Committee of Supply – Head U (Prime Minister's Office)

The Chairman: Ms Poh Li San,

2.56 pm

Singapore's Climate Ambition and Plans

Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang): Chairman, I move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head U of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

In 2022, the Government announced its plans to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. It aimed to reduce Singapore's emissions to around 60 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2030. This year, the Government announced that it will reduce emissions to between 45 and 50 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2035.

I would like to ask if we are on track to meet our 2030 target, which is just five years down the road. How much clean energy and carbon credits will we need to depend on in order to meet this target? The Government had indicated in its target submission to the United Nations (UN) that it will implement regulations, pricing and market policies to incentivise and enable all sectors of our economy to decarbonise. Would the Minister please elaborate on these plans? What has been the response from the business community so far? What is the expected impact on our economy and competitiveness, considering that Singapore is only one of the 13 countries which had submitted climate change targets to UN?

Currently, 95% of Singapore's electricity production comes from liquefied natural gas (LNG) and the remaining is dependent on oil, coal, solar and waste supply. At the same time, 97% of our primary emissions come from our power, industrial and transport sectors. What are the expected cost increases to businesses and consumers associated with carbon emissions reduction and which industries and types of businesses are expected to bear the bulk of the cost burden?

3.00 pm

To achieve our longer-term 2035 and 2050 targets, will we be making any pivots from our current decarbonisation strategy? And lastly, would the Minister provide updates on the import of clean energy, the progress of solar panel installations and the studies on the viability of hygrogen and small modular nuclear reactors?

Question proposed.

Moving from a Linear to Circular Economy

Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Sir, when we refer to the circular economy in terms of our reduce, reuse and recycle targets, our concern typically comes from when is the day that Pulau Semakau is no longer able to take any more refuse. But I would like to ask the National Climate Change Secretariat (NCCS) coordinating the whole-of-Government response about interaction between our circular economy outcomes, plans and targets with our national climate change targets.

First, I understand that products not made in Singapore, like agricultural imports, electronic imports, car imports and so on, are not counted under our carbon budget and, as such, are not covered under our nationally determined contribution (NDC). Does the Government have any mechanism to track this outsourced carbon? Is reducing these emissions covered under any Government strategy, like the Zero-waste Masterplan? From reading our NDC, it seems that the Government is working to calculate some degree of carbon abatement via recycling, but does this reflect that we track our outsourced carbon?

The built environment sector analyses and aims to reduce such carbon in the embodied carbon calculations, which are key to determining the greenness of a green building. Are other carbon intensive sectors, like marine and manufacturing, subject to such scrutiny? The European Union (EU) carbon border adjustment mechanism broadly targets goods and precursors that seem to be carbon-intensive and prone to carbon leakage. While I am not advocating for such a tariff, are we doing the analysis?

In view of this, I hope that we can fundamentally change our whole-of-Government key performance indicators (KPIs) to shift the focus from gross domestic product (GDP) growth to development KPIs, which include the compatibility of our country, where 1.5°C warming, in accordance with the Paris Agreement.

If we are to use the term "green growth", it must be warranted. Not only do we as a country need to reduce the resource footprint per unit of GDP, we need to continuously reduce our resource footprint altogether and this includes not simply exporting pollution to other countries we trade with.

Carbon Emissions Regulations for Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): The demand for AI, especially generative AI, has been increasing exponentially in the past two years. With this comes a staggering increase in the energy intensity and by extension, carbon emissions intensity of AI-related activities. The Government should look into regulating the carbon footprint of the use and development of AI.

To put things in perspective, just one query with ChatGPT uses up to 10 times as much energy as a Google search query, enough to power a light bulb for 20 minutes. Generating a single image using an AI model can take as much energy as fully charging a smartphone, thousands of times more energy-intensive than generating text.

However, not all AI models are the same. Using large general-purpose models, such as large language models like ChatGPT can consume up to 30 times more energy than a smaller model created specifically for the task. The issue arises when companies of different sizes rush to integrate general purpose AI into their products and services, leading to such general-purpose AI models being deployed in an indiscriminate manner millions, if not billions, of times a day for tasks that users do not require the use of general-purpose AI, thereby causing emissions to add up quickly.

I would like to ask the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) if there is an estimate of how Singapore's energy demand, especially for industries, may increase with a push for widespread adoption of AI. As Singapore is positioning itself to become an AI hub, as well as a data centre hub, has this been taken into consideration in the 2035 NDC commitments?

The Government should start to look into developing voluntary guidelines and eventually mandating the reporting of energy consumptions by AI models. This has already been recommended by the United Nations Environmental Programme and governments, including those in United States (US) and the EU, are actively discussing similar regulations. This would encourage developers to explore and adopt energy-efficient practices to reduce the carbon intensity of their products. AI developers will be pushed to use smaller task-specific AI models instead of large general-purpose models.

Such regulation would also have ripple effects within the AI ecosystem. Like the sustainability reporting landscape, there will be increased demand for products and services that help support such disclosures. Data centres in Singapore may start looking at developing hardware that can more easily show AI developers their energy consumption. There will be greater innovation. Downstream businesses would also be more discerning about the AI models they adopt, taking into account their energy consumption and emissions. By being an early adopter of such regulations, Singapore can enable local AI developers and related businesses to integrate carbon conscious practices early and stay ahead as global demand for sustainable AI solutions grows.

Singapore's Climate Goals

Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Sir, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit, is one of the first international treaties on the topic, which stipulated that parties should meet regularly to address climate change at the Conference of Parties (COP). The UNFCCC secretariat is the UN entity tasked with supporting the global responses to the threat of climate change. Singapore ratified the UNFCCC. We have been an active player in the international climate change negotiations and signed and ratified the Paris Agreement in 2016.

In February this year, Singapore committed itself to reduce emissions to between 45 and 50 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO₂e) in 2035. This is part of our 2035 NDC submitted to the UNFCCC.

In its statement accompanying the submission, it is said that Singapore is a small low-lying island state, climate change is an existential challenge to us. For our 2035 NDC, and I quote from the statement, "reflects both our commitment to climate action, as well as the significant uncertainties we face in our decarbonisation journey." The lower bound of 45 MtCO₂e keeps us on a linear path towards our net-zero target in 2050.

Singapore has also committed itself to continue to work on "the range of mitigation measures available to us and explore other mitigation options to drive emissions reductions." These solutions have the potential to grow the green economy, create new jobs and generate new opportunities in the low-carbon world.

In 2022, we announced our climate targets to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 and reduction of emissions to around 60 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2030 after peaking emissions earlier. May I ask how the Government decided on these targets, and what steps will Singapore take to achieve them?

I would like to highlight, this year, the Government announced a 2035 climate target to reduce emissions to "between 45 and 50 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2035". Are we on track to meet our 2030 target? Will we be making any pivots from our current decarbonisation strategy to achieve our longer-term target in 2035 and 2050?

How will the recent global developments, such as the US pulling out of the Paris Agreement, affect Singapore's climate goals?

Action Plans Towards Nationally Determined Contribution Target in 2035

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (East Coast): Chairman, let me begin by declaring that I am a senior executive with a local enterprise and I deal with matters related to sustainability.

Despite impeding global climate action due to geopolitical uncertainties, I am encouraged that Singapore remains committed towards climate action, taking critical and bold steps to shift our nation towards a low-carbon society. Climate change is evidently impacting our lives today. As a nation, we must be steadfast in our actions to fight against this existential threat.

Singapore's recent submission on our 2035 NDCs states that we target to reduce our emission to 45 to 50 million tonnes by 2035. This target puts us on the right trajectory for Singapore to achieve net-zero by 2050. However, achieving this level of carbon abatement is no mean feat. To put it in perspective, to achieve 15 million tonnes of carbon dioxide abatement from today's emission level, Singapore would need to either halve our primary emissions from the industry sector or reduce the emissions from our power sector by around 70%. Achieving such a level of abatement would require significant structural shifts in our infrastructure, economy and technological landscape.

We are already witnessing such a transition due to the Government's push to increase adoption of solar power and electric vehicles in Singapore. While these activities do contribute towards our decarbonisation efforts, similar deployment efforts would need to be needle-moving in other sectors as well to achieve the level of abatement mentioned earlier. I would like to ask Minister what the Government's deployment strategy for Singapore are to achieve our 2035 NDC target.

I acknowledge the Government's push to significantly increase electricity imports to Singapore by 2035. Based on preliminary estimation by the Energy Studies Institute at the National University of Singapore (NUS), importing an additional four gigawatts of green electricity could abate about 10 million tonnes of carbon dioxide. However, beyond electricity imports, does the Government aim to implement any significant initiatives or mandate the industrial sector to further support our decarbonisation targets? How can our local industries contribute towards such efforts to enable structural shifts beyond just relying on the reduction of Singapore's grid emission factor? Further, how can the Government support them in such activities?

For Singapore to become a low-carbon economy and with limited access to low-cost renewable energy, we need to heavily rely on low-carbon energy technologies. Yet, many of which are still nascent or not at full commercial scale. I commend the Government for continuously monitoring, developing and testing new low-carbon technologies, including in bolder areas, such as nuclear energy, to ensure Singapore pursues optimal pathways to achieve net-zero. As we explore all these new technology frontiers, there are benefits to take stock of earlier studies and to reflect as a nation how we can collectively leverage upon these learnings.

Among the multiple studies on low-carbon energy technologies the Government has undertaken, can Minister share some of the key opportunities and challenges identified? Within this portfolio of technologies studied, are there any promising ones which can be further scaled with partners and piloted before end of the decade?

Beyond technology considerations, many low-carbon solutions, including electricity imports, carbon capture and carbon markets, would require international cooperation before deployment can take place. I note that Singapore has been pursing discussions with multiple countries over the past few years, regarding these cooperation activities. Will the Government be able to provide an update on the status of these cross-border discussions and whether they are progressing as expected, and aligned with our infrastructure plans and timelines?

Sir, the impact of climate change is evident today. Inaction would only make things worse. Despite the global headwinds and geopolitics, I am heartened that Singapore remains fully committed to climate action, guided by science and facts. The steps we are taking today would be the cornerstone for our future low-carbon economy, where Government, industry and citizens can work collaboratively to achieve a greener Singapore.

The Chairman: Senior Minister Teo.

The Senior Minister and Coordinating Minister for National Security (Mr Teo Chee Hean): Mr Chairman, Sir, I speak as Chairman of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Climate Change (IMCCC), which coordinates our policy and measures across all sectors. And with your permission, Sir, I will take clarifications immediately after this speech.

I would like to thank our hon Members, Ms Poh, Ms He, Mr Tan, Dr Lim and also Miss Chan, for their interest in this subject, which has a very long-term bearing on Singapore's development and growth.

Sir, it is a difficult time to talk about climate action. The Paris Agreement in 2015 marked a breakthrough in global climate action, with countries pledging to keep global warming within 1.5°C. Although there has been unevenness in implementation, we were generally pulling in the same direction as a global community.

However, the US has recently pulled out of the Paris Agreement, for the second time. This has prompted other countries, like Argentina and Indonesia, for example, to question the wisdom of maintaining their climate commitments. Dr Lim Wee Kiak has asked how these global developments will affect Singapore's climate goals. It is quite natural for countries to ask why they should continue to make these difficult changes when others are not and whether their efforts will even result in any meaningful change, without the participation of bigger players.

Singapore's Climate Ambassador, Mr Ravi Menon, gave a speech a week ago at Temasek's Ecosperity Conversations. It provides a succinct and clear assessment of the global state of play on climate change, and I recommend that Members read it. Ambassador Menon points out that the main drivers of climate action are politics, economics and nature. I have touched on the political headwinds. So, let us examine the other two.

3.15 pm

First, the economics. Green technology has advanced dramatically in the last two decades. Several of these technologies are now mature and mainstream, and make economic sense. They are not just cleaner but lower cost. The average levelised cost of solar energy globally, for instance, is now 50% lower than that of fossil fuels. This explains why two-thirds of global energy investment in 2024 went to clean energy technologies and infrastructure.

