Debate on President's Address

Order read for the Resumption of Debate on Question [25 January 2016].

"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 he delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the First Session of this Parliament.'." – [Mr Christopher de Souza].

Question again proposed.

1.33 pm

The Senior Minister of State for Defence and Foreign Affairs (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman): Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion of Thanks to the President for his Speech at the Opening of this session of Parliament.

Mdm Speaker, within the past few months, violent extremism has affected the lives of many in various societies. Turkey and Paris suffered terror attacks, leaving scores of people dead and many more injured. The threat of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is spreading beyond the Middle East to Asia. Jakarta was attacked two weeks ago, leaving eight people dead. India arrested four students with links to ISIS who were planning attacks within Delhi and, over the weekend, Malaysia arrested seven suspected ISIS militants who were planning attacks in several locations in Malaysia. Singapore is no less vulnerable. In October 2015, two Singaporean teenagers were arrested and detained for being involved in terrorism-related activities. More recently, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) arrested and repatriated 27 radicalised Bangladeshis in Singapore who were planning to take part in extremist activities outside Singapore.

Since 2011, over 25,000 fighters from 100 different countries have travelled to Iraq and Syria, with rising numbers of Indonesians and Malaysians amongst them. Our counterparts in Indonesia have identified Bahrun Naim, an Indonesian based in Syria, as the mastermind of the recent attacks in Jakarta. In fact, militant extremist groups have voiced their ambitions to establish a "satellite caliphate" within the region, to become the unifying force for Islamic State supporters.

The social fabric in our region faces the compounded challenges of returning Southeast Asian fighters, radical ideological narratives online and offline, and competing extremist groups for leadership. Scenarios like those attacks in Paris, Jakarta and others can happen in Singapore despite our strong security measures.

These events highlight one salient point – the nature of threats we face has changed in important ways. We are now faced with a battle of ideologies, and the ubiquity of social media has allowed radical ideologies supporting terrorism to invade the thoughts of people without extremists having to physically enter a society. There are some 46,000 Twitter accounts globally and at least 1,000 Facebook accounts in Southeast Asia supporting ISIS. As a result of such pervasive social media outreach, as many as 1,000 Southeast Asians have travelled to join ISIS in Iraq and Syria since 2011, including two Singaporean families that joined ISIS since 2014. Terrorism is closer to home than we think.

Mdm Speaker, as the threat of ISIS to Singapore is very real, we need to continue to address the problem collaboratively, comprehensively and at its source. Singapore was the first Southeast Asian country to join the counter-ISIS coalition in November 2014. The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) had contributed to the counter-terrorism effort within our means and in niche areas of value to the coalition. The Minister for Defence will be speaking on the Singapore Armed Forces' (SAF's) contributions in greater detail. The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) will continue to support MHA, the Singapore Police Force (SPF) and other social and security agencies in their counter-ISIS efforts and to strengthen Singapore's Total Defence, in the combat against extremism and terrorism. Internationally, our intelligence agencies will continue to work closely with their counterparts in the region to protect our borders.

However, a military solution alone will not be sufficient in the fight against radical ideologies and terrorism, which aims to exploit potential racial and religious fault lines and de-stabilise society by causing mistrust amongst different religions and races. We need a whole-of-society response to this threat of radical ideologies and terrorism. I would like to commend the efforts of Government agencies like MHA, the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) and the Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS) for their support of programmes that help to tackle radicalisation and extremism head-on.

Looking forward, MINDEF will continue to support MHA, SPF and other social and security agencies in their counter-ISIS efforts. In addition to what the Government must do, I would also like to highlight that each of us needs to pay special attention to strengthening our social and psychological defences, which are two of the five pillars in Total Defence. Conceived over 30 years ago, Total Defence has enabled us to face and overcome national challenges, and will continue to do so in the years ahead. But we will all need to continuously translate the ideas of Total Defence into effective actions.

The fight against violent extremism will not be a quick or easy one. It is an ideological war against terrorists whose goal is social destruction through fear and mistrust and not only physical destruction. To put it simply and directly, these terrorists are criminals who have exploited and misrepresented Islam and deceitfully portrayed themselves as practising and religious Muslims. Scholars and Islamic religious leaders have noted that terrorists who claim to be motivated by Islamic religious ideology often turn out to have little and incomplete understanding of Islam.

Unfortunately, such misrepresentation of Islam has caused anxiety and even fears in inter-group relations between Muslim and non-Muslim groups in Singapore. But while this inter-group tension is understandable as a natural human reaction given the misinformation, if left unaddressed, it will surely – and not necessarily slowly – lead to suspicion and one group blaming the other. Very soon, inter-group relations will deteriorate and tensions escalate, and everyone in Singapore will suffer when the social harmony we are used to, abruptly erodes.

Hence, every group needs to make the effort to understand the other group, and act and react in constructive and adaptive ways. Non-Muslims need to understand that terrorism is based on radical ideologies and teachings that are completely un-Muslim and unIslamic. To believe that violent extremism is Islamic and that terrorists are religious Muslims, our society will fall into the terrorists' trap to sow discord. All non-Muslims in Singapore can help preserve social harmony by doing small but important things, such as correcting misconceptions or stereotypical and anti-Muslim remarks or actions by family members and friends, and also on social media.

Our Muslim community must also act and act decisively – give the clear message and assurance that we denounce violence. A Turkish Muslim scholar recently wrote in The Wall Street Journal that terrorists are committing grave sins in the name of Islam, and scholars studying the primary sources of the Quran and the teachings of Islam have all dispelled any claims terrorists make of religious justifications of their cause. Muslims must, therefore, reject any forms of violence in the name of Islam. The outgoing Ambassador of Indonesia to Singapore, Bapak Andri Hadi, informed me recently that the family members and fellow villagers of the terrorists killed in the recent Jakarta attacks refused to allow the bodies to be buried in their village, totally rejecting and disassociating themselves from the dead terrorists.

Indeed, each time a terror attack takes place, our Muslim community and religious leaders have repeatedly denounced the radical ideology articulated by terrorists and condemned the acts of these terrorist groups,including ISIS, Al Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah (JI). For example, following the arrest and repatriation of the 27 radicalised Bangladeshis, Dr Mohamed Fatris Bakaram, Mufti of Singapore, publicly denounced extremism and extremist acts that threaten the security, peace and harmony of Singapore and the world. Mufti Dr Fatris said, and I quote, "(the extremist groups) contradict the fundamental Islamic teaching of protecting the sanctity of human life and preserving peace and harmony at all times. The safety and peace of Singapore is of paramount interest to the Singapore Muslim community. We have a commendable tradition of living as inclusive and progressive Muslims within the context of Singapore's multi-ethnic and multi-religious landscape."

Every terrorist act carried out in the name of Islam will significantly affect all Muslims, potentially alienating them from their fellow citizens and deepening the misunderstanding about Islam as a peaceful religion.

We are fortunate that our painstaking effort for the past 50 years in building trust and maintaining social and religious harmony has brought us peace and stability. However, this effort is even more critical now. The ideological war confronting us is fought in the minds of our people, made more challenging with modern communication tools like social media. We need to increase our religious understanding and also build up our social and psychological resilience to reduce our vulnerability towards those who exploit the Internet and social media with false teachings. Our Muslim community needs leadership and guidance from our community and religious leaders and scholars to equip them with a moral and religious compass to help navigate the complex web of information in the borderless cyber world.

This will equip our Muslim community with a deeper understanding of Islamic teachings and discern it from the misrepresentations of Islam and the multitude of alternative extremist views that are readily available on the Internet. It also benefits the larger non-Muslim communities who will have greater awareness of the true Islamic values and teachings, given our multiracial context, and be better able to understand and engage our Muslim community.

For example, some of you may be aware of calls for Muslims to abstain from wishing Merry Christmas to Christians via SMS and WhatsApp messages that have gone viral. For those who did not know better, they might be taken in and believe that it is, indeed, un-Islamic to do so. Many of us are heartened that, as reported in today's Berita Harian, senior and respected scholars, like Habib Syed Hassan Al-Attas, the Imam of Ba'alwie Mosque in Singapore, and other religious and community leaders have chosen to speak up and address this issue directly. We now know that the proposed ban on Christmas or other similar greetings has no Islamic basis. Habib Hassan said, and I quote, "The purpose of greetings is to make the recipient happy and feeling of delightfulness. In Islam, it is strongly encouraged to make friends, family members and people happy, regardless of race and religion. It is not wrong in Islam when a person greets and gives well wishes to a friend or acquaintance who is not of the same faith, as the intention is to make the person happy".

Ustaz Hasbi Hassan, the President of Persatuan Ulama dan Guru-Guru Agama Islam Singapura (PERGAS), the Singapore Islamic Scholars and Religious Teachers Association, advises that the Muslim community must be discerning in adapting to their circumstances and context and, in this case, for a multi-racial society like Singapore. According to him, a Muslim greeting "Gong Xi Fa Cai" or "Merry Christmas" to a friend is not against Islamic teachings or traditions.

This occurrence of expressing a festive greeting, if taken alone, may seem insignificant, but, if it were to occur every other day and if the Muslim community does not have the religious ballast to fight the ideological challenge, one can only imagine the religious fault lines it could create in our society.

We cannot underestimate how actions by the Muslims could cause non-Muslims to react. It is the natural process of human interaction. Similarly, actions and counter-actions of non-Muslims draw reactions from Muslims. As more attacks occur around our region, it is not unexpected for some non-Muslims to wonder if, indeed, our Muslims are becoming more religious and whether this means they have an increasing propensity for terrorism.

Non-Muslims need to know and they must be assured that religiosity per se is not the problem. It is the misinterpretation and misrepresentation of religious beliefs and teachings that is the source of terrorist thinking. At the same time, we also need our non-Muslim leaders to speak up on how non-Muslims should and should not treat Muslims. This is critical. Non-Muslims also look to the leaders in their various communities for guidance on what to do in such sensitive situations, be it religious or non-religious communities. Ultimately, it is about interacting and engaging constructively with the Muslim community as fellow Singaporeans, so that everyone in Singapore can continue to enjoy the social harmony and stability we have built together all these years.

This action-reaction effect applies to both positive and negative actions. We need to focus on generating positive chain reactions to preserve social harmony and build social resilience so that we remain a strong society. For this to happen, we must commit ourselves to share mutual respect and wider ideological and social spaces to facilitate positive interaction and deepen understanding amongst one another. We must guard against external influences that constrict our common spaces. As a society, we will only stand to lose if this happens.

The common social spaces that we share are the cornerstone of our multiracial society. Religious and community leaders, including returning religious scholars exposed to and potentially influenced by different societal structures, must be assisted to consciously re-orientate their world view to be consistent with our societal values and make-up – for our Muslim community, one that supports the tenet that Islam embraces and respects diversity – cultural, social, religious and political. Islam teaches that God identifies learning from one another as the primary goal of diversity and that respecting each human being as a creation of God is respecting God. Thus it is critical that the moral and religious compass presented to our community reflects our deep appreciation of this diversity.

In short, we must continue building social and community resilience against the spread of extremism. Extremists will continue to exploit the misunderstanding of Islam and seek to divide us along racial and religious lines. It is critical that, whether we are Muslims or non-Muslims, we all recognise that we have a major role to play in strengthening our social and psychological defences against radicalism. Our social cohesion depends on all of us having a proper understanding and trust amongst the different races and religions. Without social cohesion and social resilience against the threat of radicalism, all it takes is one hit for terrorism to sow deep mistrust and create irreparable fault lines in our society. Mdm Speaker, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Our Muslim community must act and act decisively in order to give the assurance that we also denounce violence, similar to the view of a Turkish Muslim scholar who wrote in The Wall Street Journal on 27 August last year. He felt that the terrorists are committing grave sins towards Islam. According to him, scholars and researchers of primary sources like the Al Quran and the Traditions and Sayings of the Prophet Muhammad have all dispelled any claims by the terrorists that their cause has religious justifications. Therefore, Muslims must reject strongly any forms of violence in the name of Islam. The outgoing Ambassador of Indonesia to Singapore, Bapak Andri Hadi, told me that the family members and fellow villagers of the terrorists killed in the police counter-attacks in Jakarta recently have refused to allow their bodies to be buried in their village. Essentially, they have disassociated themselves from the dead terrorists.

Indeed, although our Muslim community in Singapore comes under the spotlight whenever a terror attack takes place, our Muslim religious leaders have irrevocably denounced strongly the radical ideology articulated violently by ISIS, Al-Qaeda or JI. For instance, following the arrest and repatriation of the 27 radicalised Bangladeshis, our Mufti Dr Fatris Bakaram publicly denounced extremism and the extremist acts that threaten the security, peace and harmony in Singapore and in the world in general. The Mufti said, and I quote, "they (the extremist groups) contradict the fundamental Islamic teaching of protecting the sanctity of human life and preserving peace and harmony at all times. The safety and peace of Singapore is of paramount interest to the Singapore Muslim community. We have a commendable tradition of living as inclusive and progressive Muslims within the context of Singapore's multi-ethnic and multi-religious landscape".

Indeed, every terrorist act carried out in the name of Islam will significantly affect all Muslims. In fact, it will potentially alienate this group from their fellow citizens and also deepen the misunderstanding about Islam as a peaceful religion.

We are fortunate that our painstaking efforts in the past 50 years in building trust and maintaining social and religious harmony have brought us peace and stability. However, this effort is even more critical now. We are now faced with an ideological war that is fought in the minds of our people and it is made more challenging with modern communication tools like social media. We need to build up the resilience of our religious relations and our minds so that we are not vulnerable to the influence of the Internet and social media. Our Muslim community needs leadership and guidance from our religious leaders and our religious teachers, who will equip them with the moral and religious compass to help them navigate the complex web of information in the borderless cyber world.

