Debate on President's Address

1.30 pm

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, "That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to: 'We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which she delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the Second Session of this Parliament.'."

Sir, let me start by saying that I whole-heartedly agree with Mdm President that the principal challenge of our times is to work together: Government and the people. We are halfway through the current term of Government and we have made progress here. A lot done with programmes and schemes, such as MediShield Life, Smart Nation initiatives, Community Network for Seniors, Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs), Adapt and Grow for workers and so on. But we still have a lot more to do.

Citizens have expectations of the Government to demonstrate leadership in formulating policies that always put the country on a better footing and care for her people. At the same time, they also want their voices to be heard and for the Government to stay connected and remain relevant to the ground. Thus, I want to speak up for different groups of Singaporeans and share my thoughts on how we can do better as an economy, as a society and as one people, one nation.

To begin with, education. It is critical for social mobility. Looking at it from the viewpoint of our students and parents, I want to share three suggestions here.

One, to pilot “through train” education to Secondary school for special needs students in mainstream schools. Students have different pace of learning and each child blossoms at varying stages of their lives. For special needs children in mainstream schools, their challenge is to cope with the same number of subjects, using the same course materials and adapting to the pace of regular learning. For some, they, indeed, struggle with something as basic as taking an additional language or subject.

Parents have shared with me that their children with such needs usually are not given exemption from the subjects until the children have proven to consistently fail. This can be very demoralising for the child who has dyslexia, autism or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. It also deters the child in wanting to learn more or do well in other subjects. Yes, it may be a sweeping statement to say all special needs children are late bloomers. But I am certain no one will deny that these children deserve the opportunity to have a longer runway to learn and explore their potential at a pace that is suitable for them.

Second, to de-emphasise academic excellence by including VIA performance as a standard school admission criterion. Today, there is no shortage of daily evidences that reflect a lack of good community values and decreasing tolerance amongst people. From road bullies, errant users of shared bikes and personal mobility devices, high-rise litterers and so on. These people have little sense of how their actions impact others and the environment.

Values, to me, are fundamental guiding principles in an individual. Our students can ace through exams; but such achievements do not empower or make them a more purposeful individual. VIA is unlikely to sustain at the current rate unless it is given emphasis in mainstream school admission criteria and not limited to those under Direct School Admission.

I believe that by knowing how to pay it forward and our relentless search for a higher purpose, we can nurture citizens with the spirit of care and giving to others. Let us start to embrace and encourage this sense of responsibility amongst our young by blurring the lines of socio-economic background through valuing their actions towards our community and country.

Third, build soft skills and creativity of students from young. How should we train our students not to be regimental experts in subject matters but to demonstrate soft skills, the ability to apply and be creative? I feel that the future skills we need to develop in SkillsFuture of our next generation are their ability to switch between industries and adjust within changing project needs. Staying relevant and planning for one’s career and life must become instinctive in them. We must build their soft skills from young. And to me, this can also help to shape their personalities and resolve when facing challenging situations.

Take, for example, the role of an Industrial System Designer or Industrial System Integrator. They have skills that are relevant to multiple industries. While their knowledge of systems, designs, mechanics are fundamental, more critical are their management skills in integrating projects and people.

Next, working Singaporeans. Today, we see growing trends of jobs moving towards the gig economy and remote workers. The pace of change is unpredictable and disruptive. Increasingly, jobs are fulfilled by satellite workgroups and regional talents. The competition for workers and jobs is no longer confined by a country’s boundary. This game has absolutely changed. The number of workers is no longer the defining trait of a business or an economy. Instead, it is the quality of workers that matters. How well do our workers contribute to their tasks, how do they sight opportunities, can they collaborate? The list goes on. The nugget is: “Can they stand out from the crowd?”

Growth, we have certainly achieved in Singapore. From a fishing village to a modern metropolis; from no industries to many multinational companies and homegrown brands. But will this growth endure the test of time? To me, I think we need to ensure we continue to have a role to play on the regional and global stage and, for this, the Government has to try some non-traditional approaches.

In this regard, I suggest two areas of enhancement to aid job matching and to build our home brands.

One, the Government has to play a greater role in shaping the job-matching scene. Having a job data bank like in the past is insufficient. We need proficient actors in the industry to scout the value and talent within our workers. As traditional hiring processes fall out of favour, it is creating a vacuum and the mismatch in skills and jobs.

And I see this as an opportunity for us. The establishment of the Institute for Human Resource Practitioners (IHRP) by Ministry of Manpower (MOM), National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) and the Singapore National Employers’ Federation is a good example of an initiative that can enable such changes within organisations and professional communities. We should encourage more of such partnerships and raise the bar of our work culture through different professional groups. With the consolidation of mature industries, a vibrant startup scene and the presence of many smaller companies, the mergers and acquisitions potential also becomes livelier. This will inevitably impact the pool of workers and freelancers during management changes and a lack of HR support is unhealthy. We need to take proactive steps to ensure progressive job mobility in order to achieve more effective social mobility.

Two, create ecosystems and build our Singapore brand. To do so, we must build upon the illustrious track record of Singapore’s quality and brand reputation internationally. Take it one step further, lead and create consortiums made up of more Singapore SMEs to create an industry of our own on the international stage. This can be a paradigm shift of what the Government used to do. We pick the potentials and help build such ecosystems. From developing global trade partnerships, exporting skilled workers, processes and systems, developing R&D expertise and know-how; to creation of new industries and co-sharing of resources within industries. Ecosystems that have cross-industry demand and opportunities will give time and opportunity for our students and workers to deepen their skills and develop them into the trade craftsmen of the future.

Let me turn now to the vast majority of Singaporeans – singles, young families, young working adults and seniors. A top concern here is housing. Affordability, choice, capital value, retirement – these are common words associated with the topic on housing. On one hand, we want the Government to do more and support through policy measures. At the same time, I believe we still want to instil a sense of responsibility in our people and have them take ownership towards securing their basic needs. Thus, I think it is time for us to include other considerations for the aged HDB flats and, in this, I mean flats that are above 50 years of age, and augment the Selective En-bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS). Bearing in mind that these efforts must be taken with a multi-prong approach, I propose a few areas for consideration.

One, change the valuation method for aged flats. The challenge the market is facing is two-fold. The sellers are having difficulties selling their flat with more options available in the market and a decreasing lease. The buyers, on the other hand, find the aged flats priced out of their attainable reach. The fact is that the value of any ageing leasehold property will be different from a young property, regardless of how attractive its location is. Thus, aged flats should not be valued using the current comparison method of past market transactions. I suggest the valuation be based instead on its remaining lease, the length of time the current owner has occupied the place and its right-sizing potential. Firstly, this enables the elderly to unlock their cash, right-size and move nearer to their children if they so wish. Secondly, it enables young families or singles to also afford flats from the resale market in mature estates and enhance the social mix.

Two, select precincts from different mature towns for lease top-up by private developers. Given the lack of new land plots in mature estates, it is difficult to effect SERS, especially when the flats are built over almost the same time span. As HDB flats are typically built precinct by precinct, so, rather than selling new land plots for private property, allow the private developers to top up the land lease of HDB flats for future development. Likewise, the Government can convert plots of private condo land for HDB housing in future when its lease is up. This creates a better mix of private and public housing in the long run and allow families to have various home options in different towns at different stages of their life.

Three, allow direct rental of interim housing from HDB for the non low-income group. For those who do not qualify as low-income group but have needs for interim housing, allow them to rent directly from HDB, only for those selected aged flats with leases of less than 45 years and, of course, subject to a capped period. These include families which have needs for interim housing as they transit, young working adults with little need for a permanent place due to their job nature, the single parents who need immediate shelter after their matrimonial flat is sold off and so on and so forth. Give them the flexibility and space to manage or rebuild their lives.

The next group I wish to speak for is the women. Mr Speaker, last year during the debate on the Motion on Aspirations of Singapore Women mooted by the PAP women Members of Parliament, many Members in this House supported and raised good suggestions in the debate on how to assist our women to become active contributors, to be treated fairly as an equal in society and duly supported to achieve their dreams. I, too, have spoken on this Motion and am happy that some of my suggestions have been addressed or are being worked on by the Ministries. I hope further consideration can be given to the following.

One, subsidies for non-working mothers with children. The current subsidies given to non-working mothers for infant care, childcare or kindergarten are lower compared to those of working mothers. As we encourage women to return to the workforce and balance their parental duties, can the Ministry consider giving equal subsidies for non-working mothers who plan to return to the workforce and remain gainfully employed after their children are placed in care services?

Two, convert unused medical leave to eldercare leave. Family remains an important first line of support for our ageing population. As this duty still primarily falls on the shoulders of the women, those coming from single-child families or are the main caregiver to the elderly will feel more pressure, balancing work and caregiving. I understand the Ministries have been studying this topic with the employers and unions, but I hope they see the request not as one asking for more entitlement and thus inconveniencing the companies. Instead, it is about making a legislative change that allows an individual’s existing entitlement to be used for caring of their loved ones. Employers should feel encouraged and incentivised, particularly when the unused medical leave reflect that their employees are in good health and with little work absenteeism. This effort is truly about giving a choice to the employees they value.

Three, freelance and flexi work. With the growing need for part-time work and care services, we should harness the strength of local entrepreneurs and the talent pool of women available in our country. I have previously suggested establishing startup spaces in neighbourhoods to enable women to work closer to home or on a part-time basis. Provide spaces in our town hubs to house such entrepreneurial businesses and shared platforms for them to create a service industry of its own – basic services like meal catering, minding of old folks and children at home, home cleaning, laundry and so on can be catered on a demand basis. With proximity and a reliable supply of services, it can help ease the burden of working mothers and reduce the cost when it comes to after-school care.

Fourth, rooting for women’s education and leadership in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM). In today’s digital world, it is quite appalling that despite our drive for equality, people can hardly associate women with science and technology. A UN research showed that only 28% of the global researchers in STEM are women in 2016. This is not a numbers game of ramping figures to parity. It is the dawn of time; a call for change. An impetus to bring new perspectives from women on product design, services and emotive connections which are seldom considered previously. With widespread technology so closely entwined in our lives, we need to embrace these technologies to achieve the much-needed productivity and innovation. Many of these tools can bring positive outcome for women in helping them balance their many roles in society.

Education and careers in STEM should be encouraged amongst females. In Singapore, we are fortunate that every child, male or female, has an equal opportunity to receive education from young. But more can be done to enthuse females to continue pursuing roles in non-traditional industries or in male-dominated industries. The current social gap lies in the perception that men are more suited for such jobs because they involve more problem solving and a level of technicality that historically men are seen to fit better. But the truth is that despite the differences in the minds and behaviours of both genders, it is through pooling such differences that we can create stronger and more cohesive teams. Such acceptance and changes in the long run will lead to more creative thinking and innovation, thus, leading to more fulfilled and satisfied employees and society. Mr Speaker, I will continue in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Next, I would like to talk about another very important group and one that is growing in our society: our seniors.

Barely three months ago in this House, we discussed at length on the Motion of Support for Our Senior Citizens. Given the significance and challenges that may be faced by these seniors, more enhancements were deliberated in Budget 2018. Minister Heng Swee Keat also announced three structural changes in his Budget Statement to better integrate health and social support services for seniors in the community. The structural changes include a nation-wide expansion of Community Networks for Seniors by 2020, the formation of the Silver Generation Office and a further consolidation of planning and policy oversight of health and social support services from the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) to the Ministry of Health (MOH). All these are done in the hope that our seniors can age healthily and confidently in place.

Based on the current situation, our priority is to help those seniors who are isolated and need assistance the most. Because these seniors live alone and have no family support, most of our efforts are now focused on planning and caring for them.

However, to ensure the other seniors are socially engaged and keeping fit, I would like to take this opportunity to call out to this generation of soon-to-be seniors to partner us in planning for the future.

First, maintain a healthy lifestyle. The adage "health is better than wealth" is well-known to many. It is ironic that we seem to understand and treasure this more as we age. In fact, prevention is better than cure. As such, we must exercise often to stay fit. So, let us take the first active step together. A good start is halfway to success. The National Steps Challenge seems to be a simple and effective platform to get our citizens moving. Hence, I suggest for MOH to consider boosting these efforts by incentivising Singaporeans through discounts on their MediShield Life premiums. For those who actively exercise and do not have medical claims, offer them annual premium discounts. As premiums will go up as people age, this incentive can motivate seniors to keep well, physically and psychologically. In the long run, this will help relieve the psychological, physical and financial pressure for them.

Second, to encourage the seniors to help one another in the community. We constantly look for volunteers who can provide care and assistance to needy seniors. To me, this initiative is one approach that increases social cohesion. Everyone has a role to play to build a community in which people respect each other. I urge retirees and seniors to give back to society and help make Singapore an inclusive society. Singaporeans who are keen to be more socially-engaged, please do step forward and help us build a more gracious nation.

Third, promote inter-generational programmes. Youths and young working adults have many commitments today. For some, to spend quality time with their parents and grandparents has become a luxury. Even so, youths and working adults choose to spend a lot of time on social media. This has become a trend of the modern society. Yet, as digitalisation is becoming a norm in our daily lives, why do we not pool our wisdom to enrich the digital space and create a platform for inter-generational bonding?

Think about it. If each of us can offer half an hour of our time regularly in helping the seniors in our own family to learn and navigate the digital world, inter-generational communication would grow exponentially. The seniors will feel safer to be taught in a known environment and from people they trust. This can greatly improve their learning effectiveness.

We can all play a part to create innovative inter-generational programmes that are unique to our own family and pass on the heritage and values that will make our seniors proud of us.

(In English): Finally, let me touch on an area that concerns all Singaporeans – the cost of living. It is natural for anyone to have concerns over necessities. After all, these have direct impact on our lives. Over the years, the Government has conscientiously supported our people in mitigating the impact of inflation and rising external costs through different forms of direct subsidies and creating schemes to ensure affordability.

While our safety net support is a targeted approach, the largest and continued financial support has always been extended to the low-income individuals and households to ensure they can keep up with basic needs and are not left behind as we progress. But with progression, it is inevitable to have an emerging middle class with rising aspirations and growing needs that go beyond necessities. How can the Government, in reality, provide subsidies and grants for the masses without breaking the bank? I believe this will be a difficult path to pursue. If we are to eschew the populist approach, the obvious answer is “We can’t subsidise for all”.

So, I think we are at a point where we have to differentiate the "needs" from "wants", and how best to support different groups of Singaporeans. To me, this can only be done if the Government is able to: one, keep necessities like utilities, food, transport and healthcare affordable; two, provide sufficient choices to meet the varied needs; and, three, build a society of giving individuals and corporations.

Take utilities and food as an example. It is hard to imagine today for one to live without power, water or food in a developed country. These are, indeed, necessities that must be kept within affordable means for any household. There is a need for the Government to keep the cost low and give direct subsidies for these items. But I think more can be done with a stronger focus on how to channel donations towards beneficiaries and social programmes that support giving necessities to those not living in public rental flats.

Mr Speaker, today, we live in a world in flux. Challenges abound. But so, too, opportunities. I am confident, if we continue to work together, the Government and people in close partnership, we will be able to seize the opportunities and effectively address the challenges – be it income inequality or social mobility – to build an even better tomorrow for ourselves, our children and future generations of Singaporeans.

Last month, in "Forbes 30 Under 30 Asia 2018" edition, themed "Disruption and Innovation", 24 individuals from Singapore made it to the list. The list featured 300 young disruptors, innovators and entrepreneurs across Asia who are under the age of 30. And Singapore tied with Japan for the fifth highest number of honorees this year. Many would also have heard of Chloe Chua, the 11-year-old violinist who won first prize at the prestigious Menuhin Competition. I am sure there are many more awards that other Singaporeans have received and continue to work towards. If we ever falter and question whether Singapore can make it in future, I would say that we do not lack local talents, but we lack faith – faith in the next generation and belief that they can do better than us in their own right and style.

Mdm President said in the 2017 National Youth Achievement Gold Award ceremony, and I quote her: "A society can only flourish when there is passion, energy and enthusiasm. Young people abound with these qualities. Their perspectives of the world also help unearth limitless possibilities that convey a fresh impetus to the development of our nation."

I fully agree with her. As a country, we can achieve much more when we put steadfast will and efforts together as one. Let us not procrastinate. Let us show faith and find common grounds as one people. Let us begin our new chapter, lift the dreams of our next generation and give them the opportunities and possibilities to make Singapore a great country, one filled with strength and hope for all. Together, we can and will continue to build a more just, a more inclusive, a more meaningful society for all Singaporeans. Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [Applause.]

Question proposed.

1.57 pm

Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Motion of Thanks to the President in the name of Miss Cheryl Chan. I will speak on one of the key themes outlined in the Addendum to the President’s Address for the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI), which is entitled “Staying Connected with the World as our Hinterland”.

Singapore is already a highly internationalised economy. Our total trade to GDP ratio at about 400% is the highest in the world. We are among the top 15 largest exporter and largest importer in the world. Singapore has an extensive network of 22 implemented FTAs, with 12 others in the works. We are among the largest foreign investors in some of the major economies, including the US, China and ASEAN, despite our smaller GDP relative to those economies.

Conversely, an estimated 37,000 international companies have their headquarters in Singapore, including about 7,000 MNCs. And EDB continues to draw in about $10 billion worth of foreign investments into Singapore each year. Singapore is well-regarded as a key global financial hub and a major risk management centre in Asia.

All these and the other attributes of us being an open and internationalised economy have contributed to the growth and vibrancy of the Singapore economy in the last five decades. It created good salaried jobs for Singaporeans, good business opportunities for our companies as well as, importantly, generated financial resources for the Government to fund its expenditures.

Notwithstanding what we have achieved, which is no mean feat, staying still has never been an option for Singapore. It will never be.

Like every aspect and at every stage of our nation-building journey and, as what the President has said in her Address, we will always ask, “What is next for Singapore? How can the Singapore of tomorrow do better than the Singapore of today?"

In the case of developing our economy, much of the “what next” is already outlined in the CFE recommendations, which blueprint the transformation strategy to build our future economy. There is a comprehensive set of actionable initiatives there. Among them, an important workstream is to further internationalise the economy, which is the focus of my speech.

We know the realities of being small. There is only so much more growth you can squeeze out of our small domestic economy. Just counting on our domestic market would not be enough to create more and better jobs for aspiring Singaporeans and more business opportunities for growth-seeking companies. So, we need to expand our economic frontiers and, in so doing, look to also further diversify our portfolio and open up new dimensions of growth. Sir, I will touch on two areas.

Firstly, in the area we have done well, that is, in trade and investments connectivity. Growing our trade flows and investments continues to be a viable strategy for Singapore, given our still compelling propositions and the opportunities that are out there within our reach.

The escalating trade tensions between global economic powers are areas of concerns but that should not dampen our spirit. Instead, we should look to build even more trade and investment links with more countries and to spread our risks.

I am glad that the remaining 11 countries of the TPP persisted to conclude the TPP 11, now known as CPTPP, despite the US’ withdrawal. It is a strong signal that there are enough like-minded countries who believe that stronger economic linkages are mutually beneficial. We should ride on the momentum to expeditiously conclude the RCEP, which includes key players like China, India, Korea and all of the ASEAN countries. That will demonstrate to the world a strong commitment to free trade from Asia and a further indication that the centre of gravity of the world economy is shifting to Asia.

At the same time, we should continue to work on bilateral linkages. There is great value in seeking more bilateral FTAs, such as the one we have just signed with Sri Lanka this year, which offers tangible benefits to Singapore companies doing business with Sri Lanka. We should also develop new government-to-government (G-to-G) business platforms with regional economies that come with complementary propositions. Such business platforms, which may be at local levels, are useful in-market networks for Singapore businesses. These additional linkages, designed with balanced two-way business reciprocity, would help mitigate our overall trade-related exposures, strengthen our economic resilience and also sustain healthier on-going trade and investment relations.

Understandably, as companies venture into newer and less familiar emerging markets, it does come with more risks and challenges for the companies. Here, the economic agencies and the TACs can do more to help companies to moderate the steep learning curve. It can help companies that are entering into new markets by providing the regions’ specific insights and research, assist with grants and support programmes and, of increasing importance, to facilitate effective networking in overseas markets among Singaporean companies. The sense among companies that I have encountered is that we have yet to finesse the way to “hunt in packs” when venturing overseas. I understand that, so far, the partnerships and collaborations among companies that venture overseas are sporadic, informal and not well-curated at times.

The sectoral-focused ITMs are important ecosystem set-ups to uplift capabilities. But it may be too vertically aligned to help enable cross-sectoral collaborations when companies venture overseas. So, an overlay of horizontal linkages across different sectoral ITMs can better bring out the synergistic value between companies and, hopefully, help to bear more fruits. The merged Enterprise SG is now the main workhorse but we can leverage on the bigger TACs which have an overseas presence, as well as the large-size leading Singapore conglomerates which could act like queen bees to bring the smaller companies along and collaborate.

Mr Speaker, the other area is to enhance our connectivity with the rest of the world in the non-physical dimensions. Singapore has been successful in developing regional hubs. It has helped better connect and plug our tiny island to the rest of the world. We should continue to invest and upgrade our physical connectivity, such as building Terminal 5, Tuas Mega Port and other infrastructure to stay ahead of the pack. But we know that many economies are also having similar aspirations and many do want to model after the Singapore experience. With enough capital and enough political determination, there is no stopping these countries in the region from building and replicating physical hubs, such as ports, airports or new specific-themed hubs.