Countries and businesses realise this, which is why despite political perturbations, there is now much greater momentum for decarbonisation than just a decade ago. Most of the world's advanced economies have been investing in decarbonisation and steadily reducing emissions. They recognise that the green transition is an increasingly important driver of growth and therefore crucial not just to the health of the globe, but also to the prosperity of their people.

This brings us to nature. Climate change is no longer a future threat. It is already here, with us. Every country, all of us, can see this – drought, fires, floods, loss of crop yields, more severe storms. The last 10 years have been the hottest years ever on record. In short, the timeline to respond and adapt is being set, not by us, mere humans, but by nature.

Countries and businesses which lag behind will be forced to act eventually. The longer they wait, the sharper and more disruptive a transition they will have to make. This is why Singapore remains fully committed to effective climate action. We want to put ourselves in the best possible position for the long-term challenge and the opportunities that arise.

Earlier this month, Singapore submitted our 2035 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). We are among just 13 countries to do so on time, out of a total of 195 countries. We have committed to reducing our emissions to between 45 and 50 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2035.

Our 2035 NDC is an ambitious commitment. It builds on our previous target to peak and then reduce emissions to 60 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2030. Forty-five million tonnes keeps us on a straight-line trajectory from 60 million tonnes in 2030 down to net zero by 2050, aligning with the goals of the Paris Agreement.

It is heartening that Members from both sides of this House have expressed support for our ambitious climate action plan and in particular, this downward trajectory of emissions, which is going to be a major challenge.

Our 2035 NDC also signals our resolve to help our economy stay competitive in a low-carbon world. Having an ambitious target generates demand for new green investments and gives Singapore-based companies an edge in developing new low-carbon solutions. It also allows us to remain attractive to companies that are looking to decarbonise their operations, which are aligned with our own national goals.

At the same time, as an alternative-energy disadvantaged nation, having a target range reflects the practical reality that our pace of decarbonisation depends heavily on technological developments and international collaboration. This range also recognises that we need some flexibility to manage the impact on our households and businesses while aligning with the pace of transition in the rest of the world.

Miss Chan, Dr Lim and Ms Poh asked about progress toward our 2030 NDC and new measures for our 2035 target.

With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute an infographic. This summarises where we are now and our journey to get to net zero by 2050.

Mr Chairman: Yes, proceed. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]

Mr Teo Chee Hean: We are on track to meet our 2030 NDC. Let me provide two examples of the progress we have made.

First, on clean energy. Despite our limited land area, we have pushed hard on solar, which remains our most viable domestic source of renewable energy. I am pleased to announce that at the end of last year, we achieved our goal of 1.5 gigawatts-peak of solar deployment by 2025. This is ahead of schedule and more than triple where we were in 2020. This puts us on track to meet our target of at least two gigawatts-peak of solar deployment by 2030.

To put this in context, our electrical power consumption today is around eight gigawatts. Of course, eight gigawatts is not the same as gigawatts-peak, but this puts it into context.

Second, on land transport. We are working towards all vehicles running on clean energy by 2040. As of this year, we have ceased registrations of new diesel cars and taxis. Electric vehicle (EV) charging points have been installed in about half of all Housing and Development Board (HDB) carparks. Members would have seen them sprouting up all over your HDB carparks. A third of all new car registrations are electric cars. We are also on track to electrify half of our public bus fleet by 2030.

We will redouble our efforts on such measures. The Ministry of Trade and Industry, the Ministry of Transport, and the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment will say more about this during their respective Committees of Supply (COS).

Beyond these measures, we will need to step up efforts to study and advance a fuller suite of potential decarbonisation solutions – something which several Members asked about.

One key enabler is our carbon tax, which was raised to $25 a tonne last year. The carbon tax shapes behaviour across our economy, from consumers to businesses. The carbon tax, in a way, is a proxy for the cost of emissions by users. It reflects the cost to the economy and to the users for emitting carbon.

This applies across the board, whether it is industry, or whether it is AI data centres. This then puts some inhibition on whether or not they will continue to have high emission levels and it applies a cost to the eventual users of all these services.

At the same time, we do not just collect the carbon tax, we plough these tax revenues back into supporting businesses and households so that they can become greener. One example is the Building and Construction Authority's (BCA's) existing buildings incentive scheme for owners to retrofit their buildings to Green Mark energy efficiency standards.

We are doing other things as well. It does not come from the collection of carbon tax, but we are doing Climate Vouchers as well. The Leader of the Opposition made some comments about that.

Our current trajectory is to progressively increase the carbon tax to $45 per tonne in 2026 and 2027, with a view to reaching $50 to $80 per tonne by 2030. Of course, we will have to watch what happens on the global scene.

I am heartened that both sides of this House have expressed support for a broad-based carbon tax, with the Workers' Party advocating even higher carbon taxes even sooner. We take such feedback seriously and look forward to their continued support when we adjust our carbon taxes in the future. We will continue to assess where the optimal range is. Our current tax rate is carefully calibrated to give our businesses and households time to adjust and to account for the maturation of green technologies that will allow us to decarbonise more efficiently.

We will also need to tap on cross-border solutions to overcome the limitations of being a dense and alternative-energy disadvantaged city-state. Miss Chan asked about our collaborations on electricity imports and carbon credits. We have made steady progress on both. We recently increased our indicative need for electricity imports from four gigawatts to eight gigawatts [Please refer to clarification later in the debate.] by 2035 and have awarded conditional regulatory approvals to potential partners in Indonesia, Vietnam and Cambodia for 5.6 gigawatts of low-carbon electricity imports.

However, there is no transition without transmission. This is why we have been laying the crucial groundwork for the development of an Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) regional power grid, which will facilitate cross-border electricity trading and increase regional energy resilience for all the countries in ASEAN.

Next, carbon credits. Unlike electricity imports, credits are not limited by proximity, by distance and by physical connections. At the 2024 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29) last year, we co-facilitated negotiations that delivered the full operationalisation of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. And Minister Grace Fu played a major role in that.

We have also signed Implementation Agreements on Article 6 carbon credits with Papua New Guinea and Ghana and memoranda of understanding (MOUs) with more than 15 other countries. Just this morning, we signed a new Implementation Agreement with Bhutan. These win-win agreements will promote the development of carbon mitigation projects in these countries while helping us meet our emissions targets.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) represents another pathway for us – one that is necessary to reduce emissions from hard-to-abate sectors. We are currently working with industry players to study the viability of cross-border carbon capture and storage projects.

Achieving our longer-term targets will also require new and innovative solutions. And several of these new technologies are showing promise. We have begun to deploy biofuels, such as sustainable aviation fuel, which can be produced from food and agricultural waste. From next year, all flights departing Singapore will be required to have a 1% uplift of sustainable fuel, with the goal to raise this to 3% to 5% by 2030, subject to global developments.

We are also studying the potential for wider adoption of biofuels in sectors such as electricity generation and transport.

We are also building capabilities to deploy hydrogen and ammonia, including through small, pilot-scale projects, as we wait for these fuels to become commercially viable at scale.

In the longer term, as the Prime Minister stated in the Budget Speech, we are studying the potential deployment of advanced nuclear energy technologies that, while nascent, could be safer than conventional reactors.

We had previously announced our plans to build a pool of around 100 nuclear energy and safety experts. We already now have over 40 such experts whose priority in the coming years is to work with our partners to assess the potential for deploying advanced nuclear energy technologies safely in Singapore.

In this transition to a low-carbon future, we will have to explore multiple, sometimes overlapping pathways so that we can find the right mix for ourselves. This is why we are topping up $5 billion to the Future Energy Fund to make critical infrastructure investments and support solutions that are the most appropriate for us.

Taken together, the measures I have mentioned constitute a holistic set of decarbonisation efforts. They maximise what is currently possible domestically, technologically and economically, while we work to advance the technologies and partnerships needed for the later phases of our decarbonisation journey.

The next question is how to help our businesses transition to this new economy.

Ms Poh Li San, Mr Dennis Tan and Ms He Ting Ru asked about costs, opportunities and the circular economy. Ms He, in particular, talked about consumption-based emissions versus production-based emissions. I should explain that currently, the world operates on a production-based emissions system. The entire United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) architecture is based around that. This is the way that we count, officially, carbon emissions for each country. And also, the methodologies for this are very well developed.

3.30 pm

For consumption-based emissions, the methodologies are not standardised and they are not widely applied. And in any case, they will not be directly applicable to our carbon account under the Paris Agreement.

But we are encouraging companies to start accounting for these things because, eventually, if carbon emission costs around the world rise, this will affect them also through their supply chain. So, they ought to know where their supply chain risks are. We are working with the Singapore Business Federation (SBF) and a consortium of partners to launch the Singapore Emission Factors Registry. This helps businesses in Singapore track and report their carbon emissions more accurately by using a database of emissions factors developed based on Singapore's context. Prior to this, most Singapore businesses had to rely on emission factors from international sources for emissions reporting, especially for Scope 3 emissions.

But to remain competitive as an economy, we must take steps towards decoupling growth from emissions. That means, if we want to grow, we must decouple that from higher emissions. We must find a way of growing without the concomitant higher emissions that growth brings.

As we move towards a low-carbon future, businesses and economies that remain emissions intensive relative to their competitors will become less attractive. So, while there are costs in decarbonisation now, it is an investment in long-term survival and growth for our companies and also for Singapore's economy.

We are helping businesses decarbonise by supporting efforts to improve their energy efficiency. For instance, we have enhanced the Resource Efficiency Grant for manufacturing facilities and data centres, by lowering the minimum qualifying criteria to support more emissions reduction projects. We have also launched schemes to support businesses in sustainability reporting.

In addition, we have been working closely with the private sector to develop sectoral roadmaps to decarbonise each sector, seize new opportunities and remain competitive in the low carbon transition. For example, we launched the Singapore Sustainable Air Hub Blueprint last year and, more recently, announced the Marine and Offshore Industry Plan. These will guide us as we work together with companies in our key sectors in the years ahead.

We also want to become an AI hub. The Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) will say more about how we plan to green our data centres to achieve both economic growth and decarbonisation. The transition also presents new opportunities. As the demand for low-carbon goods and services increases, we can benefit by moving quickly to capture new markets.

One opportunity is offshore wind. We have traditional strengths in marine and offshore. Most of that has been in the oil and gas industries. And now, there is a huge new opportunity in offshore wind.

The global offshore wind market is expected to grow to US$126 billion per annum by 2030. With the support of Enterprise Singapore, Singapore companies in the oil and gas sector are already finding success in pivoting towards providing critical products and services across the offshore wind value chain. Cyan Renewables is a new local company set up in 2022. It has now grown to become one of the largest offshore wind support vessel owners globally, supporting clients across Asia Pacific and Europe.

There will also be new opportunities in resource efficiency and circularity. For example, we are supporting research to explore the use of captured carbon dioxide to produce building materials. Singapore is also one of the world's leading producers today of sustainable aviation fuels.

While we have a broad suite of plans to get ourselves to net-zero, keeping global warming below 1.5°C will depend on other countries doing their part. We emit 0.1% of the world's global emissions but we are affected by 100% of the emissions. The transition will not be straightforward and is likely to be messy and uneven. The reality is that we, as a global community, will make progress but may not collectively meet the 1.5°C goal.

As a low-lying island nation, we must therefore prepare for the reality of rising sea levels. We are starting now and expect this will require something in the order of $100 billion in the coming decades. We are putting aside $5 billion in this Budget to top-up the Coastal and Flood Protection Fund. The Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment will say more about adaptations to rising urban heat, disruptions to food supplies and other impacts, which will be needed too.

Mr Chairman, over our 60 years of Independence, we have always placed emphasis on a clean and green environment even as we developed and grew. With climate change, this challenge has now taken on a global dimension. Nature is setting the timeline.