It will not only be useful to equip our Muslim community with a deeper understanding of Islam and its true teachings, and discern it from the misrepresentations of Islam and the multitude of alternative extremist views that are readily available on the Internet, it also benefits the larger non-Muslim communities who will have a greater awareness of the true Islamic values and teachings, given our multiracial context. They will be better able to understand and engage our Muslim community.

For example, some of you may still remember the call that tells Muslims to not wish "Merry Christmas" to Christians through SMS and WhatsApp. These messages became viral. Those who did not know better might be taken in and believe that it is, indeed, un-Islamic to do so. However, in Singapore, fortunately, we have senior and respected religious leaders like Habib Syed Hasan Al Attas, who is the Imam from the Ba'alwi Mosque, and other religious and community leaders who have voiced their views, as published in today's Berita Harian.

Our community knows that this view is inaccurate. According to Habib Hasan, I quote, "the purpose of greetings is to make the recipient happy and feel delighted. It gives happiness to friends, families and acquaintances, regardless of race or religion, and this is encouraged in Islam".

Ustaz Hasbi Hassan, the President of PERGAS, agrees and advises that the Muslim community must be discerning in adapting to their circumstances and context. According to him, and I quote, "although there are different views about this issue, that is, wishing 'Gong Xi Fa Cai' or 'Merry Christmas', it is not against Islamic teachings or traditions". He stated that the Muslim community has to know how to adapt themselves to their context and situation.

The occurrence of expressing a festive greeting may seem insignificant if taken alone, but if it were to occur every other day, and if the Muslim community does not have the religious ballast to fight the ideological challenge, one can only imagine the religious fault lines that they could create in our society.

We cannot underestimate how actions by Muslims could cause non-Muslims to react. This is the natural process of human interactions. Similarly, actions and counter-actions of non-Muslims will also draw reactions from Muslims.

As more attacks occur around our region, it is not unexpected for some non-Muslims to wonder if, indeed, our Muslims are becoming more religious and whether this means that they have an increasing propensity for terrorism. Non-Muslims need to know and they must be given the assurance that the religiosity of a community is not a problem. It is the misinterpretation and misrepresentation of religious beliefs and teachings that become the source of terrorist thinking. At the same time, we would also need our non-Muslim leaders to speak up on the best way for non-Muslims to continue their relations with Muslims today.

This action-reaction effect applies to both positive and negative actions. We need to focus on generating positive chain reactions in order to preserve social harmony and build social resilience so that we remain a strong society. For this to happen, we must commit ourselves to sharing common spaces in order to facilitate positive interactions and deepen understanding amongst one another. We must be on guard against external influences that constrict our common spaces with other communities. Otherwise, as a community, we will stand to lose.

These common social spaces that we share are the cornerstone of our multiracial society. Religious and community leaders, including returning religious scholars who may be exposed to and potentially be influenced by different societal structures, must be assisted to consciously reorientate their world view in order to be consistent with our societal values and the make-up of our country – for our Muslim community. It is one that supports the tenet that Islam embraces and respects diversity – diversity in terms of culture, social, religion and politics. Islam teaches us that we should learn from one another and this is the main aim of diversity; and respecting each human being as a creation of God is respecting God. Thus, it is critical that the moral and religious compass that we present to our community reflects our deep appreciation of this diversity.

In short, we must continue to build social and community resilience against the spread of extremism. The extremists will continue to exploit the misunderstanding of Islam and seek to divide us along racial and religious lines. Hence, it is critical that, whether we are Muslims or non-Muslims, we must all recognise that we have a major role to play in strengthening our social and psychological defences against radicalism. Our social cohesion depends on all of us having a proper understanding and trust among the different races and religions.

Without social cohesion and social resilience against the threat of radicalism, all it takes is one thing, just one terrorist attack, to sow deep mistrust and it may create irreparable fault lines in our society.

(In English): Our security challenges are beyond traditional warfare. We can overcome this ideological war and threats of terrorism by demonstrating social and psychological resilience and solidarity within the local Muslim community and with the rest of the non-Muslim community in Singapore. It will not only allow us to prevent an attack, but also prepare us to deal with the aftermath of such attacks.

In the unfortunate event that an attack occurs, we must stand together as a united community to deal with the aftermath. We should draw inspiration from brave societies like Australia when Australians showed solidarity by standing by their Muslim community in the wake of the Sydney hostage crisis, with many offering to ride with members of the Islamic faith to work on public transport.

Our commitment to fortifying our social and psychological resilience will make us much stronger and more resilient and bolstered by a renewed sense of conviction as we unite in the face of terrorism and violent extremism. A strong sense of national identity and commitment to the values of our society will be the irreplaceable pillars for the years to come. We will and must continue to adapt to rise up to the threats of today and tomorrow. We must do all we can to prevent a terrorist attack here in Singapore. But when an attack happens, we must not succumb to our suspicions and fears. We must fight back as a united community, respond effectively and recover well.

For now, we must continue to strengthen ourselves against untruths, fear and mistrust. On that note, Mdm Speaker, I move to support the Motion.

Mdm Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.

2.04 pm

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member): Mdm Speaker, in the President's speech, he mentioned five key aims that the Government hopes to fulfil in this coming term. I would like to touch on the fifth aim – to engage and partner Singaporeans in nation-building.

Madam, 2015 now behind us. While we are thankful for much that we have achieved and gone through in the last 50 years, the next 50 years will likely be more challenging. We cannot rest on our experience of the last 50 years. As the world becomes more complex and people more mobile, it is important that Singaporeans feel rooted and committed to Singapore. There are many elements in nation-building and, for today, I would like to focus on just three points: social justice; rule of law and access to justice; and strengthening governance in our national institutions.

Social justice. The President talked about a caring society and treating one another with warmth and dignity. Before we can move ahead together, we must continue to have a Singapore that looks after its people, regardless of their economic means. Ultimately, how we treat our people reflects very much on ourselves. How we care about the less well-off and the less fortunate will speak very much about ourselves. We must have compassion and empathy for our fellow Singaporeans who are less privileged. We should desire to grow together as a nation and as a people.

Recently, I had a poignant conversation with an experienced social worker who shared her deep concerns about families she worked with, where both the parents and, subsequently, the grown-up children in the families continue to rely on state welfare assistance. Yes, we have to take care of such Singaporeans when they are in need but, like the social worker, we must have empathy with even the most difficult of cases and, at the same time, we must not easily give up on trying to find ways to help needy Singaporeans get out of this financial spiral.

In a small city-state like Singapore, we cannot afford to be a society where every man lives for himself. This is especially so in a place like Singapore where a large part of our population is made up of transient residents. Like pilgrims on the same journey, we have to watch out for one another so that we can all arrive together.

Rule of law and access to justice. Rule of law is the lynchpin of developed nations. It is the knowledge of the rule of law that informs citizens their rights: what to do, how to conduct themselves, how to lead happy, orderly and lawful lives. The rule of law also helps the government of the day and our national institutions to manage and run the country in accordance with the laws of the land. And rule of law must come with access to justice.

Early access to lawyers. Recently, the President of the Law Society, Mr Thio Shen Yi, had, in his speech at the Opening of the Legal Year on 11 January 2016, brought up the issue of a suspect's right of access to legal counsel before the suspect's statement is recorded by the Police. As Mr Thio puts it succinctly, and I quote, "Justice and fairness are served because it is that lawyer's job to advise the suspect to tell the truth, to articulate any defences that they may have, to cooperate with the Police, to advise if no defence is available, but also to advise on the privilege against self-incrimination". He mentioned that, and I quote, "An accused may be detained for days or weeks without access to a lawyer", and "we need to re-evaluate whether this is fair or desirable". Mr Thio stated that the Law Society's Criminal Practice Committee has recommended that a suspect be allowed to consult a lawyer privately for up to one hour before statements are recorded by the Police.

I agree with the President of the Law Society's call for the Government to accept this recommendation. In our legal system where the accused is innocent until proven guilty, we must give the accused an opportunity to have early access to legal counsel. Until he is proven guilty, he has all rights as every other citizen. As a democracy, we must value the rights of every Singaporean and guard them jealously. These rights must include his rights to early legal advice in a situation where the end game is potential punishment by the Court. Just as the accused's failure to abide by the law shall have consequences, equally, we must give the accused an opportunity to understand his rights and defences at the onset.

Disclosure in criminal proceedings. Moving to another point regarding access to justice, I would like to refer to the Attorney-General's (AG's) speech at the Opening of the Legal Year as well. The AG made proposals for early disclosure of evidence in criminal cases by both the prosecution and defence. I support this proposal. This is a step in the right direction for our criminal justice system. Fair disclosure of evidence in criminal cases in common law countries are usually taken seriously. Discovery of obligations under our civil procedure rules have been in place since time immemorial. As the AG said and I quote, "Disclosure may or may not affect the outcome of the case, but the fairness and openness of the process is important".

Disclosure and, particularly, early disclosure, of evidence promotes a transparent process and also potentially reduces legal costs. The accused is aware of the case he has to meet. Indeed, in some cases, he may be advised from the disclosure made that he has a weak case, and he may be advised earlier to take a certain course of action. Transparency in a criminal justice process will demonstrate to our citizens that evidence is taken seriously and that, in fact, evidence is submitted early and efficiently. This knowledge will surely strengthen public confidence in our criminal justice system.

Legal aid. We have to ensure that our legal system is readily accessible to all Singaporeans, regardless of their economic means. It is heartening to see the continuing increase in the number of cases that are handled by volunteer lawyers under the Law Society's Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS). In recent years, it is also heartening to see many lawyers volunteering at our community legal clinics all over Singapore, giving legal advice to many needy Singaporeans, and also lawyers volunteering their services to do pro bono legal work under various auspices, such as the Law Society, the Community Justice Centre and various non-government organisations (NGOs).

But I think there is still a shortage of lawyers who are able to provide pro bono representation work. Many people need lawyers to assist them beyond giving advice for 20 minutes in the manner that we see at community legal clinics.

I would like to ask the Ministry of Law to consider reviewing the limits under the means test for all applications for legal aid under the Legal Aid Bureau. I believe the current limits of $10,000 disposable income is still too restrictive and a moderate increase on the limits may provide much needed assistance to many more low-income earning Singaporeans who are caught by the current limits.

Many lawyers in private practice are already doing pro bono work. May I also suggest that the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) and the Government Ministries consider allowing their lawyers to spend at least some time doing some form of pro bono work? AGC has a big pool of lawyers who are called to the Bar. This will not only help to increase the assistance that can be rendered to Singaporeans who cannot afford legal assistance, it may also help Government lawyers, being public servants, to better understand the challenges that many needy Singaporeans requiring legal assistance may face.

I move on to strengthening governance in our national institutions. In the next 50 years, we need to work towards further strengthening our national institutions, including our Civil Service and Statutory Boards. We have a highly talented Civil Service which we have built over time and one which is known for its integrity. Until now, our Civil Service has only worked with one ruling party. In the next 50 years, we must ensure that our Civil Service will always remain one of the key stabilisers of our country, regardless of which political party is in power.

The independence and political neutrality of the Civil Service and Statutory Boards must be fiercely maintained so that Singaporeans will always have complete confidence in the non-partisan nature of these institutions.

The President mentioned that the Government will work closely with the people. We must remember that Singaporeans are the masters of our country. In this connection, Singaporeans must feel engaged in the country. They have a right and a say in the governance of the country. They must not feel resigned to being a digit in the country, helplessly dependent on those in authority to make all decisions for them. Singaporeans must feel empowered about their future and in giving them a voice and a role in nation-building so that they will be engaged and vested in the country.

To this end, access to information is important for all. It is important because every citizen needs access to information in order to make informed decisions concerning matters around them which we need a comment and input in nation-building. The engagement of Singaporeans does not stop at giving them a platform to speak. They must be given the background and information so that they can make informed choices and give constructive input for nation-building.

Correspondingly, transparency is also one of the features of a good government. For this reason, I would echo the previous call for the introduction of a Freedom of Information Act by my colleague Mr Pritam Singh who spoke about this in his speech at the President's Address in 2011.

The office of ombudsman. The Government should consider setting up an independent office of ombudsman. Such an office can review any allegations of wrongful decision-making, as well as to investigate any allegations of wrong-doing on the part of public servants. Such a process may also avoid legal costs that may come with judicial review.

And on judicial review, although our laws provide for judicial review, this avenue remains under-developed. It is important for us to develop this area such that people will have confidence that they are able to challenge any questionable decision-making process of any public authority. As an eminent English Judge Lord Hoffmann puts it succinctly, "The principles of judicial review give effect to the rule of law".

The average Singaporean must also be able to afford reasonable legal fees to commence the judicial review application, or the rights under the law will be merely academic. To this end, it is also important that provision be made for sufficient legal aid to be extended to the applicants of the judicial review such that legal costs will not be a deterrent to Singaporeans who have a genuine case that he wishes to bring up.

Finally, whatever political changes the Government may have in mind will probably have important consequences on our nation- building. Singaporeans must be amply consulted and Singaporeans must be happy with such changes before any decision is made for their introduction.

Mdm Speaker, the Workers' Party will provide a platform for Singaporeans to have a strong say in the direction in which Singapore will progress. Singaporeans must feel secure about our country and where we are going from here in the next 50 years and be confident of the governance and institutions of this country. With that, Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion of Thanks.

Mdm Speaker: Mr Henry Kwek.

2.15 pm

Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Nee Soon): Mdm Speaker, I stand in support of the Motion. President Tan said that it is important for us to upgrade our economy to sustain growth. I cannot agree more. Inclusive growth is important. Of late, it is fashionable to focus more on the inclusive part of it, rather than the growth. In fact, just now in the House, there was talk about social justice.