So, just competing on building more state-of-the-art physical infrastructure alone is not enough to maintain our superiority in global connectivity. We need to work on soft attributes, as the new MTI Addendum has charted. The Addendum outlined the strategy that by further enhancing our connectivity in the non-physical dimensions, it will facilitate companies and people from around the world to do business with Singapore, through Singapore and on Singapore platforms. And through both the excellent physical and digital connectivity, we can add value to the flows of capital, goods and services, whether they may be conducted in or through Singapore or elsewhere.

This is a refreshing mindset to look at how we can extract greater value from the network, where connectivity begets further connectivity. If executed well, this would position Singapore as a key node in Asia and open up new streams of opportunities for Singapore companies and Singaporeans. For this to work, we need to deepen our digital capabilities and infrastructure. We need to digitally connect with other jurisdictions, such as the currently being negotiated ASEAN Innovation Network, as well as with other key commercial players in the digital space.

There are already bilateral digital initiatives being pursued, such as the Blk 71 Launchpads in Indonesia, Suzhou and San Francisco. And with more of such linkages, it would proliferate further ideas and business flows. Upping the game in digital capabilities is already a major thrust in the future economy strategy. Both at the enterprises and individual skills level, the Government is already driving adoption of digital technology, as well as helping the workforce with the requisite skills through ITMs and other initiatives.

Sir, products, services, transactions and queries-generated data are of valuable commercial insights. Consumers today are prepared to pay for customisation, instantaneous response and a competitive premium for efficiency and quality. The Singapore platform must have capabilities to harness the value of data and to be a trusted hub for data and AI, which are increasingly part of the connectivity value chain. We need to design a facilitative regulatory framework for a data-driven economy to thrive.

The innovation and entrepreneurial connectivity is also another dimension to add new intrinsic value into the Singapore network. We do have an increasingly vibrant startup scene. Singapore is now an established hub for R&D activities involving the research institutes, IHLs and the enterprises. This is in line with FEC’s plans to build a Global Innovation Alliance (GIA) which serves as a platform for innovation collaboration between Singapore-based enterprises and institutions with overseas partners.

Singapore is well-suited to be part of the global innovation value chain because of the integrity of our system. Innovators can be assured that their IPs or their data will be protected and we must resolutely safeguard this advantage. Our highly trusted legal system and its enforceability are among the key cornerstones for Singapore to be the reputable global financial centre that it is today. And this is one connectivity that we must continually strengthen and ensure that we stay ahead.

Mr Speaker, at this juncture, I would like to declare my interest that I work in a financial institution involved in financial services.

A vibrant financial sector is integral to Singapore being a globally connected city and a competitive economy. As Asia continues its strong growth trajectory, demand for financial services in the region will grow exponentially, whether it is trade finance, enterprise finance, infrastructure finance, capital markets, wealth management or risk management. It is, therefore, imperative that Singapore further scale up its financial connectivity capacity, both in breadth and depth so that it can fully benefit from the growing opportunities.

I am heartened that the ITM for financial services sets out a comprehensive strategy to grow the sector by 4.3% per annum and to create 4,000 jobs every year, including 1,000 jobs in the fintech sector. Talent remains the key and we have to expand and deepen the talent pool, perhaps even bringing back early-retired financial professionals to help top-up our pool of expertise. There is high demand for talents in many areas. For example, given the booming infrastructural needs in the region, best-in-class regional specialists are needed to structure complex cross-border financing and to anchor its value in Singapore; or in the insurance sector, with more global and regional insurance companies setting up presence in Singapore, they are in need of solution specialists to address emerging risks in the region.

Recently, I read in the news that Citibank has set up a China desk in Singapore to advise and service their Chinese clients that are investing into ASEAN. I suppose they do that because they see Singapore as having the needed professionals with the expertise and familiarity in the regional economies and, at the same time, is equipped to also serve their Chinese clients that are internationalising into the region. Here, the talent in Singapore becomes the connector between the Chinese companies in China and the regional opportunities in, say, ASEAN, through the Singapore platform. This would be a significant niche for ourselves that is not easily replicable. There will be more demand of such talents going forward, with an economically busy Asia and with mega initiatives, such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) taking off with more large-scale projects in the region.

We need a bigger pool of talents with deep knowledge of the regional markets, able to deal with the local market's complexity and its risk, understand the different jurisdictions, business practices, cultures and even languages and ability to develop professional and workable relationships with these entities, among others. The financial sector ITMs can continuously monitor the state of talent flows and also track whether we have fared well in expanding the Singaporean Core.

Mr Speaker, as China grows and internationalise in leaps and bounds, we should look to expand our connectivity with China further. The Chongqing Connectivity Initiative (CCI) Southern Transport Corridor (STC) is an innovative positioning to leverage on the BRI and also on what we can offer. We also look forward to the conclusion of the upgraded China-Singapore FTA to expand trade relations.

In the last decade, the Chinese yuan or RMB has been progressively internationalised. Singapore is now one of the RMB clearing centres and China has extended its RMB Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors (RQFII) programme to Singapore. RMB is gaining credentials to be another reserve currency of the world and we will see more international transactions settled in RMB in the decades ahead. For Singapore to stay relevant as a financial centre, the connectivity to China’s financial markets is crucial. We need to seek more access so that we can participate into China’s inbound and outbound capital flows that are destined to grow further and to position ourselves as one of the key trading and settlement centres for RMB as it becomes more internationalised.

Finally, Sir, while we are increasingly more selective in attracting MNCs to Singapore, it remains an important strategy for us. MNCs can also serve as a connector for Singapore to the rest of the world. The MTI Addendum stated it very well that MNCs bring along with them ideas, innovative capabilities and create new values for Asian markets. In working with local suppliers, it helps to transfer knowledge and deepen capabilities of our enterprises and keeps us abreast of developments and trends in the global marketplace. When MNCs hub their regional critical functions here, whether it is marketing, operations, finance or R&D, it helps to add yet another layer of business linkage where local and other international enterprises can be networked into. We can foster greater partnership between local companies, MNCs and Asian conglomerates to venture into other regional locations and, together, leverage on one another's strengths, as well as share the risks.

Mr Speaker, our economy must stay relevant to the world and the region. It is on this basis that we build our value as a vibrant economy. On the economic front, we have never shied away from making bold decisions or taking bold actions, whether it is investing huge capital into building worldclass infrastructures like airports and seaports, or reclaiming Jurong Island to develop it into a petrochemical complex. More recently, we invested significantly to build R&D capabilities and also took bold actions to reduce our dependence on foreign labour.

Under the future economy strategy, we continue to make bold moves to build the digital economy, to deepen transformation efforts via the 23 ITMs and to strive ahead with a whole-of-system effort to build a future-ready workforce. The game plans are there and we are well-resourced to carry out those plans. What we need next is to excite the businesses to see these opportunities, seek to upgrade their capabilities through the ITMs or others and build a solid bench strength of talents to seek the new frontiers. Mr Speaker, I support the Motion.

2.14 pm

The Minister for Trade and Industry (Mr Chan Chun Sing): Mr Speaker, Sir, for 53 years, Singapore has not only survived, but thrived in spite of it. We lack the conventional hinterland for access to resources and markets. So, we worked hard to grow our economic lifelines, connecting ourselves to the world. And in building a collective future for ourselves, we strived hard to unite our people from different races, languages and religions. There is, indeed, much that we can be proud of. However, we must never be complacent about our shared future.

In these times of rapid geopolitical shifts, technological disruption and transition, many Singaporeans are concerned, and understandably so. Many ask very simple questions: can Singapore continue to thrive? Will there be opportunities for future generations to similarly realise their potential? Will we remain united despite the many forces that threaten to pull us apart?

These are important questions and I am heartened that Singaporeans are concerned with these important issues.

While we must be alert and alive to the challenges, we need not be afraid. Challenges there will always be; so, too, will opportunities. Our challenges do not define us; our responses will. Our challenges are not insurmountable. And just like the generations before us, we, too, can be "pioneers of our generation". Pioneers who will build and leave behind a stronger foundation. Pioneers who define success not just by how well we do for ourselves, but also enabling the next generation to do even better than us.

Today, I will cover three broad areas. First, how we must stay relevant to secure our place in the world in an uncertain geopolitical and rapidly evolving economic environment. Second, what we, as "pioneers of our generation", must do to create a brighter future for all Singaporeans. Third, why we must continue to keep our systems refreshed and special to keep our country successful.

Let me start with Singapore's place in the world. The relative shift of geopolitical and economic weight between the West and the East, as epitomised by the US and China, will define the global security and economic environment for many years to come. Many ask: which side should we be on? This is not the right way to frame the issue. As a small country with an open economy, we believe in a rules-based, connected and interdependent world. Our task is not in choosing sides. Small states, more than any others, must be principled. If others ever attach a price to our position or stand, no one will take us seriously ever again.

We were the host to the historic meetings between China and Taiwan – the Wang-Koo meeting in 1993 and the Xi-Ma meeting in 2015. We will be the host for the upcoming summit between the US and North Korea in June. Our principled stand and neutrality were some reasons why Singapore was chosen for these meetings. Our task and priority is to ensure that we remain relevant. To do this, we need to have a deep understanding of the different interests, institutions and individuals shaping global developments. All of us – Government, businesses and private individuals – must understand the world and, collectively, remain alert to the forces impacting us and for us to navigate them carefully.

Let me illustrate with an example. China is a fast-evolving giant and China is not monolithic. Its interests vary and differ across its security, economic and social dimensions. There are also different provinces and different layers of government, each with its own perspectives and priorities. This tells us two things. First, to be relevant to China, we cannot rely on old mindsets and solutions. China is not looking for “hand-me-down” solutions. They are looking to develop their own solutions to their own unique challenges; sometimes by themselves, sometimes with partners.

Second, given the different interests and perspectives, knowing only the central government will be necessary but insufficient. To do business with China, we must understand the different provinces and personalities as well. Only then can we provide more relevant ideas for mutual benefit in a timely manner.

Now that China has moved beyond attracting foreign investments into venturing abroad, we must ask ourselves how we can play a role in partnering the Chinese to explore third markets or how we can become a platform for them to reach out to third markets.

However, this does not mean that we become more Chinese or do we replicate the western model for them. Instead, we must contribute to the partnership as Singapore – a multiracial and multicultural society, capable of developing unique solutions to our shared challenges, having learnt from both the East and West. There are many successful Singaporeans making waves in China because they bring this unique value. I had, earlier today, shared a video on my Facebook that illustrates this. The short film shows how enterprising and spirited Singaporeans can be and how we can be relevant to China at different levels.

How we relate to China must also be how we relate to the rest of the world. With the US, we not only deepen collaboration with American companies in areas, such as smart-city solutions and e-commerce, we are also an established gateway, a launch-pad, for American companies seeking growth opportunities in the region. What is clear is that no one deals with Singapore for our domestic markets or resources alone. Instead, they leverage upon us as a platform to reach the region and the world. To remain effective and attractive, we must develop people with a deep understanding of the region and the world, so that we can create value when others come and do business with us.

Our education and training models must similarly evolve in tandem to support this. Beyond the technical skills which we already excel in, Singaporeans must also be equipped with the mindsets and skillsets to operate and compete globally. This must be our competitive advantage and we can do more. I am encouraged by the ongoing efforts that give our people this very global exposure that we desire. Students who join Singapore Management University (SMU) from August this year, will need to participate in at least one overseas programme, before they can graduate. SMU believes that this will give its students a strong competitive edge and open doors to international networks and opportunities. I agree with them. More of our institutions should do so.

We must also help Singaporeans – individuals, companies and businesses – access and penetrate the global markets better. We need to ask ourselves: can we redefine the role of the overseas Singapore chapters and chambers to build the necessary networks?

These networks should be formed to achieve three outcomes: to connect Singapore to the world, to connect the world to Singapore and to connect fellow Singaporeans to compete in the world. To this end, EDB and associated agencies will collaborate to better organise and expand our overseas outreach. We will build a Singapore Talent Network to engage Singaporean families, friends and fans to be part of the Singapore Story. Our ability to network also depends on Singaporeans' ability to understand and work across cultures and nationalities.

Besides enabling Singaporeans to gain overseas exposure, we must also be able to work with talented people from elsewhere locally. We must have the diversity of talent, both local and global. Foreign professionals with knowledge, skillsets and competencies working shoulder-to-shoulder with skilled Singaporean talent, cross-pollinating ideas and bringing out the best in each other. Such dynamism is what keeps Singapore a vibrant, exceptional place to do business in and this is the vital ingredient for our economic future. I have always aspired that we will, one day, build a global network of more than three million Singaporeans, 30 million Singaporean friends and, perhaps, 300 million Singaporean fans. And, together, we will write the next chapter of the Singapore story.

To secure our place in the world, we must also better connect to the world as our hinterland, gaining access to resources and markets, and we need to step up in three areas. First, we need to widen our portfolio of markets to diversify our risks of relying on any single particular market. Our economic agencies are working hard to re-negotiate new Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and upgrade existing ones. We are continuously exploring new markets and support bilateral and multilateral trade efforts.

Second, we need to go beyond the conventional dimensions of air, land and sea connectivity, as expressed by Member Mr Liang Eng Hwa, by ensuring that we are connected to the world in the dimensions of data, finance, talent and technology. We have much work to build on to entrench ourselves as a global node for data, finance, technology and connectivity. We need to move fast before others leapfrog and overtake us. Today's competition is no longer linear. Having a headstart does not mean that we will always be ahead. We can capitalise on finance and data flows by building on our reputation as a trusted financial and data hub. These "non-physical" dimensions of connectivity are increasingly essential to reinforce the physical dimensions of connectivity that we already have a headstart on. If we can strengthen and complement our connectivity across all dimensions, we can continue to transcend our physical challenges.

Third, as global production and supply chains shift, we, too, must stay agile to connect to the new shifts. We need to move from getting others to trade with us, to trade through us, to also include for others to trade on our Singapore platforms.

PSA is a fine example. Since the 1980s, we knew that we could not possibly compete with other mega ports in the world in terms of size, no matter how much we try to expand our port or reclaim the entire southern coastline from Changi to Jurong. Hence, PSA updated its strategy to become a global port and supply chain operator, to compete at the system and network level, rather than at the port level. Soon, the competition followed.

Today, PSA is working with partners to use the PSA platform, regardless of where the trade flows may be. It is like having an "Intel" chip on an operating system inside the global trade flow operations.

Our economy is maturing. To achieve sustained and quality economic growth, we must not only be able to attract activities here, we must also venture out. For the next lap of our economic growth story, we cannot just look at the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of what we do in Singapore only. We need to also focus on what we call the Gross National Income (GNI) of what we do in Singapore and beyond. It is not just about giving Singaporeans the best opportunities here in Singapore, but it is also about helping Singaporeans to seize the opportunities beyond Singapore.

Mr Speaker, Sir, let me now turn to what it means for us to be "pioneers of our generation" so that we can create a better future for all Singaporeans together.

To be pioneers of our generation, we must be clear-eyed about our challenges. Let me sketch out some of these challenges which my teammates will elaborate throughout this debate. There are at least six areas that we need to focus on: having an innovative economy, building an inclusive society, ensuring social mobility, building our future Singapore, building our national identity and building trust.

Let me start with the first, on an innovation-driven economy. As any society matures, it is usual for it to become more conservative – choosing to uphold the existing system, rather than breaking new grounds. We cannot allow this to happen in Singapore. We need to keep up our vitality and verve. It is one thing to be the best-in-class for ports and airports. But it is another to be even better, ready for tomorrow's needs, ahead of time.

It is one thing to beat someone else in a competition, it is another to beat our own standards, even when we are at the top, so that Singaporeans can have even brighter prospects in the future. We need to ensure that the pioneering spirit lives on by embracing change and innovation. Our enterprises must innovate and scale up and we need to better translate investments in research and development, into new capabilities and enterprises. A*STAR and Enterprise Singapore will lead this and work closely with our companies – be they large local enterprises or small, medium enterprises and trade associations – for all of us to realise this together. Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat will speak more about this.

Second, fostering an inclusive society. Every generation aspires to do better than the previous. This is positive and this is what drives us to improve.

We are aware that Singaporeans, particularly those who fall into the middle-income, middle-age category, are feeling the stresses and strains of technological and business disruptions.

As leaders, it is our responsibility to ensure that everyone progresses together. In keeping faith with the Government, Singaporeans want us to understand their fears, concerns and aspirations. We need to continue to better help the striving broad middle group to keep improving their lives. We need to make sure that our training and skills upgrading are relevant and accessible, helping our workers to access opportunities throughout their entire lifecycle. We must do better for the weak and vulnerable in society. But beyond providing immediate relief, we must also enable them to do better for themselves.

Minister Ng Chee Meng and the Labour Members of Parliament will elaborate more on the Labour Movement’s efforts, while Minister Masagos Zulkifli and others will speak about how we can foster a caring and inclusive society that is truly meritocratic.

Third, to uphold social mobility. As society matures, social mobility tends to slow down, with social inequality becoming more apparent over time. This is often the result of "social clustering" of people from similar backgrounds. Social inequality is also partly caused by our human natural instincts to pass on wealth and privileges to our next generation. If left unchecked, our people may lose faith in our system of meritocracy and this can hurt our social compact.

Can we mitigate the forces that widen social inequality? How can we better distribute the fruits of growth to a broad majority to prevent stratification as a society? We have seen the fallout from others who did not do so. Hence, upholding social mobility is something that we must take seriously. We want everybody to have a good start and to achieve their full potential. This means ensuring that opportunities are accessible to all who are hardworking, talented and committed; that opportunities are not just tied to academic grades, but also to the right aptitude and skills. Minister Ong Ye Kung and various Members will address some of these challenges.

Fourth, as pioneers of our generation, it is also our responsibility to continue building and planning ahead for the next generation. As we progress towards SG100, we need to start planning not just for the next 50 years but also beyond.

Many of our decisions today will determine whether the next generation can have an even better living environment than ours. For example, how do we refresh our HDB flats and estates? How do we prepare our transport, utilities, data infrastructures for the next lap? Minister Lawrence Wong and Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary will speak about these challenges and our responses. But the bottom line is this: we must never think that we are ever finished with building Singapore. We must never think that we are ever done building Singapore.

Fifth, beyond economic and social development, our most critical piece of work is to rally our nation together. Our people must not merely be economic sojourners. They must have the natural instincts to defend what is ours, to build upon what we have and stay put even when the chips are down.

A nation is not just about economic benefits. It is also about the sense of community and contribution. A true nation is one where its people will stay and fight for its future and build it all up even when the chips are down. This is the spirit of the 1965 generation and this is what we want to imbue in every generation of Singaporeans. How we communicate and work as a team will establish the foundation for our identity as Singaporeans. Minister Indranee Rajah will speak on this important topic of our Singapore identity and Minister Heng Swee Keat will also discuss how we intend to engage and partner fellow Singaporeans for the next lap.

Last but not least, for Singaporeans to identify with one another and with this country, there must be trust between people and Government as well as amongst Singaporeans ourselves. To foster trust, leaders must lead by example, develop strong connections across different segments of our population, communicate with them effectively to mobilise them. The contest of ideas is constant. In fact, this has intensified in this digital age. We must work harder to let our people see and understand an issue for what it is; helping our people to become better informed of the challenges, options and rationale behind our choices. Only in this way can we all become more discerning, stay vigilant and own our choices and solutions together.

With higher education, Singaporeans’ aspirations and expectations also evolve. They want to be heard, considered and respected. So, we have to keep channels open for everyone to share their views and work on strengthening our engagement. If we can do this well, we will remain cohesive as a nation. If we can have a common vision, a common set of goals and putting our national priorities above all, we will emerge stronger than ever.

Mr Speaker, Sir, let me touch on the last set of topics I would like to speak on today and, that is, keeping our systems refreshed and special.

Singapore has come this far because of trust, teamwork as well as our ability and guts to develop our own systems to meet our unique needs. As a small city-state with a multiracial society, situated in a volatile region, without a conventional hinterland and with no one else to depend on for our defence, our circumstances are, indeed, unique. And while we study other systems and adapt them where suitable, we must not copy blindly or become "intellectually colonised".

We must remain prepared to develop systems that work best for us. More importantly, for us to also constantly update them to meet our evolving needs. This has been our approach on issues like National Service, HDB and housing, CPF, as well as the GRC system and Elected Presidency. Today, we are also fostering stronger collaboration and synergies and tapping on different networks in society for their views and expertise. For example, in our efforts to renew our economy through the ITMs and help our workers seize the opportunities ahead, we will not just involve the Government agencies alone. It must also include our Trade Associations and Chambers, our enterprises and the Labour Movement. Rather than a "whole-of-Government" strategy, we will work on a "whole-of-nation" strategy.

Next, beyond having good and nimble systems, we must have good people. People build systems. People also corrupt systems. We have seen examples of both democratic and socialist systems failing; often, by people with the wrong motivations.

To bring forth good people to serve is a never-ending challenge. It is difficult enough to bring forth good people who would sacrifice their personal and family interests for the country. This is especially so when the country is already successful, peaceful and prosperous. But we must continue to try.

We need to find the strongest set of individuals not just to solve today's current problems, but also to prevent future problems from arising in the first place. This means that we need diverse skillsets and perspectives, so that we can combine them as necessary and tackle challenges together, when circumstances change. This cannot be left to chance. The PAP Government will spare no effort. This applies to the political leadership team, as much as it applies to the Public Service and business community. Agreeing with us is not the prerequisite. Agreeing to put Singapore first and foremost is the prerequisite.

Having found the strongest set of individuals is still not enough; what we must then do is to mould them into the strongest team possible. Countries with more resources may afford to have less cohesive leadership teams and still survive. But, for Singapore, we must ensure that we have the strongest leadership team possible, for others to take us seriously and be willing to work with us.