Sir, we are neither climate zealots nor climate sceptics; we are climate realists. We cannot be sure what other countries will or will not do. But we will secure Singapore's future, by doing our part to reduce emissions, by partnering our households and businesses in this transition, by taking steps to protect us from the effects of climate change, so that Singapore remains a sustainable, liveable and thriving country for all our citizens, ready to grasp the new opportunities in a low-carbon world. So, let us all work together and travel this journey together. [Applause.]

The Chairman: Are there any clarifications for Senior Minister Teo? Mr Dennis Tan.

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: I thank the Senior Minister Teo for his update to the House. Sir, I have three clarifications. I am not so sure whether these clarifications will be answered by the Senior Minister Teo, but I will leave him to explain.

Regarding the cut that I just delivered on the regulations for AI, I heard the Senior Minister Teo referring to MDDI. Is MDDI going to reply to my cut on carbon emissions regulations for AI? That is one.

In my Budget debate speech. I also asked about the concern that I have after Terminal 5 opens, when our Changi Airport flights may increase quite considerably and which will lead to an increase in aviation emissions. Yes, the Senior Minister Teo mentioned about the 1% sustainable aviation fuels. But of course, compared to some other places, for example, I believe, Heathrow, I think it is about 10%, if I am not wrong. Actually, I am just wondering, is the Senior Minister going to address that question I have? Essentially, it is how will our sustainable air hub blueprint be stepped up in the next few years to mitigate the likely increase in aviation emissions after Terminal 5 opens? That is my second clarification.

My third clarification, where in my Budget debate speech, I sought the Government's update on the green transition or the transition of our petrochemicals industry. Where do we stand now in our journey, especially in light of the sale of the Shell assets in Jurong Island and Tuas last year? Related to this is actually about the manpower transition for our workers in the petrochemical industry, but I am not sure whether the Ministry of Manpower will be dealing with this.

Mr Teo Chee Hean: Yes, indeed, Minister Chee will take the Member's questions on Terminal 5 and sustainable aviation fuels in the COS. And also, for AI, MDDI will take that up with the Member.

On industrial sectors and how we approach that, there has been a plan on what we intend to do there. And what our intention is, is to make sure that our petrochemical plants in Singapore always are in the top quartile of emissions efficiency. They are not all there today, but that is the trajectory on which we are moving. And as I mentioned, we are not just talking about the traditional petrochemical plants anymore. We actually have one of the largest, if not, the largest sustainable aviation fuel facilities in the world in Singapore, which has recently expanded as well.

So, we are a serious player in the sustainable aviation fuels area, but we must also understand that the pace at which we proceed should be aligned with the pace which the global players proceed and which our regional partners or competitors proceed, and we should not be too out of line with what they do.

On manpower transition, I will also leave that to the Ministry of Trade and Industry when they deal with that particular industrial sector.

The Chairman: Ms He Ting Ru.

Ms He Ting Ru: Sir, I just have a couple of clarifications in relation to the initiative of SBF, in terms of the consumption-based emissions initiative.

First, I would like the Senior Minister to clarify about whether there are any further details about timeline, for when this will be up and running. I know that it has been launched, but also the details of when we are going to onboard various industries.

Second, whether the Senior Minister can give a bit more details about which sectors will be prioritised for this. For the EU carbon border adjustment mechanism that I highlighted earlier, they target carbon intensive sectors, such as electricity, steel, cement and so on. So, I am just wondering whether we have a similar approach.

Mr Teo Chee Hean: Mr Chairman, I do not have the details on the timelines. It is something which is in the early days, and they are working on it. But we do have to take into cognisance carbon border adjustment taxes, and that is another reason why we need to put in our own measures and our own carbon tax and other measures in Singapore. Because if we do not, what will happen is, when our exports reach the borders of those countries which have a carbon border adjustment mechanism, they will get taxed there. And so, this has also been the reason why some of our neighbours have recently introduced their own carbon taxes, in order to make sure that they conform.

The Chairman: Ms Poh Li San.

Ms Poh Li San: Mr Chairman, I have a question for Senior Minister Teo. The Senior Minister mentioned that the carbon tax is an important enabler to incentivise businesses to go green and we know that the carbon tax has been projected to reach between $50 to $80 per tonne of carbon dioxide in the next five years. But five years is not a very long time for businesses to plan ahead.

I would like to know when will the Government announce the schedule of carbon tax increase so that we can better help businesses make mid- to long-term plans and, more importantly, for them to make significant business decisions to invest in green solutions or even to pivot their businesses to greener options.

Mr Teo Chee Hean: Yes, Mr Chairman, that is why we have indicated when we are increasing from $25 to beyond that in 2030, and then beyond that. So, that is why we have that indication that we are going to increase and also the range to which we are likely to increase it too. So, I think that will give businesses an opportunity to make their own assessments within the range that we are able to forecast right now. I hope that that is sufficient for the time being, because those are sort of further out. But as we approach those times when we are going to increase the carbon taxes, we will give them adequate advance notice, as we have done in the past.

The Chairman: I believe that is all the clarifications for Senior Minister Teo. We move on. Ms Yeo Wan Ling.

Managing Work and Family Commitments

Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Couples often cite concerns about managing their work and family commitments. While flexible work arrangements and the introduction of Shared Parental Leave have helped alleviate some stresses related to managing work and family commitments, in a recent survey by the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) of more than 1,000 married individuals, less than half of parents surveyed found the financial requirements of raising children manageable. This points both to the need to provide more affordable access to caregiving resources, such as childcare and migrant domestic workers (MDWs), as well as equipping couples in dual income families to perform well at work to maximise livelihoods. In this respect, how can the Government do more to support working parents with their caregiving needs?

3.45 pm

The Chairman: Ms Ng Ling Ling, you can take your two cuts together.

Supporting Marriage and Parenthood

Ms Ng Ling Ling (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Chairman, Singapore's total fertility rate (TFR) reached an all-time low in 2023. Can I ask what is the latest TFR in 2024? Did it increase with the effect of the Dragon year last year?

If TFR has improved in 2024 due to the Dragon year effect, besides having more hopes for more babies for Singapore, will the Government consider commissioning research psychologists and behavioral scientists to conduct a study with interviews of parents who have had Dragon year babies to better understand and distill what are the underlying root beliefs that lead to the unusually better TFR in most Dragon years, despite all other circumstances, for example, high cost of living, lack of time, work and life stress, remaining the same in such years?

How can the Government use such studies to better design public messaging and conditions that will be more conducive for Singaporean couples to have more babies?

While major urban and developed nations and cities have all seen declining TFR over the past years, Israel's TRF has remained relatively stable over the past decade, with a slight decrease to 2.85 births per woman in 2023, despite high inflation and a high cost of living also being a problem for that country.

Can the Singapore Government do a more thorough study on the factors contributing to Israel's stable TFR and consider what can be adapted for Singapore?

Overall Population Strategies

According to the World Bank, Singapore's age dependency ratio for the dependent population is reported as 33% in 2023. This is a lower value against the global average of about 58%. A lower ratio indicates less financial stress on working people and greater political stability. The total age dependency ratio that the World Bank uses is the ratio of young and elderly dependents who are generally economically inactive, compared to the number of people of working age. Despite this good data from the World Bank, with an ageing population and declining TFR, there is still cause for concern.

I would like to ask: one, how can supportive stakeholders, including employers, religious bodies, such as churches and mosques and grassroots organisations across the society, be better connected and coordinated to enable the key population strategies of the Government to reach their best outcomes?

Two, where can young Singaporeans, grassroots advisors like me, grassroots organisations and educational institutions interested to support marriage and parenthood find accurate, age-appropriate and contextual information about fertility health of both women and men to increase public awareness and education on this important health topic?

The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh.

Total Fertility Rate and Number of Working and Retired Citizens

Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, our resident TFR reached an all-time low of 0.97 in 2023. What is the latest TFR? Did we have more births from the Year of the Dragon? What is the updated data on the number and ratio of working citizens to those who are retired?

I am heartened that the Government is providing greater support for parents who desire more children. Will there be incentives to encourage and support young couples to have more children earlier? What is the Government doing to help and support singles who are interested in marriage to meet potential partners?

For children of single mothers, I urge the Government to admit them into the Baby Bonus scheme and update legislation for their inheritance rights to their mothers' assets.

The Chairman: Ms Carrie Tan.

Transnational Couples Parenthood Support

Ms Carrie Tan (Nee Soon): Mr Chairman, a Singaporean whose wife is a Permanent Resident (PR) and having their first pregnancy is having a very stressful time trying to get a Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) for his mother-in-law for long enough to provide both emotional and physical care to his wife who is having health and pregnancy complications.

The soon-to-be mother is terrified, this being her first pregnancy and by a health situation that requires her to have a prolonged period of recovery postpartum and more intensive care of the baby post-birth. The couple worries about the well-being of both mother and child and financial inadequacy if they cannot find suitable childcare and the wife needs to quit her job. They are not alone in such anxieties.

With later marriages and pregnancies increasing the risks of complications and the absence of family members around to care for them, parenthood can be daunting and scary. Transnational couples, especially, contend with less familial support with one spouse's parents overseas.

I urge the Government to facilitate the visit passes of parents of foreign spouses, so that transnational couples can have better access to familial support during pregnancy and for the first three years of a child's life. There should be a category of visit passes for parenthood support for at least three years, so that overseas grandparents can be present to support the new parents while they find their footing as a new family.

The Government has valid concerns about aged grandparents having extended stay in Singapore, as it adds on to the country's potential eldercare burdens and costs if they are not financially supported. To mitigate this, we can require mandatory savings be put aside in one's Central Provident Fund (CPF) account as a "ParentCare Fund", for those who wish to renew their foreign parents or in-laws' visit passes past the grandchild's third birthday. Contribution amounts can be tiered according to the elderly parent's age and health condition – those with no chronic illnesses contribute less, while those with chronic illnesses contribute more. And put in place annual mandatory health checks for each extension of the visit pass.

This way, foreign grandparents can continue being in their grandchildren's lives and be motivated to keep healthy. Those who are financially able can also contribute to this ParentCare Fund themselves. When they do return to their home countries in their last years, they can withdraw this fund for their own care.

This will provide a pool of funds should healthcare costs need to be incurred during their stay here or add to their retirement fund if unutilised, and allow couples and children to benefit from the presence and support of grandparents for as long as their health allows them to contribute.

I urge the Government to study this and make a win-win solution possible for transnational families.

The Chairman: Dr Wan Rizal.

Supporting Working Parents

Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Sir, balancing work and family responsibilities is a key concern for many Singaporean parents. As families juggle demanding work schedules and caregiving duties, more substantial support structures are essential to help them manage both effectively.

What additional measures is the Government considering to ease caregiving pressures for working parents, especially those with young children? Are there plans to enhance childcare accessibility, parental leave policies or flexible work arrangements (FWAs) to support families better?

Beyond workplace policies, how can we strengthen community-based support networks to assist working parents in areas, such as after-school care, parental coaching or peer support groups? As we continue to encourage parenthood while supporting career aspirations, how will the Government ensure that working parents have the resources and flexibility to balance family and work commitments?

The Chairman: Ms Mariam Jaafar.

Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Sir, working couples often cite struggles in managing their work and family commitments. The Tripartite Guidelines on FWA Requests were a welcome step. My other colleagues and I in this House have asked about childcare leave, especially for families with many children.

The Large Families Scheme is a step in recognising the increased financial burden on larger families. When might this be extended to recognising the increased childcare burden, that is, childcare leave? How can the Government do more to support working parents with their caregiving needs?

The Chairman: Mr Xie Yao Quan.

More Childcare Leave

Mr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong): Chairman, Members have called for additional childcare leave for parents with more children. But I also note the Government's position that we have already made major moves like the Shared Parental Leave recently, so we should give employers and businesses time to adjust to these moves first.

I myself have constituents who are employers and also constituents who are employees covering for colleagues on parental leave. So, it does take a whole village to support Singaporeans to start and raise families and I understand the need to strike a careful balance with any move.