But really, if we think about it, growth is a critical element and ingredient for inclusiveness. Without growth, our society's wealth will be more commonly inherited and less commonly created. Without opportunity, our society will be one of permanent class and stifling glass ceiling.

And without success, we will not be able to pay for an inclusive society, for generations to come. So, in this fast-changing world, how can we make sure that Singapore remains relevant? I would like to talk about three points today. One, how we can grow our future economy by creating more businesses, especially those with disruptive innovation and models. Two, how we can refresh our education system for the new economy. Three, how we must retain our fighting spirit.

Before we talk about the "what" to do, it is important to understand where the global economy is at today. For the last few decades, we have had unsustainable borrowings that have fuelled excessive consumption. But after the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), this unsustainable borrowing has stopped. We still have a lot of surplus production capacity. So, basically, we have a supply challenge.

To keep the world afloat, the central banks have flooded the world with money and, businesses and individuals fearing deflation and disinflation, are afraid to spend or expand. Even China today is cutting back and is entering a low-demand period. So, on top of the supply challenge, we also have a demand challenge.

The other emerging economies are also getting more competitive. Singapore Airlines (SIA) has to fight "tooth and nail" against Middle Eastern airlines, which are well-funded. Our shipyards have to contest against capable Korean counterparts. Even our role in the region is also less certain moving forward.

In the Western-dominated economic order, we have a distinct role in Singapore – as a finance and business hub in Asia. But think about it: when China builds its One- Belt- One- Road initiative, a new world economic order, it is unclear how central our role will be in Asia. And then, there is the disruptive effect of technology.

Multinational corporations (MNCs) that Singapore traditionally relied on are being disrupted by start ups, and start ups have much less to do with Singapore. A case in point – Hewlett-Packard (HP) employs around 10,000 people in Singapore, while Google just have a few mere hundreds.

A recent World Economic Foreign Report said that the 15 major economies in the world in the next five years will lose around seven million jobs to technology; seven million jobs. So, what is the underlying theme to all these? The underlying theme is actually that our mainstream export-based economy that has fuelled Singapore's success for the last few decades is now under siege from excessive competition and from disruptive technology and business models. And let us not forget that Singapore is mainly designed to support this mainstream economy.

Our mainstream economy is important, and will continue to be so, and I will share some of my thoughts about it in the Budget speech. But for today, I would like to talk about how we can urgently grow the economy.

Let us ask ourselves: how many significant companies with disruptive models and disruptive technology has Singapore created in the last decade? Honestly, very few. If we do not have a frank conversation about this today, and do not adjust, we will be in for a tough ride in the future.

How can we grow this new economy? The Government's role is primarily to create a conducive environment for the new economy. But in specific areas, such as finance, smart-nation, urban planning, where Singapore is boldly inventing the future, we should give ample opportunities for Singapore-based businesses and start ups to grow together with Singapore, and they can be global giants one day.

We usually equate the new economy with cutting-edge technology. But it is not always true. Case in point – Facebook, Instagram and Uber – these are combinations of existing technology, but not necessarily leading-edge ones. So, what matters is the combination and the recombination of ideas and technology and the ability to test and scale the innovations quickly in the global markets in weeks rather than months.

Our role as a Government is to build this environment for the new economy. I have a few suggestions.

One, our research efforts must be aggressively translated, first, into innovations and then into enterprises. Our research labs should get the ideas out quickly in an affordable and simple manner, preferably to Singapore-based companies. Let us not forget that the circulation of the ideas is just as important as the ideas themselves.

Two, we have to build a world-class funding environment. We already have a good base of venture capitalists today, but, because of the recent uptick in number of startups and a lack of high-profile market exits, there is a pressing gap in seed, Series A, mezzanine funding. We also do not have a real venture-focused bank like a famous Silicon Valley bank that looks at start-ups' viability beyond their balance sheet.

Three, crowd-sourcing platforms like Kickstarter are fast becoming the preferred way to test and scale innovations globally. So, we should entrench these players in Singapore and, as our start-ups secure commitments from such crowd-sourcing platforms, we can help them scale up their ideas in weeks, instead of months, by giving them access to capital by also connecting them with local manufacturers, contract manufacturers and partners.

Four, we should provide opportunity for start-ups to demonstrate their ideas. The finance industry is on the verge of being disrupted by financial technology companies. Barclay's President recently said that in the next 10 years, 20% to 50% of finance jobs will be replaced by technology; 20% to 50% in just 10 years.

I am confident that Singapore can invent the future and set the gold standard on how financial hubs should operate in the digital world. The important thing is this: while we invent the future, let us make sure that we bring our startups along to ride this wave. For example, we can create regulatory sandboxes to test out new ideas on a small scale. After all, the United Kingdom is doing the same already for the finance industry.

For these experiments, what our agencies can do is to look beyond the established firms, perhaps through a double-envelope tender system where, first, you can evaluate the innovativeness of the idea and then evaluate the companies' ability to see the project through and not just on financial terms. If Singapore startups can do it, our Government should provide more support.

Five, we should remove unnecessary regulations. Many of our economic agencies are pro-business, but many regulations fall outside their purview. Let me share a light-hearted example from the traditional economy. Try putting a food truck on the side of any road in Singapore. Do you know that you would have to apply for a separate permit for every location you put it at? But is this really necessary? After all, if the National Environment Agency has certified the food truck for safety, is it still necessary to have a location-based licence for every location? After all, do we not have solid rules on traffic obstruction? So, that is just an example.

Regulations should protect the essential. But in most areas of the new economy, Singapore can strike a better balance between stability and opportunity, because it is hard to go against what the consumer wants. Once Internet banking is invented, it is hard to uninvent it. It is hard to protect our local banks by limiting the number of foreign banks' branches or automated teller machines (ATMs) because when you go to the Internet and use your smartphones, you will get past it. So, therefore, our regulations should go with the type of consumer preference, which usually embraces the new economy and not against it.

In fact, I think that we can go the extra mile by setting up an advisory centre for startups to assist them in regulatory and public sector matters.

The second part of my speech is about education. The future of science fiction is almost upon us. Fast forward 10 years, and we will live in a world of self-driving cars, computers detecting diseases, and robots doing routine tasks.

History has shown that technology creates winners, especially in the long run. But in the short run, it can create many losers. In the last industrial revolution, it took 100 years before the steam engine was able to uplift somebody's life in Europe. In today's digital revolution, the effect is even more pronounced, because the winner can usually replicate their ideas digitally at virtually no cost and take most of the profit home.

Let me give an anecdote. Two centuries ago, the world's 10th best bricklayer was assured of a future. But today, an app developer working for the world's 10th best, let us say, music streaming app company has a questionable future.

So, the question is: are we preparing Singapore to thrive in such a future? And this goes beyond SkillsFuture. We must prepare our children starting in their earliest years. Therefore, I urge the Ministry of Education (MOE) and SkillsFuture to critically examine our basic and continuing education system in two ways.

Firstly, we should prepare our children to do what machines cannot do. It means we should teach them how to innovate, how to communicate complex ideas, how to recognise macro patterns, how to connect ideas across different fields, sense the ground and tap on intuition.

Secondly, we should also teach our children to be the masters of machines. By that, I mean letting them learn the basic principles of computer programming, artificial intelligence and big data. We must prepare Singaporeans as if their future depends on it, because it does.

What I am saying is not for every kid, on top of their hefty curriculum, to be a top-notch programmer, an AI specialist and a big-data analyst. What kind of childhood is that going to be, if it is all work and no fun? What I am saying is that we must teach them the broad principles through a general programme, so that when they graduate into tertiary education and beyond, they are able to specialise in some of these areas.

Singapore is in an excellent position to refresh our education system because we are excellent and nimble and we can plan 10 to 15 years ahead and adjust our curriculum quite quickly. We already have a tech-savvy population. Just look at the number of kids with iPads when you go out. But we must go beyond being just consumers of technology to being co-creators of technology.

My first two points are about how the Government can help Singapore preserve our livelihoods. But no Government intervention is sufficient if our people are not hungry enough. So, the question is: how can we preserve our children's will to fight and win? Education – be it history or social studies – is a key way we can pass down values from one generation to another.

To me, the real story of Singapore is in the first 20 years of our Independence. This is the Singapore exceptionalism Deputy Prime Minister Tharman spoke so eloquently about at the St Gallen Symposium. It is about how we turned our perpetual disadvantages into a determination to succeed and innovate. Out of nothing, we created a multiracial society, a contrarian growth strategy, an inclusive housing programme, a thriving metropolis well-defended by all.

So, the story is not just about the Government. It is also about our people, including the community and business leaders, how they rose to the challenge. Therefore, I am calling for an increased emphasis of our history and social studies on the first two decades, with the focus on Singapore's exceptionalism. It is critical that our children learn that they should continue to take risks, not take anything for granted, recognise the harsh realities of our surroundings. In short, we must make sure that our children learn about the spirit of 1965.

In conclusion, fellow Members of Parliament and fellow Singaporeans, our success in the first 50 years has been described as a vision of audacity, an audacity that was built on far-sighted and bold Government policies; on the determination and spirit of Singaporeans; and Singapore's survival and success in the future again depends on this spirit. Will our nation continue to defy the odds? I believe we will.

Recently, I came across a quote by Richard Branson, the founder of Virgin Atlantic. He has this line, "Train our people well enough so that they can leave, but treat them well enough so that they do not want to".

Let me paraphrase him to encapsulate some of the points that I mentioned today: "We should prepare our people, so that they can go beyond Singapore, today or tomorrow, but build a home, and a sense of purpose, so that they will stay".

Mdm Speaker: Mr Seah Kian Peng.

2.31 pm

Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Mdm Speaker, thank you for allowing me to join this debate.

Before I come to my main speech, I just want to add my comments to the two points which the hon Member Mr Dennis Tan spoke about just a couple of minutes ago. Unfortunately, he is not in the Chambers. He touched on social justice. Indeed, I think social mobility is something which this Government and, certainly, the People's Action Party (PAP), subscribes to and takes great pains to ensure this remains the case for every Singaporean, something which our Prime Minister, our Deputy Prime Ministers and many of our Ministers have mentioned several times, that we should leave no one behind, and that we should build a more caring and inclusive society. The way many of our assistance schemes are designed is tilted to give more to those who have less. It is something which we continue to do over the years, not just the last few years, from Year 1 – SG1, to now, SG51. I am sure we will continue to go on that route.

Over these last two weekends, as with many of us here, we gave out several Edusave awards. I handed out to over 1,100 recipients over 12 sessions. For many of them, education is, indeed, the most important area we want to invest in. It is the best way for each and every Singaporean to break out and create a better life for themselves – which is why we always see MOE getting a large slice of the Budget, something which we all support.

The other point which Mr Dennis Tan made was about strengthening governance in national institutions. He exhorted it. I totally agree with him. In fact, strengthening governance is something that should take place in every organisation and we should all embrace it. If you are a public-listed company, it matters. If you are a sports association, it matters. A religious institution, likewise. A voluntary welfare organisation (VWO), a charity and, I dare say, also in the Town Councils, we all have a duty of care to all stakeholders in any organisation to make sure that governance is there.

Mdm Speaker, for today, I would like to reflect on the President's points about partnership and collaboration amongst citizens, that everyone plays a part in building our nation.

Last year, I had a senior, although young, civil servant observing one of my Meet-the-People sessions. The combination of youth and seniority is sometimes an indicator for high flyers, but it can be an unpropitious mix. This officer observed what we did that evening. At the end of the session, as we were sharing, he turned to one of my key volunteers, exasperated, and he asked, "Why do you keep writing us these letters to make exceptions? You know that we cannot do that. You do not waste time writing; we do not waste time replying".

Mdm Speaker, as a politician, I am very seldom speechless. And as a former Administrative Officer, I am very seldom at a loss for ideas. But that night, I paused on both counts. Does our Public Service need to change? On the one hand, this high flyer is right. Some residents do sometimes ask me to write letters that are beyond the pale. One resident lives in a landed property and owns three cars. Unfortunately, her house is only big enough to have one car park lot. She expects the Government – that is me – to provide her with lots for her two other cars. If not, she told me, the Government is lousy and she would vote against me in the next election.

My reply, given verbally, was quite a strong one. With hindsight, I was lucky that she did not video-tape me on her handphone. A Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) officer was not so lucky. I am sure you are all familiar with the incident that took place at the Social Service Office (SSO) at Boon Lay, where a man went to demand his monthly social assistance which was late for that month.

The SSO, knowing that this man was actually going to have another baby, had initiated an early review, and increased the amount of assistance for the family from $600 to $800 per month. This change, unfortunately, resulted in a delay of a few days in the crediting of the financial assistance to the recipient. Even as the MSF officer was trying to explain this, the recipient, loud and hectoring, demanded "his money". After several minutes of this, the officer was riled up enough to say, "We do not owe you". The whole exchange was put up on social media.

Two things were clear to me. First, the man seeking assistance intended to record everything because the recording started with his session. Second, there is a strong sense of entitlement and the tone he took was that the officer, indeed, "owed" him the money. Both sides were not right, but in this sense, my sympathies lie with the officer.

Mdm Speaker, I have noticed in recent years that there is a rise of self-administered vigilante justice among members of the public. The weapon of choice – the handphone. Judge and jury – the social media public. This has to change. On the flip side, I have also seen some very bad responses by civil servants, the very few which give the Government as a whole a bad name. Some put on what they call an "EQ face" but their empathy quotient leaves much to be desired. This is not who we are. This is not what we dream of becoming. This is not Singapore.