For Singapore, this teamwork does not just exist within one generation. It is also between generations. Our leadership model is to have overlapping generations of leadership teams to help the next generation do even better. This provides continuity in our interaction with others and for us to compete at the highest global level with consistency in vision and execution with purpose.

All these leadership traits – commitment, teamwork, courage to evolve, a sense of mission – are what we will need to keep our systems special. At this juncture, I would also like to place on record our appreciation to Mr Low Thia Khiang, as leader of the Workers’ Party for the last 17 years. Allow me to continue in Mandarin, Mr Speaker, Sir.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, although Mr Low Thia Khiang is a Member of the Opposition, he is, nevertheless, a fellow Singaporean and very much a part of Team Singapore.

While we may not always agree with his perspectives or methods, we, nevertheless, appreciate his efforts to work together to build a better Singapore, as the leader of the Workers' Party. Although Mr Low may have different perspectives, but, from his speeches, we can detect his pride in Singapore and his determination to defend our sovereignty. Here, we would like to thank Mr Low Thia Khiang.

We look forward to similarly working with Mr Pritam Singh and the Workers' Party to put Singapore's and Singaporeans' interests first, always.

Mr Speaker, Sir, politics is not just about winning votes. It is about serving our country and people.

To win votes by stoking anger and unhappiness may be a common practice in politics elsewhere, but this is negative politics and is not constructive. To win the hearts and votes of our people, we must work hard to develop sound policies for our common future. I hope that all of us will continue to define our politics in constructive ways.

All along, my belief is that we want political leaders, not just politicians, to lead Singapore; leaders who weigh options carefully before acting decisively and never opt for just the most expedient idea or solution for personal interests or short-term gains.

It also means not shying away from making difficult or unpopular decisions, but being guided by that resolve to always do what is in the best interests of Singapore and Singaporeans, never shirking responsibilities towards our current and future generations.

Always putting our country and people first, our political leaders must treat people with sincerity. They know that our achievement today is built on the foundation of what our previous generations have left behind. Therefore, the responsibility of every generation is to leave behind a better Singapore for future generations. They also know that the success of each generation is defined by the success of the next generation.

(In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, let me conclude in English. In the next lap of our country's history, we will have our fair share of challenges and opportunities for our generation. But we can be confident that we will build an even brighter future for ourselves and our future generations.

To secure our place in the world, we have to value add to stay relevant, build our networks and be able to compete globally, in order to transcend our constraints of geography and resources and, instead, turn them into opportunities. As pioneers of our generation, we must continue to break new grounds, build on our fundamentals that have brought us this far, so that we can continue to enable the next generation to succeed even more than us.

To keep Singapore successful, our systems and politics must be special and refreshed, suited to our own unique circumstances and needs. We will also need to do more to inspire yet another generation of Singaporeans to come forth to serve Singapore, in spite of.

We can, and we will, together, write the next chapter of our Singapore story that is meaningful, engaging and real for all Singaporeans. Our 1965 generation has achieved that with much less. They had overcome their share of the challenges to leave us the Singapore we have today. There is absolutely no reason why our generation which has so much more cannot leave behind an even better Singapore for the next generation.

We can, together, become Singapore Unlimited. Unlimited by our geography, unlimited by our size, unlimited by our resources. We can only be limited by the scale of our ambition and drive. And our scale of ambition and drive will determine how far we progress as a nation for the next 50 years and more. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion. [Applause.]

2.46 pm

Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support this Motion. Our nation is going through a period of transition – from one generation of leaders to the next, drawing upon the wisdom and experience of the past while needing to forge new paths in this ever-changing world.

But there are some things that remain constant. The first is the national aspiration.

Singapore is like a ship. Aspiration is navigation, – the direction we are headed to. It is about vision. It is about hope. The President has outlined key priorities for the Government's latter half of this term. One of them is "Building a Well-connected, World-class City for Singaporeans". This is aspiration.

Part of Singapore is the Southern Islands, seven islets: Kusu Island, Lazarus Island, Pulau Seringat, Pulau Tekukor, St John's Island and, now, the Sisters' Islands. They are a treasure trove. Land in land-scarce Singapore, but not just land. It is nature, beauty, memories and rest. Sisters' Islands house a marine diving trail. There are coral, blue waters, flora and fauna unique to the islands, rich biodiversity. In order to better protect the biodiversity, we have extended the protection under the Parks and Trees Act to marine parks last November.

Currently, only St John's Island and Kusu Island are served by regular ferries and Lazarus Island is connected to St John's Island with a pedestrian causeway. The rest, besides Pulau Tekukor, are accessed through chartered yachts or chartered ferries.

Singapore may be resource less but we are not resourceless. We should consider how we can bring out the biodiversity potential of the Southern Islands, while increasing connectivity to the islands so that Singaporeans can enjoy this part of Singapore. My aspiration is that the Southern Islands become a network, a neighbourhood of recreational parks where there are nature, biodiversity research and connectivity between the islands and the islands with the main island. Nature and connectivity need not be mutually exclusive. Accessible, yet preserved.

Another aspiration I have is to consider the setting up of a Singapore Stewardship Fund. Without costing employers more, a percentage of the salary of a foreign worker, perhaps 10%-20%, can be put directly into a special savings account. This account, which would be able to pool together contributions from many other workers, would be able to earn a more attractive interest on the sum of money pooled. Upon termination of the work permit or pass, the worker can choose to cash out on the savings, or, if there is a renewal of the work permit, the worker can also choose to roll over the savings.

If this arrangement is done on an opt-in basis, a discount on the worker's levy could be considered, thereby benefiting the employer, which, in turn, could provide a financial incentive for the employer to opt in. From the money deposited from his own salary into the worker's Stewardship Fund or account, there could be possible categories of expenditures that he can draw down on, for example, payment for enrichment or training courses accredited by the Government. It is hoped that, through a Stewardship Fund, foreign workers will be able to enjoy and utilise a nest egg when they go home to their families, for whom they have come here to work.

Just as we cherish the contributions that Singaporeans make, we also cherish the contributions that foreign workers have made to our city. We also want them to come and add that extra value to our livelihoods, communities and culture. Therefore, for as long as they are here, we should be stewards of their lives, we should be good hosts, to build up and benefit their lives as they have ours.

How this fits in with aspirations to "secure a place in the world for Singapore" is that, by doing so, the foreign workers will leave with fond memories of Singapore, that the links built will forge the path for reciprocal goodwill and friendship. In this way, we can build up an overseas family of workers who have once worked and lived in Singapore, and secure a place in the world for Singapore and for her values.

A third aspiration I wish to talk about today is the ability to make tough decisions. The President said that we need to be able to go for bold changes, not merely to be content to tweak at the margins. To take such an approach, we need to make sure we retain the ability to make tough decisions.

For example, when renewing casino licences every three years, the question for us should not just be whether there should be a three-year extension but the question we should visit and contemplate is a more fundamental one: whether in this present economic climate, we need casinos at all. Being able to revisit decisions, as tough as such revisiting is, must always be on the cards. This will also make sure that we are not overly reliant on the revenue generated from casinos to meet national expenditure. It creates the discipline of prudence. We should never get into a corner where we have to rely on tax on gambling revenue to meet expenditure needs. So, tough decisions must include revisiting policies.

A similar aspiration applies in the international arena. Even as we recognise the importance of "upholding international law and the role of supra-national institutions", we need to make sure we retain the ability to stand for what we believe is best for Singapore.

Aspirations help to direct, to navigate, a new course for our nation's future. In this, teamwork is key. It is teamwork that helps direct the course of the ship and maintains her seaworthiness in times of squall or in times of calm. Teamwork is key. Over the years of being a Member of Parliament, I have seen how teamwork is key. I truly hope that there will not be over-focus on one person or persons. I would much rather that the team be looked at for the prowess and the calibre of the whole team and not the characteristics of an individual person. Allow me to share, from my experiences, why I think this is very important.

There are occasions when I raise issues that are close to my heart with the Prime Minister. In some instances, the Prime Minister would support the ideas I had suggested. For example, I had asked the Prime Minister to consider whether he would support the introduction of a Private Member's Bill on the Prevention of Human Trafficking. The Prime Minister offered his guidance and shared his insights on how any introduction of a new law would entail collaboration with multiple agencies, in terms of enforcement and that, at some stages, the path to a private Bill would be tough. Yet, the Prime Minister supported it and it was very much a team effort between Minister Masagos from Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), Minister Chan Chun Sing who was leading MSF at the time and Minister Tan Chuan-Jin who helmed MOM. Without Prime Minister's support, and each of the Ministers lending their weight to the policy, it would not have been pushed into law.

Equally important are the times the Prime Minister has had to deal with matters from the front, leading the team and the debate publicly on difficult topics and policies.

Yet, often times, the responsibility does not rest with the Prime Minister alone. Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean weighed in on heavy topics, such as Ministerial Salaries, and the Little India riot. I was here, I saw them first-hand. These are heavy topics and displayed how important teamwork is in Parliament, in Cabinet and in the caring for Singapore. It is not a one-man show.

Teamwork is important and this was so for the recent debates on the Motions on terrorism and the drug menace. Minister K Shanmugam was deep in his thinking to agree that these were important topics to debate and, hence, rendered his support at the Ministerial level, and even participated in the debate. As there were many things on his plate at that time in the lead-up to the debate, the GPC worked with Minister Desmond Lee, Mrs Josephine Teo and Mr Amrin Amin. Topics discussed were what are the enforcement capabilities that we can deliver in terms of reducing the drug menace, how we could overcome or mend the break in trust if an attack did vest on our shores – these were some of the types of questions the GPC and Members had to ask of them. Why? In order that the debates displayed accurately the capability of our forces and that, what we say, we do, so, the threats are deterred as best we can. After all, that was the team's aim for the debate.

Therefore, it is a team effort among many different Ministers, Ministries and, indeed, Members of this House. It is a structure that does not rest on the shoulders of one man or one woman.

This is even more evident when we see in action the Singapore team travel on state visits. Sometimes, there are about six to seven Members in the political delegation, made up of front- and back-benchers as well as the team leader. Two years ago, I witnessed first-hand how our Prime Minister engaged with President Barack Obama on the state visit to Washington DC. I saw how he, as the leader of the team and of the Government, was clear in his mind what our positions were and how he engaged with the Americans on many topics and fronts. But there were other team members, too, including Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, whom I saw first-hand engaging world leaders – people like Mr Joe Biden, Mr John Kerry and Ms Susan Rice – on significant issues. Part of that same delegation were Mr S Iswaran, Mr Chan Chun Sing, Mr Ong Ye Kung, Ms Rahayu Mahzam and Ms Chia Yong Yong. Each one had a significant role to play. Again, the point I am making is that teamwork is key. It cannot rest on the shoulders of one man or one woman.

Another illustration of how teamwork is important is through the previous debate on the President's Address in January 2016. During the debate, Minister Heng Swee Keat was able to gather the views of many of us who shared our aspirations for our country and the constituents we serve and, during the debate, attributed many of these points to the Members present. Again, such attribution shows how each Member of the House has something to give. And each of us here lean on our grassroots leaders, community volunteers and, certainly, our families to serve each resident. I am sorry I have not mentioned all Members in my speech. But this does not detract from the point that I am trying to make: that all of us here, and, indeed, every resident that we serve, have a role in the next chapter of our Singapore story.

But besides aspiration that gives us direction and, teamwork, which is the all-important glue, it is the motivation to serve that is the fuel that keeps the ship of Singapore going. At its base, it is not just about teamwork or advancing the interest of Singapore and Singaporeans, but it is about our motivation, what makes us tick. The reason why we are here: it is serving Singapore and Singaporeans. Allow me to share two examples.

Dr Balaji Sadasivan, a man I deeply respect. In 2010, unfortunately, he had come down with cancer and, being a doctor himself, knew that he did not have much time more. I remember seeing him coming to Parliament two weeks before he passed away. He already looked drawn and thin. In the Members' Room, I saw him sit down with Mr Inderjit Singh, and I think the Prime Minister was there, too. And he was explaining to Mr Inderjit Singh and the Prime Minister all the duties that had to be fulfilled so that the residents in Dr Balaji's ward in Ang Mo Kio would continue to be served and would not be prejudiced by his illness. He passed away two weeks later. That made a lasting impression on me. To me, Dr Balaji displayed a motivation so pure.

And other examples are the many former back-benchers and front-benchers who continue to serve with vigour and rigour: Mr S Chandra Das, Dr S Vasoo, Mr Lau Ping Sum, Mr Zainal Abidin Rasheed and many, many more. The motivation for coming into politics is to serve; to serve as part of a team.

The conclusion I have drawn thus far is that, if there is right motivation and there is teamwork, we will have an effective and efficient Parliament, which makes for an effective and efficient Cabinet, which makes for an effective and good Prime Minister; a strong leader. That responsibility of leadership is shared by everyone. Every Member of this House shares that responsibility, including all residents we serve.

So, my hope, my humble hope, is that aspirations of Singapore, with which I started my speech, and the aspirations of all Singaporeans we have the sacred duty to represent here in this Chamber, will be held in the precious crucible of teamwork and correct motivation.

It matters less to me the good traits of an individual or a group of individuals. It matters more to me that the values and principles of incorruptibility, the dare to aspire, the right motivations, importance of selfless service and strong teamwork continue to be the genetic make-up of any team that is to propel Singapore to greater heights. That makes for a very secure formula, a very unique formula, that will benefit Singaporeans for generations to come. That formula of teamwork will ensure that Singaporeans will win. [Applause.]

3.02 pm

Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion to thank our President for her Address. The Thirteenth Parliament is re-opening in rosier times. Measures which the Government put in place over the last few years are beginning to show green shoots. Last year, our economy grew at 3.6%, exceeding forecasts. Overall, labour productivity grew at 4.5%, marking the highest productivity growth since 2010, fewer workers were retrenched for the first time in seven years and real wages rose steadily for all income groups.

Yet, the President reminded us that our long-term challenges remain broadly unchanged. Our economy needs to restructure towards higher value-added activities and stay dynamic, we need to secure Singapore’s place in the world, we need to stay focused on upgrading skills and we need to forge a caring and inclusive society. And we must keep up our efforts to make Singapore an exceptional nation.

I am encouraged by the determination and resolve of the fourth-generation (4G) leadership that I sense through the President’s Address. I am excited by their appetite to undertake the "bold changes" needed to navigate the unchartered waters that lie ahead for Singapore. These attributes are necessary to take Singapore forward through our next phase of development.

Mr Speaker, I would like to focus my speech on Singapore’s priority to develop a vibrant economy with good jobs and opportunities for workers. In order to sustain a vibrant economy despite an ageing population, a tight labour market and the changing nature of work brought on by technological disruptions, we really need fresh perspectives, breakthrough ideas and decisive action to lead us there.

The current tight labour market is really a key constraint for business growth. Growth in our local workforce is expected to slow further, unfortunately. A recent study by Korn Ferry Futurestep predicted that Singapore will be one of the countries with the highest risks of a severe talent crunch, estimating that we will be short of more than one million skilled workers by 2030.

This issue of talent and jobs is closely linked to the accelerating pace of technological disruption in transforming industries, business models and jobs. The future of work is now one of the hottest topics in many industries, provoking much debate and predictions about the impact of automation technology like artificial intelligence and robotics on jobs, skills and wages.

I, for one, think we need not surrender to the nightmare scenario where we would all be replaced by robots. The most significant disruption will come from an increasing rate of change in job destruction and job creation, including new forms of work, as well as skills churn within existing occupations. Machine learning and robotics will replace specific tasks previously performed by humans, freeing them to focus on new tasks and leading to rapidly-changing core skillsets in various occupations. Workers will have to learn new skills to work alongside increasingly capable machines.

Therefore, in order to avoid having a class of people becoming unemployed and under-employed, it is imperative that we develop effective strategies to help Singaporeans make the transition, have them retrained, reskilled and capable of performing new kinds of work.

As the Fourth Industrial Revolution takes hold in different industries and job families, it, unfortunately, will affect different segments of society differently. Automation promises great gains for higher skilled workers who can innovate, create and apply new developments, whilst mid- to low-skilled workers will be at greatest risk of being replaced by technology. And here, we must guard against the increasing polarisation of employability, which will exacerbate income inequality.

Job families expecting the highest employment growth – in science, technology, engineering and mathematics – currently have some of the lowest female participation rates and continue to find it much harder to recruit women. Yet, at the same time, women are over-represented in other job families, such as office and administrative roles – the ones that are expected to experience heavy disruptions. Seniors will be more adversely affected than younger workers. The Government must put in place the necessary measures to ensure equal opportunities for all and avoid inequality being exacerbated by the digital divide.

Mr Speaker, if it is any consolation at all, Singapore is not alone in facing this digital challenge. Nations the world over are struggling to deal with the social and political implications of impact on jobs and society brought on by information technology, artificial intelligence and robotics. In fact, the World Economic Forum’s White Paper on Realising Human Potential in the Fourth Industrial Revolution actually highlights Singapore’s SkillsFuture movement as a global best practice and role model. I applaud the Government for launching this visionary initiative as far back as 2015.

I think it is time that we step on the accelerator for SkillsFuture, if it is to go the distance that we expect, at the speed it needs to. The movement needs to evolve from one that prides itself on offering thousands of courses in a plethora of fields catering to individuals’ interests, to a system that lays out a clear path linking lifelong learning to skills and jobs dynamically. It needs to become the new engine of education that drives Singapore’s growth and development, in much the same way that educating and training our children and young adults have helped propel our growth over the last 50 years. We need to move from front-loading our citizens’ education in the earlier part of their lives to helping them learn at all stages of their lives. We need to develop lifelong learning institutions, as well as the necessary discipline and comprehensive infrastructure, to ensure that a strong culture of learning and an ecosystem of continuing education take root.

The World Economic Forum’s report on the Future of Jobs estimates that 35% of core skills required to perform today’s jobs will change or be wholly new by the year 2020. SkillsFuture must be capable of providing the adult learning that is vital to ensure today’s entire workforce can cope with the disruptions to come and be prepared for new skills requirements in both existing and new roles.

To achieve this, SkillsFuture needs to partner academic institutions, vocational training providers, trade associations and employers to develop and incentivise customised training solutions capable of lifting skill levels of the whole workforce, industry by industry. With our economic transformation efforts focused around the 23 ITMs, I urge the Government to consider launching SkillsFuture for ITMs, in order to ensure strong alignment of training efforts with industry needs and future growth.

Trade associations and industry task forces in the respective ITMs should play an active role with training providers in defining competency-based credentialing and recognition systems, as well as creating a continuous feedback loop between labour market needs and training requirements. They should collaborate to develop robust and scalable training interventions to benefit the whole industry cluster, lifting skill levels in the sector through systematic accreditation of workers.

Mr Speaker, despite our best efforts, the rate of technological disruption will probably result in some degree of job displacement. For some workers, it may even occur multiple times during their careers. We must, therefore, strengthen the support systems for dislocated workers. The key is to ensure that they are re-employed quickly to avoid sticky unemployment or under-employment.

Based on feedback from residents who have tried finding jobs through current employment services centres, it is evident that the operating model will have to evolve to include new partnerships and mechanisms that better connect workers to jobs, and jobs to workers. Job-matching efforts should be integrated with SkillsFuture and ITMs as well as income safety nets during periods of displacement. There should be early warning systems for possible lay-offs and rapid response mechanisms for career counselling and job placement tightly coordinated.

Even as we work on positioning Singaporeans favorably in the global marketplace for talent, Singapore must remain a magnet for expertise that our industries need but cannot fill locally. We must deal squarely with calls for help from businesses struggling with manpower shortages. I support the manpower-lean approach as the way forward and agree that we should maintain the overall ratio of local to foreign talent in our workforce. However, we should review our foreign manpower policy to introduce a differentiated intake approach to enable acquisition of capability in new domains critical to Singapore's future growth, such as expertise in data analytics, artificial intelligence and cybersecurity, whilst balancing this with reduced intakes in other areas.

So, rather than adopting a one-size-fits-all approach, foreign manpower policy should evolve to include skill-based factors that prioritises certain types of skills and expertise over others, within a quota system. The system should provide transparency and predictability in order to help companies plan their growth strategies in Singapore.

Mr Speaker, we are confronted with formidable challenges that require new ways of thinking about education and training, not just for a season, but for a lifetime. But we have been here before. In 1974, Mr Lee Kuan Yew said, “Our lives and our children’s future must be built on a solid infrastructure of education and skills, tuned to high performance by efficient management, always able to respond quickly to sudden changes in the world.”

Just as we were called upon in the country’s early years to take our fledgling nation of poorly-skilled factory labourers to one that served up world-class manufacturing and top-flight services, so we are now called upon, once again, to shape Singapore’s "future of work". This will be an undertaking for all Singaporeans – Government leaders, corporations and individuals – everyone playing their part and aligned towards the same vision. We must be equal to the task, for the sake of our future. I support the Motion.

3.15 pm

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, in addition to laying out the Government's plans for the rest of the term, the President's Address this year was noteworthy, particularly for the upcoming transfer of power from the third to the fourth generation of PAP leaders.

Three remarks, in particular, shone through. Firstly, the new PAP leaders cannot take the people's trust for granted and assume that the right to lead will automatically pass from one generation to another. Secondly, the 4G leaders ought to resist the temptation not to go for bold changes. And, thirdly, the 4G leadership must fire up and mobilise the spirit and energy of young Singaporeans.

One thread that binds these three directives is the ability and willingness to listen to the people. This trait can be understated, especially in light of the dominance of the PAP and its electoral success over more than five decades of uninterrupted rule. However, societal norms and expectations of political leadership have evolved. Alternative views will have to be addressed, accommodated and considered thoughtfully so as to allow us to move forward together as one Singapore.