Yet, I wish to make a push today for just a bit more childcare leave and with a slightly different consideration. My suggestion is to increase our Government-Paid Childcare Leave from six to eight days, to align with the eight days of annual centre closure that the Early Childhood Development Agency allows childcare operators. Because these eight days of annual closures are actually wonderful opportunities for young parents to use the time to bond with their young children. So, we should really try to support our young parents to make full use of these opportunities.

And this increase to eight days of childcare leave should apply to all parents, regardless of the number of young children they have. In fact, for couples with more than one child in preschool, it is likely that all the young children will be attending the same preschool, with the same annual closure dates. So, it becomes all the more valuable for both parents to be able to align their childcare leave with the closure dates and allow the whole family to come and spend time together.

As for supporting parents with more young children, I think the crux is actually the amount of flexibility that parents have today to balance work and ad hoc childcare demands as they arise, rather than the adequacy of leave entitlement per se. And so, we should push for FWAs as the dominant solution to support parents with more children.

The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, you can take your six cuts together.

Supporting Fathers with Newborns

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, eight years ago, I delivered my first Adjournment Motion, sharing my painful experience of my premature twins Katie and Poppy's 10-week stay in hospital. I spoke up calling to extend parental leave for parents with birth of multiples and of pre-term babies.

I am glad the Government responded positively and introduced The Tripartite Standard on Unpaid Leave for Unexpected Care Needs offering up to four weeks of unpaid leave for parents with births of multiples and of pre-term babies. Minister Josephine Teo shared in her reply that, "He spoke from the heart and won us with not just the strengths of his arguments but also the intensity of his conviction."

[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]

Sir, my conviction over this issue has intensified over the years and I also remember that Minister Josephine Teo once told me that, "All good things will be considered." It is time for us to upgrade the Tripartite Standard to Tripartite Guidelines so that it is no longer voluntary and every employee will get to benefit from it. This is a good thing to consider.

Supporting Parents with Care Needs

I took all my paternity leave and I know how important it is to be there for our children when they are born. I treasure that few weeks I could spend with them to welcome them into this world.

The Government has sent a clear signal that parental leave is important. We have increased paternity leave and introduced a new Shared Parental Leave. But only about one in two fathers take their paternity leave and not all mothers take their maternity leave. We all know that part of the problem here is workplace culture and support. As the Prime Minister said, "Employers and businesses are concerned about managing manpower gaps when their employees are away for an extended period."

Can the Government do more to support employers, similar to how the Ministry of Defence supports employers when it comes to reservist obligations? Can the Government work with companies more closely and consider more incentives for businesses to ensure their employees use their parental leave?

Supporting Parents with Young Children

Three years ago, I asked the Government to provide more support for lower-income fathers to take their paternity leave. I shared that a National University of Singapore study study found that fathers in more labour-intensive jobs, such as machine operators and cleaners, were half as likely to take their paternity leave, as compared to fathers working as legislators, senior officials and managers.

I am asking again that the Government conduct a targeted study on the barriers to taking paternity leave for lower-income workers, look into policies to increase their usage of paternity leave and also look into incentivising, again, the employers who support their employees to take their paternity leave?

Can we finally do more to help lower-income fathers take their paternity leave? Why should they be denied the time to spend with their babies?

Support for Couples Undergoing In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF)

I love my three children, Ella, Katie and Poppy, and as I have shared in this House, without in vitro fertilisation (IVF), I actually would not have kids today.

IVF is not for the faint-hearted and as I shared in my Adjournment Motion four years ago, "Going through IVF was like being on an emotional roller coaster ride. It was a journey filled with pain and anguish, excitement and disappointment and hope and happiness at times. It was financially, physically and emotionally draining."

The Government is providing the much-needed subsidies for IVF but we can do so much more to help. IVF is a very time-consuming procedure and couples need time to go through IVF and time to support each other. But many are not given time off work. Many face unsupportive employers and this adds stress to an already stressful journey.

I am calling again for the Government to legislate gender-neutral fertility leave. This will support couples, send employers a clear signal and trigger mindset shifts in the workplaces.

Support for Older Couples Starting IVF Treatment

Many Singaporeans are getting married later and we should not penalise those who find true love later in their lives. But the reality is that we do penalise them.

The age criterion for the Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) co-funding scheme is currently set at below 40 years of age. As the Ministry of Health (MOH) has shared, "This is based on current clinical evidence, which shows that the chance of conception for a woman who undergoes ART treatment decreases with age, with the success rate being significantly lower after 40 year of age."

4.00 pm

I understand this rationale for this policy, but we must also understand the impact this has on many couples who are affected by it. Science is important, but we should also do all we can to help couples who are trying so hard to have children.

Can the Government consider providing a lower percentage of co-funding for ART treatments for those who get married when they are 40 years old or older? A Singapore Made for Families must also include those who get married later in their lives.

Supporting Parents with Young Children

Lastly, we all want to be there for our children when they are sick, but many simply do not have enough childcare leave to be there to look after our loved ones. I understand the Government's concern when it comes to giving more childcare leave, but surely, childcare sick leave backed up by a medical certificate is a lower hanging fruit and is a necessity.

I know the Government agrees with childcare sick leave and that it is needed. After all, we provide all civil servants with this and the Minister recently replied to me that, "The utilisation for childcare sick leave has remained steady at around 50% over the years and remains relevant for officers" – "officers" meaning Public Service officers. The time has come for us to legislate childcare sick leave for everyone and not just civil servants.

As promised by Minister Indranee, I look forward to all her sympathetic responses to my cuts.

The Chairman: Ms Hany Soh, you can take your two cuts together.

Fertility Support for Aspiring Parents

Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Chairman, in my Motion titled "Supporting Singaporeans in Starting and Raising Families" that was debated and passed in this House last month, the issue of Singaporeans having children when they are older was one of the concerns raised as this means more couples would likely face increased difficulties in conceiving. How will the Government further increase awareness of this risk and support Singaporeans in this area?

Fertility Support SG, a non-profit self-help group, has shared with the People's Action Party (PAP) Women's Wing Policy Group, some best practices globally. In Japan, the government provides counselling and support services for all couples facing infertility, including emotional support and guidance on treatment options. Australia has a national infertility support organisation that provides information, resources and peer support to couples and individuals. Its various states have also integrated both public and private sector initiatives to support fertility treatments, often including financial subsidies as well as robust counselling services. Certain states in the US, including New York, have mandated insurance companies to cover infertility treatments.

Drawing inspiration from these examples, will our Government consider providing even more support with or by:

(a) upstream fertility education to help Singaporeans plan their fertility journeys early. Agencies can work with support groups like Fertility Support SG (FSS), who have offered their support by hosting relevant resources and information on their website for easy access, especially by aspiring parents;

(b) the introduction of grants for pre-IVF or general fertility testing to help identify issues and allow for appropriate solutioning early, thereby improving the chances of success;

(c) expansion of public sector grants to cover more IVF cycles as families may want more than one child or face complex cases that require additional rounds of treatment; and

(d) allowing grants to cover the cost of treatments in private clinics as well, giving couples more options, particularly so when time is of the essence in many of such cases.

Additionally, in specific instances where the woman undergoing treatment is below the age of 40 and the fertility medical team at public hospitals have recommended that she continues treatment beyond her subsidised assisted conception procedure cycles, will the Government consider extending the coverage of subsidies up to the point when the patient successfully conceives or when the fertility medical team advises her to stop?

This is the situation that my Woodgrove resident, Tina, is in. Her medical fertility team has advised her to continue with her treatment even after the existing subsidies have been fully utilised as each cycle actually brings them closer to finding the optimal combination of medication and timing for successful conception.

Support for First-time Parents

Couples considering or expecting their first child would invariably feel overwhelmed or anticipate getting lost along their parenthood journey. Can the Government better support these parents and aspiring parents in their prenatal and parenthood journey? I repeat my request for the Government to introduce, amongst other support schemes, a "Mommy's Milestone Booklet" to keep track and support an expectant mother's holistic well-being.

In our continuing drive towards being a smart and smarter nation, this booklet could also be issued in electronic format, comprising a side guide that updates parents about new developments in the parenthood journey, including getting value-for-money deals from parenthood-friendly businesses and perhaps even include a live chat function with human expertise or AI support where appropriate.

I look forward to the Government's response, please.

The Chairman: Mr Yip Hon Weng, you can take your two cuts together.

Encouraging Large Families

Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Chairman, raising a large family is rewarding but challenging. As a father of five, I understand the sacrifices parents make. While I support the Large Families Scheme, financial incentives alone will not reverse demographic trends.

That is why I advocate a whole-of-society approach. Families need more than money. They need affordable housing and childcare, FWAs and strong community networks to share caregiving.

A major concern is competition. Parents fear a third child might stretch resources, disadvantaging their other children. Policies should turn large families into an advantage, not a burden.

We can: (a) set aside more primary school vacancies for their children; (b) enhance the Third Child Priority Scheme to provide them with more chances to secure the Build-To-Order (BTO) of their choice, including 5-room BTO flats if they wish; and (c) better match flat types with family needs.

Beyond policy, we must foster a culture that values large families. Workplaces can offer tax benefits for employees with three or more children. Housing supply should accommodate growing households. Small efforts like family-friendly parking, restaurant accommodations and mentorship programmes signal support.

Investing in big families means investing in Singapore's future. Let us build a society where families of all sizes thrive.

SG60 Baby Gift

It is a thoughtful initiative shaped by feedback from parents who emphasised the need for practicality, usefulness and aesthetic appeal. As the Minister highlighted, parents do not want just beautiful but impractical items. They want something they could use and treasure. This approach is certainly a step in the right direction.

However, while the gift is a meaningful gesture, we must ask: will it be enough to move the needle on our total fertility rate? What are the deeper barriers – housing costs, childcare affordability, work-life balance – that prevent young families from growing?

Additionally, can we have more clarity on the gift's nature? What is in the package? Who is eligible? When and how will parents receive it?

Let us ensure that this initiative is part of a broader effort to make raising a family in Singapore truly sustainable.

The Chairman: Minister Indranee Rajah.

The Minister, Prime Minister's Office (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mdm Chairperson, with your permission, I will take any clarifications after my speech, subject to the availability of time.

The Chairman: Noted.

Ms Indranee Rajah: This year, we celebrate 60 years of nation-building. We have come a long way as a people and a nation, and, together, we have built a Singapore that we can be proud of. To ensure that Singapore continues to thrive, we must address two demographic challenges which are also faced by many other societies around the world – a rapidly ageing population and a low fertility rate.

Last year, there were 24,800 resident marriages. We also welcomed 30,800 resident births, a slight increase from 30,500 in the previous year. Our preliminary TFR for 2024 was 0.97, unchanged from 2023. The Dragon year effect has been diminishing over the years, reflecting the generational shifts in attitudes and priorities among young couples.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about the updated ratio of working adults to retirees. A decade ago, there were six residents aged 20 to 64 years old supporting every elderly person aged 65 years and over. The resident old-age support ratio has almost halved from six in 2014 to 3.5 in 2024.

A low fertility rate and an ageing population have significant implications on our economy and society. As our local workforce growth slows, it will be increasingly challenging to sustain economic growth and maintain a dynamic economy. There will be fewer young people to support a growing elderly population. Addressing our low TFR remains a national priority.

Ms Ng Ling Ling suggested working with academics and studying other countries' practices to tackle low fertility. We are doing so and also regularly engage Singaporeans to develop policies that fit our local context.

As shared during the Motion on families earlier this month, we have a comprehensive suite of measures to support Singaporeans in their marriage and parenthood journey – from housing, healthcare, preschool and education to financial and work-life support.

We have made significant enhancements in recent years. In 2023, we enhanced the Baby Bonus Cash Gift and contributions to the Child Development Account (CDA). We have reviewed and will be expanding the uses of CDA to better support parents. The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) will share more at their COS.

In 2024, we launched the Tripartite Guidelines on FWA Requests. The enhanced Government-Paid Paternity Leave and new Shared Parental Leave announced by the Prime Minister last year will start from 1 April this year. This month, in Budget 2025, the Prime Minister announced the new Large Families Scheme.