The President, in his Address, noted that many Singaporeans are willing to contribute and share a part of their lives with one another. He invited all of us to participate in shaping our common future, to strengthen our bonds and deepen trust with one another. And implicit in his speech is the tension I spoke about. He said, "Our individual aspirations may differ, but we all realised that we must work together to create our common future. This spirit was sustained through our SG50 celebrations, and profoundly deepened when we mourned the passing of our founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew. The SGfuture dialogues and the Committee on the Future Economy are but two national platforms for us to make our future together."

Mdm Speaker, the Government is the servant of the people, but civil servants are not minions to be ordered about; they are our brothers, our sisters and they are also our friends, too. They are the people who help those of us who cannot help ourselves. The people direct public resources with their collective will, but, individually, we have no special call on these resources, we cannot demand private use of this joint resource. We cannot demand rules to break on every occasion that benefits us, without care for fellow Singaporeans. We should have neither vigilante justice from the public or high-handed behaviour from the civil servants. This is not who we are as Singaporeans.

So, what are we? Who is this "Singaporean"? My answer is not very "cheem". But every week I walk around Braddell Heights, Marine Parade, Serangoon Central and, yes, Aljunied too, I can see our language is one kind. Our style – you do not mind I say – is other places cannot find. Nasi lemak and roti prata, our yong tau foo got halal one. Who is the Singaporean? I ask you, you just listen, can tell lah. By the way, I ask you, what is this "Eu-no-ia"?

Mdm Speaker, you may be thinking whether to stop me now because dialects are not allowed in Parliament. But is Singlish a dialect? I do not know. But I do know that our language is like us – we are Malay and Chinese and Indian – and we are "others", too. Our common space is large and our politics practical – not because we do not care, but because we care too much. We care too much to allow what makes us different to keep us apart. Our faiths, our race, our religions may be different, but these differences make us strong.

Mdm Speaker, Eunoia – I have no strong views on the name of the new junior college, but I have strong views on how we need to be confident in our new identity. Sure, our country is young, especially compared to Greece, but in our names and in our lexicon, let us be proud and celebrate our own. Indeed, "our language is one kind". And to the students of Eunoia, be confident and make the name your own. The history of your school is yet to be written, so co-create it and write it in your own words, with your own accent.

So, what is this Singaporean style? It is said that the Singaporean is pragmatic, which has often been mistaken for not caring enough; for not having a particular political philosophy. The truth is we care too much – we care too much to allow blind ideology to prevent us from pursuing our clear vision. We care too much to let go of our brand of metaphysics – keeping our families safe, our jobs secure, our future bright. This is what gives us meaning and hope, and this is how we define our shared future.

We must keep our common space large and our country united. What makes us Singaporean is invisible – the way we sound, the way we think, the way we reason and the way we make collective decisions. To continue to do this, to continue being Singaporean, we must remain together. We must not see people to be herded by rules that cannot be broken; at the same time, we must not see our collective good as largesse to be exploited, our public servants as servants to do our bidding, to bear our anger, to right our personal wrongs.

Who is the Singaporean? We, the people of Singapore, we are Singaporean. We are the Government and we are the people. Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion. [Applause.]

Mdm Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.

2.43 pm

Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Mdm Speaker, it is my privilege to address this House today to support the Motion of Thanks to the President. It is a privilege that I do not take lightly. I shall speak today on the subject of national unity and, specifically, what ideas and values we should unite around.

My starting point is the reaction to the results of the General Election 2015. One key note quickly emerged from some quarters. It was said that the results showed that we were one united people.

Mdm Speaker, I find that casting the election results as a badge of national unity is deeply unhelpful for nation-building. It suggests that what unites us as Singaporeans is our support for one political party. I am sure that most Singaporeans believe that what unites us is not that. Mdm Speaker, real unity should be built to last. It should be built on sterner stuff. Real unity recognises that the different voices and the debate among them are precisely what make Singapore stronger. Singing with one voice is neither proof of unity nor is it conducive to real unity.

What unites us is our shared heritage, our shared values and our common hopes for the future. Our bedrock as a nation should lie not only in the trust between the Government and the people. Mdm Speaker, our bedrock should be the trust that we have in one another, our collective sense of self-worth and national purpose. This will outlast any government and any party and is a firmer foundation on which to build our nation.

To me, there is no more eloquent statement of what defines us than the Singapore pledge that our children recite every day at school. There is no point in asking our children to do this if we do not fashion our institutions around the values that it enshrines. The pledge enjoins us, yes, to be one united people, but united in building a democratic society based on justice and equality. Some say that the pledge enshrines abstract principles. Yes, it does. But are we a people who do not hew to any abstract principles? Are we a people who only recognise purchasing power as a touchstone of progress? Surely not. I am sure everyone in this Chamber would agree.

Mdm Speaker, the pledge gives us principles but, to concretise those principles, I will argue that we can unite around two major themes that will build the Singapore story on strong foundations for the 21st century.

The first is a confident Singapore, and the second is what I call a big Singapore – a Singapore where not only the state is strong but non-state actors are strong and influential and steering our course as well.

Today, our economy faces major headwinds, as many Members here have noted. Such challenges are likely to recur in the 21st century. This is because we have already picked all the low-hanging fruit of economic growth. Future growth in the 21st century as a developed economy in an increasingly competitive and globalised world may not come from pursuing exactly the same economic development strategies that got us to where we are today.

Mdm Speaker, what should unite us at this time is the same thing that will secure our long-term economic future as a developed economy, that is, to build a confident citizenry and a confident base of local companies. Confident citizens are not so worried about the cost of living, or their ability to retire, afford property or afford to have children, that they cannot take risks or make career choices with longer-term payouts. Confident citizens will dare to switch industries to start a business, to take time out from working to reskill or further their education. Confident companies would not be so insecure about future business costs and rentals that they cannot invest in big bucks about the future or secure the funding to do so.

The confident citizenry and companies would drive productivity, innovation and entrepreneurship. Confident Singaporeans will not only want to work for multi-national companies, but to found their own multinational companies.

Mdm Speaker, the Workers' Party has proposed several measures to foster confidence amongst Singaporean citizens and companies. We should continually strengthen our risk-pooling of social safety nets and management of the cost of living. Insecurity about the risks and costs that lie in the future holds back risk-taking and breeds short-termism.

We should cherish social mobility, take steps to enhance it and measure it regularly. We should do more to ensure retirement adequacy. Right now, many Singaporeans who reach their drawdown age have little or nothing to withdraw from their Central Provident Fund (CPF), whereas CPF LIFE payouts that they would receive are insufficient to retire on.

If Singaporeans fear retirement, they will not make confident choices that a 21st century economy needs us to make. We should do more to groom our local companies to become world leaders and to form a strong third engine of economic growth, alongside multinational and Government-linked companies.

The Workers' Party has called for a National Secretariat to bring a whole-of-Government approach to this critically important task for our nation's economy.

Together with a raft of other measures that not only provide Government support and help small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to manage costs, but also help to nudge SMEs towards greater productivity, a way of setting long-term productivity targets and enabling our SMEs to benchmark their own productivity performance within their industries.

Lastly, we should look at our education system when talking about a confident Singapore. Is our education geared to producing leaders, innovators and entrepreneurs? Or are our students focused more on content-mastery at the expense of cultivating soft skills like leadership, problem-solving, initiative, communication skills and confidence?

It is said that, in Singapore, a child raises his or her hand only when he or she is 100% sure that he or she has the right answer, whereas in Silicon Valley, for example, a child would do so even if he or she was not completely sure.

Are we nurturing Singaporeans who have enough sense of self-worth and self-esteem to make confident choices?

Mdm Speaker, when we talk about the economy, we have to talk about industries. What is a sunrise or a sunset industry will change, and change more frequently as the 21st century meanders on. Confident Singaporean citizens and companies will be able to seize opportunities in any new sectors that emerge. But when we talk about future-ready economic sectors, we should not forget those sectors where Singapore's small size and high population density force us to develop expertise. Necessity, it is said, is the mother of invention.

We have developed technologies and know-how in water recycling and water management due to our water scarcity. This is an example of that. In the same vein, we should consider becoming pioneers in the fields of indoor urban agriculture and urban as well as offshore solar power generation which bolster our food and energy security. We should explore using underground space for indoor farming and optimise our rooftop and maritime options for solar power generation, thereby developing potentially exportable know-how and intellectual property. We shall have more to say about these matters in future sessions.

Mdm Speaker, some would say that Singapore and Singaporeans are already confident enough. I am not so sure. In my grassroots work in East Coast Group Representation Constituency (GRC) and Aljunied GRC, I meet many residents who feel insecure and, in some cases, overwhelmed by the cost of living and the challenges of retirement and by fears about whether their children can afford housing.

The second theme that we should unite around, Mdm Speaker, is that of a big Singapore, a Singapore that is not dominated by a very strong state, but one where non-state actors are also strong, confident and influential. Here, I refer to the private sector, civil society, alternative political parties and the citizens of Singapore themselves. How can we face the future as a developed country if we are dominated by a very powerful state that is, in turn, dominated by an entrenched, single political party? This structure creates too much dependence on a small group of people. The risk is too high. When our leadership core comes overwhelmingly from one kind of career background – lifelong civil servants – the risk becomes greater.

Mdm Speaker, I respect our Civil Service and the civil servants who have devoted their careers to serving the needs of the people. But to have a core leadership that has very few with any other kind of career profile, that opens up the danger of groupthink, self-rationalisation and self-congratulation.

Recently, some individuals in the Arts Engage network of Singaporean artists commented, in an op-ed piece, that there were "cases of work censored to protect the Government from embarrassment rather than for society's good."

They said, "Singapore has yet to achieve the ideal of 'arms-length funding' where public money is given out by an independent, non-government body." This was said in the context of the arts sector.

Mdm Speaker, we have some degree of public debate involving scholars and public intellectuals. This is good, but we need more civil society bodies that take on the role of policy debate and advocacy.

And what about politics? In the General Election of 2015, it was said that voting for the Opposition went against human nature because it was human nature to thank a party for good policies. There is something else that is more or less predictable about human nature. In my opinion, when too much power becomes entrenched in one party or group of persons or individuals, whoever they may be and from whatever party they may come from, inevitably, that power breeds complacency and a tendency to be self-serving. It is a matter of time.

There is yet another argument about diversity and debate, Mdm Speaker. If policy ideas are not tested in open and public debate, not only in Parliament but outside Parliament, there will be less public understanding and buy-in into the thinking that has gone into the policy making. This will make it harder for us, as a country, to truly move as one.

Yet, Mdm Speaker, in the last election, we came close to having no elected Opposition Members of Parliament in this House. With a Parliamentary super majority for one party, what is the greatest danger facing Singapore's political landscape in the long term? Is it that of gridlock, a word which we had frequently heard yesterday? Or is it that of the non-existence of any viable alternative party other than the ruling party?

Mdm Speaker, we must celebrate diversity of views, debate and disagreement. This must start in our schools and carry forward into this Parliamentary Chamber and to all social spaces in between. We must celebrate debate and disagreement as the best way to test ideas. We must learn to agree to disagree without branding one who disagrees with us as our enemy or as someone who has disrespected us.

This is real unity; this is real respect. Let us debate and disagree but remain united as Singaporeans. That is real unity worth fighting for. Let us not forget that in 2019, which is just another three years into the future, we face another anniversary – 200 years of Singapore's existence as a recognisably modern society.

Mdm Speaker, I believe that a confident Singapore and a big Singapore can stand the test of time. And if we focus on that test of time, on the longer term, there is one way in which we, in Singapore, can be a beacon to the world; there is one purpose which can serve to focus our hearts and minds in the 21st century.

The Singapore glass is half full. We have done very well with a very high quality of civil service, government efficiency and urban planning. We have not done as well in fostering strong non-state actors and institutions to balance a strong state. We can be an example to countries around the world of how efficiency in government, economic and urban planning can be combined with democracy, healthy and vibrant democracy, balanced politics, active citizenship and an active civil society and private sector. We can show the world how a country can be vibrant economically while having a vibrant political life and a deep sense of belonging.

Mdm Speaker, at SG51 and staring out at SG100 – which I will most certainly not live to see but our children will – I can think of no better mission for the country that we love. With that, I support the Motion.

Mdm Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.

2.57 pm

Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Mdm Speaker, thank you for allowing me to participate in this debate to express my support for the Motion of Thanks to the President for his Address.

As a new Member, I am humbled to be given this opportunity to serve and be a voice for our constituents whom we care about a lot. Despite overwhelming odds, our Pioneers had brought Singapore from Third World to First within a generation. Singapore has experienced such remarkable growth that other nations are looking to us to share our experience.

A number of my residents told me that the recollections of our past during the SG50 celebrations last year have strengthened their resolve to protect our little red dot and preserve our way of life.

Indeed, as the President has highlighted in his Address, we must, first and foremost, keep Singapore safe and secure to ensure our own sovereignty and livelihoods.

Terrorist attacks had claimed many lives in the last few years, with the most recent in our neighbouring country Indonesia. Just last week, MHA announced that 27 radicalised Bangladeshis were arrested here. We must be prepared and vigilant against potential attacks as well as the impact of incidents upon our social fabric. We must maintain our neutrality and be careful not to get involved in foreign politics or religious movements which could disrupt our delicate social balance and erode the goodwill which has taken years to build.

The social harmony we are enjoying today has been hard-earned. Let us continue our work to deepen mutual understanding, tolerance and respect among our diverse racial and religious groups.

The President's call to all Singaporeans to unite and to move ahead together is an important reminder for a young nation. Whether we are fifth generation Singaporeans or new immigrants, we must always be mindful that we have pledged to stay united, regardless of race, language or religion.

