for the school and the system to recognise that IB is quite an academically rigorous programme and you want to make sure that the students can keep up and not end up not being able to cope and losing confidence totally. And so, for the time being, so long as SOTA continues to offer an IB programme, I think it will take in Express students. However, in time to come, when the three streams are merged, I think it will naturally have to relook at what kind of students it takes.

As for Spectra and Crest, as I mentioned in my speech, speaking to Spectra's and Crest's students, they feel so much better being in a school where there is a whole school approach to recognise that they are probably better at doing technical jobs, hands-on jobs and develop them in that direction. So, there is value to have diversity across schools, having schools that focus on certain segments of students but, at the same time, the bulk in the middle have diversity within the school, which is what we are trying to achieve.

Ms Indranee Rajah: Dr Intan asked about what we are doing to equip teachers to deal with students with special needs. There is training for basic awareness for SEN. MOE has equipped all beginning teachers with the basic understanding of SEN since 2005 through a compulsory module in the NIE pre-service training. This enables the teachers to understand and manage the learning demands for students with SEN. And we also have teachers who are trained in special needs. A core group of teachers in every school is equipped with the deeper understanding of SEN through 108 hours certificate level training that is known as the Teachers Trained in Special Needs or the TSN course. And as of July 2018, 512 teachers have been trained under the revised TSN programme, and some of these TSNs go on to acquire deeper knowledge in SEN support by attending disability-specific training modules.

With regard to peers, the Member is correct. You do want the other students to be empathetic to students with SEN and generally know how to relate to them. When I visited some of the IHLs and spoke to some of the students with SEN, they mentioned that when they were younger, they were often misunderstood. Their peers did not talk to them, would not sit down and interact with them. And I think that really did have an impact on them. But helping students to understand what it is to be a friend to someone with SEN makes a huge difference. And it is not a one-way thing; it is two ways because the child without SEN is also learning what it is like and receives knowledge that way as well. So, we will continue to work on that to make sure that their peers interact well with them.

The Chairman: Mr Seah Kian Peng.

Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Thank you, Mr Chairman. My questions are directed to the Minister for Social and Family Development, Mr Desmond Lee.

First, I welcome the changes to the ComCare Assistance Scheme, for the short-term, medium-term as well as the long-term one. I note that this is part of regular reviews which the Ministry conducts. And, in this instance, it is quite a hefty jump, up to about 20%. So, my question to the Minister is whether these reviews, could they be undertaken more frequently and the adjustments be more incremental but do it more regularly.

My second supplementary question is, when the Minister spoke about how Government is helping Singaporeans in the area of social mobility and inequality, the Minister mentioned that they are starting some pilots together with MND, by launching community links at or near rental flats, to offer more integrated and coordinated support and customised programmes and services for families living there.

Two supplementary questions. First one is: how will community links support the families within the neighbourhood? And secondly, how can partners, whether they are corporates, they are community or residents, contribute to this initiative?

And, Mr Chairman, if I can speak on your behalf, I note one of them is in your constituency so I am sure you welcome that.

The Chairman: Totally.

Mr Desmond Lee: Mr Chairman, in terms of the ComCare reviews, we conduct them regularly. So, every two to three years, over the past 10 years, we have been making adjustments. But we will take on-board the Member's suggestion to see whether we can make incremental adjustments more frequently, as opposed to making jumps every two to three years.

1.15 pm

He also asked about ComLink. I have articulated that ComLink as a social service hub embedded at or near rental housing, to be able to tackle and address the challenges that rental-housing families face. Look at each family's circumstances, starting with families with young children; understanding their needs holistically rather than looking at the issues they face. So, look at the individual, look at the family, understand what are the challenges that hold them back, that hold them down. What are the risks that poverty gets transmitted to the next generation, and the next generation? And work with relevant Government agencies, work with the families, understand what their dreams and aspirations are; work with community partners who will come in to the ComLink and integrate our support for these families. And, of course, work with the neighbours, because they are not beneficiaries and clients, they are people living there, who have abilities, leadership and initiative, and who themselves may have found ways to improve their lot in life. And then they can share examples, support each other.

Now, the ComLink is an example of how we want our future of social service integration to be – working together, looking at families holistically rather than individual needs, looking at the whole rather than silo and compartments. In a way, the ComLink is a microcosm of what we are hoping to achieve at the broader level, at the town level, at the community level. That is why we establish SG Care community networks in each and every town all across Singapore. I will speak more about that by way of an update during MSF COS, so please stick around for it.

In essence, Members asked how ComLink approach can benefit the wider neighbourhood. I think that integrated approach to tackling complex challenges in order to achieve maximum social uplift for these families, is the way we want to go.

In terms of corporates and partners, the ComLink white spaces or community spaces will be places which community partners, who wish to see their giving achieve maximum impact, they can go there. They can say, "I would like to support these families and not just give generally. I want to see outcomes, I want to see upliftment in these households. I want my colleagues, my staff, my vendors to partner these families, walk the journey with them until some of them have a better life ahead of them to look forward to".