But for these policies to work, we need mindsets and culture to shift in tandem. This requires support from everyone across society, as highlighted by Ms Ng Ling Ling. A key area is workplace support. Employers, supervisors and coworkers can all contribute to fostering a family-friendly workplace culture.

After the new Shared Parental Leave is fully implemented next year, parents will have 30 weeks of paid parental leave to care for their infants in the first year after birth. This will foster the parent-child bond and it is good for the child's development, too.

We know it is not easy for employers to manage when their employees are away for an extended period. This is why it is so important for employees and employers to build mutual trust and play their part in making the leave provisions work for both parties.

Employees should discuss their leave plans and covering arrangements with their supervisors and coworkers as early as possible. At the same time, managers and coworkers ought to be supportive and facilitative so parents feel reassured about taking time away from work.

As Mr Louis Ng highlighted, fathers should be encouraged to fully utilise their paternity leave. One key step we have taken is to introduce employment protection for fathers on paternity leave from April this year. We will study utilisation patterns and see how to better support fathers who encounter challenges in using their leave.

Various Members asked for further support for working parents. Suggestions include providing more leave for parents of preschoolers, those with pre-term and multiple births, larger families, as well as those seeking fertility treatment.

At present, each working parent with a youngest child aged below seven years old has six days of paid childcare leave a year. This means a working couple would have a total of 12 days to tap on – more than the number of preschool closure days that Mr Xie Yao Quan mentioned.

We have also doubled Unpaid Infant Care Leave since 2024, where each working parent will have 12 days per parent per year, in the child's first two years.

These parental leave provisions are provided on top of the parents' annual leave provisions.

We will continue to review our parental leave provisions in consultation with parents and tripartite partners. While we understand the desire for more childcare leave, any further leave enhancement has to be carefully considered and must strike a balance between the needs of different caregivers and the operational impact on employers.

More broadly, however, we do need employers to embrace more family-friendly workplace practices.

For instance, FWAs are an important form of support for parents with young children and other workers with caregiving responsibilities. When implemented well, FWAs enable employees to balance their responsibilities both at work and at home. With the implementation of the Tripartite Guidelines on FWA Requests from December last year, I hope that more employers will embrace FWAs as part of their core HR strategy.

4.15 pm

Employers are also encouraged to go beyond the legislated leave provisions to position themselves as employers of choice. For example, more than 4,000 employers have adopted the Tripartite Standard on Unpaid Leave for Unexpected Care Needs.

Mr Louis Ng suggested incentivising businesses, to ensure their employees take parental leave. In reality, new workplace norms are emerging and the younger generation of workers value greater work-life balance.

If employers want to continue to attract and retain talent in their companies, their workplace practices will have to evolve. For example, Adecco Group APAC Pte Ltd has an employee who will be eligible for the new Shared Parental Leave. They plan to hire temporary and contract staff as covering manpower so that the employee can take her parental leave with peace of mind. When the employee returns to work, Adecco will also make available suitable FWAs. This will allow the employee to balance her work and family commitments while still ensuring the company's work gets done.

Mr Louis Ng can rest assured that we will continue to work with employers to foster more family-friendly workplaces and encourage those who can, to go beyond what is mandated. The wider community can also play a part in supporting working parents, as Dr Wan Rizal highlighted.

Madam, the Large Families Scheme is a significant move. Our Marriage and Parenthood Surveys show over a third of married couples aspire to have three or more children. However, fewer married couples are having more than two children. Some worry about having less time for each child. Others may be daunted by the prospect of higher expenses.

Our existing support measures recognise this. For example, parents receive more under the Baby Bonus Scheme and Parenthood Tax Rebate for each subsequent child they have.

But we want to give greater assurance to couples who wish to have larger families. The Large Families Scheme will provide more financial support for large families for a start. Families will receive an additional $16,000 for each third or subsequent child, born on or after 18 February this year. The CDA First Step Grant will be doubled from $5,000 to $10,000, and the families will receive a new Large Family MediSave Grant of $5,000, and $6,000 in Large Family LifeSG Credits. Existing large families will receive $1,000 in Large Family LifeSG Credits annually, for each third or subsequent child until the year the child turns six.

The LifeSG credits will provide sustained support for large families. Parents can use these credits to buy groceries at major supermarkets, or to top up the family's SimplyGo cards for public transport. They can also be used to pay for rides from transport operators that accept NETS QR payment, like TADA and ComfortDelGro taxis. We will provide more information on how to access and use the credits later this year.

We recognise large families also face other challenges, as highlighted by various Members during the Budget debate. For example, they may require larger housing, face difficulties getting around as a family, or worry about the costs of higher education that increase with more children. We will study Members' suggestions on how to further support large families.

Mr Yip Hon Weng highlighted the need for whole-of-society support to shift norms and encourage larger families. We agree. We hope the Large Families Scheme will kickstart a societal movement to celebrate and support these families. We have been engaging corporates to support the Large Families Scheme by offering privileges and deals for families with three or more children. I am happy to share that more than 30 corporate partners spanning different sectors have come on board, including food and beverage, retail and transport.

For example, to help larger families travel around more easily, private-hire services like Grab and Gojek will be offering discounts on bookings with their larger vehicles. Car-sharing services like Tribecar and GetGo will be offering discounts on car rentals. HomeTeamNS will be offering bundle promotions for tickets to their clubhouse family events, adventure and children's facilities, as well as discounted membership fees. FairPrice Group will also be offering value bundles for large families to provide savings on essential groceries. These will be provided later this year.

I would like to thank all corporate partners who have committed to providing deals to support families with more children. We encourage more corporates to join us in this movement. Together, let us make Singapore a conducive place for large families to thrive.

Ms Hany Soh and Ms Ng Ling Ling highlighted the importance of raising awareness on fertility health issues. I agree. Fertility health can be a difficult topic to broach. We need to change mindsets and normalise conversations about fertility health and support couples who have fertility health concerns to seek help without fear of stigma. The wider community can play an important role in this. Ground-up efforts by groups like Fertility Support SG provide a safe space for couples facing infertility to share their experiences. It also recently organised a fertility fair to raise awareness of the fertility health resources and support available.

To address the myths and misconceptions about fertility health, we collaborated with the Obstetrics and Gynaecology Society of Singapore to publish an article titled "Debunking 5 Myths of Fertility Health" on Health Hub. It contains information on commonly faced fertility issues and provides useful resources for couples seeking help.

Let me assure Ms Hany Soh and Mr Louis Ng that we will continue to support those who are tapping on fertility treatments. Today, eligible couples can receive up to 75% in co-funding for ART treatments for up to three fresh and three frozen cycles at public healthcare institutions. They can also tap on their MediSave for the treatment costs, up to a lifetime withdrawal limit of $15,000 per patient.

We have made some progress in supporting fertility issues in Singapore, but more can be done. With more Singaporeans marrying and having children later, as Ms Hany Soh and Mr Louis Ng pointed out, we may need to relook our support on this front. I thank Members for their suggestions and we will study these ideas with MOH.

Ms Hany Soh spoke about providing more support for those who are expecting. The antenatal journey can be daunting, especially for first-time parents. Expecting couples today can access the Health Promotion Board's Parent Hub, a one-stop online portal with health-related resources and tips for their pregnancy and parenting journey. The Child and Maternal Health and Well-being Strategy and Action Plan also provides enhanced support for pregnant women and couples, such as the introduction of mental health screenings and support for pregnant women and new fathers at antenatal and postnatal stages at KK Women's and Children's Hospital and National University Hospital. More antenatal education programmes have also been rolled out at community touchpoints to help couples better prepare themselves for pregnancy, childbirth and parenthood. I have taken note of Ms Hany Soh's suggestions and we will look into them. We welcome further suggestions on how we can make the antenatal journey more positive for expecting couples.

This year, we celebrate our 60th year of Independence. As the Prime Minister mentioned at the Budget debate, all Singapore-citizen babies born in 2025 will receive a special SG60 Baby Gift to celebrate their birth. Mr Yip Hon Weng will be happy to hear that the gift represents our commitment towards building a Singapore Made for Families. It is also a symbol of our hopes and aspirations for our future generations.

Many people have been asking about the SG60 Baby Gift. Mdm Chairperson, with your permission, may I show an image on the LED screens to give Members a preview of the SG60 Baby Gift?

The Chairman: Yes, please. I think it will address some of the curiosity that everyone is having. [A slide was shown to hon Members.]

Ms Indranee Rajah: The gift comes with a specially designed trolley bag which can double up as a travel case for the baby and contains a specially curated set of 10 commemorative and useful items, sourced from local brands and companies. They include practical items like the straw cup set from local brand, Hegen, which comes with their patented adaptor cap to meet the babies' needs as they gain more independence feeding themselves. There are educational items like storybooks by local authors featuring Becky Bunny, our mascot for the Families for Life movement, as well as a plushie of Becky Bunny. We encourage parents to bond with their babies over these books and inspire a love for reading through them. Other items include play items that will help their babies in their growth and development, as well as items for parents to mark their precious moments with their little ones.

Students from LASALLE College of the Arts designed the artwork that you can see on the SG60 Baby Gift items. Each gift set comes with a congratulatory letter from Prime Minister Wong. We hope parents will find the gift meaningful and useful – to inspire their child in discovering the world around them, and to support parents in nurturing and caring for their child.

Parents whose babies are born in 2025 will be able to register online for the gift. We will launch the distribution of the gift at various community events in April and May 2025. We hope that families will be able to join the event in their neighbourhood and get to know other young parents. For those who are unable to collect the gift at these events, or who register for the SG60 Baby Gift after 15 March 2025, we will arrange for the gift to be delivered to your homes from mid-May 2025.

As we celebrate SG60, allow me to highlight two values which have served us well over the last 60 years: openness and multiculturalism. These are fundamental aspects of who we are and key strengths that help us to make our way in the world.

Immigrants help to moderate the impact of low birth rates and ageing on the size and age profile of the citizen population. We will continue to carefully manage the pace of immigration, taking into account factors, such as the falling TFR. In 2024, we granted about 24,000 new citizenships, including 1,400 to children born overseas to Singaporean parents. We also granted around 35,000 new Permanent Residents, or PRs. The average number of new citizenships and new PRs granted annually over the past five years is slightly higher than that over the preceding period. We remain committed to ensuring that our new citizens and PRs are well-integrated into our communities.

We can all play our part to embrace the newcomers in our midst and help them to better understand our local norms and culture. Over time, many of them become not just friends but also family. Over the last decade, more than one-third of citizen marriages every year were transnational, meaning marriages involving a Singaporean and a foreigner.

One such transnational family is Kiren T and Angela Bueno's family. Kiren, a Singaporean Indian, and Angela, a PR originally from the Philippines, met while working in the same children's ward in the National University Hospital. They fell in love working and doing their in-house advanced diploma together and got married in 2016. Today, they have two children, a boy and girl, aged nine and seven. There are many such stories. Many transnational couples make Singapore their home and over time, these foreign spouses become one of us.

Ms Carrie Tan asked whether the Government could facilitate long-term visit passes, or LTVPs, for foreign parents of transnational couples, to help with the couple's parenting journey. Today, Singapore Citizens and PRs can apply to sponsor their own foreign parents for an LTVP, subject to the prevailing criteria. These LTVPs come with a validity of up to five years and can be renewed. This relatively long period provides some certainty to help transnational couples in planning their caregiving arrangements.

We will continue to review our population strategies to ensure that they remain relevant in meeting our needs. As we look to the next 60 years and beyond, let us work together to build stronger families, a more united society and a brighter future for Singapore.

The Chairman: Clarifications. Mr Louis Ng.

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Thank you, Madam. I have pushed the issue of childcare leave for a number of years now, but can I just have two requests for the Minister? One, can the Government do a public consultation to see how much support there is for the increase in childcare leave and how much is needed by families with children? Two, whether we can do a consultation with businesses to understand again what concerns they have with regard to increasing childcare leave and what kind of support they hope from the Government when it comes again to increasing childcare leave?