Every one of us has an important role to play. Social integration and assimilation are built one encounter, one day at a time. A kind word, a thoughtful gesture or a considerate act can make all the difference. And occasionally, when we accidentally step upon one another's toes, let us always remind ourselves to take the high road for the greater good.

Since our Independence, social integration and harmony have always been the Government's priorities, backed by innovative policies. I say "innovative" because these policies have no precedent elsewhere in the world and were even criticised as overly controlling and intrusive. Our Housing and Development Board (HDB) ethnic quota policy is a very good example.

However, in view of the clashes in neighbourhood enclaves from the United States (US) to Paris and London, we come to appreciate the intent and benefits of these measures and initiatives. Our political system, National Service, schools, HDB estates and even People's Association activities bear testimony to successful integration.

Nonetheless, we can do more. There is always room for improvement. One of the ways is through our community bonding programmes. In addition to our usual inclusive festive seasons' activities, we should put in more effort to update our programme formats.

When I was working in the People's Association, there were activities to promote inter-generational bonding, such as parent-and-child, grandparent-and-grandchild, young-and-seniors singing/dancing contests. We can have similar formats to promote inter-racial bonding.

Our community clubs can organise more activities which require participants of different races to team up and work together over a period of time. For example, cooking contests comprising several rounds so that participants have to practise and create several dishes over a few weeks. This would promote mutual understanding through cooperation.

Clan associations can also be encouraged to consider inviting non-Chinese to participate in more activities and events. Similar initiatives by private companies should also be encouraged through Government funding or resource sponsorship.

Another important platform where social interaction takes place is in cyberspace. The importance of social media will only increase as our younger generations become more and more Internet-savvy. The anonymity provided by social media facilitates freedom of expression but this freedom can also be abused, trigger conflict and deepen divides along racial, religious and income lines.

We have legislation in place which enables the Government to act against incendiary expressions in cyberspace or in print. However, prevention is better than cure. We have to step up on public education to set the parameters for acceptable expression and inculcate responsible behaviour online.

I urge the Government to continue taking the lead in creating, funding and supporting such public education programmes which should reach as many as possible – schools, housing estates, recreation centres, workplaces and more. Mdm Speaker, in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Our seniors. In his speech, the President talked about his hope that Singapore can build a caring society. With our rapid ageing population, groups that need care will include the increasing number of seniors.

I am pleased to see that the Government will introduce several schemes, including the Action Plan for Successful Ageing, to help the seniors live a fulfilling and happy life.

We say that, "One should look after the seniors the same way he treats his own parents". When we care for our own seniors, we should also care for and help the seniors around us. Looking after the elderly is not just the responsibility of the children, family and Government; as long as it is within our means, we all have the responsibility to extend help to the elderly around us. There are many warm-hearted VWOs and volunteers in Singapore, who spend time and effort to visit and help the seniors.

It will take a multi-prong approach for elder-care to be effective. Hence, I suggest setting up a Statutory Board or an officially recognised organisation to take the lead to provide one-stop services for the seniors. This will streamline administration, improve service quality and ensure the long-term sustainability of the various programmes for seniors.

At the same time, I also suggest that the Government consider setting up more holistic eldercare service centres. The centres should have day care services and look after the seniors' needs in areas, such as medicine. Staff in these centres should understand the background of the seniors and slowly build bonds with them through various activities. The centres should also coordinate programmes of VWOs and the Government and look after the needs of the elderly at different stages.

I think this operating model will greatly simplify the collaboration process and is worth being introduced more widely.

Second, I further suggest that the Government set up a central website so that seniors who wish to become a volunteer can register by stating the areas that they are interested to serve and the time they are willing to devote.

Many professionals are still healthy after retirement and they want to contribute to the society. But, sometimes, just because they do not know how, their passion and skills end up being wasted. It is truly regrettable. These professionals include retired teachers, nurses, lawyers and accountants.

They possess knowledge, skills and experience accumulated over a life long time and it will be good that there is central system which can act as a middleman, introducing them to organisations that need their service. By doing so, these senior volunteers can maximise their time, remain healthy physically and mentally, and stay connected with the society. The benefiting organisations also save money and manpower at the same time. This is killing two birds with one stone.

My last suggestion is asking Town Councils to install Alert Alarm System (AAS) for the poor seniors living in rental flats, so that they can be connected with the 24-hour maintenance centre Essential Maintenance Service Unit (EMSU). Currently, AAS is monitored by the Senior Activity Centres during working hours; at night, it is monitored by neighbours.

The problem is that not every HDB block's tenants can help. As EMSU has 24-hour emergency service, it should also be able to receive emergency signals sent by AAS.

Mdm Speaker, to build a loving home is not a very difficult task. As long as we all do our part, our society will be filled with love and care. Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion.

Mdm Speaker: Minister Yaacob Ibrahim.

3.08 pm

The Minister for Communications and Information and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim): Mdm Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of the Motion to thank the President for his Address.

I would like to elaborate on the exciting future that Singaporeans can look forward to. Last week, I announced that we will be restructuring the Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore (IDA) and the Media Development Authority (MDA), to create a new Info-comm Media Development Authority (IMDA) and a new agency, tentatively named the Government Technology Organisation (GTO). This restructuring is a key part of the Ministry of Communications and Information's (MCI's) policy agenda for this new term of Government.

In his Address, the President said that "we must adapt as the world changes". Few sectors have changed as much as infocommunications technology (ICT) and media. Infocomm media technologies have fundamentally disrupted established business models. Today, the biggest taxi company in the world, Uber, does not own a single car. The largest purveyor of accommodation in the world, Airbnb, owns no hotels or rooms. The changes will only accelerate. Our motivation to restructure IDA and MDA is to help Singapore seize the opportunities presented by these technological changes.

The first, Madam, is convergence – the increasing overlap between ICT and media. We see this in many ways – traditional telecommunications companies (telcos) expanding into content creation, such as StarHub, new media companies delivering content over the Internet, such as our own Viddsee.

In order to better harness the power of convergence, we reviewed our approach towards the development of the infocomm media sector. In August last year, I launched the Infocomm Media 2025 masterplan which was the culmination of the ideas and recommendations from the committee. The report showed the many ways in which the media sector was embracing digital technology in order to better understand audiences and create even more appealing content. It also showed how technologies developed for the media could be applied in other settings.

Madam, the second change is big data. Data can be invaluable in allowing service providers to improve the way their services are delivered by making them more customised and anticipatory. The public sector is also actively looking at ways to use public data to get a better understanding of people's needs and how to meet them in a seamless and cost-effective way.

One example is in media. Those of us who use YouTube will know that it recommends videos based on what we watch and like. Mediacorp is doing likewise on its online platform, Toggle. Using data, it will recommend programmes to enhance your viewing pleasure. More importantly, Mediacorp will also use the data to improve the content that it produces.

The third is the Internet of Things. One reason there is Big Data is the advent of the Internet of Things. With declining cost of sensors and cloud storage, it is now possible to connect devices to the Internet and to each other. In Singapore, work has already started to build a Smart Nation Platform that enables our public agencies to be plugged in so that essential sensor data can be shared and analysed in a secure manner.

Another area is how machines can improve productivity through learning algorithms. One of the major areas that machine intelligence is leading us to is an understanding of natural language voice commands.

We have been using natural language processing (NLP) technology in delivering Government e-services. One of the virtual assistants serving more than one agency is called "Jamie". Virtual assistants can help to free up scarce manpower to do other important work or building up the most common questions posed which we then use to improve our policies and processes. In future, NLP can provide real time translation for "live" television, benefitting the hearing-impaired. They can translate languages so viewers can enjoy content produced in foreign languages.

All these technologies will continue to develop and will only get cheaper, more mature and more reliable over time. The Internet of Things will generate immense pools of data which, through the application of data analytics, will generate fresh insights and offer new possible solutions.

How we respond to these trends will determine how much benefit we derive from them. We must use technology to benefit our economy and our society.

Earlier this month, Prime Minister Lee announced our commitment to develop the services and digital economy in Singapore under the Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2020 Plan. Indeed, there is tremendous potential in pushing the frontiers of technology in various service sectors. For example, in healthcare, cognitive systems like IBM's Watson are being trained to analyse medical images and videos and perform diagnoses to a very high accuracy. Developments in remote medical care will allow doctors to consult with their patients, healthcare providers or caregivers without the need to be physically present with their patients. These technologies will help make the provision of healthcare services more efficient and less manpower-intensive, and support our ageing-in-place initiatives.

IMDA will drive further sectoral innovations. We will work with the industry and community to develop these shared solutions.

Next, Madam, we will use the opportunity offered by new technologies to further improve Government services. We have been pioneers in many areas of Government service delivery.

We were one of the first globally to deliver nationwide fibre-to-the-home broadband with the Next Generation Nationwide Broadband Network. Today, there are currently more than 830,000 residential fibre subscriptions in Singapore – a residential fibre broadband penetration of about 70%.

As a government, we have also used technology boldly. We implemented the computerisation of the Civil Service in the 1980s. We also led the way into cloud computing for Singapore to enable organisations to consume infocomm services without the need to own expensive servers and data centres or operate an IT infrastructure team.

As technology changes and matures, the new GTO will help our Government to understand and use technology boldly to deliver better public services.

GTO will include all the functions of IDA's Government Chief Information Office (GCIO) in providing enterprise IT solutions to over 90 Government agencies, governing ICT standards within public agencies and coordinating the three-year ICT masterplans across the Government for more effective procurement of ICT services.

As we continue to adopt new and emerging technologies for better service delivery, GTO must safeguard Government digital services against cyber threats. GTO will be well-placed to provide robust and cyber-resilient IT services for the Government, so that we can be well-prepared against cyber attacks.

With an expanded mandate to grow new technology capabilities, GTO will also support the Government in its digital transformation efforts and build engineering talent for the Government. It will also help public agencies realise the capabilities to build a Smart Nation. We will, hence, see more improvements and initiatives that will bring more benefits to citizens and improve their quality of life.

Madam, in October last year, Prime Minister Lee announced that the Government will set up a Committee on the Future Economy (CFE) to develop economic strategies to position Singapore for the future. Infocomm media has tremendous growth potential to contribute to our Singapore economy. With a vibrant infocomm media sector, we will see many good jobs that have meaning and purpose and which have good career prospects for Singaporeans to aspire towards.

One such Singaporean is Janice Chan, a layout and match-move artist at Industrial Light and Magic (ILM) Singapore Janice has worked on a number of movies, such as "Transformers", "Hitman: Agent 47" and, of course, "Star Wars: The Force Awakens", and is now working on "The Great Wall", a US$150 million project directed by Zhang Yimou. She is one of the many talented Singaporeans putting their mark on global productions. IMDA, Madam, will continue to work with companies, both locally and internationally, to raise the capabilities and profile of our local talent.

Madam, I am heartened that many Singaporeans have been drawn to the infocomm media sector and we are working on great ideas. I am confident many will bear fruit in the future.

IDA's Infocomm Investments Pte Ltd (IIPL) has invested in a number of accelerators to build high-growth, innovation-driven technology start ups in Singapore. IIPL created an incubator space, which they call BASH. It stands for "Build Amazing Startups Here". It was set up almost a year ago at Block 79 at Ayer Rajah Crescent. It has become a home and a place for members and partners of the tech building community across the entire value chain – from accelerators to investors, incubators and entrepreneurs. They gather at BASH to exchange knowledge, co-create innovations and seal deals.

The energy at BASH is quite incredible; we not only see start ups work hard to realise their vision, but also share experiences and help one another to succeed. In fact, I hear that many successful start ups, like Glint and Carousell, keep returning back to BASH to meet more mentors and investors, even though they have officially graduated from our accelerator programmes and moved out since.

Madam, it is a good sign for the health of innovation and entrepreneurship in Singapore. IMDA will support BASH and more of such spaces. And for those who aspire to create great media content for new digital platforms, they can look forward to the Creators' Space, which will be built later this year.

There will also be equally vibrant places for GTO engineers and programmers. The recently opened HIVE has become a fledgling centre of excellence in data analytics, software design and development. The in-house team has already partnered Government agencies to develop new and exciting apps, such as Beeline that allows commuters to pre-book rides on express private bus routes; and myResponder, a location-based app that mobilises users to respond to nearby cardiac arrest cases to render first aid before an ambulance arrives. The team has also helped to develop OneService, a one-stop platform which helps agencies resolve issues faced by the public by collating public feedback and routing them to the relevant Government agencies.

The new IMDA and new GTO will continue to engage the public to co-create solutions. Madam, in July last year, IDA organised Hackathon@SG and invited participants to create applications to benefit our society and build our Smart Nation. The hackathon saw more than 300 entries from participants as young as five years old! More recently, I attended the Designathon organised by DesignSingapore Council. One hundred and seventy participants took part in the 36-hour challenge to come up with design solutions to make lives better for our elderly.

One of the teams, Mobilizer, came up with an innovative walking stick to prevent the elderly from falling. Lee Jung Wei, one of the team members, is serving his National Service. He had just booked out of his army camp for the weekend, and, of all the things that he could have done, he chose to come down to the Designathon to work with his friends. There is a lot of excitement and energy, and it speaks volumes of our young people who want to make Singapore a better place.

In the digital economy, Madam, data will become a new currency of great value both to businesses that use them and the individuals who provide the data. To maintain the confidence of individuals that their data is being well-managed and is not abused, to develop Singapore's reputation as a mature venue for data and to build up trust in the Singapore economy, we need a balanced and robust data protection framework.

With the restructuring, we will incorporate the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) into IMDA to bring about better policy synergy. It will continue to maintain its separate identity as an independent personal data protection authority.