What the Government should not do is to close the door or resign itself to the politics of majoritarianism when a sensitive or difficult subject comes along, but, instead, invest a lot more energy to engage and explain, for our people have more than their fair share of good ideas. If the approach of the 4G leaders is to ignore, silence or ridicule alternative ideas, they will fail to galvanise and spur all Singaporeans to greater heights; or worse, they may even engender a divided society, rendering the message of inclusivity hollow and without substance. This would be an untenable outcome for the continued success of a small country like Singapore that needs to pursue innovation and excellence and to conceive new ways of doing things to greater vigour than ever before.

I will focus my speech on the cost of living, a topic which the Workers' Party believes deserves closer scrutiny by the Government for the remainder of the term and beyond. The remaining Workers' Party Members of Parliament will address other issues, as covered in the Addenda to the President's Address.

In the last few years, cost of living issues have dominated the headlines and more price rises are on the way, with a prospective hike in the Goods and Services Tax in the near future raising anxieties further.

More than a year ago, in the wake of the announcement of a hike in water tariffs, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean sought to assure the public that the price of coffee should not go up in the aftermath of the water hikes because the cost of water in a cup of coffee is "much, much less than one cent" and that the public should not be scared of untrue stories about the coffee prices. While this is true in a mathematical sense, just a few days ago, a Zaobao report confirmed that one of the largest coffee shop chains had increased the price of coffee, citing rising overheads.

One response to pre-empt cost of living concerns by the Government at Budget 2018 has been to enhance the GST U-Save Voucher, with each eligible household standing to receive $5 more every three months between 2019 and 2021 to compensate for the recently announced carbon tax. The PAP Government's philosophy has always been to target assistance.

For those who govern, the fear of overly generous welfare payouts for the able-bodied comes with a warning. The message that can be inadvertently sent is that a person is not able to look after himself, hence, needing support and severely undermining the work ethic. Singaporeans should not dismiss this concern.

But parallel expectations and considerations apply equally for the Government, too. At the Committee of Supply debate this year, the Transport Minister confirmed that Singaporeans can expect to see a rise in transport costs in the very near future, too, to reflect growing network capacity and ridership. But as many callers to a local radio station commented not too long ago, the costs of running and improving the transport system cannot just be seen through the eyes of fare revenue. Many correctly questioned whether there ought to be some scope for other segments of SMRT's business to subsidise train operations, too, such as advertising and revenue from other investments to lessen the effect of any fare increases on the general population.

Mr Speaker, the question of the quantum of the surpluses and the prospect of alternate revenue streams and future surpluses of many Government-linked companies and Statutory Boards to better cushion price hikes on Singaporeans needs to be looked at very closely and debated before prices go up. For example, on the 30% water hike, how do future capital investments in water supply and transmission cohere with the large capital reserves of the national water agency which have increased consistently from around $3 billion in 2007 to more than $5 billion in 2016?

Getting into the details of such matters would represent a unique partnership with the people. It would represent bold leadership, but such an approach would also come with an upshot. Price hikes are likely to be better understood and contextualised to the benefit of the policy discourse in Singapore.

Mr Speaker, the President correctly pointed out that young Singaporeans want to feel a strong sense of nation. Raising our Total Fertility Rate (TFR) is an existential issue for our nation. We know from a recent Government survey that many married Singaporean couples actually do wish to have three or more children.

While 39% felt this was an ideal outcome, only 18% were able to actualise it. Similarly, while 53% of couples ideally wanted two children, only 37% were able to actualise it; 61% of respondents raised financial costs as their first out of three reasons for not having more children, followed closely by the stress of raising children in Singapore at 56%, and the difficulty of managing work and family demands at 33%. If, indeed, the cost of living is a major impediment to having more children, what can we do to address this issue? How will we create a strong sense of nationhood when our Singapore Core and the values internalised over 50 years of nation building are progressively hollowing themselves out with the population not replacing itself?

Sir, immigration cannot be the long-term solution to our TFR woes. Immigrants will grow old, too, and we cannot be encouraging even more immigrants to set up home on our shores without a robust strategy to raise TFR. Not to do so would severely impact the quality of life in Singapore for our future generations in view of our limited size.

The problem is a structural one; and structural changes are necessary and bold thinking is required to break with the orthodoxy of the past. Is there scope to make HDB flats more affordable by pegging prices to income levels? And can flexible work arrangements become a compulsory option for new parents from employers? What can we do to make the education system a reason for parents not to panic about having children? Is there scope to introduce more child-support tax credits for low- and medium income parents which can be scaled back progressively as household income increases?

Unlike their predecessors, the 4G leadership is coming into power when expenditures will rise in concert with the changing demographics in Singapore. But that is only half the story. On the question of finances, the inclusion of Temasek into the Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC) framework from 2016 has also put more money and, by extension, more political capital in the hands of the current Government and 4G leaders than any generation of PAP leaders. This is without having to even call on the President to unlock the reserves.

To put this in perspective, the overall Budget surplus for this term of Government for FY2016 and 2017 is currently at $15.7 billion and this is after transfers to endowments and trust funds like the GST Voucher Fund. The $15.7 billion could potentially cover two more Pioneer Generation Packages of about $8 billion each, covering almost an additional one million more elderly. This is only taking into account the accumulated surplus of out of two of the five years of this Government’s term.

In comparison, the first and only drawdown of the reserves in 2009 requiring Presidential approval amounted to $4.9 billion for the Jobs Credit scheme, which extended a cash grant for every local worker on a qualifying employer’s payroll, with a smaller amount allocated to financial institutions for the Special Risk Sharing Initiative.

With $15.7 billion in hand today and, given the putatively stable formula for NIRC withdrawals in spite of market fluctuations, the picture for the immediate future does not appear to be one of a Government needing money to stay afloat and needing to tax the population as a result, raising the cost of living.

We are told more money is needed for healthcare and other areas in the years to come. This is not unexpected, given our demographic transition with our elderly population expected to grow to 900,000 by 2030. But what are the Government’s current estimates and the underlying basis for its projections of higher expenditure coming on stream in future? This information needs to be shared so that the public is clear-eyed about the sufficiency of the budget at the Government’s disposal to help Singaporeans with the cost of living today.

In conclusion, Sir, the President’s call not to eschew bold changes is not one that should preoccupy the 4G leadership alone. The leadership transition from the third generation (3G) to 4G leaders also presents a unique opportunity for each Singaporean to question what we can do to make Singapore a better home for all of us. The leadership team is no longer just the political leadership. Singapore needs a special breadth and depth of leadership if it is to succeed; leadership in every field of industry from trade and industry to sports, arts and culture.

If Singapore is to thrive as the immediate geopolitical situation shifts – and separately, the challenge of an ageing society, inequality and an extremely low TFR confronts our small country – boldness should be part of our national character, too.

At its core, the transition from the 3G to 4G leaders must be accompanied by a transformation of our society which creates the conditions to engender a confident people. The impetus and authority behind a new boldness in Singaporeans should harken back to the title of the President’s Address: a call for a strong people-Government partnership to build our future Singapore. A people who exercises independent judgement and who are empowered to support Singapore and to move forward together.

Finally, Mr Speaker, I would like to put on record my thanks for Minister Chan Chun Sing’s words on the Workers’ Party and Mr Low Thia Khiang’s contributions over the years. The Workers’ Party will always bear in mind the national interest in our deliberations and endeavour in the interest of Singaporeans and Singapore.

3.26 pm

Assoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion. One of the first things our workforce of the future would have to be prepared for is the increasing differentiation in job roles and, as a consequence, also of the skillsets that these roles will demand. Singapore's early success with employment growth had been founded on the same principle that other industrialised economies adopted, with mass creation of jobs to support large-scale manufacturing. As the President's Address indicated, the future of work will be very different.

Unlike many other economies, however, Singapore had managed to sustain the early approach by recognising quite early on that a much more sophisticated labour market model would be required as global economic competition intensified. Hence, instead of differentiating industries, therefore, economic planners had the foresight to push for the workforce to graduate into higher value-added activities. As the population's incomes rose, the workforce as a whole embraced higher skilled jobs, including moving much more quickly into knowledge work than other economies which had started out in a similar way. What we face now in Singapore are, in some ways, the problems of having been too successful too quickly.

With a workforce in which the proportion of degree holders is increasing rapidly, we now have an increasing proportion of professionals, managers and executives (PMEs) and, as a result, of knowledge workers as well. Knowledge workers are subject to the same laws of demand and supply that all other resources must adhere to, and an excess of knowledge workers of the same type in any one area that is unsupported by demand will see the labour market prospects of that group dwindle.

As an advanced economy, Singapore faces the same insatiable thirst for top manpower in a broad array of fields as other advanced economies. But the limited size of our population is such that the availability of skills it can supply will always fall short of the breadth being demanded by companies competing at the cutting edge of global competition. In other words, I strongly believe what Singapore faces quite uniquely among advanced economies is not so much a problem with skills gaps, but more one of insufficient skills coverage.

To deal with this, the core principles which had guided early planners to their success remain relevant today. And that is to prepare early for the inevitable, to make difficult decisions to match seemingly impossible and incompatible objectives and, most importantly, to do so with a clear understanding of how much is at stake.

Sir, all advanced economies face the same challenges that we face in trying to keep up with the rapidly changing manpower needs of their economies. And many have already begun to recognise that the solution lies in preparing and revisiting the skills adequacy of their workforce, so that it keeps up with the evolving demands of the global economic competition.

In order to improve their preparedness, advanced economies regularly make projections about their skills needs, appropriately harnessing the technology that is available today. A picture of where the skills deficits are can be obtained which, no matter how imperfect, gives the modern advanced workforce a good sense of what the skills landscape would look like in the near future. For Singapore, especially where the twin challenges of manpower shortages and skills deficits are never far from our minds, mapping the landscape of available skills will provide policymakers with an informed start to addressing the skills challenges of tomorrow.

Hence, I agree strongly with the characterisation Minister Heng Swee Keat offered last week of the situation we are in, where he pointed out, in his media interview, that the solution to the problem we face should also be contained in the very technology which is causing the destructive challenges.

In short, Sir, I believe that the crux of the on-going industry transformation efforts is workforce skills. The imperative for the workforce is to keep as much ahead of the curve as possible against the competition, leaving them in no doubt that even if tomorrow's jobs appear to be created, the Singapore workforce of today is prepared to be the first off the mark to acquire the necessary skills to fill them.

Despite the scale of the challenge, there is room for cautious optimism. The SkillsFuture movement is providing a much needed focus on the skills issues. As the information in the skills framework is augmented, understanding that individual workers have not just the challenges that confront them in skills acquisition, the opportunities that are open to all of us in the skills landscape should begin to crystallise.

Even though the Ministry of Education (MOE) is the one coordinating all these efforts through SkillsFuture Singapore, all Government Ministries and agencies have a role to play in this and I would urge each and everyone to accept the role on the skills endeavour entrusted upon them as leaders in all areas of skills development. The roles of Ministries, such as MOM, MTI, the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI), the Ministry of Finance and agencies, such as the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and the National Research Foundation, are clear but they must go beyond these natural lead agencies to include all others who have influence over shaping work attitudes and, therefore, work ethics.

Here, I would like to talk about a role that may not be as clear but, certainly, no less direct, and, that is, the one that is played by the Ministry of Defence(MINDEF) and the Singapore Armed Forces in leading the impressionable young minds in 21st century skills mastery and leadership. Skills training, in many ways, is part of what an organisation like MINDEF invested with heavy responsibilities for shaping young lives must dedicate itself to in order to stay relevant. As a small country, painfully aware of our natural limitations, there should, therefore, be no self-imposed limits to asserting the priority of progressive thinking but a need to pursue continuing skills improvements. This must naturally, therefore, begin with a 21st century military that should go beyond the call of duty in the pursuit of individual skills proficiency.

In conclusion, Sir, I would like to emphasise the need to ensure that equality of opportunity is something that every Singapore Citizen continues to have confidence in. Although income inequality is a legitimate concern, I would argue that we should focus on it not to the exclusion of the much more fundamental need to ensure equality of opportunity.

Singapore has strong and reliable institutions which provide opportunities for all segments of society to access basic social and municipal services, not to mention opportunities for social mobility. Equality of opportunity benefits everyone in the long term because it strengthens the social fabric and provides a sustainable basis for each and every generation to pursue prosperity and individual fulfillment.

Ultimately, better equality of opportunity should reduce income inequality in the long run but it cannot be something that can be done in a rush. Singapore has grown from strength to strength over more than 50 years because of focus on equality of opportunity when it comes to jobs, in particular. It is important to refresh and rejuvenate these efforts in the current industry transformation push and to continue to emphasise equality of opportunity in acquiring skills at every stage of our citizens' lives, regardless of whether it is in the schools, in National Service, in the workforce, in re-employment or even as a non-working member of society. It is almost no doubt that the days of mass job creation are over. We need to create a much more differentiated workforce, one that can confront, even if not completely overcome, challenges of inadequate skills coverage. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion.

3.35 pm

Mr Teo Ser Luck (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Motion. I agree with the President that we need to develop a vibrant economy by strengthening local companies, supporting startups and investing in technology. I also agree that we need to go through trials and tribulations before we reach that stage.

I learnt business the hard way because it is so dynamic. I can never get it right all the way and I still do not get it right all the time. I left Singapore in 1997, I lived overseas trying to do business in north Asia, Hong Kong, China, Thailand and India. And I was in the logistics business. I tried to sell warehouse space, but then that did not give me any winnings or contracts. So, I learnt to sell solutions. I realised that the Internet was buzzing and progressing really well. So, I learnt to develop a software. And I kept changing the software and refining it by listening to the customers, make more changes, but I never changed what my core solutions were. After about nearly nine months without any business, I got my first contract, a very small contract. But it taught me a lesson that nothing is perfect and, if you try to find the perfection, you can never get there.

So, that is how business succeeds. Business succeeds in its imperfection: finding gaps, filling them and succeed in its imperfection. This needs trial and error and refining. But that also taught me that you cannot have one size fits all for all customers. You just look at our coffee shops and the coffee. It has got kopi c kosong, kopi, kopi o siu tai, lots to choose from. Every customer has different preferences. So, business succeeds not because it is perfect but because it is imperfect or because it impacts.

Our policies and programmes will never be perfect. But it must impact and we have to get it right; we have to get the broad directions right. It has to go through the trials and tribulations but it will never be good enough. So, we have to keep reviewing it, keep refining it. Many of our policies and programmes are well-intentioned. They have the right objectives but, at implementation, we need to improve a lot more. For example, the objectives of the Industry Transformation Map, are good. I think it will help if we achieve the outcome that is desired but, somehow, the implementation needs to be improved. The Industry Transformation Map (ITM) plans have not been widespread throughout the different sectors of industry. The impact is felt at some level but not felt throughout.

The broad direction was that we expect the industry to change but that needs a good number of enterprises to undergo radical changes. Radical changes include business model change, workforce skills upgrade, product redesign, internationalisation, so that the sector can become more productive and competitive. You need critical mass for the whole sector to transform and to change.

But in every sector, businesses are at their different phases of development. I look at it in three different broad categories in these phases of development: innovation, consolidation and expansion. Within that, they are of different sizes, shapes, forms and different phases and they are built upon different types of structures. ITM within a sector cannot be a one size fits all. ITM can also not be about disbursing grants or transformation through technology. Not all businesses can be transformed through technology.

So, in reality, many of the businesses will tell you? "Before I transform, before I invest in innovation, where is the business volume? Where do I get the contracts?" So, yes, innovation is critical. But, more importantly is commercialising or realising the gains of what they have innovated. Companies will have to compete internationally but there will be some that can never be competing internationally or go beyond the shores of Singapore, they will fall by the wayside.

So, maybe ITMs have to go beyond work skills development or company capability development into opening up more paths and business opportunities. That calls for more effective trade missions and also a more successful way to hunt as a pack. As the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) Chairman for Trade and Industry, Mr Liang Eng Hwa mentioned we need to hunt as a pack. But our success rate of hunting as a pack needs to be improved, too. We also have to give local companies a chance to work on public sector projects and contracts. And with real business volume and in a tight labour situation, we can rest assured that the companies will have to become productive, to innovate and to transform.

Businesses need to play its own part because the responsibility cannot be shouldered by the Government alone. They have to make changes and take steps. Some will succeed, many would not. In that sense, we will see business closures and that is part and parcel of the process to help the sector become stronger. And when there are business closures, there is consolidation. It is part and parcel of building a stronger industry.

So, the ITM strategy is not just about skills nor innovation; it may also be facilitating this consolidation, having a broad view about what the sector should do and, also in this consolidation process, transition to workforce within the sector, change their jobs, you can skill them, skill them differently so they have jobs all across different sectors. Some sectors may slow down in order to scale quickly and we should facilitate that. Sometimes, when a sector shrinks, it may not be such a bad thing to happen so that they can come back stronger; and stronger companies can rise up.

Let us also clear barriers to business. There are some low-hanging fruits: administrative costs. Administratively, you cannot deny some of the daily issues businesses face. The process that companies have to deal with when applying for support and grants, we need to streamline that a lot further. The administrative fees across different departments that add to the business cost; maybe we should review that. Let us help to review and, if possible, reduce them. I believe what we can do is not to add to the burden of the businesses. Small or big businesses, they do create jobs.

That is why Enterprise Singapore (ESG) plays a very critical role. Now that it is a one-stop agency for businesses, I hope that the ease of access increases. Hopefully, the integration is successful and they do not behave like International Enterprise Singapore and SPRING again but, really, as one, one-stop shop. ESG needs to identify industries that require consolidation, expansion or innovation but not all industries should be managed in the same manner. Not all 23 sectors that have launched their ITMs should be managed in the same mode.

As I have mentioned, transformation is either innovation, consolidation or expansion. And once it is clear whether a company or a sector requires either of the different stages, Government support would then be holistic. If we leave it to the market, there will be inefficiencies. ESG should take a more active role in this process to strengthen companies and help them internationalise or consolidate. It should take a more proactive approach than to just leave it to the trade associations. Trade associations are a helpful vehicle but trade associations have their limitations.

That said, I would also urge trade associations to step forward, especially those which have received help, but, sometimes what they can do is far from what we expect. They will do their best but there are limitations and there are different interests. ESG should continue to work hand-in-hand with them, take a more proactive role. Trade associations must continue to play their part but make an effort to galvanise the industry, the sector, make that a priority, beyond just asking for grants or subsidies.

As for grants and schemes, we can streamline the grants and schemes across different Ministries. I am sure between MOM, MCI and MTI or other Ministries that offer grants or subsidies to businesses, there are many of them out there, you can streamline them. Maybe it should be streamlined under the ITM for each sector. That way, there is a better chance for businesses to gain a better understanding, awareness and access to these grants and schemes with ease, and the effect and the impact can be more widespread.

I also believe that the startup environment is important because startups, although they are young companies, inject new life into the economy. In Singapore, the startup environment has certainly progressed – Launchpad, Block 71 and many, many other pockets of development in Singapore.

We see many more Singaporeans launching their new businesses, especially in the tech area. But the reality of setting up a business is that it is not easy and failures are more than successes.

Startups achieve both social and economic objectives so we have to continue to support them. They can influence a culture; inject new hope and new life into the economy. We can focus on growing startups but create the ecosystem and environment, not just giving out grants or subsidies; create opportunities for them.

First, let us be optimistic about startups. Being optimistic about startups means giving them hope, giving them encouragement but not unrealistic to think that the startups in Singapore can become unicorns. Most of them would not become unicorns with the size of Singapore's market. Our market has its limitations. We can start and develop our solutions here. It is a springboard but you definitely have to launch your business or startup almost immediately overseas – markets beyond Singapore – to commercialise what you have developed with a chance to succeed or survive.

Secondly, in this digital economy, we have to learn as quickly as possible what our community needs. It requires a culture that encourages people to try things and test things and fail. And when it comes to launching a product, imperfect is perfect – we cannot wait until perfection. And that is business. Every entrepreneur walks this fine line between what is fixable and what is fatal. The important thing is that they push their experimentation to the limit but we need to embrace failure for success.

The Government and private sector must work together, come together to help to build this environment and a culture with a vibrant ecosystem, enhance the platforms for people to start and offer equal opportunities to startups, not just the first-time startups, but serial entrepreneurs as well – those who have failed first time, failed second time and trying it again. Allow more of them to bid for public sector projects and give them a chance to have a go at it. This, in turn, will encourage entrepreneurial dare, thinking and doing.

The Singapore economy needs a new vision, a new direction. I support the initiatives of Minister Chan Chun Sing in developing Singapore into a data hub, attracting a good mix of talent, focusing on strengthening the local sector to become globally competitive and relevant. We have to know where we are going and how to get there. It has to be a new direction that can sustain us for the next decade and we need a sense of where we are every step of the way.

But we cannot manage what we cannot measure. We probably need new indicators to measure economic growth and success. And, what does that mean? We need to better reflect how our economy and local businesses are doing, and whether growth and wealth that we have created have really benefited people’s lives, jobs and wages.

One thing is for sure: what brought us here can no longer take us further. Let us move forward with a new vision, direction and strategy. With that, I support the Motion.

3.48 pm

Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, I thank the President for her Address, and I pledge my support for the Motion. In her speech, the President spoke about the need for Singaporeans to work closely with the new generation of 4G leaders to write our future chapters.

We are on the cusp of a new era. Jobs automation, re-skilling, cashless payments, smart technology and so forth are becoming a part of our lives, regardless of whether we are resistant to it. A renewal of leadership comes at an opportune moment. In the meantime, citizens, too, must partner this new Government and renew ourselves, so that we can navigate the new complexities as one.