Ms Indranee Rajah: Mdm Chairperson, in the course of work in the Prime Minister's Office as well as in Forward SG, there have been ongoing consultations. I think there is no doubt that if you ask parents, they would definitely like to have more childcare leave. It is when you speak to the employers that they have some concerns, not because they do not want to give childcare leave, but they are also grappling with the Tripartite Guidelines on FWA Requests, as well as the new Shared Parental Leave that we have also asked them to accommodate.

4.30 pm

So, I think, let them have some time to work through the Shared Parental Leave and the FWAs and it is not that additional childcare leave is a never, but it is really more a question of letting the employers and the businesses adjust and arrive at some equilibrium, before we start adding on to the things that they need to do.

The Chairman: Ms Ng Ling Ling.

Ms Ng Ling Ling: Mdm Chairman, I thank the Minister for the very comprehensive updates. I just have one question. I remember during the debate of the Motion for support of marriage and parenthood, the Minister explained the rationale of why the Government is reluctant to set a TFR target.

But having been a public and civil servant myself for almost 20 years before I stepped into a political role, I know well the culture of what gets measured, gets attention, gets resources and gets done. So, I am wondering whether the Prime Minister's Office is open to setting a TFR target of bringing it back to 1.0 in the next five years.

Ms Indranee Rajah: Mdm Chairperson, I appreciate the sentiment and I genuinely wish that it was so easy. Because we could set the target. I could go and tell every newly-married woman, "I expect one child from you" or "Give me another child". Or if you work it out, it will end up like 2.5 children or something like that. But they also have their concerns and they have their needs, they have their worries and they have aspirations.

So, what we have tried to do is to approach it from the viewpoint of, "What are your concerns?" Your concerns are cost, your concerns are time, your concerns are housing, your concerns are work-life balance. Let us see how we can address each of these concerns, whether it is through enhanced Baby Bonus; enhanced CDA; or with housing, apart from ramping up, also the new classification framework; the Tripartite Guidelines on FWAs. Each one of these things step-by-step. And then asking everybody to come on board – corporates, employers – to make Singapore more conducive.

Then, I think, if we send out a general call and we say, "Please have more children", then at least they feel a lot more assured in having children rather than just assigning them. It is not like a homework assignment to have a baby.

The Chairman: Mr Louis Chua. Sorry. Senior Minister Teo.

Mr Teo Chee Hean: May I take the opportunity to make a correction in my replies just now. I had indicated that we are increasing our indicative need for green electricity imports from four to eight gigawatts. I meant to say, "four to six gigawatts".

I just wanted to make that correction for the record, please.

The Chairman: Noted. Mr Louis Chua.

A Vibrant Equities Market

Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Chairman, as late as May 2024, I asked the Prime Minister about the Government's assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of existing measures to increase the attractiveness of the Singapore equities market, and whether the Government will take the lead in promoting our equities market by encouraging the privately-owned companies in which it holds equity through its investment vehicles to list in Singapore.

Back then, Prime Minister Wong responded that notwithstanding the Government's efforts, the conditions remain challenging for the Singapore equities market, as they are for stock exchanges in many other countries, and that we have to be realistic about what we can do to change them. It was a disappointing response, but I was comforted to hear in August 2024 that the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has set up a Review Group to recommend measures to strengthen equities market development in Singapore.

Chairman, capital flow is more mobile and global than ever, seeking the best return wherever it may find. Our measures must be bold enough to bring our equity markets into the future, in order to give us the best chance of success.

I welcome the measures announced thus far but have some clarifications for the latest measures announced in February 2025.

On the launch of the $5 billion Equity Market Development Programme ddressing demand issues, it is a case of better than nothing. As we all know, the Government has long held that directing GIC to invest in locally-listed firms is "not the solution" to improve the attractiveness of the local equity market and its mandate specifically excludes the Singapore market. This is unlike Malaysia's Employees' Provident Fund (EPF), which is the largest investor in its domestic market, supporting Malaysian companies' capital needs and the economy as a whole.

In the grand scheme of things, $5 billion is just a small fraction of the free-float market capitalisation of the Singapore market. How does MAS intend to use this seed funding to draw in investments from other investors? Moreover, the number of Singapore-focused equity funds have dwindled over the years. Singapore represents just a small percentage of the Asia ex Japan and World indices. How does MAS intend to evaluate and allocate the funds to the fund managers, and how will these funds be disbursed? Will there be sustained funding and cash injections for continued support of the equities market over the medium to long term?

I also wish to propose two key reforms to ensure long-term sustainability.

While MAS has taken the lead on the demand side with the Equity Market Development Programme, on the supply side, I urge the Government, via its investment entities, to similarly take the lead for its companies to list on the Singapore Exchange (SGX). This has been done before, through the listing of various Government-linked companies in the early years. Even the Singtel Special Discounted Shares Scheme in 1993, aimed at making Singapore a share-owning society by giving Singaporean CPF members the opportunity to buy discounted Singtel shares. For all intents and purposes, the scheme worked well.

We can give this current generation of Singaporeans a stake in the country via a meaningful Initial Public Offering (IPO) of the next wave of various private companies held by Temasek and encouraging them to list on the Singapore exchange. Top of mind is PSA International, which pulled the plug on its IPO in 2002 after years of preparation and this plan was never revived. Recently, Saudi Global Ports, in which PSA co-owns, is said to be aiming for an IPO worth up to US$1 billion in Riyadh too. Many families are excited to visit the new Mandai boardwalk and the upcoming Rainforest Wild Park. I am sure many will be excited to own a part of Mandai Wildlife Group. Especially when we are looking at the long-term expansion of Changi Airport and Terminal 5, tapping the global capital markets is a key avenue in which we can fund Changi Airport Group in an efficient and sustainable manner.

More importantly, as MAS moves to move towards a more disclosure-based regime and a supposed pro-enterprise regulatory stance, it is imperative that we strengthen corporate governance standards and double down on investor education.

In 2023, Japan introduced what The Financial Times called a radical "name and shame" regime to drive better corporate governance and stock market valuations, particularly at listed companies with a price-to-book ratio of less than one. Corporate reform since March 2023 following Tokyo Stock Exchange's directive for all companies to take "Action to Implement Management that is Conscious of Cost of Capital and Stock Price" has led to almost 90% of companies taking some kind of action by end-2024.

Similarly, since 2024, South Korea has also started to tackle the "Korea discount". Singapore can certainly take a leaf or two from them, by focusing on broad-based corporate governance reforms and implementing our own "value up" programme. This will go hand in hand with a disclosure-based regime and address longstanding concerns on corporate governance.

Further, Singapore investors, especially retail investors, need to be better equipped to make sound investment decisions and to question the board and management teams of the companies they have invested in. This can only happen with a purposeful effort to strengthen investor education and empower retail investors to make informed investment decisions in a "buyer beware" regulatory regime.

Chairman, we need to do all we can if we want to revive our equity markets and this is our best chance, maybe our only chance.

Bank Accounts for Ex-offenders

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Madam, access to a bank account is essential in daily life in Singapore. In response to a cut filed in 2022 by my colleague, Mr Gerald Giam, then-Deputy Chairman of MAS Mr Lawrence Wong had spoken on the Limited Purpose Bank Accounts, which was then in its pilot phase. These accounts are meant to help ex-offenders to access basic banking services, including receiving their salaries and Government payouts. I seek an update on how many local banks are offering such accounts for ex-offenders and whether MAS has data on the take-up rate for such accounts by ex-offenders.

Madam, one of my constituents recently approached me for assistance with opening a bank account. My constituent is an ex-offender and needed a bank account in order to receive her salary. I sent appeals to six different local banks, which were all unsuccessful. I also sent an appeal to MAS. MAS offered to forward my constituent's appeal to DBS, UOB and OCBC but stated they were unable to compel any banks to open an account for my constituent. I urge MAS to work with the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Singapore Prison Service in ensuring ex-offenders can open bank accounts.

The Chairman: Minister Chee Hong Tat.

The Second Minister for Finance (Mr Chee Hong Tat): Madam, with your permission, I will address both cuts for MAS and take clarifications after this reply if there is available time. Let me start with Mr Louis Chua's cut on the equities market.

A key challenge which many exchanges face is that global capital is heavily concentrated in the US and US-listed stocks currently account for around two-thirds of global stock market capitalisation.

The Review Group is clear about our objectives and realistic about our goals. Based on industry consultations, there are companies with a strong presence in Singapore and the region that might not be large enough to sustain investor interest post-listing if they were to list in the US. These companies represent one key segment we could attract. The Review Group focused on strengthening the elements of our ecosystem to enhance its competitiveness and provide a well-functioning market for companies, including technology startups, to raise capital for their expansion.

The first set of measures span three mutually reinforcing pillars covering demand, supply and regulations. On demand side, we introduced measures to increase investor interest and deepen trading liquidity, such as the launch of a $5 billion Equity Market Development Programme (EQDP).

On the EQDP implementation, MAS will start evaluating eligible fund managers and strategies in the next few months. The EQDP will invest in a range of funds with a focus on Singapore stocks, including non-index component stocks. These funds will be managed by fund managers with strong investment track record and capabilities in Singapore. The fund strategies should be actively managed and commercially viable to attract capital from other investors. MAS has experience in running programmes with both investment and market development objectives, and this is an extension of our approach in developing fund management capabilities in Singapore.

The feedback from the industry, so far, has been more encouraging than how Mr Chua has described it. He said, "better than nothing". I think other industry participants and stakeholders have given more positive comments about this move. But whether it works or not, let us see. We will do our best and see whether this will help to grow the local fund management industry and also attract more investor liquidity.

Madam, the Government and SGX will continue to encourage companies to list in Singapore, and we have recently introduced tax incentives for this. However, listing decisions will be made by the companies based on their commercial objectives. We should allow this and not impose requirements for the companies to list on SGX, as it is more important for our overall economic competitiveness to preserve Singapore's attractiveness to the founders of these companies and the global investors who invest in them.

On the regulatory front, Mr Louis Chua's description of the Review Group's approach does not represent the full picture. I hope this is not deliberate as it would otherwise be rather unfair to the Review Group and our workstream members, who include eminent industry leaders, such as Mr Neil Parekh.

Madam, the Review Group has recommended taking a regulatory stance that is both pro-enterprise and pro-investor confidence. While regulation will be more focused and facilitative of listings, we will continue to uphold high corporate governance standards. We stressed this a couple of times during our media conference and also in our reports. The Review Group also said that in the next phase of our review, we will look at initiatives to uplift companies' capabilities in shareholder engagement and sharpen their focus on shareholder value. We will enhance avenues for investor recourse and will take robust enforcement action against market misconduct. In addition, research coverage will be enhanced, to support investors to make better informed investment decisions.

As we embark on the next phase, the Review Group will continue to seek feedback and work closely with industry partners to co-create solutions and strengthen our foundations to give Singapore the best chance to attract listings and grow investor interest.

4.45 pm

Madam, Mr Faisal Manap asked about bank accounts for ex-offenders. MAS does not prohibit banks from opening accounts for ex-offenders. However, banks may choose to offer accounts with more limited functions to ex-offenders of financial crimes to manage the higher risk of them being misused.

To promote financial inclusion, MAS has worked with major retail banks to offer Limited Purpose Bank Accounts (LPBAs). From January 2022 to June 2024, banks have offered more than 3,600 LPBAs. These address the basic banking needs of most ex-offenders and other persons whom banks have assessed to pose higher financial crime risks.

With LPBAs, individuals can receive salaries and government payouts, and make payments. Banks monitor LPBA use more closely to ensure only funds from agreed sources are received and to detect suspicious transactions.

Banks will assess each case individually to decide whether to offer LPBAs and they have offered LPBAs to ex-offenders of serious financial crimes where the risks are manageable. Banks may also decline to open an account for individuals who are assessed to pose unacceptable risks that cannot be mitigated by the LPBA's safeguards, such as those who repeatedly allow bank accounts to be misused, have violated financial sanctions or are unwilling to cooperate with the bank's due diligence.