Mdm Speaker, with the new GTO and new IMDA, my hope for the future is that Singapore is at the forefront of technology, with Government departments that use technology boldly, with an economy that is constantly transformed for the better through technology, and with a people comfortable and welcoming of technological change.

Madam, please allow me now to speak as the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs. Madam, with the Opening of the 13th Parliament, it is timely for the Malay/Muslim community to ask what future we want for ourselves and for our children. What sort of community and society do we wish to have? How can our community be adaptive and ready for the future? How can the Government and the community build upon our past efforts and co-create solutions to meet new challenges? Please allow me to share three challenges ahead for the Malay/Muslim community and how we can work together to chart the way forward.

The first challenge, Madam, comes from a rapidly evolving and volatile modern economy. The restructuring of the economy and increasing competition mean that our businesses and workers need be more productive, adaptive and committed to continual upgrading. Organisations like the Singapore Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry and MENDAKI SENSE have stepped up to partner national agencies like the Workforce Development Agency (WDA) and Spring Singapore to bring the full range of SkillsFuture support for training and skills mastery. MENDAKI is also starting a Future Ready unit to explore more opportunities for the community to tap on SkillsFuture.

But all these efforts will only succeed if members of our community step forward with the desire to learn and equip themselves and if companies actively support and invest in developing their workforce. Without this commitment, the consequences will be grave. We may have a pool of well-meaning, hardworking workers, but they lack the skill sets to compete and do well in the new economy.

The second challenge, Madam, is that of diversity. In truth, diversity is nothing new. The Malay/Muslim community has always consisted of various ethnicities and schools of Islamic thought. Our community's religious life has always been shaped by the basic principles of moderation, respect for differences, the promotion of inclusiveness, and openness to diversity. These are values that our community cherishes. We know very well that we cannot afford to be divided by narrow views or the selfish agendas of a few individuals or groups.

Yet, in recent times, we have started to see some quarters in society, and not just in the Malay/Muslim community, holding stronger, if not intractable, views on a range of complex issues. Harsh judgements and pejorative labels have been unnecessarily passed. Online media trends, migration changes, and regional and global influences, including developments in the Middle East, threaten to accentuate our differences and bring culture wars that are taking place half the world away to our doorstep.

Faced with these challenges, our community needs to continue to stand together to foster an environment of mutual respect and understanding. The Government will continue to serve as a community arbiter. However, this will be an increasingly difficult job as we try to balance competing views and interests, and as our usual approach of negotiating sensitive matters carefully and discreetly is being challenged. If we should be intolerant of anything at all, it would be against the intolerant, particularly those who sow discord, spark disunity and incite hatred.

This brings me to the third challenge, which is that of extremism. The Government has been able to work with a proactive community, led by organisations like MUIS, PERGAS and the Religious Rehabilitation Group, to build our resilience against extremist forces. But the risk of radicalisation remains because of the sheer accessibility and spread of information on the Internet.

Just as we rose strongly against the challenge of the Jemaah Islamiyah threat more than 10 years ago, we must press on to reach out to every segment of the community and speak with one rational, moderate voice against exclusivist and extremist doctrines. Such a time also calls for extra vigilance to keep our country safe and secure, whether against radical ideologies, errant preachers or of any suspicious activities around us. We must stand as one united people and not let the radical actions of a few spread fear and suspicion among the different communities in Singapore.

Madam, the challenges that we face as a community are not insurmountable. We have faced difficult challenges in the past, but, together with the Government, we have been able to tackle them. The positive state-community relationship has been steadily built over the last 50 years, thanks to the support and patience of the community.

With that trust and confidence, the Government went beyond national initiatives, such as public housing, education, and healthcare, to also make inroads in areas key to the community's progress and socio-religious life. This started with the passing of the Administration of Muslim Law Act in 1968 to set up MUIS and to regularise the Syariah Court and the Registry of Muslim Marriages (ROMM). In 1975, the Government facilitated the introduction of the Mosque Building Fund (MBF) to allow Muslim workers to contribute to the construction, and later also upgrading, of our mosques. In 1982, we partnered the community to form Yayasan MENDAKI to address the under-achievement of our Malay/Muslim students.

This link between the state and the community has strengthened over the years and allowed the community to thrive. Through consultation and engagement with the community, the Government introduced several initiatives to better support our madrasahs, including MOE's Edusave Fund for enrichment programmes and the waiver of national examination fees for secular subjects.

In his National Day Rally speech last year, Prime Minister Lee announced that the Government will work with MUIS to provide financial support to help teachers of secular subjects upgrade themselves. There will also be awards for students who achieve academic excellence in secular subjects in our full-time madrasahs. Madam, all these efforts are a result of our shared focus to raise the quality of education in our madrasahs, so that they can develop into progressive, all-rounded institutions for the benefit of our students.

Such state-community engagement on sensitive matters or issues of interest is not unique to the Malay/Muslim community. It has been the Government's approach for other communities as well. Earlier this weekend, our Hindu friends welcomed "live" music during the Thaipusam procession event, something that had been banned previously but was just relaxed this year. There was some measure of give-and-take during the discussions, with both sides eventually coming to an agreement on the three "live" music points and seven music-transmission points along the route. Importantly, there was an openness and appreciation of needs and constraints as state and community worked together to arrive at the best possible solution.

However, Madam, state-community relations are not static. They will evolve with the external environment and as the community progresses. Also, the perspectives of Government and communities may not always be aligned because we view issues with different concerns. For example, the Government may be wary of how rising religiosity could lead to deeper divides, but some followers from the different faiths may see religiosity as a positive development that could translate into a more spirited and engaged community.

We want to work with the community to realise multiple possibilities and to dabble less in narrow binaries. A transactional "winner takes all" relationship between the Government and the community is one-sided and will not be helpful for all parties. It cannot be as optimal as a relational approach, where both sides are co-creating "win-win" solutions.

The Suara Musyawarah dialogues in 2013, the KITAx youth envisioning exercises in 2015 and the current SGfuture discussions, all show that we have moved from simple consultation exercises to discussions focused on generating ideas, proposals and collaborations with fellow Singaporeans.

These are good initiatives, but we must continue to build on these to develop stronger processes of mutual engagement between state and community that can be sustained for the next 50 years. Differences of views have and will continue to emerge between the two sides. It is how we manage those differences to allow for a greater plurality of views and ideas, and yet not pull the society apart. It is always easier to dismiss differences for its perceived potential divisive effects. But it is far more enlightened and progressive to look for ways to accommodate some of the differences in order to enlarge the common ground.

This is the best way, and the only way for the Government, as we shape our future together. It is an approach of honesty and mutual understanding, as, together, we will weigh the concerns, weigh the constraints and options for both the Government and the community. Most importantly, it is an approach to work through our differences and enlarge our common ground, as we seek to reach the best solutions possible together.

Madam, to conclude, some of the challenges we are facing are, indeed, unlike any we have faced before. But as the President said, "The future of Singapore is what we make of it… everyone plays a part in building our nation". I have every faith that we will overcome our challenges by standing together. We are already starting from a much better place than ever before. Our foundations are strong, our institutions are sound, and our people are motivated. That Singaporeans have given the new Government a strong mandate only inspires us to keep giving our best for our people. I am convinced that an even stronger partnership between the community and the Government is, and must be, the way forward to co-create the future.

For the community, let us continue to stay united, to inspire success in one another, and to step forward to lead this community to even greater heights. Singapore is our home, and, together, we will build this nation for our children and for many generations to come. Madam, allow me to conclude my speech in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Speaker, for the past 50 years, the Malay/Muslim community in Singapore has achieved remarkable progress. We made major contributions to the nation as an important partner in the effort to strengthen Singapore's multiracial and multi-religious society. This new term of Parliament is a starting point that provides us with a good opportunity to re-evaluate the type of Malay/Muslim community that we want for our children and grandchildren. How can the Malay/Muslim community prepare itself to overcome future challenges?

Essentially, we want to strengthen the cooperation between the Government and the Malay/Muslim community because this has been the cornerstone of our progress. This positive cooperation comes from the strong support and perseverance of the Malay/Muslim community, who have given their trust and confidence to the Government. As a result, the Government was able to introduce special supplementary policies that contribute to the progress and well-being of the Malay/Muslim community's socio-religious life.

For instance, the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA) was passed in 1968 and has resulted in the establishment of MUIS, the Syariah Court and ROMM. In 1975, the Government assisted in the creation of MBF, which receives contributions from every Malay/Muslim worker through their CPF accounts. Seven years later, the Government worked with the community to form Yayasan MENDAKI to improve the educational standards of Malay children.

This positive cooperation between the Government and the community continues to be strengthened year after year. The Government's efforts to constantly consult and involve the community closely when dealing with issues have clearly produced results. For instance, the Government managed to introduce several initiatives to support the full-time madrasahs. These include the Edusave Fund from MOE and the financial assistance to allow teachers of secular subjects in the madrasahs to upgrade themselves, and awards for students who excel in secular subjects.

It is clear that the Government wants to continue working with all Singaporeans, including the Malay/Muslim community, in order to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes, through the process of consultation, information and idea gathering, and cooperating with the people to create the best solutions.

Mdm Speaker, just like Singapore, the Malay/Muslim community faces challenges that are becoming increasingly complex. Although it is tough, by virtue of our strong fighting spirit, I am confident that the Malay/Muslim community can overcome these challenges, just as we have successfully done before. In fact, today, we are in a better position: our foundation is strong, our institutions are stable and our community members are more mature, more qualified and more confident. We have a noble aspiration to create a Community of Excellence, which is in line with the aspirations of our other fellow Singaporeans. We are committed to continue making contributions together with the other communities in order to build a better future in Singapore for all of us.

Mdm Speaker: Mr Cedric Foo.

3.35 pm

Mr Cedric Foo Chee Keng (Pioneer): Mdm Speaker, Members in this House have spoken about a fast-changing world and that for Singapore to survive, thrive and remain exceptional, we need to stay ahead of this curve. We have a very small domestic economy and must "plug" into the world if we are to do well. I hope, in my speech, to describe what economists and researchers see as potential changes that will confront us. Many of my colleagues here have spoken about them and I will reinforce some of those points. Not all these changes will have a big impact on us, but some definitely will. If we are not alert to them, then we risk being left behind.

Going forward, some things will change linearly but probably at a faster clip as technologies from diverse fields advance and converge to produce solutions that were not possible previously. Other things will face non-linear changes brought about by disruptive technologies, that my colleague Henry Kwek talked about, the way cassette tapes or general cargo ships gave way to the iPod and container ships.

As early as 2011, Foxconn, the electronics contract manufacturer for Apple and other electronics companies, announced its goal to replace one million workers in China with robots. It did not succeed initially because robots then were not dexterous enough and were costly. Today, many of these shortcomings in robotics have been overcome. Foxconn now deploys 50,000 robots in China, and they call these robots "Foxbots". Other companies like Asea Brown Boveri (ABB), a Swiss and Swedish joint venture, are also deep into robotics research and production. It now produces robots that can be sophisticated enough to do very micro-type circuitry assembly, and at low cost – each robot costs about the price of a car in Sweden, not in Singapore. ABB called their robots "Yumi" which stands for "You and Me (the robot)", collaborating in manufacturing.

In the early 2000s, manufacturing moved to China in a big way, because environmental laws were less stringent, labour costs were low and labour relations more stable than in the West. All of these factors are changing.

One would think that China which has to find jobs for a population of 1.4 billion, would not want to adopt automation or robotics. But they, the Chinese, know that, if they do not, other countries will. So, their peculiar domestic situation notwithstanding, China is embracing this new technology and, if they are successful, they will leapfrog others who are less nimble.

China has an initiative called "Made in China 2025" and this is to transform the country from a "Big Manufacturing Country" to a "Powerful Manufacturing Country". Sale of industrial robots in 2014 rose 56% in China from the year before. Today, there are 25 robot-making companies, not companies using robots, but robot-making companies, in China and the plan is to have up to 200 robot-making companies.

With robots, unlike humans, they work 24/7. They do not join unions who go on strikes once in a while. They do not take sick leave – maybe a couple of days a year for maintenance. They do not argue with their supervisors about work conditions. They live in the factories, literally, never once late for work. This is the type of competition that we can expect to face.

We will see more robots not just in China but also in North America and Europe where a large chunk of global consumption takes place. The US economy is about maybe 60% to 70% consumption. Instead of "off-shoring" manufacturing from the US and Europe to China, the buzz word now is "near-sourcing". So, production for European consumption will take place maybe in Eastern Europe or Europe itself, and production for the US will take place in Mexico, facilitated by NAFTA. This "near-sourcing" will become even more pronounced as clean energy in the form of shale gas becomes readily available in the West. This will impact areas like logistics and supply chain solutions. So, think of change in shipping routes.

Change is not only happening in manufacturing, as I have described, but also in services. Professional work like accounting and legal services can be performed in lower-cost locations like India or Estonia. The output is then transmitted through low-cost fibre optics to the US, Europe or Singapore where the customer-facing takes place.

Even research work and the very slick power-point presentations of major consulting firms are now produced in low-cost centres in India and they call them "knowledge centres". They like to call it "knowledge on tap" in the consultants' jargon. Many jobs that were thought to be domestic in nature are becoming tradable. In fact, many Singaporeans have haircuts in Johor Bahru.

Robots, labour cost arbitrage and supply chain disruptions are but a few of the changes that are taking place. Then, there is Uber. As the Minister talked about, drones, the e-commerce wave – Taobao, Carousell, Apple Pay, and we have our own DBS PayLah; and Oculus Rift, the virtual reality that can bring you to face a dinosaur, dive deep into the ocean or go into outer space. Not real, but virtual reality.