Mr Chan Chun Sing mentioned the need for connectivity and the importance of talent for Singapore as well as saying that we need to make 300 million friends and fans. Given our lack of a hinterland and mineral resources, it is inevitable that Singapore will have to use new technologies, platforms and connectivity channels to overcome these constraints and build demand for our products and services. Globally, this will come fast and furious, unlike what we have seen in past phases of global industrialisation and technological advances. Smart technology and automation save us a lot of time and effort which we can then use to indulge in other pursuits. For the less mobile and elderly, such technologies enable them to lead more independent and fuller lives and this is good news for an ageing society.

Yet, because new technologies are emerging and evolving every day, there is only a short window of time to adapt. Those who are unable to catch up, particularly the seniors and the poor and less educated, get left behind and further behind. This causes existing inequalities to worsen.

Sir, in moving forward, it is absolutely crucial that we patch up these cracks before they turn into chasms. At the same time as this is happening, many are concerned about the changing nature of work. The amount of self-employment is increasing, along with the fragmentation of labour into microjobs. So, is it contingent that work, such as self-employment or gig work and the disappearance of salaried employment likely to become the norm? I do not think so. I would think it would be a gradual move towards more people working independently and not the complete disappearance of salaried jobs.

In this ecosystem of rapidly changing technology and evolving nature of employment and with tighter global competition, the labour market of the future will be somewhat tight and will get tighter. So, it is essential to ensure workers' well-being in search of jobs, whether salaried employment or self-employment. The state or Government must be the guarantor of a level playing field between organisational forms. And one thing is certain: we will need to rethink our labour laws and regulations and the whole work environment – training, retirement and unemployment insurance – in a world of rapid technological and organisational change. This is even more important as the only real resource we have is our people, our talents.

I firmly believe that, in the future, countries that can attract the most productive people in the digital economy will disrupt the value chain in every sector and appropriate immense wealth, while other countries will have only the scraps. The mobility of talented people will lead many of these wealth creators to migrate to countries that offer the best conditions, including the lowest tax. So, countries not taking part in this global competition for talent will not be able to redistribute wealth to the poor, because the poor will be all that they have. So, as such, it is inevitable that Singapore will have to be more flexible to global talent to make our economy more vibrant and to, surprisingly, make us more inclusive too.

To achieve many of these things, Singaporeans will need good jobs; jobs that will give them good incomes to sustain their desired livelihood; jobs that are fulfilling and challenge them to grow. Unfortunately, some of them, despite being capable and well-qualified, are impeded due to discrimination against circumstances that cannot be helped.

The President highlighted the need to continue to strive for a more caring and inclusive society and the need to tackle inequality vigorously, she said. She had mentioned the need to provide the right additional support to those needing it – in housing, education, skills training and employment – so that meritocracy works well. Only then can everyone do well through hard work, talent and skills, regardless of their backgrounds.

But for many people and, for the future, the right question is not whether there will still be work. The real question is whether there will be enough jobs paying decent wages. Most individuals want to be useful to society and work, remunerated or not, is one way for them to feel so; employment is one way we construct the social fabric. Perhaps, people will be prepared to accept lower pay in return for this social bond. In the short term, however, the destruction of jobs is costly for those who lose them. The acceleration of creative destruction raises three questions: how can workers, with jobs or not, be protected? How can we prepare ourselves for this new world through education and regulatory changes? How are our societies going to adapt? Burying our heads in the sand is not a strategy.

This brings me to the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) and I have raised this quite a number of times, including in my maiden speech in Parliament. Over the years, TAFEP has relied on a range of methods to protect employee rights and combat workplace discrimination and inequality. It does so by encouraging and supporting employers who are able and willing to adopt progressive workplace practices. TAFEP would refer complaints to MOM if further investigations are warranted. It then works with employers to change their practices and blacklists those who are unwilling to comply.

Understandably, it is not possible to completely weed out workplace discrimination, just as it is impossible to completely stamp out discrimination in any community. To prove discrimination is challenging, there are laws in place that employers must comply with. Equipping TAFEP with legal powers to prosecute errant employers is something Singaporeans have openly wished for.

Meanwhile, preferential treatment of foreigners is also another common grievance. According to TAFEP, it remained the top gripe of Singaporean workers for five years in a row and made up a third of the 213 grievances lodged in 2015. On the flip side, there are also claims that Singaporeans turn down jobs because they feel the pay is too low, thus leaving jobs to foreign nationals who are willing to work at lower wages.

So, my questions are: has any research been done on how true these claims are? If there is some truth in them, how can we resolve these? Are companies doing enough to integrate foreign employees so that they do not gravitate to their own nationalities? And should we also investigate whether employers are offering reasonable salaries that match the required job scope?

In a gig economy where job security is on the decline, there is certainly going to be more frustration and panic among a generation that had become accustomed to having stable jobs. Upskilling is certainly important and a personal responsibility, but we also must give Singaporeans the assurance that they will get jobs if they work for it. So, I urge the Minister for Manpower – and I think it is somewhat highlighted in the Addendum for MOM – to consider giving TAFEP legal powers to act on errant employers. It is necessary to go beyond curtailing work passes to penalise employers who are blatantly flouting discrimination laws. And I have heard from employees who have given up on legal action against employers because it is too expensive and troublesome.

In the US, for example, the equivalent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is responsible for enforcing the federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee. The commission pursues litigation against errant employers who are found to be guilty of discrimination offences. Similarly, in Australia, the Fair Work Ombudsman does the same thing. It has the power to initiate litigation against a national system of employers for contravening the Fair Work Act.

In Singapore, we recognise the importance and effectiveness of a tripartite approach towards resolving workplace discrimination issues. As such, TAFEP is deserving of more powers to strengthen its capabilities. I hope this can slowly be part of the medium to long-term plan to ensure the ecosystem of inclusivity which can be further enhanced and all our talents can be maximised fully, regardless of an individual's physical disability, gender or ethnicity. Indeed, Singaporeans want to live in a fair and just society, one based on meritocracy but, at the same time, strives to leave no one behind. I strongly believe a stronger TAFEP is needed so that meritocracy works well and would go a long way to allay fears faced by Singaporeans and Singaporean jobseekers in a tight labour market environment.

Disruptions caused by automation are another concern of mine. According to the UK think-tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), middle- and lower-income workers are likely to lose their jobs to machines. Low-skilled roles could be completely phased out. Our Government has rightly been encouraging employers to send their employees for training to acquire new skills to manage the new technologies. With large-scale retrenchment a possible problem from automation, I think it is important that authorities also consider new guidelines that make it necessary for companies to help their workers to remain employable. The IPPR also suggests that automation can result in higher profits at the expense of employees' salaries, and thus, new guidelines for additional protection of workers would be necessary with the use of emerging technologies by businesses.

But how can companies help employees without it being an additional burden on the companies? The Government may want to consider setting up a Future Ready Fund beyond the existing SkillsFuture Study Award for employers that we have now, where corporates and SMEs can tap. This Future Ready Fund can be used specifically to prepare our workforce in areas where they can be retrained or reskilled to meet the changes in the job market. For example, an SME can tap on it to focus on educating staff on being future-ready by having a monthly digitalisation online course, for example, for a start, and then focus on the relevant job-related needs. It needs to be sector-specific. Company management may be better suited to guide the type of challenges and opportunities needed and tailor a future-ready programme for their employees.

Next and, finally, on fintech. Mr Speaker, Singapore is on the right track to embrace it. In ASEAN, we have the largest sector, of which, 490 fintech companies that we have – the top few of our most well-funded fintech companies deal with cryptocurrency platforms and exchanges. I do think it is time to start looking into policies legalising and regulating it.

Switzerland has earned the reputation of having the friendliest and most welcoming environment for companies and tech firms when it comes to cryptocurrency regulations. BitCoin is considered legal tender in the country and it is a hotbed for blockchain-based companies and advisory services. Cryptocurrencies are legal tender in Switzerland. I think we have good potential to be a leader in fintech solutions in the Asia region. I am pleased to note that some startups are offering their own cryptocurrencies, using initial coin offering (ICO) as a fund-raising platform. And recently, there was even a fintech firm launching an ICO advisory centre. I think the Switzerland model could serve as a useful reference and guide towards possible liberation of regulations in regard to embracing the cryptocurrency culture in Singapore.

But fintech is more than cryptocurrencies. It is also about mobile banking, investments, online wealth management and so forth. And I hope more Singaporean fintech startups will think beyond cryptocurrencies and venture into other areas of fintech. The MAS has launched several grants to support fintech ventures, consolidated under StartupSG. And, while the focus appears to be on startups, I hope more assistance can also be given to companies to create and expand their own financial technologies, such as cashless payment apps and online purchasing platforms.

Mr Speaker, I would like to conclude that it is prudent that we stay abreast with technological developments in the industry so that we are a vibrant and connected city of opportunity. Our 4G leaders, I know, are well attuned to this need. At the same time, technology potentially causes a digital divide between the rich and the poor, adding yet another level of social disparity.

We can play a part by introducing more teeth to TAFEP. Global inequality is on the rise, according to the World Inequality Report. We must be mindful to ensure that wealth is fairly distributed, that the poor continue to get their needs met and they can go on to obtain skills and education to support their families and, in turn, our economy. We are at the cusp of a technological revolution and we must work doubly hard to make sure no one gets left behind.

4.00 pm

Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied): Sir, the President outlined the tasks ahead of the nation in five groups of priorities: securing a place in the world for Singapore, including our region; building a well-connected world-class city for Singaporeans; developing a vibrant economy with more opportunities for workers; forging a cohesive, caring and inclusive society; and nurturing an identity we are all proud of.

Sir, I have a small suggestion. I believe we can aid our efforts in each of these areas, to greater or lesser degrees, by an increased focus on our school curriculum on teaching Bahasa Melayu. It is our national language and a regional language. It is rooted in our geography, in our history. It is not only important to our sense of who we are and where we are rooted in the world; it is also important to securing our future in the region and share in the growth of the region.

Could we help those students who do not currently learn Malay in school to attain some basic level of proficiency? I know our children have a lot to do already in school, including learning English, Chinese or Tamil to ever higher levels of proficiency. Many Members have spoken in this House on the importance of such learning and they are right.

But Bahasa Melayu is our national language. I believe it would be to the good if all our children could learn it to some basic level of conversational fluency. Such learning will be good for the cognitive and intellectual development of our children. It will also protect and preserve our multi-culturalism and promote national integration and a sense of identity.

We currently have conversational third language programmes for Malay at the primary school level as enrichment, but not as part of the regular curriculum. As learning languages is best done when young, could we look into making the conversational Bahasa Melayu programme part of the syllabus for our primary school students who do not otherwise learn Malay, perhaps included as part of the regular curriculum for every primary school student, but without the pressure of exams?

Sir, the President reminds us that the Singapore Bicentennial in 2019 will be an occasion to trace our roots and draw inspiration for the journey ahead. We will reflect on what it means to be Singaporean and on the common values and beliefs that bind us together.

The President says that “our diverse cultures and traditions are now interwoven…we have succeeded in nurturing a distinct Singapore identity.”

Sir, I am not as confident as all that but I believe that we will be taking a step firmly in that direction when we make the learning of our national language a bigger part of our national education.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, Sir, the President said that in the last 52 years, through the education system, we adopted a common working language in English that enabled our diverse communities to interact with one another and succeeded in nurturing a distinct Singapore identity and that we have come far.

I suggest that we complement this nation building effort in the next 50 years and enable, through our education system, all non-Malay students to study Bahasa Melayu, our national language, to basic levels of proficiency.

The President said that the focus of the future work before us would include the following: to work with regional partners to strengthen ASEAN centrality and unity, maintain an open and inclusive regional order and strengthen our position internationally, including in our region; to encourage local businesses to stay relevant and venture into oversea markets, including our regional markets; strengthen the education of different age groups, promote proactive lifelong learning among our people and be adventurous to venture beyond our shores.

Learning the national language will help us achieve these goals.

In the 21st year of the reign of the Qing Emperor Guangxu, Li Zhongyu recorded that Malay was commonly spoken in Southeast Asian islands and the Chinese born and bred and living in Singapore had all learnt the Malay language. In other words, modern language, approximately a hundred years ago, all Chinese living in Singapore could speak some Malay with some facility.

Former Member of Parliament Mr Lim Huan Boon was a pioneer in encouraging the learning of Malay among Chinese Singaporeans. He took part in and won the 1963 Legislative Assembly Elections in the Bukit Merah constituency and represented his constituency in the Malaysian Parliament as one of the Members representing Singapore.

In Mr Lim’s words applied to today’s Singapore, Bahasa Melayu is our national language, it is an important tool of nation building and promotes the communication among the three main races in Singapore: the Chinese, Malays and Indians. Learning Malay can help promote cultural exchange among our different communities and it is the duty of every Singaporean to do so.

Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.40 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 4.08 pm until 4.40 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.40 pm.

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair]

Debate on President's Address

Debate resumed.

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, I declare my interest as the Chief Executive of ACRES, a civil society organisation. Sir, our President spoke about the importance of fostering a compassionate and caring society and a giving society where everyone lends a helping hand.

Beyond the dollars and cents, renewing our economy, strengthening our fiscal position, which is important to our survival, the heartware of this nation is equally important. How we care for one another, how we make sure no one is left behind, how we speak up for a better Singapore and how we have a culture of giving are crucial in the next chapters of the Singapore story.

My late father taught me to always give and, in his eulogy, I said "Daddy gave more than he received and that ultimately was his strongest philosophy in life. A philosophy I hold dear to my heart and one I will impart to my daughter as well." It was with this philosophy that I entered politics and the quote I used in my candidate video was: "There is beauty in giving more than receiving".

This spirit of giving is very much alive in Singapore and I see it in my work as a civil society activist for the past 17 years and as a Member of Parliament for the past three years. I see it almost every week when I meet my Legislative Assistants. Perhaps the most common question I am asked now is how on earth do I speak up so much in Parliament. How do I find the time to research and draft so many speeches and questions? For this, I have to thank Melissa. Melissa has a full-time job, is actively involved in humanitarian work and is also my Chief Legislative Assistant. If there is just one word to describe her, it is that she is amazing. But she does not do this alone. She and my six other Legislative Assistants – Charmaine, Karen, Su, Roy, Jing Ling and Rachel – embody the spirit of speaking up and this spirit of giving. And, like Melissa, they, too, are amazing. Despite having full-time commitments, they give their time and energy towards the Singapore cause. They care deeply about our future and, most importantly, want to play a role in shaping it.

This spirit of giving is also very much alive in Nee Soon East. Tan Meng, my CCC Chairman and also my left-hand, left-leg, right-leg, right-hand man, exemplifies this. He leads a team of dedicated volunteers and has been a grassroots leader for 26 years now. He serves with his heart and handles every feedback and every case so passionately, so meticulously and with compassion. And he does this every single day as a volunteer. Twenty-six years ago, he was curious and wanted to see how he can help improve the community and so he joined the CCC. Twenty-six years later, he looks as young as ever; perhaps the secret of looking young is to volunteer more! And I know he will volunteer more and continue to serve till his last breath.

Siti Durriah is equally committed and I first met her when I was visiting a refugee camp in Aceh. I met this young lady who was so passionate about helping people that she used her precious time off from work and her salary to volunteer to help others. A physiotherapist by training, she was in Aceh to conduct developmental assessments for refugee children and teach them English.

Sir, it really has been a privilege working with Melissa, Tan Meng and Siti, Singaporeans who embody the spirit of giving, who volunteer to give their time to help others. And there are others who are so devoted that they have chosen to make a career out of it.

I recently met Dr Sudha Nair when I joined President Halimah to open Safe Spaces, a Child Protection Specialist Centre run by PAVE. The stories they shared with us that day were heart-wrenching. The children made cards for President Halimah and, in one card, the child wrote about how she watched her father strangle her mother. It takes a very strong heart to be able to handle all these abuse cases every day but Sudha spoke with so much passion and so much determination. I thought this Executive Director must be quite new to this as she was so fresh, not jaded at all and was bursting with positivity. But she has actually been a social worker for more than 30 years now. We are fortunate to have someone like her, devoting her time towards ending family violence.

We are also fortunate to have Kalai who devotes his time to end animal cruelty. He has worked at ACRES for the past seven years now. He was previously a volunteer with ACRES before I conned him, I mean convinced him, to join ACRES full-time. He took a pay cut to pursue his passion. He took on a job where the office hours are 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

A lot of animals are indebted to him, from otters to owls, from pythons to pigeons and, most recently, a dolphin. The recent dolphin rescue near Bedok jetty was perhaps the best example of his level of commitment. He spent hours searching for that wild dolphin which needed our help. His hard work paid off and he managed to find and free the dolphin from the fish nets the dolphin was entangled in. He gave that dolphin a second chance at life.

Sir, there are many, many more stories to share. So many more civil society activists I have met who work steadfastly to feed one mouth, educate one mind and comfort one soul. The question is how do we have more Melissas, Tan Mengs, Sitis, Sudhas and Kalais? How do we support their efforts more and strengthen this Spirit of Giving here in Singapore?

Volunteerism is increasing steadily. The National Volunteer & Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) found that one in three Singaporeans volunteered in 2016, up from one in 10 in year 2000. And we have SG Cares, a brilliant initiative to increase acts of kindness and volunteerism.

To further increase volunteerism and sustain it, perhaps we first need to take a step back and study the effectiveness of our school-based volunteer programmes. It is important as that lays the foundation in our youths for volunteerism. Mr Kwan Jin Yao raised several points about this, including, "To what extent does involvement in VIA, Community Involvement Programme (CIP) and service-learning projects affect whether students continue volunteering after graduation? Are students who chalked up a high number of VIA or CIP hours more likely to volunteer for a social cause after leaving school?"

Ms Tan Rong Ying's view was that, "It is important to reconsider the rewards and mandatory aspect of volunteerism in schools so as to increase and make clearer students' intrinsic motivations. This could encourage them to willingly volunteer more often during their school days and after graduation, thereby promoting a culture of active volunteerism."

There are good VIA programmes, like the one at Hougang Secondary. Rather than introducing volunteer work through ad hoc projects, at Hougang Secondary, it is a way of school life, a life of volunteerism that is inculcated from the very beginning and they even get the parents involved. There are lots of lessons to learn from them.

But at the end of the day, I do hope that MOE can review our school-based volunteer programmes and see if there is still a need to make it compulsory and provide rewards.

I also hope that we can consider giving people more time to volunteer. Time is perhaps the most valuable commodity in today's world and lack of time is the most common reason given for not volunteering. NVPC has found that volunteerism rates drop once people enter the workforce.

To ensure the flames of volunteerism is not extinguished by the demands of work, employers are a key partner in building a nation of volunteers. We need to follow the positive example set by Salesforce Singapore, which offers seven days of volunteer leave annually. They have a particularly successful volunteer scheme with all of their employees making use of their volunteer leave in 2016 and clocking in more than 11,000 hours.

I hope the Public Service, as the largest employer, can take the lead by extending the one-day volunteer leave currently given to public servants and consider allowing them to use their leave in blocks of hours instead of full days.

Sir, we can also strengthen this spirit of giving by strengthening our engagement and collaboration with civil society. As John Mackey nicely put it, "A healthy society rests on three pillars: business, government and civil society or non-profits. Each has a distinct and important role to play and all three need to work together synergistically to create the most value for society".

Given the insights that civil society can bring to the table with their ground experience, I hope they can be better represented on the Boards of our Statutory Boards. As Prof Tommy Koh stated, "When we appoint people to boards, we can also appoint challengers who are subversive and who have alternative points of view. That's the kind of cultural change we want to see. It makes Singapore stronger, not weaker".

I do not believe that we hold the key to the best ideas. Rather, the best ideas are out there. I hope that we can build more regular channels for dialogue between the Government and civil society. Already, there have been many instances of fruitful dialogues. One example is the roundtable discussions that MEWR conducted to engage green groups to galvanise action and efforts for the Year of Climate Action. Participants shared with me that they came out of the session with greater optimism and a better understanding of the Government's efforts to tackle climate change.

Another recent instance was IMDA's consultations with filmmakers on amendments to the Films Act. IMDA had extended the consultation period upon request and had taken on board the suggestions by filmmakers in the final wording of the Bill. Jasmine Ng, one of the filmmakers I worked with, commented in a Facebook post that she "really does appreciate that this engagement with IMDA and with you and the other MPs has been authentic". I was particularly struck by her comment that, "we felt that we were heard and understood, even though we may variously disagree on some points".

Indeed, even where there is disagreement over the outcome, there is greater acceptance of the end result when civil society understands the reasons for the Government's actions and policies. As such, I hope that the Ministries consider making consultations with civil society organisations a regular part of the policy- and law-making process.

Sir, recently, I was at an informal dialogue session between public servants and civil society activists. It was a beautiful session to say the least. Both sides gained a better understanding of each other's concerns, challenges and constraints. Most of all, both sides realised that we are all on the same side, on the same boat.

Sir, a stronger civil society will mean a stronger Singapore and a stronger spirit of giving. Ultimately, we can fire up and mobilise the spirit and energy of Singaporeans if we engage more, consider more alternative points of views, empower more, inspire more and ensure people have time to give back when they are mobilised.

Sir, there truly is beauty in giving more than receiving and this strong culture of giving is very much needed. Let me end with a quote, as always. Nelson Mandela said, "There can be no greater gift than that of giving one’s time and energy to help others without expecting anything in return". I was going to end with that quote but then I realise that, actually, while we do not expect anything in return, sometimes we do stumble upon something valuable. Sometimes, we find true love.