We encourage individuals to provide the necessary information to banks to allow proper due diligence to be carried out. This balances financial inclusion against the risk of our financial system being abused, which would then be to the public's detriment.

Mr Faisal Manap's resident was convicted of money laundering offences and sentenced to 20 months' jail. She had continued to use her bank accounts to receive funds from people she did not know, despite repeated warnings from the Commercial Affairs Department not to do so. The banks have rejected the appeal because the appellant's bank account is still subject to a seizure order, and she has not provided the necessary information and supporting documents to the banks.

MAS will continue to work with the banks to see if more can be done to help the appellant. Members can also refer affected residents who require assistance to MAS.

The Chairman: Clarifications? Mr Louis Chua.

Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis: Just a few clarifications for the Minister. Firstly, I look forward to the next phase of the review. Hopefully, we will have our own value-up programme.

Specific to the Equity Market Development Programme, I asked whether there will be sustained funding and cash injections for continued support of the equities market over the medium- to long-term. Just to get a sense of this $5 billion in terms of, are we looking at something upfront? Is this something that will be providing continued liquidity support over the medium- to long-term for it to be sustainable?

Second, the Minister mentioned the direction towards non-index components. In terms of the actual implementation, how does the MAS plan to ensure that the funds are directed to the Singapore markets, specifically to this area that the Minister mentioned? And at the same time, given the current liquidity of the small mid-cap space, ensure that there is not a subsequent bubble or even a popping of the bubble if, let us say, certain counters became concentrated?

Lastly, I think the Grant for Equity Market Singapore Research Talent Development Grant previously was actually focused on and at the same time developing local research talent. With the Equity Market Development Programme, is there also a similar requirement to develop the local fund management talent?

Mr Chee Hong Tat: Madam, the EQDP is a programme that we will start. We will assess the outcomes before we decide on whether there will be further moves. As many industry players have noted, this is a good start. It will help to develop our local fund management industry.

As to the specifics of how we design it, I think MAS has explained it. We do want to set a focus on the local equities market, for these funds to focus on the local equities market. Not to just invest in the index stocks, because those are already quite well-researched and well-traded, but to look for opportunities in other stocks as well – the mid-caps and the smaller companies with potential.

But all this, as I mentioned in my main reply, would have to be done commercially, because at the end of the day, you still want to balance that objective of having investment returns with a development objective.

GEMS. Yes, I think I mentioned this or the Review Group mentioned this in our announcement as well. We will also look at how we can support the research ecosystem. This is an important part of the effort to be able to raise awareness amongst investors and also to have more information about the companies be made known.

The Chairman: Ms Hazel Poa. Sorry, I could not see you.

Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): As bank accounts have now more or less become a necessity, is there any recourse for any individual or even business if they are unsuccessful in their application for bank accounts with all the banks?

Mr Chee Hong Tat: Madam, I mentioned it in my reply earlier that Members are able to refer their residents to MAS if they require further assistance. We will have to look at these on a case-by-case basis, because it really depends on the risk of that particular appellant. I did explain, in my main reply earlier, that there are valid situations, and I hope Ms Poa will agree with me that we need to strike that balance between providing the convenience for the individual and the company versus protecting the wider public.

The Chairman: Ms Hazel Poa, your next cut.

Electoral Boundaries Review Committee's Terms of Reference

Ms Hazel Poa: Chairman, as is the usual practice, the Prime Minister set the terms of reference for the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee (EBRC) when he recently convened it.

EBRC has a history of adhering closely to the terms of reference set by the Prime Minister. In 2011, for example, when the terms of reference stated that "there should be at least 12 Single Member Constituencies (SMCs)", EBRC created exactly 12 SMCs. In the past three General Elections in 2020, 2015 and 2011, EBRCs were directed to reduce the average size of Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs) and/or to increase the number of SMCs.

This time, the Prime Minister directed that the EBRC "should seek to keep the average size of GRCs, the proportion of Members of Parliament (MPs) elected from SMCs and the average ratio of electors to elected MPs, all at about the same as that in the last General Election". This means that the average size of GRCs should be kept at around 4.65 and about 15% of the seats should be elected from SMCs.

We think it is important to understand the reasons behind his decision. Specifically, why he did not instruct EBRC to reduce the average size of GRCs further or explicitly increase the number of SMCs, unlike the past three General Elections. Does he believe that it would be in the voters' best interests not to reduce average GRC sizes below 4.65 or increase the proportion of Members of Parliament elected from SMCs beyond 15% and, if so, why?

In addition, why did the Prime Minister not see the need to direct EBRC to provide greater transparency on the reasons for boundary changes? Does he not agree that this would be conducive to building public trust and, hence, beneficial for the country?

The Chairman: Ms He Ting Ru. You can take your two cuts together.

Rekindling Exploratory Research

Ms He Ting Ru: Madam, Singapore's research and development (R&D) landscape has a reputation for efficiency and the announcements in this year's Budget undoubtedly add to our strengths in physical infrastructure. However, there is room to nurture truly visionary scientific research backed by the idea that detours and exploratory science can yield the most disruptive impact with a longer horizon.

Some might ask, why invest in exploratory research given our resource restraints?

The goal is not to supplant applied research but to increase our offerings to create a fertile ground to encourage potential breakthroughs that may only emerge years after. In this vein, Switzerland's Spark scheme offers lessons. The scheme explicitly minimises bureaucracy and encourages high-risk, unconventional ideas comprising four main points.

First, focus on novelty and originality. It welcomes proposals that challenge existing norms or lacks extensive data and expressly accepts projects that traditional schemes may deem too speculative. Second, rapid and flexible funding. Grants of ₣50,000 to ₣100,000 are given over a six- to 12-month timespan to allow room to fail fast and pivot quickly. Third, double-blind proposal evaluation where applicants and evaluators remain anonymous, guarding against bias that may result from individual or institutional prestige overshadowing each proposal's intrinsic merits. Fourth, tolerance for negative results. In Spark's eyes, even projects that fail can may mined for valuable insights, noting the explorations are essential even when outcomes are unclear.

In Singapore's context, adopting a Spark-like model means carving out a dedicated stream for high-risk, early-stage exploration where high-risk research is explicitly insulated from more traditional performance measures. A possible pilot would be to create open problem platforms with prizes, like global cryptography or single-cell biology competitions.

After all, the essence of science is uncertainty and real breakthroughs rarely proceed linearly. Our system has to accommodate exploration and dead ends and to allow impossible experiments.

I also hope that we could consider two further measures in Singapore: allowing principal investigators (PI) to use PhD students for high-risk projects and permitting PIs to use a proportion of grant funds towards exploratory work. The aim here would be to stimulate original ideas rather than confining researchers to incremental pursuits.

Meanwhile, the 2024 Frontier Competitive Research Programme grant call announced in May 2024 focuses on use-inspired basic research. Could the Minister clarify how substantial the commitment is, which projects have secured support and how is this publicised to all scientists? Is this a sustained initiative or a one-off call?

To be a truly world-leading R&D research hub, Singapore has to invest in exploration that may time to bear fruit or even fail. I hope that the ideas above will contribute to policies that reflect the thinking necessary for Singapore to sustain our competitive edge in an uncertain global innovation race.

Quantum Computing

Quantum computing promises exponential improvements in simulating physical systems and solving complex problems faster than classical computers. Last year, Singapore made available nearly $400 million to quantum research, with MAS promoting quantum key distribution (QKD) for the banking sector. I seek greater clarity on our quantum roadmap.

First, Singapore is currently focused on noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) machines, which rely on many short, error-prone runs and statistical processing of noisy outputs. Yet, the industry is moving toward fault-tolerant quantum computing (FTQC), as illustrated by Google's December 2024 Willow chip demonstrating exponentially decreasing errors as qubits increase and Microsoft's 2025 Majorana 1 processor aiming for a million qubits on one chip. Such breakthroughs could revolutionise physical sciences. Are there plans to pivot or also pursue FTQC?

Second, under the photonics and control electronics vertical of the National Quantum Processor Initiative (NQPI), how does the National Quantum Office plan to develop auxiliary industries, namely controls, readout and hardware-based error correction, to support next-generation quantum processors?

Third, NQPI's science verticals focus on trapped ions and neutral atom arrays. Could the Minister clarify why superconducting qubits promising synergies with our semiconductor industry's cleanroom fabrication processes were excluded?

Fourth, QKD has been strongly promoted by the Government and Temasek. However, QKD requires specialised, expensive hardware, whereas post-quantum cryptography (PQC) needs only software updates. The US National Institute of Standards and Technology recently finalised post-quantum standards, which function like current public-key encryption and are expected to be adopted universally. In this light, what is the view over our continued significant investments in QKD? Does the Government foresee regional QKD networks, possibly via low Earth orbit satellites and how would such efforts compare against simpler, cheaper PQC solutions?

The Chairman: Mr Melvin Yong. I can see you are very eager to move your cut.

Future-ready Public Service

Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Madam, time is of the essence.

In my Budget debate speech, I touched on how Singapore is operating in an increasingly challenging geopolitical environment. I have regularly highlighted, in this House, that it is important for Singapore to ensure that our Public Service officers have broad perspectives so that they are equipped to take on not only today's challenges but challenges of the future. This is even more crucial now, with rising tensions between big global powers and the threat of impending trade wars.

5.00 pm

I would like to ask how does the public sector intend to prepare its workforce and foster greater collaboration within and across its agencies to effectively address the multifaceted challenges of the future? What critical cross-cutting and diverse capabilities should the Public Service prioritise in developing its officers to ensure that they are future-ready?

Madam, a future-ready Public Service must have in its DNA, a culture that prioritises innovation and regular upskilling. I would like to ask how does the Public Service intend to create a learning ecosystem that fosters innovation and agility across its different agencies?

Building Global Mindset in Public Service

Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Madam, with rapid tech changes, shifting geopolitical dynamics and existential challenges, such as climate change and national security, the need for a globally aware and adaptable public sector has never been more critical.

For the private sector, the Government has stated that more Singaporeans need overseas exposure to take on leadership roles in global firms. And to achieve that, there are initiatives, such as the Institute of Banking and Finance's International Postings Programme (iPOST) and Workforce Singapore's Overseas Markets Immersion Programme (OMIP) for financial institutions and employers to send their workers for overseas exposure.

How is the Public Service enhancing its officers' international exposure, competencies and understanding of global trends? What opportunities exist for officers to gain international experience through overseas postings or exchanges?

At the same time, what are the Public Service's strategies to foster engagements and build relationships with international partners? What opportunities are there for regular dialogue and collaboration with foreign public service counterparts, to anticipate global shifts?

Better Integrated Public Service

Mr Yip Hon Weng: Chairman, our citizens' needs are becoming more complex and interconnected, crossing traditional Government boundaries. While we have developed new services, the main challenge is integrating them. We must ensure help is accessible without obstacles and bureaucracy, providing solutions and support instead.

In previous debates, I spoke about the sheer number of Government apps and systems, about how, for too many Singaporeans, finding the right service feels like navigating a maze. I emphasised the necessity of transitioning from an agency-centric approach to a citizen-centric model, because no one should have to struggle through Government silos just to get the help they need. No one should be left wondering where to turn when services should already be meeting them where they are. So, how do we achieve this integration? How do we move from complexity to clarity?

The answer is this. The Public Service cannot just provide services. It must orchestrate them. It must understand that our citizens' needs do not exist in isolation and neither should the solutions. This means bundling services across multiple agencies, proactively connecting the dots at every stage of life and it means more than just adopting new technology. It means adopting a new way of thinking, a mindset shift, a commitment to breaking down silos so that no Singaporean is left behind.

That is how we build a Government that is not just effective, but responsive; not just efficient, but compassionate; a Government that does not just serve the people, but truly empowers them.

Career Longevity of Public Officers

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): Singapore faces significant demographic changes in the years ahead. Singaporeans are living longer and we will soon become a super-aged society. Our workforce is rapidly ageing, alongside rapid economic and technological changes.