Genome editing will change medicine; 3D printing – I thought they print toys, but I just read that they have printed an electric car; batteries – you have heard of Elon Musk – that will be used at home and they would not look like batteries we are used to, but they may be a painting or a sofa set. These batteries will take electricity from the grid at night when the industrial needs are low.

All these change the way we commute, the way we shop, the way we pay, the way we play, the way we learn and perhaps even the way we think. Such developments could be viewed as threats but, if we are nimble, they also present Singapore with many new opportunities.

It is easy to become complacent with past successes or to buckle under political pressure to take it slow, to "relax", so they say. And I heard in this House, "Just be happy!"

The reason why our economic thinkers in Government are somewhat "paranoid" about economic growth is because we cannot risk a hollowing out of our economy. Without economic growth, as some of my colleagues have said, and without good jobs, we cannot sustain the funding for defence, education, health care and other social programmes, especially with an ageing population.

The Committee for the Future Economy, led by Minister Heng, has its work cut out. So, is the new SkillsFuture Statutory Board and the Smart Nation initiative. If we do all these well, Singaporeans will continue to live good lives.

As we embark on economic transformation, we also want to avoid the pitfalls of unfettered capitalism. So, in line with such arguments, there are calls to protect our citizenry.

Should our political instincts be "to protect" or "to prepare"? I think the answer is both. For vulnerable groups who are disadvantaged either through disability, ill-health, educational opportunities and so forth, we should seek to protect them, but always within the bounds of preserving our work ethic.

For able-bodied Singaporeans, it would be better to prepare them for the challenges that lie ahead. SkillsFuture is an excellent way forward. The programme recognises that the world is changing faster than most people can cope on their own; that learning does not end with formal education, that we all need to learn, unlearn and relearn throughout life, lest our skill sets become less valued or outright irrelevant.

Having said that preparing our workforce is a more enlightened path, I am especially concerned about our professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs). I believe they need a little more protection, especially against unfair employment practices. We have talked about this, where Singaporean PMETs are sidelined for other nationalities because the bosses from the same other nationality are more comfortable working with their own kind and not because we are less skilled as Singaporeans.

This is prevalent in certain sectors of our economy and also in certain companies more than others. Since there are no dependency ratios for Employment Pass (EP) holders, there is little or no protection for these Singaporean PMETs. And, indeed, the space that they occupy and the work that they do are subject to wage arbitrage. It is, of course, easy to empathise with them to see the injustice in unfair employment practices on our own soil.

Mdm Speaker, we live in a fast-changing world. We are fortunate to have a Government which is always forward-looking. It understands our strengths and vulnerabilities and then charts a course to take the country forward. Whilst change can be disconcerting and intimidating at times, it also presents many new opportunities, if we stay nimble. Singapore has more resources than it ever had. We can use them to protect the vulnerable groups and prepare the rest of us for what is to come. Our young are smart, well-educated and inventive. I see a Singapore future that is bright and exciting. I thank the President for his Address.

Mdm Speaker, before I end, I would like to comment on what the hon Member Leon Perera spoke about. Mr Perera bemoans the low number of Opposition Members in this House. Yet, in the same breadth, he calls for open contests. He calls for more democracy. Let me remind the Member that in the last general elections, every seat, each and every one of the 89 seats was contested. That Singaporeans have voted for the PAP and also six other Opposition Members is the outcome of an open contest. I hope the Member and his party will respect that outcome. We, on our part, are humbled by the outcome and will work even harder to do well for Singaporeans.

In fact, the presence of Mr Perera as a Non-Constituency Member of Parliament himself was a creation of the PAP Government because it believes in diversity, as he has suggested. And it guarantees − and no other governments guarantee − that there will be at least nine Opposition Members in Parliament. On top of that, the PAP Government also introduced the Nominated Member of Parliament scheme, so, like the Member said, different segments of society and their voices can be heard and be represented in this House. Madam, I support the Motion. [Applause.]

Mdm Speaker: Order. On that note, since we are all not robots, I propose to suspend the Sitting. We will take the break now. I will take the Chair again at 4.10 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 3.49 pm until 4.10 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.10 pm

[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]

Debate on President's Address

Debate resumed.

Mr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio): Mdm Speaker, I stand in support of the Motion of Thanks to the President. Our employment landscape has changed much over the decades. Most workers from my parents' generation held only one job since they started working and served the same company until retirement. Recently, I witnessed a colleague receiving her 35- year long service award.

Many were amazed that it was her first and last job. These days, it is not surprising for a worker to change jobs four to five times in his career. Some even take on jobs in different industries. Indeed, technological shifts and rapid changes in customer tastes have led to traditional jobs or tried and tested ways of making a living becoming less reliable.

To make sense of the fast moving dynamics and in response to changes on the jobs front, some workers have taken on a new earning option, that is, to freelance. It is fast becoming a viable career option. A conservative estimate today puts the total number of freelancers in Singapore at about 200,000. This figure is likely to go up.

Many in our midst probably think that it is about having the courage to change course from being a salaried employee to becoming a freelancer. However, having spoken to many of them on why they decided to forgo jobs which provided them with a steady income every month, I am beginning to understand that it is about wanting to break free from becoming accustomed to a previously secure situation and being oblivious to the need to adapt in view of rapid changes.

Freelancers want to adapt. Some look to freelancing to offer variety and scope of roles that their current jobs do not offer them as an employee. Of course, there are those who enjoy the flexibility and, naturally, prefer not to be bounded by employer-employee arrangements. For this group, they pick freelancing as their first option.

The types of freelance jobs have also expanded. I have met many who offer services in photography, copywriting, translation, web design, sports coaching, and the list goes on. There are also websites today that allow a freelance worker to be registered for assignments, connecting them to offers of jobs both locally and overseas. Such one-stop hubs allow free service buyers to have access to a wide pool of talents, both in Singapore and elsewhere, to engage for projects.

Options for those who wish to pursue freelance work have also opened up. Some even see it as a viable long-term career option. I have met former employees who moved out of a stable and regular income job to become their so-called own "bosses". Some do so at the prime of their careers.

And there are those who also started off by holding down a full-time job and taking on freelance projects on a part-time basis. Gradually, as they become more aware of the market, they moved to become full-time freelancers, bringing their former skills to the marketplace. Some are also learning new skills and offering different skills options. For example, there are trainers that I met who also double up as translators.

What used to be popular among stay-at-home mums, retirees and undergraduates looking for some earnings has become more viable and stable. Freelancers, Mdm Speaker, are working people, too, and we, in the Labour Movement, are embarking on efforts to assist them.

What can the rest of us do? With freelancing becoming a viable career option, there are three key areas I feel that our society, buyers of services and the Government can do to support them.

On society's mindset, many still deem freelancing as a deviation from the norm and equate it to unstable earnings or being more suited for retirees or as a temporary stint. Since young, we are encouraged to study hard, get the best skills, secure a full-time job, preferably with the best employer in that field.

With economic restructuring, however, companies and jobs could be impacted at short notice, and retrenchment, unfortunately, is an unavoidable outcome for some. People lose their jobs when they are unable to adapt or acquire new skills when companies go through major shifts or when product lines get obsolete. Society, too, needs to move away from the past notion of what is defined as a good job and a stable income.

To many of us, freelancing may look like frontier town. Some of the rules appear unclear and the marketplace seems fraught with uncertainty. However, those who are in freelancing choose how to build their own security, overcome uncertainty and make adjustments, as well as collaborate with one another. Many are also refining their old skills and acquiring new ones to stay relevant, even before the Government announced strategies, such as SkillsFuture. They do not wait for someone else to navigate the path ahead for them. On our part, we need to change how we perceive freelance work and embrace it as part of the changing employment landscape.

On the role of service buyers, companies, we know, are always on the lookout for new ways to do business and to reduce costs. For some, freelancers are a source of talent pool. With no actual headcount, they can keep costs low, have access to a worldwide pool of talent and are able to obtain services anytime, anywhere. The number of new jobs created appears to be declining, but, based on sharing by freelancers themselves, the demand and offers for freelance work seem to remain steady. Perhaps, companies are already making structural changes as to how they assemble the resources needed to complete tasks in this changing environment.

For these companies to work well with freelancers, they do not treat them as a cheaper option. Instead, they accord their appointed freelancers the same respect and treatment as they would a business partner. They make reasonable demands, respect intellectual property and make payment on time for the freelancers' services. For other companies contemplating the option of using freelancers, it is, therefore, wise to adopt the same approach. They can only tap on the best services if freelancers are allowed to grow well, earn decently and sustain their businesses. I propose that high among the service buyers' priorities must be to learn how to tap on the different capabilities out there and treat freelancers fairly to achieve a win-win situation.

On our policies, we have good schemes to help our Singaporean working people. Schemes like SkillsFuture will benefit many workers, enabling them to acquire new skills to pursue lifelong learning while MediShield Life will offer them greater protection. However, some of our schemes and attitudes need to be reviewed to consider the needs of freelancers.

For example, HDB housing loan eligibility for freelancers or the self-employed, even if it comes from an applicant who is about 30 years old, can appear to be conservative because they do not seem to have a regular income or able to produce an income pay-slip of six months or more. I was told that banks, when assessing credit card applications, also take on very conservative approach when it comes to freelancers who apply for credit cards. Our system to help Singaporeans apply for HDB housing and prepare for retirement has worked well for those who hold conventional jobs. As freelance work grows to become a popular career choice, it is timely to tailor policies to be more inclusive and to benefit the freelancers.

We talked about encouraging an entrepreneurial and pioneering spirit in our people. It is, indeed, a positive sign that there are increasingly more Singaporeans opting for freelance work. It is, therefore, crucial that we offer them the right support that can benefit them directly and enable them to thrive.

Mdm Speaker, many of our older generation workers stick to one job for life. This current generation of workers change jobs many times in his career lifespan. That is how we respond to economic and business shifts. Our next generation of workers will have to tackle a different set of challenges. Freelancers, like many new working people, are seeking new earning options and it should not surprise us if, one day, our new job entrants' preferred choice of earning comes from freelancing.

Freelancers are responding to the new competition and adopting approaches that we may deem unconventional. In fact, some of us regard their decisions to discard their well-paying jobs as a bold one. Perhaps, it is we who need the courage to adapt our mindset, to change our policies and offer strong support to our freelancers and the proper recognition due to them. With that, Madam, I support the Motion.

Mdm Speaker: Dr Koh Poh Koon.

4.20 pm

The Minister of State for National Development and Trade and Industry (Dr Koh Poh Koon): Mdm Speaker, I rise to thank the President and speak in support of the President's Address.

As the President said, we are embarking on "a new chapter of nation-building". Last year, we celebrated half a century of economic progress and success. This was the product of decades of hard work by our forefathers. We will need to have the same resilience and enterprising spirit, in order to write the next chapter of our economic miracle together.

However, with the changing population demographics, disruptive technologies and new global economic challenges, the previous formula for economic success may no longer be adequate to ensure our economic resilience for the next 50 years. For Singapore to remain competitive, we need to do things differently. A new formula for success may be required. Our businesses need to go beyond adding value and competing on costs and move on to creating value and competing on innovation. As a significant part of our economy, SMEs play a crucial role in the transformation of our economy.

Mdm Speaker, I would like to deliver the next part of my speech in Mandarin and to conclude thereafter in English.

(In Mandarin):[Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In the last few months, I have met with a number of SMEs and had a deeper understanding of the way they operate. They almost unanimously highlighted one point: the various challenges that they face today have brought about greater pressure. The most recent SBF-DP SME Index shows that SME's business sentiment has fallen to a four-year low. This indicates that our SMEs are less upbeat in their business outlook, as they are under strain due to domestic business cost pressures as well as the worsening external economic factors.

Two of the major challenges that our SMEs face are in the areas of manpower and rentals.

On the manpower front, the key issues faced are rising manpower costs and difficulties with attracting and retaining talent. In addition, SMEs also have difficulty in coping with rising rents.

While there are cyclical factors affecting both issues, they also stem from the fact that Singapore is, fundamentally, a small country with limited resources.

In order to address manpower challenges, our economy needs to transform and shift towards growth driven by productivity improvements and make the best use of available manpower.

Rental increase is another challenge faced by SMEs. Many SMEs have told me that they have been struggling with rising rents. However, the overall situation has stabilised. In the third and fourth quarters of 2015, retail rentals fell by 0.3% and 0.1% respectively on a quarter-on-quarter basis. Likewise, office rental fell by 0.1% in both quarters, while industrial rental dropped by 0.8% in the third quarter of 2015. Nonetheless, the Government will do its best by working through the market to ensure that there is enough space supply to meet long-term needs. I believe sufficient supply would mitigate the adverse trend of rising rents.

At Singapore's current stage of economic development, our companies, particularly SMEs, need to pursue growth through innovation and internationalisation. With innovative technologies, SMEs can introduce new products and services to consolidate their market position. By internationalising, SMEs can tap into larger markets to grow their revenue sources.

The Government has introduced a broad array of programmes to help companies access the financing, infrastructure and expertise that they require in order to succeed. However, many SMEs are still unaware of the channels of assistance. The Government will, therefore, engage and consult closely with the business community to identify technology trends in each sector and further improve our various assistance programmes provided for companies.

We will also further leverage our current SME Centres to provide SMEs with advice on how to transform and innovate their business models. In addition, they should also help the SMEs to forge closer ties with public research entities to design specific technological solutions for them. The SME Centres can also play an active role in guiding our SMEs to seek for the relevant R&D and technologies they need.