And this was the case for Joseph and Jing Yu. Jing Yu was volunteering at ACRES in 2012 when she met Joseph who was working at ACRES. They both gave their heart and soul towards helping animals and they also gave their hearts to each other. They got married two Saturdays ago.

And, so, for all the singles out there, start volunteering and you might find your true love. Better still, ACRES has quite a good track record, so volunteer with ACRES and you will find your true love while helping to strengthen this spirit of giving. Sir, I support the Motion of thanks to the President.

4.52 pm

The Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M): Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for the opportunity to participate in the debate. I support the Motion.

We are living in exciting times in a region full of challenges. I am confident that Singapore will be able to handle these challenges, harness these opportunities and thrive. Or as the President has put it, Singapore will remain exceptional. In the same way, we became exceptional at dealing with our water challenges through perserverance and innovation, even creating new jobs and exporting solutions abroad.

As we forge ahead, we must hold on to the sound principles that have guided us in our journey thus far. One of these is meritocracy which, I believe, is important for us to revisit once in a while. In fact, it would not be wrong to say this was one of the values upon which Independent Singapore was founded, powerful ideal which Mr Lee Kuan Yew and our Pioneer leaders believed in.

What is meritocracy? At its core, meritocracy is a principle of allocation. Allocation of resources, allocation of opportunities and allocation of rewards.

A society founded on meritocracy makes these allocations based on capabilities and efforts, not on race, not on gender, not on your family connections. When working properly, it is the fairest allocation system imaginable.

But meritocracy is not a perfect system and does not always work properly, especially when it is a narrow and brittle one; one which only focuses on outcome or engenders ruthless competition, at the expense of cooperation; or one where those who have more at the starting line monopolise success over generations.

Over time, this will increase inequality and polarise society into the "haves" and "have-nots" – distinct groups living different lives in different worlds. Over time, the marginalised will lose trust in institutions and others in the community. At the root of it is this: it does get harder for them to succeed and, eventually, it becomes impossible. Slowly and quietly, society will break up from within. When that happens, we will not be able to overcome together to face challenges that call for national unity.

Indeed, we have seen worrying consequences of rising social inequality overseas. "Drain the swamp" was a key slogan in the last US election. As Americans found social mobility hindered, the American Dream – to be middle-income, to own a home and to raise a family – was no longer within grasp for some. It consequently saw the US retreat from free trade in a bid to revive the American Dream, an economic nuclear option which does not address the domestic causes of the problem. Some in Europe are turning towards extreme right-wing parties amidst anxieties over immigration, at a time when the struggling masses feel the squeeze for resources and space and their lack of progress. Asian countries have not been spared either. The same could easily happen in Singapore.

That is why we must grow a Singapore brand of meritocracy. We must balance our economic and social policies. We cannot drive our economic policies on fierce pursuit of economic gains; but neither can we design our social policies with bleeding hearts. Singapore's brand of meritocracy is characterised by three ingredients: first, the successful giving back to society; second, common spaces and experiences for all Singaporeans; and third, support from the Government.

Mr Deputy Speaker, meritocracy can only be moral when those who take the most from the system also put back the most.

I quote from an address entitled "The Ten Suggestions" at Princeton University in 2013 by then-US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke: "A meritocracy is a system in which the people who are the luckiest in their health and genetic endowment; luckiest in terms of family support, encouragement and probably income; luckiest in their educational and career opportunities; and luckiest in so many other ways difficult to enumerate – these are the folks who reap the largest rewards."

It is tempting for those who have succeeded to attribute their success solely to their own capabilities and efforts. There is even a term in psychology for this: "attribution bias". However, if we are successful, we should realise how lucky we are and not forget the support society has given us: a good education, a safe and secure environment and the mental and emotional support. Remember to give back.

In our meritocratic society, we must ensure that the spirit of giving back is most apparent in the successful. This starts at home. I read in a Dads-for-Life article where Mr Gerard Ee related how his father, the late Dr Ee Peng Liang and Singapore's father of charity, "transmitted good values through word and action". The Ee family lived in a lower income neighbourhood at Geylang Lorong 13, and Senior Ee organised annual toy-giveaways at his home for children in the neighbourhood. Junior Ee and his brothers were in charge of packing the toys. And while this happened 50 years ago, Gerard still remembers how the children so looked forward to receiving the toys. Gerard continues his father's spirit of giving back. He served as Chairman of the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) from 2005 to 2012, having responded to a call to help NKF get back on its feet. This was even after he had retired from active volunteering to take a deserved break.

This spirit also lives on in Mr Mohamed Abdul Jaleel, who recently launched the S M Jaleel Foundation. And in the philanthropic families of the late Dr Lee Kong Chian and Syed Omar Aljunied.

We, too, are successful in our own ways. Share our time, talents and treasures with those in need. As employers, uplift wages of our employees. As colleagues, support those with care-giving responsibilities. Everybody can join the SG Cares movement to play a part and give back. Be kind to our fellow Singaporeans in their daily lives.

The question is: will the new generation in Singapore, some of whom will become very wealthy in record time in new areas, such as tech, have the same spirit of giving as our Pioneers? And will the children of our new well-heeled, who have access to the best education in the world, still give time to help uplift the rest of us?

What is clear, though, is that only when the successful give back will society accept, rather than envy, their success. And that is because success that benefits others is success which we all can be grateful for. This is how meritocracy can be moral and not just a method of allocating resources: when the successful demonstrate a sense of duty to society, when the successful share the fruits of success with others, instead of hoarding the gains for themselves.

This is, indeed, why our Public Service model succeeds. Our most capable are awarded with prestigious scholarships – no small sums from public coffers – to pursue their education at the best universities all over the world. Because they dedicate their best to Public Service, everyone in society benefits. We are fortunate to have good people who decided on a Public Service career, rather than more lucrative fields, because the Public Service offers them greater meaning.

And society has been the better for it because the best of our Civil Service know, as President Bush Senior put it, and I quote, "There is but one just use of power, and it is to serve people".

Whether the outcome of meritocracy is the accumulation of wealth or authority, it will only function morally when those who are rewarded find ways to benefit others and help others succeed too. This is how we can narrow our social distance, even as we improve the Gini coefficient. It is, as Bernanke puts it, "The only way for even a putative meritocracy to hope to pass ethical muster, to be considered fair, is if those who are the luckiest in all of those respects also have the greatest responsibility to work hard, to contribute to the betterment of the world and to share their luck with others."

Mr Deputy Speaker, let me now talk about common spaces and experiences as one feature of Singapore's brand of meritocracy. No other country or city shares common spaces like Singapore. We live together in shared neighbourhoods, eat at the same hawker centres, exercise in the same parks and waterways, and bring our children to the same libraries to read. This is special. We must preserve this to ensure that every Singaporean has a stake in and a shared ownership of Singapore.

We do this so that there are places and spaces where our community can come together, regardless of race, language or religion, to enable daily interactions in as many ways as possible. But these common spaces are even more meaningful because they guarantee common access to quality public facilities and infrastructure for all.

Our most basic rental housing must, therefore, continue to provide tenants with a decent home. That is also why as the Government shapes our future urban landscape, it must distribute rental housing across the island and mix public and private housing more deliberately. This will ensure that the most needy among us, who have not done well yet in our meritocracy, are not deprived of access to good quality public facilities. The successful and yet-to-be successful will live equally far or near to new nodes of economic activity in Jurong and Punggol, to hawker centres, eldercare facilities and schools. Every Singaporean must play our role – resist the "not in my backyard" tendency to shove critical but undesirable facilities like funeral parlours behind rental blocks.

Another quality common space is schools. We must continue to provide the best teachers and educational resources to our heartland schools and maintain our motto of "Every School a Good School". Members may smirk at the mention of this motto. But it is a serious matter to remind ourselves to be thankful that we do not have a bifurcation where the elites send their children to expensive, private schools and the rest to poorly resourced ones. In fact, many of our best students in national examinations come from our heartland schools.

Our education policies must enable every Singaporean to pursue their aspirations and realise their potential, regardless of their family background, including those with special needs. Since Independence, our policies have attempted to equalise the opportunities for each generation, even as we know that we can never equalise outcomes. Indeed, we are one of the few cities in the world where parents have no qualms putting their children through pre-schools and Primary and Secondary schools where they live. That is part of our brand of meritocracy. Investing in quality education is our way of ensuring a fair and good start to our children's journey, whatever their background.

While some have the means to go overseas for studies, every Singaporean has the chance to receive a quality education at home. Everyone knows that their degrees and diplomas from our local institutions carry with them a world-class reputation.

Mr Deputy Speaker, my work at Singtel and in Public Service has taken me across the world. In every city, there are areas where the rich and successful live, with schools where only the wealthy and connected can afford to send their children to. And then, there are the areas which visitors are advised to avoid, typically where the low-income or new immigrants gather. Even when rich and poor neighbourhoods exist side by side, their inhabitants never cross paths. I am not talking of developing nations but of rich and wealthy ones. That is a failure of meritocracy that we have avoided and must never allow to take shape in our future.

Let me move on to the third ingredient. The Singapore brand of meritocracy must ensure that nobody is left behind. How can Government policies achieve this?

First, Government policies have to act as enablers, as ladders and bridges, to provide a fair chance for everyone to move up in society, not only across families of jobs, but also over time. The Government must, therefore, not allow meritocracy to reward narrowly, but instead broaden and make alternative routes available. As Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam once put it, "multiple peaks of excellence". And if I may add, "many chances of success".

Second, our policies must enable self-reliance by supporting and encouraging work. We must provide all Singaporeans with the opportunity to work and do well for themselves and their families, regardless of where they are within our system of meritocracy at that point of time. This empowers individuals and families and strengthens dignity and purpose.

But the Government cannot stop there. It has already recognised that the workforce must be ready for future opportunities, as their current skills could become redundant. We are investing in SkillsFuture to support the lifelong development of skills and knowledge, and ITMs to enable our workforce to seize opportunities in the future economy, a future that, as former Minister Lim Swee Say observed, will see workers transit "from one job in one career" to "many jobs in many careers". This will also ensure that our meritocracy does not become a static snapshot, but a dynamic one where everyone has the opportunity to reap success throughout his life journey. This recognises that potential is not just realised in school and provides the opportunity for late bloomers to realise new dreams at different stages of their lives.

Ultimately, it is trust between citizens and institutions that will strengthen the Singapore brand of meritocracy. To kindle this virtuous cycle, the Government must deliver on our policies and continue to actively and openly engage, except in matters that are sensitive, involving issues of security or commerce. Mr Deputy Speaker, allow me to continue in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Deputy Speaker, please allow me to put on record our highest appreciation to Dr Yaacob Ibrahim for his outstanding contributions as the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs for 16 years. We have truly benefited from his leadership during his tenure.

Mr Deputy Speaker, meritocracy has done much to shape the identity of the Malay/Muslim community in Singapore. Although our community has retained our religious beliefs and safeguarded the social values and graces of the Malays, it is meritocracy that gave us unique characteristics.

The main impact of meritocracy is that we have shifted from a feudal society that emphasises rank, titles and wealth that can be inherited, into a community that values someone in terms of educational achievement and career. We have become a community that builds hopes and dreams for the future because it opens the possibility of a better life. We do not simply submit to fate.

After 50 years of Independence, Singapore’s brand of meritocracy has resulted in achievements that our community can be proud of. The evidence is this: in 1980, only 2.3% of Malay residents attained post-secondary education and above. However, this figure increased steadily to almost 40% of Malay residents in 2015. This is the total figure comprising both the young and old.

If we look at today’s cohort, only 1% of Malay children do not complete 10 years of schooling and 94% of them attained post-Secondary education. At the University level, we have seen more Malays achieving First Class Honours each year. This is something to be proud of. They are our community’s latest assets and will become the stepping stone towards ensuring our future remains bright.

In the job market, we see more Malays in administration, managerial, professional and technical (PMET) jobs. This is an increase from over 7% of the total population in 1980 to more than 32% in 2015. The household income of Malays also increased six fold within 35 years, from 1980 to 2015.

Perhaps, there are those who always criticise these achievements because it is seen to be lagging behind other communities. But I feel pride instead because our achievements today are proof that we can succeed by making an effort and not by submitting ourselves to fate or being dependent on assistance. This is even more so when we look at the potential of the current cohort. We are the products of the system of meritocracy that does not side with any particular race or social status. Therefore, to those who succeed and gained everyone’s confidence, our achievements are genuine. In fact, the expertise of the Malays are recognised everywhere we work, because our passports are viewed the same way, it is as red as all others and as valuable.

Mr Deputy Speaker, we cannot afford to just be proud of today’s achievements and rest on our laurels. This is because there are three external factors that challenge us and we must overcome. Otherwise, these factors will impede our community’s progress in the future.

Firstly, the external elements that attempt to transform and influence how we lead our religious lives here.

To a certain extent, these elements have managed to erode our religious and cultural values as Malay/Muslims in this Archipelago as well as our Malay heritage that we should be proud of. These elements can also divide our community and even members of our families.

Here, the role of the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) in supporting the socio-religious life of local Muslims and interaction with Singapore’s multi-religious society, is an important one. We will strive to ensure that our local religious teachers are equally competent and as good as foreign religious preachers who may appear more glamorous. This is because the religious message must be effective and relevant to life in Singapore and should not merely be appealing to the listener.

Therefore, we must ensure that the Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS) continue to strengthen and be led by the Mufti’s Office and supported by our religious teachers, to accredit religious teachers so that teachings are conducted in line with Singapore’s way of life and context, without compromising basic Islamic values.

The second challenge is the economic disruptions that have become more frequent. The world is facing many uncertainties economically, socially and politically. These happen near and far. Challenges arise with the expansion of the economies of Asia and our region. Our current position as well as regional countries have changed and we are being challenged to the extent that they have morphed into our closest competitors. New technological disruptions will be more competitive and impactful, whether they come in the form of artificial intelligence (AI), robotics or the digital economy.

Our population is ageing further. Jobs disappear quickly and yesterday’s skills are not needed tomorrow.

On this aspect, MENDAKI can play an important role by tweaking its programmes. For students, MENDAKI will continue to ensure that they possess basic education and strengthen those with potential, as early as preschool. Therefore, MENDAKI will also collaborate with Government agencies and other Malay/Muslim bodies to focus on factors that cause our children’s education to be interrupted, especially when their families’ lives are disrupted.

This is because dysfunctional families would not just prevent our children from reaching their potential, but they will also be more likely to be involved in crime and drug abuse.

Since economic disruption can make a university degree to become invaluable or a particular skill to become unwanted in the blink of an eye, MENDAKI has also been busy thinking of ways for our community to live a culture of lifelong learning quickly and ready for change in terms of skills enhancement for the new economy, as well as grab opportunities that will come.

The third problem is the impact of extremism from foreign religious influences. It is not limited to just terrorism, because extreme behaviour have started to have links to exclusive behaviour, which can cause the Muslim community to isolate itself from the wider society. To a certain extent, it has already impeded the pace of integration between communities.

In facing those challenges, MESRA can also play an important role to ensure that our community remains in the mainstream. MESRA can play a proactive role so that our community has many opportunities to interact with all races in our daily lives and not just in school or at work.

This was how Singapore developed an integrated and harmonious society that interacts well with each other despite having different religions and cultures. At the same time, all of us know that the rights and responsibilities of our fellow citizens are not different at all. This is what makes us a cohesive society.

Therefore, MESRA must extend its reach so that it does not just focus on the language and cultural segment of the community. I would like MESRA to be further strengthened in order to achieve two major objectives.

Firstly, for Malay grassroots volunteers to strive to build a wider and deeper relationship with various segments of the Malay community. Soon, MESRA will have a community focus at Wisma Geylang Serai (WGS) under the leadership of Senior Minister of State Dr Mohamad Maliki which will be sustained for the benefit of the community. The other MESRA advisors – Senior Parliamentary Secretary Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin Amin and Ms Rahayu Mahzam – have already started several innovative pilot programmes that involve professionals in new fields like health, legal and education. This clearly proved to be attractive to new segments of our community. We will increase such programmes and implement them in more residential areas as well as at the MESRA Centre in WGS.

Second, we will strengthen the ranks of good calibre leadership in MESRA. I am grateful that several professionals who are outstanding in their respective fields have answered our call to work together to help our community continue its progress. With this, I am heartened to announce the establishment of the People’s Association Advisory Council of MESRA comprising seven advisors, MESRA’s highest Exco and those professional members. We will work together to involve more professionals in order to give better service and contributions to the community in MESRA’s activities. This is the best outcome of meritocracy in the Malay/Muslim community, whereby our outstanding professionals who have succeeded return to give back to the community.

Mr Deputy Speaker, looking ahead, three main thrusts will be emphasised in our continuing effort to strengthen our community. Firstly, we will continue to strengthen MUIS, MENDAKI and MESRA – or the power of M³ – with the best manpower and standards. These three institutions are highly valuable assets to the community and the cornerstone of the Malay/Muslim community in Singapore.

Although M³ comprises different institutions – MUIS as a statutory body, MENDAKI as a self-help group and MESRA as a part of the People’s Association – our system of meritocracy enables us to strengthen M³ with the best officers. Meritocracy also ensures that renewal can be done if some parts are less than outstanding.

In addition, professionals at M³ should be able to and know how to have synergy and solidarity when working with one another. M³ has to drive efforts with the same aim and direction towards achieving progress for the Malay/Muslim community.

Second, since the effort to drive M³ to overcome the community’s challenges is a heavy one, we, the officeholder MPs – that is, myself, Senior Minister of State Dr Mohamad Maliki, Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin Amin – will work together as one united team. I will ask them to lead various initiatives and mobilise other partners. As the first step, I am appointing Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad as the Vice-Chairman of MENDAKI.

We will work with the same alignment. As the African proverb goes, we realise that if we wish to run fast, then run alone. But if we wish to run far, let us run together.

Third, M³ will further strengthen their respective networks. There are many innovative programmes being done by the organisations within M³. However, one weakness that should be addressed is the issue of last-mile service delivery. The following story illustrates this example very clearly.

Mdm S is a resident in my constituency. Her family faced difficulties when her husband was detained for drug offences. They have just sold their house. The rules state that she is not allowed to rent a home. She cannot purchase a new house because the CPF amount is in her husband’s account. When grassroots volunteers knew about her situation, we hastened to get help for her.

Clearly, there are many available programmes to help her. The main one is getting the attention of the Social Service Office (SSO) and HDB. The Family Service Centre of the Singapore Buddhist Lodge Vision also provided counselling as she began to have depression. They referred her to opportunities to undergo training and, with this support, she started work even though she never had a job before this. Mdm S and her children were also helped by the Muslimin Trust Fund Association (MTFA), the Harun Ghani Education Fund and MENDAKI’s Weekend Tuition Scheme. As she was very determined to be self-reliant, there were times when she was willing to do several jobs.

Her life journey was full of challenges, but her family stayed together. Her husband has been released and returned to their family. Her husband now works as a driver and they have moved to a 3-room flat. The most wonderful thing was that her three children are now studying in Polytechnics.

Because volunteers managed to get in touch with Mdm S early and society quickly supported her and accompanied her in her difficult journey, her family was able to rise up again.

Mr Deputy Speaker, this shows the importance of last-mile service delivery. That is why it should be developed and strengthened. I think that we have sufficient programmes produced by M³ institutions and their affiliates to assist the community and help it progress, including programmes by the Government. Therefore, we would like M³ to develop and strengthen the respective networks in order to become an effective "last mile": MUIS with our mosques, madrasahs and religious leaders; MENDAKI with its Malay/Muslim affiliate bodies; and MESRA with the professionals and the general public.

Moving forward, all their institutions and networks must exist as one ecosystem whereby the three institutions are not only innovative when crafting community programmes, but also help one another by delivering the other institution’s programme as well as Government programmes through their networks, wherever it can be beneficial. If we can overcome the attitude of "Not Invented Here", or not supporting others’ initiatives and guarding our own turf, or worry that our influence will be affected, our community can make more discernable progress.

We must make use of our community’s full potential. We are already admired by visitors to Singapore as a model minority community that succeeded because we have been strengthened by Singapore’s system of meritocracy. It will be unfortunate if we only create a community that is prosperous only in terms of wealth. Let us listen to the lyrics of a song by Malay rock legend Ramli Sarip titled “I Seek Eternal Peace” from his album, Sadaqa. I will not sing it of course. His lyrics are:

“I do not seek abundant wealth

To live like a rich man

I do not seek millions of dollars

To live lavishly

I do not seek friends

To live a life of indulgence”

Our prosperity should also make our community feel so grateful that they are moved to have the spirit of giving. This spirit of giving, in turn, will encourage us to have the responsibility to develop the community on the basis of the gotong-royong spirit. This was also my message to a group of tertiary students recently at Berita Harian, that is, when they eventually become successful, they should give back and engage the community. At the very least, they can inspire others to succeed as well. This is in line with what I said earlier, whereby, if meritocracy only manages to make us successful, it is an imperfect system because it does not inculcate the desire to give back to society.

In line with the coming month of Ramadan, let us renew our pledge to give blessings to all. With that, we can achieve an objective in life that is consistent with the message from Ramli’s song earlier, that is, “to have a life of eternal peace”.

Mr Deputy Speaker, our President calls on us to keep Singapore an exceptional nation. Our collaboration will enhance the standing of the Malay/Muslim community in Singapore, from a model minority community into an exceptional minority community just like the Gurkha community whose members are known for their courage in the battlefield and are an exceptional Nepalese minority community. Let us build an exceptional Singaporean Malay/Muslim community in the Southeast Asian Archipelago.