In the face of these demographic changes, the Government has announced that the retirement and re-employment ages would be raised to 64 and 69 respectively in 2026. This is in recognition that with higher life expectancy, many older officers may wish to stay active, including being meaningfully engaged at work for longer, though in different ways.

To support officers who wish to continue serving Singapore and Singaporeans, the Public Service announced that it would take the lead to raise the retirement and re-employment ages to 64 and 69 respectively from 1 July 2025, one year ahead of the national timeline.

While policy changes are being enacted to enable officers to continue working for longer, how can the Public Service ensure that individual officers on the ground feel confident, well-equipped and adequately prepared for their extended careers as job demands will change in the future? What specific programmes and resources are being put in place to empower public officers as they navigate longer working lives? How can we help officers build good transition skills and strike a balance between leveraging their wealth of experience while remaining able, agile and adaptable in a rapidly-evolving work landscape?

The Chairman: Minister Chan Chun Sing.

The Minister for Education (Mr Chan Chun Sing): Chair, we thank Members for their various questions and suggestions on how our Public Service can do better.

Let me first address the cut by Ms He Ting Ru. She asked how we support exploratory scientific research and about our approach to quantum research. Chair, R&D is a long-cycle endeavour and any payoffs will be more appropriately assessed over the long-term, rather than the short-term, as Ms He has suggested.

In any research, particularly initial research, there will be many competing ideas. For instance, the mRNA vaccines that were crucial to fighting COVID-19 are a good example. The vaccines were enabled by decades of work in mRNA therapeutics, which many initially regarded as unpromising. No one knew then the role it would eventually play in a global pandemic. This is the nature of R&D.

In R&D, success requires carefully balancing continuity in commitment and investment, with the ability to pivot decisively when the need arises. Our National Research Foundation takes a portfolio approach, supporting R&D across fields and at different levels of maturity and applying relevant programme management approaches. Let me just explain that.

There is no one method in managing the complexity of different fields of research, different levels of research, different maturities or readiness-to-market levels of research. So, it is not a one method or a one-size-fits all. Different research areas with different time horizons, different challenges, require different management methods.

We review our programmes regularly, pivot them when necessary, or double down on efforts that show strong promise when circumstances evolve. We can only have such optionalities if we have built up our capabilities and talent intentionally. I must also explain that in making such decisions, we do not just rely on our own expertise. Because in many of these emerging fields, we may not have all the expertise. And this is the reason why the National Research Foundation and our research institutes make sure that they have extensive global networks with different panels of advisors that can give us their different perspectives for us to make a considered decision. And we have different councils, comprising both local and foreign experts in different fields to give us those advice that we need.

Quantum research is an example of where we are doubling down after seeing initial promise. Ms He asked about the possible technical approaches, including our current areas of focus as well as industry development efforts to build our quantum capabilities.

Indeed, this domain is nascent and dynamic. We will continue to adjust when needed and make judgements, taking into account the evolving landscape, our capabilities, what we have achieved and what others have achieved. Also, we keep a keen eye on where others are investing in, so that we can focus on the areas that we will have a competitive advantage.

I would also like to assure Members that the key Government agencies and research offices are keeping a close watch on all of these, internal and external developments, in consultation with both our local and international scientific panels, and we are not wedded to any particular focal area or approaches. But what we must do, carefully, is to build up the capabilities to allow us to have the suite of optionalities to pivot or double down as the circumstances evolve. And for Ms He's suggestions, we will be happy to take into account her suggestions. If she has scientific papers that she feels will benefit our considerations, we welcome her to let us know and we will convey this to the National Research Foundation and our panel of scientific advisors to take a look at this.

More important than just building own talent pool and expertise, we must also grow our ecosystem of research institutes, industries and workforce. And when we say this, I do not just mean growing the capabilities in-house or only in this country.

Very often, in today's R&D environment, we will need to leverage on the networks that we are able to access in the global environment. No one country, not even the biggest countries of India, China or US, will work alone necessarily in many of these cutting-edge areas and that is what we are committed to do. And in a more fragmented world, we must also ride on the opportunity for us to play the role to bring people from different backgrounds together and that is one area of our competitive advantage. This will then position Singapore strategically to contribute where we can and take advantage of the opportunities, be it in quantum technologies or other areas.

Now, let me address Ms Hazel Poa's cut, on behalf of the Prime Minister, on EBRC.

Ms Poa will agree that there will be an asymptotical limit to asking EBRC to keep reducing the average size of GRCs and that limit is one, with all electoral divisions being SMCs. The current terms of reference provide some stability in our electoral landscape by having a balance in the proportion of GRCs and SMCs. Having Members of Parliament serving a broadly similar number of electors on average as the last election will enable Members in the coming Parliament to continue to serve and represent their residents effectively. This last point is what matters most.

As for greater transparency for its recommendations, we discussed this extensively during the debate on the Motion that Ms Poa and Mr Leong Mun Wai tabled in Parliament last August. We do not intend to repeat the debate today. Suffice to say that we should avoid imposing requirements or instructions on EBRC that are too prescriptive, but to give EBRC, which comprises senior civil servants with the relevant professional knowledge and expertise, the space to do their work independently and objectively, without fear or favour.

Next, Mr Melvin Yong asked how we would prepare the Public Service workforce to tackle the multifaceted challenges of the future.

Our Public Service has achieved much for Singapore and Singaporeans since 1965. Today, we are known for our efficiency, innovation and our ethos, from meritocracy to incorruptibility. For example, Singapore has been ranked within the top five in the World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators on Government Effectiveness since 2014 and topped Oxford University's inaugural Blavatnik Index of Public Administration in 2024. But having said that, we are not complacent and we must not be complacent.

Our world is changing rapidly. The once familiar rules-based international security and economic orders are fracturing. Achieving survival and success for Singapore and Singaporeans will require fresh approaches in the way we do things, not just internally but also how we connect with the rest of the world. Our people's aspirations, as Mr Yip Hon Weng says, have also changed. They have gone up, while our manpower resource base remains tight. And we will constantly need to review the way we build our capabilities, execute and deliver.

The Public Service will focus on strengthening three areas this year. First, we must deepen our perspectives of the world and strengthen linkages with partners beyond our Public Service.

Public Service delivery does not happen in a vacuum, nor does it only depend on us looking inwards at our own issues. As Mr Saktiandi Supaat mentioned, for Singapore to remain successful, our Public Service must deeply appreciate the fast-evolving external context which we have to operate in. We must remain engaged with our international counterparts through active participation in international forums, exchange and training programmes, and we must keep in close touch with what is happening in many international agencies because the decisions that they make there can have significant impact on what we can or cannot do, even in our domestic context.

5.15 pm

And this is where we will continue to send relevant officers to many of these international organisations for us to touch base with the latest thinking and build those networks that are necessary for our continued survival and success.

To this end, we aspire to send more officers beyond the Public Service and beyond Singapore, to understand and build those linkages to further the cause for Singapore and Singaporeans. Just as an example, National Environment Agency officer, Khairunnisa Binte Yahya, has first-hand experience of this. She was attached to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) as an Air Pollution Expert. She shares expertise and develops solutions for air pollution with UNDP partners, enhancing Singapore's global partnerships in environmental sustainability and climate resilience. Khairunnisa has gained insights into the UNDP's strategies which informs our efforts to improve Singapore's air quality. More importantly, she has built up a network, which she can call upon in time to come.

As we prepare our officers for an increasingly complex environment, Mr Patrick Tay asked about our efforts to prepare officers for our expanded or lengthened career spans. We have introduced a Public Service Career Coach Network and will be ramping up our CareerFitness programme to empower officers to build career resilience and agility across different life stages.

One such officer is Latha Nadarajan. A personal assistant at the Ministry of Social and Family Development, she pursued her passion for social work by obtaining a Singapore University of Social Sciences degree. After attending a CareerFitness workshop in 2023, she is now set for an attachment with Child Protection Services to apply her new skills. To further reap the career longevity dividend, we will continue to tap on the Public Service Retirees Network, which provides job and volunteer opportunities, to harness their wealth of experiences and add resilience to our system.

Second, in response to Mr Yip Hon Weng's question on coordinated citizen services, we will continue to integrate our service delivery from a citizen-centric perspective, rather than a silo-Ministry perspective. For example, our ServiceSG omni-channel strategy is not just about bringing different services together. It is about how we rewire our processes to deliver services more efficiently and yet, be more aligned with the way our people expect their service journey to be.

As we continue to streamline and digitise our services, we will certainly not leave those less digitally-savvy behind. This requires a mindset shift from Ministry or agency-centricity, to a people-centricity and whole-of-Government perspective. It is a digital-first, but not a digital-only service that we are aiming for.

Third, we must strengthen team development for a more complex and challenging operating environment. And this is slightly different from how we have done things in the past. In the Public Service, we have always focused on the development of the individual and this remains valid. Going forward, we need to go beyond developing just the individual. We need to strengthen the way we develop the teams and compose the team with diverse abilities, with people from diverse backgrounds and perspectives.

Our ability to compose teams with diverse abilities to resolve and pre-empt problems is critical as challenges become more complex and interlinked. To this end, our Civil Service College will lean forward to help different agencies to build stronger and more agile leadership teams to bring out the best in our agencies to enable Singapore and Singaporean success.

So, three things that we need to do and we will need to focus on them urgently this year.

One, for our Public Service to maintain a sense of perspective, to not just be able to understand our own challenges deeply, but to have a view of how the world is evolving, because the rules are changing fast. And unless we are plugged in, we might be overtaken or bypassed by other people making rules beyond our shores.

Two, we will continue to focus our efforts to build our services around the citizen. We aim for a more seamless service experience for all Singaporeans. And third, beyond building the individual, we must build our teams to have different perspectives, to be able to see things from different angles, so that we can have more robust solutions. Build our teams with people with the courage and the know-how to pivot and change course when the need arises, to pre-empt problems.

So, Chairman, we do not take for granted our strong track record and will naturally enable our success tomorrow. Indeed, we believe, as a Public Service, that we should be continuously vigilant to our fast-changing world order and domestic expectations, and constantly challenge ourselves to evolve faster.

It is not just about solving today's problems better. It is about anticipating tomorrow's challenges earlier to find those solutions before the problem arises. Only then, can we be more assured that we are able to overcome tomorrow's challenges, seize new opportunities to benefit all Singaporeans and be a Public Service that can continue to be the pride of Singaporeans.

But to be successful, we must maintain a strong, continuous and consistent partnership between the political leadership and the Public Service, that allows our Public Service to execute with consistency and conviction, without fear or favour. This is, perhaps, something that we have taken for granted. In many countries, they, too, have people in their public service that have very strong convictions and good ideas on what they want to achieve, but they do not necessarily have the ability to do this and to do it well. And that is because they do not have the continuity in perspective, that allows them to think long term. This is something that we have, this is something that we cherish and this is a competitive advantage for Singapore.

Chair, I have shared how we will deepen our external linkages, deliver integrated services and strengthen our teams. If we do this well, if we do not become complacent, I am quite sure this will be a Public Service that we can all be proud of and this will be a Public Service that will partner us to SG100 and beyond.

The Chairman: Any clarifications? Ms Hazel Poa.

Ms Hazel Poa: Can the Minister explain the logic behind this position that it is okay to impose or to specify to EBRC that the average size of GRCs and the proportion of SMCs should be maintained at current levels, but it is overimposing on EBRC to ask them to explain the reasons for their changes? Because according to normal logic, it would actually be the other way round, that you do not impose conditions on the sizes of GRCs or the number of SMCs if you want to preserve the independence of EBRC, but simply require them to explain the reasons behind their decisions.

Mr Chan Chun Sing: Chair, I am quite sure EBRC will explain its thinking in due course.

The Chairman: No further clarifications? Ms Poh Li San, would you like to withdraw your cut?

5.24 pm

Ms Poh Li San: Mdm Chair, I seek leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $1,108,629,600 for Head U ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $106,620,900 for Head U ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.