So, ComLink is not just a Government initiative. It is a platform that allows the broader community to come in – companies, philanthropists, donors, volunteers, givers – but working together in an impactful way, in an integrated and coordinated manner to uplift people's lives.

The Chairman: A reminder to Members to direct more of the questions related to the Ministries subsequently during their COS. Dr Lily Neo.

Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar): Thank you, Mr Chairman. I would like to have two supplementary questions, one for Minister Indranee Rajah, the other one for Minister Desmond Lee.

For Minister Indranee Rajah, earlier on she mentioned on the expansion of after-school care. Can I ask her how many community or grassroots-initiated after-school care there are in community, and whether she could support or even take over CATCH Plus. CATCH Plus stands for Children and Teens Community Hub started since 2014 at Kreta Ayer precincts – that is at the Jalan Kukoh rental blocks – which is a holistic care programme for the disadvantaged children there, with 100 membership right now. So, whether MOE could help with that one and maybe take over the CATCH Plus Centre. That is my first question.

For Minister Desmond Lee, on ComLink, may I ask him what kind of outreach will there be, because that is most important as the core success for this project; and whether there will be enough social workers that can have a hand-holding approach to all these disadvantaged families with multi-faceted problems; and also whether we can have a long-term basis approach for the children of such families.

Ms Indranee Rajah: I thank Dr Lily Neo for her question. Maybe I can outline what the thinking of the philosophy behind UPLIFT is, and then I will address the question.

There are some things that should be done in the school within curriculum time by teachers. Then there is something that can be done in the school but not part of the curriculum, and not necessarily by teachers. And then, there are things which can be done in the community.

So, the Student Care Centres, which is after school, is really a facility that is provided outside of the school curriculum. For that, what the school does is the school provides the premises and the school works with others to provide the programmes. So, the Big Heart Centre, for example, was one of those; that is the three Self-Help Groups that have come together to provide services, and they work together with the school. So, that is what the expansion of student care centres is about.

Then, you have things which are in the community and for that, there is actually a value to having community-based programmes, because not everybody may want to send their children to a Student Care Centre. As you know, when you live in a rental block, sometimes the parents work shift hours, they prefer their children to be at home at a certain time; they cannot collect them from school. So, we would like to encourage VWOs, as well as grassroots organisations and other community projects, to continue. The question is how to link them up.

The CATCH Plus programme that the Member referred to is actually a very good programme. I visited your constituency and I was introduced to the ReadAble Programme. I was very impressed by the work that they are doing there, and there is value in that. So, it would not be so much a situation of MOE taking over community programmes like that, but what MOE and UPLIFT office can do, together with MSF, is see how we can link up, coordinate better. If programmes like that need assistance or support, we will see how we can connect you with the entities or persons who can better support such programmes.

Mr Desmond Lee: Chairman, I thank the Member for her question. If I may just venture an additional reply on the CATCH Plus programme. The Member had also described to me in detail how CATCH Plus works. CATCH Plus is in Jalan Kukoh. It is where the ComLink for Jalan Kukoh will operate. Certainly, we will work very closely with the people working in CATCH Plus, to ensure a more integrated support for young people living in rental housing, that particular group that we are very focused on.

I have spoken earlier about the Local Community Network (LCN). We are starting off a pilot in Boon Lay because we have ComLink there as well. But you begin to see how our structures that we will start to put on to the ground begin to relate to each other and work with each other.

So, UPLIFT, the programme office, the LCN support in the schools, we identify younger people who may have difficulties. Often, you find the challenges begin at home, or the derailers come from beyond them, from the family.

So, it is not something you can just tackle in school, you really need to work together with the social workers, the family members, siblings and the local community there, to provide that scaffolding and support, so that the young person can thrive and not have his promise snubbed out.

In terms of ComLink outreach, as I said earlier, rental housing should not just be a promise of infrastructure and shelter. It is shelter where you have no home and it comes with social support. That is why, initially, we call it a social hub; rental housing combined with social services, and social services being proactive, integrated, at your doorstep; a journey of social workers and community services with these families when they are at their lowest point in life.

So, the ComLink will build an understanding of the families living in the estate that they serve. It is a composite picture that we need to put together with all our partners. This also involves outreach to these families, starting with families with young children, understanding their situation, understanding, very importantly, what their dreams are for themselves and, in particular, for their children. That was what the Senior Minister of State Maliki found in Project 4650 when he paved and many other community groups worked together, conferenced monthly, to understand the challenges and dreams of each and every one of the families they serve, until they see light at the end of the tunnel. It may take months, years, or a very long time to happen. But that kind of support, integrated, interlocking, will make a difference.

So, in terms of outreach, it will be proactive, it will reach out to these families and seek their participation and partnership along this journey.

The Chairman: Any other clarifications? Assoc Prof Walter Theseira.

Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Thank you, Chairman. I agree completely with the Minister for Education that a good AU is one that suits students and develop their full potential. So, to support that goal, I would like to ask the Ministry if we can have a commitment to at least study resource-sharing for library materials, as I had raised, because the disparity in access can have serious consequences for learning and for scholarship. It also may be cheaper for us to study sharing library resources across the AUs that may allow for economies of scale and bargaining, for example, with the publishers.

Just to share a personal anecdote. I do have colleagues who actually use their alumni library accounts from their PhD granting institutions in order to get access to certain library materials. They find this easier than trying to rely on their own institutions' resources, and I think we have to fix this problem.

Mr Ong Ye Kung: Thank you for describing the practical problem you face, and, yes, we will be happy to study them.

The Chairman: Ms Anthea Ong.

Ms Anthea Ong: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I thank Senior Parliamentary Secretary Faishal for giving me a direct response to my cut. I appreciate it. I have two clarifications, one to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary and the other to Minister Ong, please.

The first is that I absolutely agree about the programmes that you have started to support the psycho-social well-being of our students. May I ask how widespread is the implementation of these initiatives like Peer Support Programmes in our schools and IHLs, and what sort of results are we seeing so far?

The second question to Minister Ong. We all agree that there is no health without mental health. I also agree that mental health is complex and multi-faceted and, therefore, there is not one clear solution. But I wonder if a good way to start is to reframe the way we see health education in schools. Right now, we know that health education is compulsory but it is confined to physical health education. Will we be looking at mandating mental health education as part of health education requirement in schools, so that our children know from a young age that both aspects of their well-being are equally important?

Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: I thank the Member for the supplementary question. Indeed, we look at mental health as something that we want, to build the socio-emotional competency of our children, as well as build the resilience in the programmes that they undertake. So, in essence, we start at a very early stage of their education at Primary school level, whereby all these values, experiences and components where a child can develop himself or herself emotionally, socially and that resilience in all the programmes that we undertake.

We take on an approach of prevention, early detection and intervention. Of course, we also engage the parents along the way. Many of our schools have Peer Support Programmes. We see the benefits of having peers looking out for one another. I for one, have come across situations whereby peers supporting each other, peers informing the educators about some of the issues faced by their own classmates, and the issues are being resolved not only by one person but together as a community.

So, as I have said earlier, it takes a many-hands approach whereby we want to see how we can enhance the education journey of a child, regardless of where they come from and regardless of the experience that they have, so that they continue to be socially and emotionally resilient and able to have a fulfilling and meaningful educational journey here in Singapore.

1.30 pm

Mr Ong Ye Kung: I think there is no disagreement that mental health is part of health, together with physical health. In fact, when you speak with students today, teenage students, mental health is one of the top concerns in their mind, I have spoken to many of them. Definitely, this is something we have to look into and continue to improve. What I want to seek the understanding of Members is that the mode of delivery does not always have to be in a curriculum, and under "lessons" and under " talks", taking up curriculum time.

In fact, I think for mental health education to really work, it has to be delivered in a different way, such as through peer support groups that Senior Parliamentary Secretary Muhamad Faisal talked about, and also general public education which students now receive through their social media channels. So, I think let us explore different ways and not always channel through the formal MOE education curriculum. I think it is more effective that way.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Chairman, my clarification question is with regards to my ITE cuts and I am glad that the Minister mentioned in his speech that all ITE students are not disadvantaged. In relation to my cut, it is with regard to the resources at ITE, in general, whether there will be more focus on providing enhanced resources to ITE, particularly for SEN students like what some of the other Members have mentioned as well.

The second question I have is in relation to my second cut on the ITE question which is about the Joint Admission process for Polytechnics and Junior Colleges. Currently, for ITE students, they apply for the Joint Polytechnic Admission Exercis (JPAE) after all the "O" level students have actually applied. In my cut, I actually highlighted whether there will be any tweaks to the process to ensure that ITE students are not disadvantaged in the sense that they only come in after the remaining seats have already been occupied by "O" level students. So, may I get the clarification from Minister please.

Mr Ong Ye Kung: The first question is on ITE resources. ITE is well resourced. First, infrastructure. Look at the ITE Ang Mo Kio (Central) – very nice premises. There are many countries that look at it and think this looks like their Universities. Secondly, programmes and lab equipment. And also ITE students pay only 3% of the total costs of delivery. So, subsidies for ITE students are much higher compared to Polytechnics or Universities. Thirdly, we continue to build new pathways for ITE students and one of them, which I explained, was the Work-Learn Technical Diploma, which will be a major programme coming out of ITE. So, really, no worries about ITE not resourced enough.

As for the other question on JPAE, I addressed it in my speech, they do come after the "O" levels students but it is a separate queue with their separate places set aside for them. So, they will not be disadvantaged in any way.

The Chairman: Ms Denise Phua, would you like to withdraw your amendment?

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Chairman, it is a COS session that is substantive, and at times, game-changing especially in the removal, scrapping of streaming. So, thank you very much Minister. I thank the Minister and his Ministry for the significant work and the often very good work that is being done. It gives great pleasure to now beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $12,705,098,400 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $710,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.