(In English): Let me conclude. We are at a key juncture in our nation’s journey. In this journey, we will preserve our place in the world; Singapore must remain exceptional. And we must do so with the Singapore brand of meritocracy, one that is not merely a way to allocate resources but to do so also fairly and effectively. The Singapore brand of meritocracy must remain the means to build a good society, not just one to build a richer society. With the aim to ensure that Singapore remains a home for all, not just for the rich and successful. A Singapore where nobody is left behind and a Singapore which continues to provide opportunities for everyone to realise his dreams. [Applause.]

5.28 pm

Mr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Deputy Speaker, Sir, during a recent business lunch, I was relating how some families in my constituency were relying on pay-as-you-use or PayU meter and could not even afford a refrigerator, a basic household item to many. One of the successful business leaders at the lunch suddenly cut me off by saying she could not believe there was a device like PayU meter in Singapore. She quickly changed topic by saying how she and her daughters from a top girls' school would only stay in Marriot Hotel when they travelled overseas. She did not come across as a person who was particularly arrogant, ignorant or heartless. Her circle of friends was mainly from the same school, the same social class as her.

I do not think she is alone. Thus, it is not surprising that the IPS study on social capital in Singapore showed that those staying in private housing are more likely to have ties with people staying in private housing as compared to those staying in public housing. In fact, the IPS survey reveals that the social divide in Singapore is more likely based on class rather than race or religion. To this end, I am glad that the President acknowledged the need for the 4G leaders to deal with income inequality and social stratification seriously in her Address.

During the 45th Gallen Symposium in 2015, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam talked about our policy with regard to housing estates and ensuring a certain racial quota. He said the policy would not have come naturally: “The most intrusive social policy in Singapore has turned out to be the most important,” as it melded a nation where the people considered themselves Singaporeans first and foremost.

In my speech today, I would like to urge the Government to urgently tackle the issue of class-based divides with the same intent, purpose and rigour as we did in the past in ensuring racial and religious harmony, or the “CIMO” policy as it is known by ordinary Singaporeans.

What do we mean by class-based divides and social divides? The IPS report has broadly categorised the social divides in two aspects: one, comprising people staying in private or public housing; and another, arising from what most Singaporeans believe to be from "elite" and "non-elite" school backgrounds.

How do we encourage people staying in the private estates to make the effort to mix more with people staying in the public housing estates? Many speakers before me have made very good suggestions. Through volunteering, sports and developing common interests, we can encourage mixing of social class. For me, I just want to focus on one housing policy that may help to mitigate the social divide between people staying in public and private housing.

I understand that MND has a policy of reserving land just beside MRT stations for private housing. The rationale is that the reserved land can be tendered out so that the prime land can be sold at a market rate that reflects the true value of the land beside MRT stations. If HDB were to build public housing just beside the MRT station, there is a limit to which HDB can price the HDB flats significantly higher than those further away, from a social standpoint. As a result, those who succeed in obtaining such flats through balloting would be deemed as enjoying too much of a windfall.

However, such a policy has had its unintended side effects. The private housing built beside an MRT station often blocks the direct path between the public housing estate and the MRT station. So, the MRT station is here, the reserve land is in the middle and the public housing estate is on the right. The pavement built in between the HDB estate and MRT station often blocks the direct path and the residents cannot walk directly to the MRT station but they have to make a big round. This is very evident in Jurong.

In Potong Pasir, for example, URA has tweaked the policy to mandate the developer building the condominium beside Potong Pasir MRT station to maintain a public passageway for the residents in the Potong Pasir HDB precincts to have a direct path to the MRT station. So, I urge URA, HDB and LTA to consider rectifying the past errors based on the Potong Pasir model.

Next, I would like to turn our attention to bridging the gap between those from "elite" and "non-elite" school backgrounds. A 2016 study showed that children from higher socio-economic backgrounds are more likely to attend Integrated Programme (IP) Secondary schools and their affiliated Primary schools as well as those that offer the Gifted Education Programme (GEP).

About 30 years ago, Raffles Institution (RI) and Raffles Girls’ School (RGS) recruited students from a large base of Primary schools, "elite" or "non-elite" Primary schools through merit, basically through the PSLE results. From my understanding, 30 years ago, students from "non-elite" Primary schools, that is, from all the different schools made up more than half of the RI, RGS students. Today, RI and RGS still take in students from roughly the same number of Primary schools. However, my estimate is that less than half are from the "non-elite" primary schools. MOE probably has the figures and I hope the figures can be shared publicly.

At least the immediate-past principal of RI had admitted that, I quote, “RI is now a 'middle-class' school that caters to the affluent segment of Singapore’s population. Wealthier families have been able to give their children an edge through tuition and enrichment, leading to examinations, such as the PSLE, no longer being the level playing field that they were intended to be", and I agree. Similarly, most RI alumni interviewed also agreed that RI had become less diverse in its student population.

The concern is that the "haves", with their connections and advantages, get more and more economic, social and cultural capital, while the "have-nots" struggle to even get a foot in the game even if they work hard from the start. Is Singapore meritocratic?

Today, a good number of us in this House came from humble family backgrounds, including myself. Thirty years from now, will we see a similar composition? What can we do to address this? It is a deep and complex issue with many causes and points of approach but I would like to suggest that we start with our education policies. Much has been said about investing in pre-schools and giving all children a good start in life, which is commendable. I would like to dwell on what happens after, because socialisation continues even after the age of seven.

Despite the claim that "Every School is a Good School", I am concerned that the range of students getting into the perceived “elite” schools in Singapore is narrowing in terms of family affluence. The concern is that the rich, the well-connected parents have the means to “protect access” to the best schools – and perhaps even the best opportunities in life for their children, excluding those who are not so well-off.

To address this issue, I would like to suggest that the principal of each “non-elite” Primary school be allowed to nominate one deserving student from their respective school to enter a top Secondary school. “Deserving” implies that the student is of the intellect, temperament and potential to go to a top school. However, such a student may come from a disadvantaged background and perhaps could not afford the enrichment or tuition that caused him or her to miss the PSLE T-score of the top school cut-off point by one or two points.

Will such “nominated” students feel inferior in a top school? Will such a student continue to experience unfair disadvantage as he or she cannot afford a personal laptop or co-pay the overseas field trip? This is where additional help in terms of financial and mentorship will be useful. Perhaps, a Junior Raffles Institution Scholarship of $1,000 cash a year offered by RI can be modified to cater to this group of students. Otherwise, it will remain only a handful of successful applicants each year.

However, financial assistance or scholarships may not suffice. Author Shamus Khan, who wrote “Privilege: The Making of an Adolescent Elite at St Paul’s School”, makes an interesting point about how those from disadvantaged backgrounds given scholarships to the school are never quite on the same level as the entitled. Academic performance notwithstanding, they are deferential and do not have the same air of success and confidence, traits which would serve them well in later business, politics and public life. This is where mentorship is important. The top school may have to institute a mentorship scheme whereby the successful alumni who came from similar humble backgrounds can periodically provide guidance, encouragement and connection to this group of “nominated” students.

Next, I would like to turn our attention to the Special Assistance Plan (SAP). SAP was introduced by our founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew in 1979 to preserve the best Chinese-stream schools so as to develop effectively bilingual students inculcated with traditional Chinese values. There are currently 11 SAP Secondary schools. I am from the second batch of SAP students and I have benefited from the system tremendously. So has our current Minister for Education, Mr Ong Ye Kung. Mr Ong had confided that he would not have attended Maris Stella High School if it was not a SAP school.

SAP schools have existed for nearly 40 years and many people have asked to examine their relevance today. With China becoming a major global player and the second largest economy in the world, it is even more pressing and necessary for SAP schools to churn out youths who are comfortable with the Chinese language, culture and values. This has and will continue to help Singapore to deepen our relationship with China. It will help facilitate trade, business and cultural exchanges with the mainland Chinese. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, please allow me to continue my speech in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I am from the second batch of SAP students. I am able to speak in Parliament in both Chinese and English and credit must be given to the SAP system. Next year, 2019, SAP schools will be celebrating their 40th anniversary. It is also the bicentennial of Singapore. The Chinese like to celebrate the "5s” and "10s” to review the past and look into the future. I would like to take this opportunity to look into the pros and cons of SAP schools.

SAP was introduced by founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew in 1979 to preserve the traditions of the Chinese schools and to cultivate effectively – bilingual and bi-cultural talents. The number of SAP schools has increased from the original nine to 11 in 2011. SAP schools are very popular and many of the SAP schools have also developed into elite schools and their success stories abound.

With the success of its economic reform, China has become the second largest economy in the world. With its One Belt One Road initiative, the Chinese influence in Asia and the world is becoming more and more significant. Not only are more Singaporeans willing to learn Chinese, foreigners are also sending their children to Singapore to learn Chinese. So, learning Higher Chinese is no longer the monopoly of SAP schools. Many Secondary schools are now offering Higher Chinese and the take-up rate has been increasing over the years.

Many people are asking: do we still need to have SAP schools? To learn a language is not just for examination or being able to speak and write. The important thing is to know, understand and appreciate the culture. Hence, the Chinese tradition of the SAP schools is a very important factor in cultivating bi-culturalism in Chinese and English. It is an irreplaceable channel.

However, the development of SAP schools has hindered the chance of non-Chinese students entering SAP schools. Now, only those who have studied Higher Chinese can go to a SAP school. The threshold is too high. Is this a good phenomenon?

Just now, in my English speech, I mentioned that educational background has become a faultline in our society; students from the elite schools and non-elite schools tend to stay within their own inner circles. This is natural as “like attracts like”. To fix this faultline, perhaps we can review the policy and allow non-Chinese students to attend SAP schools. For example, to allow non-Chinese students studying ordinary Chinese to attend SAP schools.

Allowing non-Chinese students to study in SAP schools provides Chinese students with the opportunity to mix with non-Chinese students. It has shown that graduates from SAP schools, whether they go to JCs, polytechnics, universities or National Service, can generally mix well with non-Chinese Singaporeans.

However, we should not refrain from promoting Chinese culture in SAP schools just because there are non-Chinese students in the school, just like the Mission schools or Buddhist schools will not reduce their religious aspect simply because there are non-believers in the school. Non-Chinese students going to SAP schools will have to accept exposure to the Chinese culture.

Lowering the threshold for non-Chinese students to go to SAP schools is a complicated and sensitive issue. I hope MOE can face the issue squarely and discuss with people from all walks of life. It is not necessary to make a hasty decision.

(In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, encouraging non-Chinese students to study at SAP schools is a sensitive topic. However, we have to face the situation squarely as we tackle the issue of class divides along educational background. Class was certainly not so much of an issue when the words of the Singapore pledge "regardless of race, language or religion" were coined. But, the situation is different today. We now want to build a democratic society, regardless of race, language, religion or class. With this, I support the Motion.

5.45 pm

Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Nee Soon): Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. There has been much discussion about fighting inequality and blurring emerging social divides. It boils down to different perspectives. Is the glass half empty or half full?

We have a functioning meritocracy with various pathways of success. But our needy sometimes face structural issues. We have healthy social mixing. But there are areas of rising concerns. Rather than arguing about whether the glass is half empty or half full, can we get everyone to join in to fill up this half empty and half full glass called Singapore?

How can we achieve this? The answer, I believe, is what psychologists have termed as the "Ikea effect". Simply put, the "Ikea effect" says that we cherish what we build. Many of us have struggled with self-assembled furniture. The instructions often look easy: insert a screw here and turn an Allen key there. But the results are usually far from perfect and certainty not what we see in the showroom. Yet, despite the imperfections, we are intensely attached to our self-built furniture, far beyond their useful years. At home, I still own a few Ikea stools that I built during my university days. They made it through eight house moves and I lugged them through half the world. This is the "Ikea effect": we cherish things that we build and labour leads to love.

Therefore, when we get Singaporeans to come together to build a better society, we value not just the shiny successes, but also the imperfections, the work in progress.

I often see this happening on the ground when we come together to do some meaningful social work. After a successful project, the better-off among us appreciate the challenges and inequalities that less fortunate Singaporeans face. We also realise that our own success is not just a result of our hard work and talen,; but also of circumstances and the help of others along the way. At the same time, the needy among us get lifted up, not just because of the material assistance that they received, but also because of the wisdom and life-skills, because they felt the warmth and solidarity of fellow Singaporeans and because they learnt that those with less also have something to give. Most importantly, whether we are the better-off or the needy, we all appreciate society with its imperfections, because we all know that, on that day, we made society just a little bit better.

With that in mind, I would like to propose three sets of policies that can fight inequality and bridge social divides.

First of all, by making SG Cares a centerpiece of Singapore. We can make volunteerism a defining aspect of what it means to be Singaporean. SG Cares encourages individuals, companies, schools – to work together to build a more inclusive Singapore. SG Cares is already piloted in two towns.

I believe we can do more. Over the next five years, I hope we can extend and connect SG Cares with our five Community Development Councils (CDCs), as well as with the grassroots across Singapore. How do the pieces fall together? SG Cares provides the technology, combines the needs of various communities and serves as the bridge to major companies and institutions. The CDCs provide support for various causes. Some CDCs, such as Northwest CDC, also have good social work programmes and can mobilise people to do good. With the data, technology and added volunteers from SG Cares, as well as project management and funding from the CDCs, the grassroots can be an effective last-mile coordinator of assistance to the needy.

For example, in my constituency, Kebun Baru, thanks to the strong support from Mayor Teo Ho Pin of Northwest CDC, we are implementing two priority long-term programmes for social work: to build up the best community support for cancer patients and survivors, and to build a dementia-friendly community. We are also exploring getting technical assistance from SG Cares.

At the same time, I am advocating that over the next two years, we can consider piloting the SG Cares/CDC/grassroots collaboration for a quarter of all Singapore. And from 2020 onwards, we roll out this collaboration nation-wide.

At the same time, I also hope that SG Cares can mobilise our people to help pockets of Singaporeans that are usually unseen, such as children and youths at our various homes and the young offenders serving time. Over time, I hope that SG Care can make volunteerism a defining characteristic of being Singaporean. SG Cares can transform the Singapore psyche and turn Singapore into a Democracy of Deeds.

Let me next speak on encouraging Singaporeans to forge friendships across social divides.

Today, MOE encourages students to do VIA programmes. We can use this platform to incentivise youths to do more social mixing. Specifically, MOE can provide bonus VIA points to encourage collaborations between different schools. At the cluster level, the MOE school leaders can work hard to nurture collaboration between elite and non-elite schools, so that students from different educational backgrounds can forge friendship from a young age.

MCCY and MOE can also create a parallel track for youth sports, so as to encourage social mixing outside the schools. For example, we can grow ActiveSG's Sports Academy and Clubs to absorb more youths from different schools and give them CCA points under the LEAD framework. At the same time, MOE can also invite Sports Academy and Clubs to send teams to join inter-school sports competitions. And, in general, ActiveSG also brings people together through regular sports competitions and activities. There is more we can do to encourage them to extend their camaraderie beyond the soccer field or badminton hall. And when Singaporeans willingly come together to socialise, they will treasure the bonds they build.

To the third set of ideas: supporting our needy to break out of the poverty cycle through some policy enhancements.

First of all, we can do more to promote financial literacy and prudence of our needy. There are many VWOs who are willing to go to the schools, army camps, the community, or even the prisons to teach financial literacy. We should open the doors to them. MAS and MTI can also do more. MAS can mandate businesses to present interest rates to consumers in a unified manner. MAS can also mandate a simplified template for presenting mass-market financial product information. MTI can tighten the hire-purchase regulations to clean up unfair practices and charges that some of our needy get entangled with. These will benefit all Singaporeans, but especially the needy.

Second, we can consider reviewing our Registration of Criminals Act, to temper justice with mercy, to rehabilitate and to re-integrate. We all know that a prison conviction can have a tremendous impact on a person's ability to get hired. That, in turn, creates financial hardship for the family and contributes to poverty and inequality. Today, a former inmate with no prior convictions and who is jailed for no more than three months or fined no more than $2,000, can apply for the criminal record to be spent after a five-year crime-free period. Perhaps, MHA can review and propose a wider scope of criminal records that can be spent over time, if former inmates go through voluntary community rehabilitation. These former inmates can volunteer for five years at VWOs that are IPCs. A national panel can review their volunteer efforts and recommend to MHA on whether their criminal records deserve to be spent.

Lastly, we can provide a better rental housing environment for our needy while they battle to improve their lives. For example, we can factor in household size as a major criterion to rental flat size. For singles who are working hard and cooperating with the social workers, we can consider waiving the joint-single requirement if no suitable room-mates can be found.

Let me now talk about the economy, about unleashing data and digital transformation to drive our economy. There are many exciting possibilities if we can overlap our data and digital capabilities with Singapore's physical and financial connectivity.

Let me first share three examples of recent success. We have built our new National Trade Platform (NTP), which serves as our "national single window" for trade. We are also connecting our NTP to Japan, to China through the Chongqing Connectivity Initiative (CCI), as well as to Hong Kong through the Global Trade Connectivity Network (GTCN). As a result, physical trade documentation is minimised. Default and transaction risk in trade financing is reduced. Through the Project Ubin trials, MAS is using distributed ledger technology to circumvent slow and expensive bank-to-bank transfers technology. Singapore companies are also coming together to build the Fast Track Trade Platform (FTTP). This SME trade platform is a block-chain powered digital e-commerce marketplace, with many added financing and insurance services built on it.

In turn, these three projects can open up new possibilities for Singapore, especially if we can integrate them into a national e-business platform. Can we allow our banks and financing companies to tap on these trade and transaction data, so that they can determine more efficient ways to provide finances and issuing credits to our companies? Can we connect up the supply chain of players of various industries to identify real-time opportunities? For example, during low-demand periods, can three-party logistics (3PLs) and warehousing companies tie up with PSA or CAAS to offer discounted services, so that we can encourage more ships and freight planes to stop by Singapore? Can we integrate this platform to our digital security efforts, so that our emerging digital service providers can work with next-generation technology? Lastly, is there scope for us to extend relevant and non-competing aspects of our national e-business platform to the rest of ASEAN because ASEAN can be a single economic ecosystem, with Singapore at the heart of it?

Beyond this, digital technology can also help us drive our Government's productivity, which has an impact on business productivity. The National Trade Platform can be described as a "National Single Window" for trade for all companies. Can we build other "national single windows" digital platforms for other industry clusters? For example, developers, builders and architectures within the construction sector have to work with various agencies to get the permits and approvals. These are expensive and time-consuming processes.

Can we get various agencies to redesign their approval processes, identify conflicting or overlapping requirements and create a common and current depository of regulations for all? This means the entire sector can efficiently transact with the Government through that single national window for most key processes. And if we can come up with a "National Single Window" digital platform for the construction sector, another obvious choice is the lifestyle cluster, which frequently has to deal with various agencies on F&B, zoning and Police permits.

To conclude, our debate on the President's Address gives us the opportunity to cast our eyes to a further horizon. I share many of the priorities that the Government has highlighted. In particular, I believe there are exciting opportunities to use data and digital transformation to drive the economy and also believe that there are some policy adjustments that we can do more of to fight inequality and bridge social divides.

Most importantly, if we can infuse SG Cares into the Singapore soul, inspire our people to build a better Singapore, we will all be happy and happier for it because people value what they build and because labour builds love.

5.58 pm

Mr Ganesh Rajaram (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Motion to thank President Halimah Yacob for her Address in this House last week.

Sir, President Halimah's speech clearly defined the roles and challenges facing the 4G leadership of Singapore. Building a well-connected world city, developing a vibrant economy, forging a cohesive, caring society and nurturing a Singaporean identity that we can be proud of. These were all addressed by Mdm President and they struck a cord with all Singaporeans.

But to me, Sir, the most important points of Mdm President's Address were about the 4G leadership earning the trust and connecting with Singaporeans. Trust is a commodity that cannot be taken for granted and is not easily earned. The trust that we currently have between Singaporeans and the Government will not automatically pass on from one generation to another.

Mdm President said and I quote, “In each generation, the people and leaders must work with one another, go through trials and tribulations together and forge their own bonds afresh”. She added, the 4G Leaders they will need to listen to the views and feelings of the people and, by their own words and deeds, show that they have heard”.

These are powerful words and I hope very much that the 4G leadership will heed this very wise advice, Sir, as trust and connecting with the people are the foundation stone of the social compact between Singaporeans and their leaders.

So, how should the 4G leadership connect, maintain and build on the trust that their predecessors have had for all these years? My sense is that this is already happening. We have arguably the brightest and most able talent of their generation on the 4G leadership bench. Many are natural born leaders. But in today’s digital world, where reputations are made almost instantaneously – and lost just as quickly – how our next generation leaders engage with Singaporeans will be particularly crucial. Behavioural experts will tell you that how you are perceived is often the starting point of how your message is received and understood and this intuitive impression you make on your audience is very much a function of the multiple visual and social cues you send out.

Sir, self-awareness is, funnily enough, one of those qualities obvious to those who value it and quite invisible to those who struggle with it. In a paper published in the MIT Sloan Management Review in February this year, self-awareness was cited as the most important capability for leaders to develop. Successful leaders know where their natural inclinations lie and use this knowledge to boost those inclinations, or compensate for them. A Korn Ferry International study also found that self-awareness impacts the bottom lines of companies.

Sir, our 4G leaders have shown their capabilities in leading Ministries, formulating policies and tackling difficult issues on a daily basis. As they transition to become the future leaders of Singapore, I hope very much that they will strive to remain fully aware of the aspirations and concerns of Singaporeans on the ground, beyond the traditional avenues of feedback.

Sir, the advantage that the 4G leadership has today is that they are surrounded by a treasure trove of experience and wisdom that lie with 3G and the second generation (2G) leaders, many of whom are still with us in this House. They exemplify the trust and connection with the people that President Halimah spoke about. I would like to pay tribute, Sir, to three of these leaders who recently stepped down from their Ministerial posts. Sir, Singapore owes a debt of gratitude to Mr Lim Hng Kiang, Mr Lim Swee Say and Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim for their dedicated service and contributions over many years. I did not have the privilege of working closely with Mr Lim Hng Kiang and Mr Lim Swee Say, but I have seen how well they connect with the ground and how trusted they are. So, thank you, Sirs, for your contributions.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I did have the very great privilege of working closely with Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim for over the last decade or so. Prior to working with him, I had the privilege of lining up behind him at a popular briyani stall at Newton Food Centre when he was Minister for the Environment and Water Resources, probably in the mid to late 2000s. What struck me then was his humility and graciousness. No one would have noticed that a Minister was in the queue. He was friendly, approachable and got his food without any fuss; all this, with his trademark smile. I was impressed.

Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob and I met formally when he was the Minister for Communications and Information. Because of my appointment to the then-MDA Board and also several other MCI committees, I had the opportunity to work closely with Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob. What strikes me most about Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob in my interactions with him over the 10 years is his awareness of those around him and how he makes it a point to make those around him feel comfortable and at ease. Let me share with this House my favourite anecdote about Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob.

In 2013, I hosted Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob to a dinner at a television market in Cannes, France. My events team in London had made reservations at a halal restaurant in Cannes, which was a challenge back then as there were only a handful of them. It was a Middle Eastern restaurant which they said was a highly recommended seafront restaurant. So, we sat down to dinner at that restaurant, ordered our food and everything was going well. In the middle of our main course, loud music came on and, to my horror, a belly dancer emerged. She went table to table to try to get diners to join her on the dance floor. I broke out in cold sweat, hoping that she would not stop at our table to ask the Minister to dance. Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob patted my hand and said in his usual calm manner, “Ganesh, don’t worry about it; just enjoy your food. I’ve encountered this in my travels to the Middle East many times and they won’t disturb you if you are busy eating your food.” And true enough, the belly dancer skipped our table.

Beyond the belly dancing episode, Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob was always connected, calm and gracious in work settings, so much so that it is quite hard to disagree with him. And even on occasions when we have disagreed, Dr Yaacob would always make it a point to explain his side of things. He is, to me, an excellent example of a leader who is self-aware, connected and genuine. And this, to me, is why he is trusted by all who have worked with him and the people he serves. Sir, in Tamil, please.

(In Tamil): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Last week, President Halimah Yacob mentioned in her speech several points on how the 4G leaders should lead our country. They must receive the support of the people. They must have a good relationship and trust among the people, she said. They must work hard for that. The 2G and 3G leaders have built a relationship as strong as a tower with the people. This will not be easy for the 4G leaders. They still have much more to learn from senior leaders in our Parliament.

Let us take Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim as an example. He had been a Minister for 16 years and a Member of Parliament for 22. I was a Board member at the Media Development Authority for some time with him and had the opportunity to interact with him. He always had a smile on his face. And from the Permanent Secretary in MCI to all who still work in the Ministry, everyone was simple and interacted courteously like him. The 4G leaders would have much to learn from their experiences and lead the country well.

(In English): Sir, President Halimah Yacob, in her speech, asked for the 4G leaders to make bold moves. For this to happen, trust has to be paramount. If there is no trust, people will not believe the messenger and bold policy decisions will be that much harder to effect. In today’s digital world, the messenger and the way the message is delivered are sometimes more important than the message itself.

My hope is that the 4G leadership strives to be continually self-aware as they engage with the people of Singapore. Trust is earned, not given; I am confident that the 4G leadership will build their own strong connections in the years ahead.

6.08 pm

The Senior Minister of State for Health and Transport (Dr Lam Pin Min): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak on the Motion of Thanks to the President for her Address at the Opening of the Second Session of the Thirteenth Parliament.

President Halimah stressed the importance of leadership in an "uncertain and volatile world" and aptly advised that the 4th generation leadership must "fire up and mobilise" the spirit and energy of young Singaporeans and grow with the people we represent. I cannot agree more.

Leadership renewal is well underway with the recent Cabinet reshuffle. Singapore will transit progressively from 3G to 4G over the next two to five years. Each generation of leadership change premises a new social compact – one that is based on a set of core inclusive and shared values; one that also builds on our past and embraces our future. Confucius once said: "Study the past, if you would divine the future".

An astute Singaporean political observer once shared with me this: he said that when Singapore was first founded from the embers of the British Empire and the brief interlude in Malaya, the founding fathers of the first-generation leadership saw the need to build the country and its institutions as quickly as possible, in the face of external threats and internal strife. The relationship between the polity and the political leaders could be summed up as "No Voice and No Choice". There was no luxury of space for discourse or time for discussion with the people. People accepted this because existential threats were not rhetorical questions or strategic questions to be answered but they were actually day-to-day issues that needed to be tackled in the business of running Singapore.

After about 20 years in the mid-1980s, as the 2G leaders began to take on the day-to-day running of the country and things settled down a bit, the people were then asked to air their views. It is no surprise that the Feedback Unit, which was the precursor of REACH, was formed in 1985. This new consultative leadership, could be summed up as "Got Voice but Little Choice". We hear you, and, indeed, we want to hear from you, but we will still have to make the hard decisions because we still know better.

After another 20 years, the 3G took over. The 3G team started taking over the responsibilities of running Singapore in 2001 even though the 2G leaders kept a watchful eye. The 3G team formally took over in 2004 with the appointment of the current Prime Minister. Active citizenry was encouraged and this is best encapsulated by the evolution of the Feedback Unit into REACH in 2006. REACH stands for Reaching Everyone for Active Citizenry @ Home. I think some of us may have forgotten this little factoid. Active citizenry is necessary because the Government recognises that it does not have all the answers. Political and policy solutions used to be formulated for the people. In the 3G age, solutions have to be formulated and implemented with the people. The relationship has now evolved to "Got Voice and Got Choice".

What about 4G? Where and how should Singaporeans and their 4G leaders go from here? Whether it is "No Voice and No Choice" or "Got Voice but Little Choice" or "Got Voice and Got Choice", one fundamental force remains over the last 50 to 60 years. And that is Trust.

The trust between the PAP Government and the people has largely remained strong over the years, despite the many tests and tribulations. Trust not just nurtures and edifies, but, if not betrayed, trust perseveres and overcomes. Trust, with time, reveals and discovers. Trust, is difficult to quantify or value precisely, but, in its absence, renders almost everything else worthless in a relationship. Trust endows us with courage and cohesion, which are what we need going forward.

I am not talking about individual courage but courage as a nation and as a people to forge a future together.

As Aristotle once said, "Courage is the first of human qualities, because it is the quality that guarantees others". Courage as a group is based on trust. Cohesion is a little bit more difficult to understand. Cohesion is not simply uniformity and does not occur just as a default option due to the lack of diversity. Of course, if a group shares the same genetic, cultural and geographical factors, then cohesion may be much easier to achieve.

But the hard truth is that the hand that nature dealt Singapore is not an easy one – Our multiracialism, multi-religion and multiculturalism may be a strength, just as much as it can be a challenge. And we will always have to work through the cards we are dealt, one by one to get the best possible result. This is and will be the work of generations of leaders of Singapore.

Just as our Founding Father Mr Lee Kuan Yew had reminded us, "This is not a Malay nation, this is not a Chinese nation, this is not an Indian nation. Everybody will have his place: equal; language, culture, religion."

The challenges are many for the new 4G leadership. Some may think that existential and basic questions no longer dog us. We no longer worry about the roof over our heads, about clean water or having enough food for our children and having a chance to get a decent education.

The only basic or "daily-living" questions that admittedly still elude us a little are the high costs of living, affordability of healthcare and reliability of our public transport system. The PAP Government, whether current or future, is determined and committed to address these issues together with the people.

But this does not mean we do not have challenges that threaten the very basic fabric of our society. These challenges are more subtle but no less fundamental and visceral. One major challenge is how do we maintain cohesion in Singapore? Cohesion is formed from a sense of identity, shared values and singularity in purpose. It is, unfortunately, as abstract as trust. The old challenges of race and religion to cohesion are still there. It will always be a work-in-progress in Singapore. The 3G leadership has evolved and made appropriate changes in giving voice and choice to the people and the 4G leadership should do likewise, albeit in a more challenging environment. But there are other forces at work, such as technological disruptions, the proliferation of fake news and sometimes extremist views and ideologies that we need to be watchful about if we are to protect and improve upon the cohesion we have.

To me, there are three key challenges on building cohesion facing Singapore and the new leadership. Let me share them with the House.

The first challenge is the widening social and income divide. The gap between the "haves" and "have-nots" is becoming more pronounced. How do we keep the country going together when different social classes may be living, literally and physically, further and further apart? On one side, there may be families who take holidays in European ski resorts without a second thought and, on the other hand, many other families can only afford to take a coach to Malacca for holiday, if at all.

These outcomes may be entirely due to a meritocratic system sorting out society and also due to market forces and may be even entirely justifiable from such perspectives, but, in the long run, what will be the effect on cohesion? And what do such outcomes reflect on the values we profess or, at least, claim to profess?

The second challenge to cohesion is marshalling the middle ground. It has been said that if one can capture the middle ground, then one is usually victorious in politics. But as we have seen in many post-fact democratic societies, one sometimes wonders what is the middle ground?

In most issues in the past, the spectrum of opinion of the polity could be described by a Gaussian distribution, or what we call a bell-shaped curve. If the entire chunk of the bell-shaped curve supports you, you are home.

I am not sure if the bell-shaped curve is still so prevalent anymore in the multi-polar world with many different viewpoints and groups. Anyone can publish a blog or be an influencer with a following of thousands. There are now thousands of moderately loud voices versus only several very loud voices in the past. It is getting harder and harder to discern what constitutes the middle ground and what does not. Or whether the middle ground now is simply a collection of smaller interest groups, temporarily coalescing out of shared self-interest and undergoing dissolution soon after? There are now too many choices and voices. How then do we lead and foster cohesion when the middle ground is either not so middle or grounded?

Consequently, it may become harder and politically riskier to prescribe what we think is frankly unacceptable. This may not be apparent in peaceful times, but in times of crisis and uncertainty, hard choices will have to be made. Remembering the words of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, "Whoever governs Singapore must have the iron in him." Indeed, even as a tiny red dot, we must stand up to our principles and beliefs, and we will not be pushed around.

The third challenge to cohesion is change. We need to embrace change for survival. We cannot be static. We have all heard this before. But let us face it. There is a place in your heart that just warms up when you visit the same coffee shop or hawker centre that your father brought you to as a kid. You feel a sense of security and joy when you tuck into the same nasi lemak and kaya toast with soft-boiled eggs that had been made by the same folks for the past 20 years.

Humans being humans, we anchor our lives to persons, places, moments and experiences that defy the imperatives of economics. These anchors define what is truly "home" to us. I will be honest: every time I see a favourite hawker retire or a coffee shop close, a little bit of a sense of "home" dies in me. Even though I can understand why he is retiring, maybe because his children have all graduated from university.

Yes, change is inevitable; we either change or be changed. How we then lead Singaporeans to face and embrace change so as to stay relevant in a world of ever-shortening business and technology cycles and diminishing distances between competitors and yet keep and grow the sense of home within all of us, is a major challenge.

The more shared life anchors we have, the more cohesion we have. National Service is one such example. But our life anchors often do not answer to questions of economics, even though our economics and physical well-being demand that we answer and respond to these same questions adroitly.

In conclusion, the 4G leadership will have to answer these three questions with imagination, conviction and courage. How do we foster trust and cohesion between Singaporeans from different social economic classes who may lead very different lives? How do we rally Singaporeans together when the middle ground may not be so middle or grounded? How do we maintain cohesion among Singaporeans by anchoring them to Singapore as home even when we need everyone to embrace change so as to remain relevant and economically viable?

As Prime Minister Lee has said, each generation has to chart its own way. Ours has just begun. With trust and cohesion as our shield and sword, we should be more than alright. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion. [Applause.]

6.23 pm

Mr Thomas Chua Kee Seng (Nominated Member): (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the focus of my speech today is: "Building a Government-business collaborative relationship in a new era that is based on mutual trust and mutual learning in order to achieve breakthroughs in transforming the economy."

In outlining the Government's policy objectives, the President issued the call that the 4G leaders must boldly promote change and lead Singapore into the next development phase. The business community generally agrees with this stance and expects our country’s 4G leaders to continue consolidating the new era’s Government-business collaborative relationship which is based on mutual trust and mutual learning, and pushing for economic transformation with dynamism and resolve.

In the past Singapore had succeeded many times in finding breakthroughs in economic transformation. Our first-generation founding leaders succeeded in creating Singapore’s economic miracle when Singapore struggled for survival in adverse circumstances. Their far-sightedness and precision in positioning Singapore while relying on the people's trust and support amid an extremely unfavourable environment, paid off.

Ten years ago, that is, when the financial crisis erupted in 2008, the 3G leaders and the businesses confronted it together. They rolled out employment subsidy programmes and encouraged upgrading of skill to help workers keep their rice bowl, taking Singapore on a quick bound after it bottomed out amid the global economic recession. All these were acknowledged by the people.

Today, Singapore is once again in an unpredictable international environment. Businesses expect 4G leaders to be both talented and virtuous and be attentive to the lives of the people while understanding the vagaries of recent industrial developments. They are expected to demonstrate courage and determination as leaders while injecting new vitality into the economic transformation.

At the same time, the new era requires the creation of a new form of collaboration between the Government and businesses which will let enterprises have a greater rein in terms of initiatives in economic development. In the early years of nation-building, due to the special political and economic situations then and the constraints of domestic education, the Government exercised full control on the direction of economic development. Today, the international market is open, information flows freely and technology keeps renewing to no end. With the spread of digital technologies such as big data analysis, it is easier for enterprises to muster resources while the trends of industries are more diversified. But the risks faced are even higher. In these times and circumstances, it is not easy for the Government to understand deeply the actual situations of various industries.

Therefore, to achieve a breakthrough in economic transformation not only requires courage and resolve from 4G leaders, but also the building of a new-era Government-business collaboration that is based on mutual trust and mutual learning, which will help set free the energy of the enterprises with an inclusive mindset.

For example, the Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) promoted by the Government have already got a clear industry clustering strategy framework. Next, it is necessary for the trade associations and enterprises to be more involved and in control. Going forward, the responsibilities of the Government are to clarify the directions and allow companies full play on a level playing field and promote mutual trust with enterprises in the transformation.

To this end, Governments and businesses must strengthen their mutual interactions and deepen mutual understanding. To grasp the development opportunities amid rapid changes, 4G leaders must listen to the voices of businesses, pay close attention to the developments of the industries and broaden their visions so that they can formulate pro-business policies more accurately.

I remember that, in the 1990s, Singapore eliminated the garment-processing industry while developing high value-added industries. Later, the garment industry continued to develop in Hong Kong as its base, bringing about a fashion design hub and a related logistics supply chain that brought high returns. This was an opportunity we missed at the time.

Therefore, when a new generation of leaders is designing industrial policies and allocating resources for development, it must canvass opinions from a wide swathe in the business community and, particularly, it must understand the links between the old and new industries. For example, Singapore’s import and export trade accounts for a very high proportion of our total economic output. In the future, we can continue to explore how to leverage these existing advantages in new circumstances.

The Government can keep in touch with companies through platforms, such as trade associations and chambers, to adjust policies in line with the latest trends.

Mr Deputy Speaker, when companies are creating value, they are also creating jobs. If the Government wants people to live well, they must first let businesses do a good job. The Tripartite cooperative model of workers, businesses and the Government has always been an important foundation for Singapore to keep its competitive edge and overcome all difficulties in the past and in the future. To this end, I urge businesses to actively establish a new Government-business relation. They should not just make good use of Government assistance programmes to develop their businesses, but also understand more about economic policies and provide constructive suggestions to Government agencies. Today, not only are the Government leaders passing on the baton; so too are the business leaders. Besides, there are many young entrepreneurs who are making great achievements in emerging industries, such as in technology and Internet-related industries.

Whether businesses are willing to cooperate with Government policies will affect the effectiveness of national economic policies, especially in this day and age when the business cycle has been greatly shortened and companies have to look much further ahead. There is a good saying: "If you want to go fast, you go alone; if you want to go far, you go in a group." In the highly versatile market, a temporary success may be due to a single seizure of opportunity, but if you want sustainable development, businesses must build up real strengths. As Minister Chan Chung Seng has said, we must upgrade from "whole-of-Government" cooperation to a "whole-of-nation" framework in line with the country's strategy to build long-term competitive strengths.

To sum up, I support the Government's policy objectives and look forward to the 4G leaders coming up with a new economic growth blueprint via the new-era Government-business relationship based on mutual trust and mutual learning. Also, I look forward to the leaders grasping the dynamics of industries accurately and offering them effective help. Going forward, we are ready to build a better future for the country with the new leadership team.

6.31 pm

Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Motion of Thanks. While Singapore faces many challenges in the coming years, it is good to see a clear identification of the issues we need to address and the road map for dealing with these challenges.

And notwithstanding these challenges, I am also heartened that there is still an important part of Singapore's plans to secure a place for ourselves in the world. Singapore's success in the previous decade has been built upon being an open economy and staying relevant in an ever-changing world. Almost immediately after Independence, Singapore's economic plan was to engage with the world, to bring in investments, to be a platform for trading, and EDB and other institutions helped to build Singapore's economy. Singapore's security was also built having strong defence relationships with countries both near and far. These important relationships were developed because Singapore had an outward focus from the get-go.

One of the growing trends that is of concern to us is growing insularity in many parts of the world. In Singapore's early years of Independence post-World War II, the global architecture was being set up. The Bretton Woods institutions, including the World Bank and the IMF had been set up in the 1940s, a few decades before our Independence. And the trend was very much to support investment and growth in the developing world. At that time, the western powers had realised that it was necessary for the whole world to prosper in order to ensure that peace would continue.

In parallel with the Bretton Woods institutions, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) oversaw the liberalisation of world trade and this Agreement eventually developed into the World Trade Organization. Together, these institutions have brought down trade barriers in many countries, including Singapore, which have benefited and grown. These institutions were also complemented by regional organisations that are focused on bringing down internal barriers and facilitating trade. The bigger alliances included ASEAN in our region, the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in America, and, the most comprehensive integration, which was the European Union (EU).

The President's Address highlighted important events that seemed to suggest a global shift from this trend and I will elaborate on some of these. The US was once a champion of free trade but, following the last election, has started pulling back from some of these treaties, including the TPP and now the Iran Nuclear Deal, and even NAFTA appears to be under reconsideration.

The EU had been considerably expanding both its membership and its areas of coverage, but Brexit – or the British voting to leave EU has marked an important swing away from this trend. This is unprecedented in EU history and, although the EU looks like it will survive Brexit, it is clear that the concerns that triggered the British decision to leave were also resonating in other parts of Europe. I expect these challenges will continue.

Even as developed countries appear to be becoming more inward-looking, China has taken a different approach. It has reiterated its intentions to become a world player. Its Belt and Road initiatives are being rolled out, providing large amounts of capital to developing countries, both near and far.

At the time of the President's Address, the Malaysian elections had not yet taken place. I am sure, if it had, she would have highlighted this as an important development as well, given that our relationship with Malaysia is one of our most important bilateral relationships. My heartiest congratulations to Prime Minister Mahathir, who has prevailed against all odds and is set to be Prime Minister again.

Singapore is a small country with no control over what happens in other countries and changes in other countries take place at paces that they dictate. While other countries may change their minds on how far they wish to engage, I think Singapore still needs to find a way to stay relevant.

In this regard, another thing that happened last week – which was a pleasant surprise to many of us and a huge honour for Singapore is that Singapore was picked as the venue for the historic meeting between President Trump and President Kim, a move that may spark a thaw in what is probably one of the last legacies of the Cold War.

I think even as countries change and governments' outlooks in the world change, what has helped Singapore and certainly with the generations of leaders so far is a way to stay relevant in this ever-changing world. This is built largely on relationships that have been developed over the generations. In relation to Malaysia, I think Prime Minister Lee was one of the first to congratulate Prime Minister Mahathir on his appointment as Prime Minister. I think it was important to reiterate that many of the projects that have been developed are in both countries' interests to pursue.

One of Singapore's greatest assets has been the strong standing of our leaders and the many relationships that have been built up over the years. Even as countries appear to lean away from multi-nationalism, I think it is the strong standing of our leaders and the reputation of Singapore, the diligence of the many people in our Foreign Service and our trade representatives who have helped us get a listening ear from the senior leaderships in other countries. I think it is important for us to continue to build these relationships and for the next generation to also continue to nurture them.

Our position as ASEAN Chair in the coming two years is a golden opportunity. If ASEAN countries can come together more strongly, this may set a positive example for other regions. I understand that our objectives include committing to a rules-based regional order and to tackle issues, such as cybersecurity, transnational crime and terrorism. If we can get important achievements in these, it will be a signal to the rest of the world that multilateralism is still relevant and still important. If we can get further economic integration, that will also be an important achievement. I think the best way to sell the message that multilateralism is still an important part of our world is to show that we can thrive through multilateralism.

Even as Singapore's 4G leadership comes to the fore, I certainly hope that the previous generation of leaders will stay around to nurture relationships and to help guide and lend a helping hand, where possible, because human relationships are very important. If someone else comes on board, I think it will be necessary for them to learn as well. So, in the face of countries getting increasingly more insular, I certainly hope that Singapore and Singapore's leaders will continue to prevail as a voice for multilateralism and integration in this world.