Businesses undergoing transformation can be likened to warriors on a battlefield. In order to have well-developed muscles, they have to train very hard to build a strong and healthy body. This will not only ensure that they can face the challenges on the battlefield, but also help them withstand the injuries that they may sustain. Similarly, in order to succeed in the competitive landscapes, companies must continually seek breakthroughs in technology to develop their unique weapons and capabilities.

The process of transformation of the business can be difficult and painful, much like life-saving surgery. Even businesses which have realised that they need to transform can be daunted by uncertainties and fear of the unknown future. But we also know that there are many examples of SMEs which have successfully transformed. Today, I would like to share a few examples, not only to recognise the achievements of these businesses, but also to give you some inspiration. As long as we maintain an open and innovative spirit, we can overcome any challenge.

Sanwa Group was established in 1977. It focuses on manufacturing high-quality and cost-effective products. However, as fewer young Singaporeans are willing to work on the production floor, the company faced severe manpower shortages. In response, Sanwa invested heavily to automate and mechanise its production and quality control processes. Factory automation has also helped Sanwa to perform highly repetitive tasks and achieve higher levels of accuracy, reliability and efficiency. Through this, Sanwa achieved 50% manpower savings and improved its overall productivity by 15%. In addition, buyers recognised the higher quality and reliability of its products, resulting in higher sales for Sanwa.

Beyond improving work flow for its existing businesses, Sanwa has also been actively building capabilities to seek out new business opportunities and niches. Sanwa is currently partnering research institutes, such as A*Star's SIMTech to develop new technologies and business opportunities.

Recognising additive manufacturing as another potential growth area, Sanwa worked with six other local precision engineering companies to focus solely on additive manufacturing projects. Supported by Nanyang Polytechnic and the Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD), this consortium pools together capabilities of each member firm in developing additive manufacturing solutions for key customers in niche areas. Sanwa has shared with me that this collaboration has been successful because members did not see one another as competitors and were willing to share expertise with one another. In fact, members acknowledged that the competition was global and that they had to collaborate in order to survive and succeed. I am heartened by the spirit of cooperation shown by Sanwa and its partners and hope that more SMEs will embrace this mentality to develop win-win outcomes for the broader industry.

Another example that I would like to share is Skylace Language School. This is a Chinese language training school. In terms of scale of operation, resources and finance, it is significantly smaller than that of Sanwa's. However, it has similarly taken the first step to transform. To reduce its teachers' workload in having to mark student's worksheets, Skylace digitised its worksheets onto tablets. This way, not only do students receive instant feedback on their automatically-marked assignments, it also frees teachers up to focus on their main job – teaching. Skylace is also looking to implement the same technology to automate its administrative functions, such as payroll.

The underlying point of all the examples that I have shared is that all SMEs, regardless of size, have the potential to transform their businesses through technology to address business challenges and open doors to new business opportunities. The Government is committed to helping SMEs which are willing to transform through multidimensional assistance, but businesses have to recognise the need for innovation and transformation and be willing to change their old business model, in order for the assistance programmes to be effective.

(In English): Mdm Speaker, I would now like to finish the rest of my speech in English. Beyond helping established SMEs to transform, we must continue our efforts to support entrepreneurs and build a vibrant startup ecosystem in Singapore. Startups, particularly those with high-growth potential, are an important source of innovation in our economy and help to rejuvenate our business landscape.

Today's innovative startups are transforming many aspects of our lives, from the way we travel and the way we shop to the way we live or interact with others. The use of Facebook, Uber and Airbnb are well-known examples.

Over the past years, there have been strong, concerted efforts by the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) and many Government agencies to build a vibrant startup ecosystem in Singapore. Through the collective efforts of both the startup community and the Government, we now have in place the key building blocks of a successful start-up ecosystem – infrastructure, financing support, community and culture. For instance, in the past year, JTC Launchpad@One-North was launched as a deliberate effort to create a startup cluster in the One-North area. The response to Launchpad has been good, with occupancy currently at over 90%.

As a result of these efforts, the startup scene in Singapore has gained increasing momentum. For instance, the Global Startup Ecosystem Ranking in 2015 put Singapore's startup ecosystem at 10th place in the world, an improvement from 17th place in 2012. Our population has also become increasingly entrepreneurial in outlook. Based on surveys by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), the proportion of our working population actively involved in an entrepreneurial activity increased from 4.9% in 2006 to 11% in 2014.

On my recent visit to JTC LaunchPad@One-North, I was struck by the passion, optimism and can-do spirit of the startups that I met. ShopBack was one of them. Recognising a market gap in the growing e-commerce space within Singapore and the region, ShopBack set out to revolutionise the e-commerce landscape by tying up with online merchants to provide cashback to online shoppers. Its young founders, whom I spoke to, were not trained in computer science or computer programming, but that did not stop them from taking the bold step of starting their own company.

Aware of Singapore's unique value proposition as a well-established Asian hub for businesses, with close links to the fast-growing Asian market, ShopBack decided to build a base here in Singapore and use that to target the neighbouring Asian markets. Within 18 months of its formation, ShopBack had moved into our neighbouring markets, such as Indonesia and the Philippines, with support and facilitation from International Enterprise (IE) Singapore, while the e-commerce landscape in these countries were still relatively less mature. Today, ShopBack has over 400,000 regional users and receives over three orders every minute.

As a first-mover in a rapidly growing e-commerce space, ShopBack is well-placed to establish itself as an important link in the e-commerce value chain and ride on the global e-commerce wave. Our SMEs and startups must constantly be on the lookout for new opportunities and not be constrained by our geographical limits, just as how ShopBack has recognised that the global nature of its business, which means that it must internationalise at a very early stage to reach out to a wider customer base. This is a very different approach from what a usual brick-and-mortar business like our SMEs, which usually consolidate their local operations and only internationalise at a later stage of their establishment.

ShopBack may look like a thriving and promising startup today. But, in fact, their initial proposal for Government funding was rejected by our agencies. Firmly believing in the market value of their business idea, the initial rejection, from what I know, according to the young founders of ShopBack, was actually helpful in making them work and think harder about their business ideas and, eventually, they caught the eye of investors who provided them with further seed capital. ShopBack started out with three co-founders less than two years ago and now they have close to 60 staff, with an average age of only 27 years.

Clearly, in the case of ShopBack, it was not Government efforts alone that got them started. In transforming our economy to be future-ready, startups can be a driver of change. But we must ask ourselves these questions: how can we create a more conducive ecosystem for our entrepreneurs to thrive? Are there hindrances that we must remove to allow ideas to germinate and innovative start-ups to prosper?

Will over-supportive policies stifle the fighting spirit and the desire to succeed, much like over-watering a plant would kill it? How do we calibrate the relationship between Government and the industry to ensure that the optimal amount of intervention and creative-tension exist? Is this a case of "doing more is not doing better but may be doing more harm"?

How can we be more flexible in the way we render help to our small startups and SMEs to make impact where and when it matters most?

As we move from SG50 towards SG100 and cast our thoughts on what our future economy entails, these are questions that we need to think carefully about.

The entrepreneurial spirit of our next generation, like the group which started ShopBack, will open new avenues through which we can create the economy of our next 50 years. The Government must rethink how it supports our entrepreneurs and work closely with the entrepreneurial community to build a vibrant startup ecosystem.

Today, we stand at a critical inflexion point in the journey of our nation-building. Even as we celebrate the successes that we have achieved in the past 50 years, we also need to take the necessary steps to build the framework and the groundwork for our future generations from this position of strength. The path forward does not promise to be easy. We are acutely aware of the pains that our SMEs are going through and we are prepared to walk this journey with them. We will continue to provide strong support to SMEs that are prepared to transform and enhance their businesses. We will work closely with the trade associations and the business community to ensure that our SMEs continue to succeed. We will seek new growth industries to set the stage for our future economy.

With the business community, the Government and the people working hand-in-hand, I am confident that the next chapter of our economic story will transcend what had preceded before and bring about greater prosperity and opportunity for each and every Singaporean. With this, Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion.

Mdm Speaker: Miss Cheryl Chan.

4.40 pm

Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): Mdm Speaker, in his Address, the President highlighted that by 2030, one in four Singaporeans will be aged 65 years or above. A critical question then is: how do we want our society to age? How prepared are we to manage and deal with not just the economic consequences of a rapidly ageing population but, perhaps, more importantly, the social implications of a greying society?

In my conversations with my residents, dialogues with VWOs and also with healthcare professionals, a striking observation here is that our seniors often feel they are unable to integrate within the community post-retirement and has a tendency to be or to feel isolated.

Studies have also shown that many of our seniors wish to continue being a part of the community, actively involved in one way or another and, to some extent, the broader society. Understandably, this helps in improving their self-esteem and builds confidence even as they age. This being so, whether there are choices readily available to them is thus something we need to focus on.

In Singapore, we have encouraged our seniors to remain in the workforce for a longer period and introduced the concept of Lifelong Employability. The Government has also encouraged the tripartite partners to enhance job opportunities and employability for our mature workers. Various grants are available to companies to tap on to redesign jobs, handle age management and so on. But the impetus to take up the grants has remained relatively low. This could be attributed to a lag on the employers' mindset and also the general work culture that we have here. We still do not easily associate having experienced older workers with a positive value.

What then are the implications to those seniors who wish to but cannot be gainfully employed at a mature age? From their feedback, many of these seniors remain at home not to care for their grandchildren but because they have no alternatives. Many choose not to go out as they do not wish to spend much since they no longer have an active income.

Unfortunately, for some of our seniors, their ageing conditions also deteriorate after their spouses have passed on. It may seem surprising, but surveys show that these lonely seniors are not living alone. In fact, many of them actually live with their families. However, they feel isolated as they have little communication with their children who often work long hours or they do not have activities to be mentally and physically preoccupied with. Over time, such isolation has detrimental effects on their health and, naturally, increases their healthcare costs.

Given where we are today and a future with more seniors, what should we do to ensure that they have a meaningful life?

I believe that, first and foremost, we need to consider the needs and aspirations of our seniors and their caregivers. Let me touch on some known needs and/or aspirations of these groups.

The first one being the seniors. I think many of them wish to continue to be active contributors of the society. Some want to be part of the workforce. Others actually require activities to have a regular routine. Some want to be active and positive contributors, for example, being volunteers or fulfilling dreams that they were not able to pursue previously, having no time for it. They want to have a social network that provides mental and physical support, one that encourages communication and channels to seek assistance, and caregiving beyond just their family network. They want to have awareness of their health conditions and being financially capable to seek the necessary medical treatment and with the discipline to follow through.

For their caregivers, they hope to have personal awareness leading to better preventive care for themselves and also how best to play the role of being a caregiver and having a larger community network to support caregiving – from volunteers, healthcare options and financial support – and for the support group to provide mutual sharing and learning.

One way which I suggest we can help meet these needs and aspirations is to develop integrated social hubs for our seniors at the community level − "integrated" in the sense that we bring many of the social activities into one location, one place that caters to the needs and aspirations of our seniors. To help see how this may work in practice, let me describe how a day would be like in an integrated social hub.

To begin, we start with the familiar. Site these integrated social hubs at our Community Clubs. Why? Presently, many of our Community Clubs are not extensively utilised during the weekdays. At the same time, we face space constraints in accommodating more facilities at the HDB void decks. As the Community Clubs today are much better equipped with facilities and they already serve many functions, we could consider enhancing their functionality and leverage the infrastructure to serve as an integrated social hub.

The Community Club becomes an integrated social hub during the weekdays and continues with its usual outreach activities in the nights and on weekends. Various services from the VWOs, like the day-care activities and training, the healthcare partners who manage elderly care centres and the Government agencies with their social service helpdesk will be co-located at this hub. Additionally, the constituency office, together with the social enterprises, can coordinate the resources available within the community and can allocate these resources accordingly for employment, training and for volunteer work.

Let me now give a quick introduction to some of these residents who live in this community.

Mr and Mrs Salleh, both aged 62. Mr Salleh is a former school teacher who retired about seven years ago and Mrs Salleh is a housewife. They have three children − two sons who are married, while their daughter is single. One of their sons lives within walking distance from them and they have two children who are attending nursery with childcare.

Mr Goh, aged 50, is working odd jobs as he has some health issues requiring regular treatment. As he is single, he needs to continue working in order to afford his daily expenses and medical bills.

Mdm Lee, aged 76, has five children but none of them lives with her. After her spouse passed away about three years ago, she has been a little depressed and has not left home much until our volunteers engaged her and started bringing her to our Community Club activities.

Mrs Soh is a stay-at-home mother who is a caregiver for her two school-going children and also her father-in-law. Her father-in-law is still healthy and very mobile. He is very much interested in music and likes to interact with others during his younger days when he was working as a producer.

So, below is an example of what their usual day is like within the community. Mr and Mrs Salleh usually begin their morning by sending their grandchildren to the nursery at the void deck of their HDB block. After this, they will head to the hub to meet Mr Goh as they have been volunteering at the elderly care centre located in the hub. This elderly care centre is managed by the VWO with healthcare professionals, but the difference is that it is widely operated by volunteers made up of residents, many of whom are also seniors living within this estate. Like other volunteers, when first inducted to the care centre, the Sallehs are trained by the professionals. They feel that they have personally benefitted, as these ongoing training sessions and practical experiences also help them raise awareness of how to better care for themselves as they age.

With education and support from these healthcare professionals and volunteers, Mr Goh has been more disciplined going through and following through with his treatment. The social service helpdesk that is co-located at the hub enables some of the needy residents like Mr Goh to actually seek for advice, understand some of the schemes that are available and also to seek help with applications if required.

Mdm Lee, who had not been out of her home for a while, is really intrigued by many activities that are happening at the hub. She gets to socialise and learn more about what is taking place in other parts of Singapore and some of our policies through the explanation from the trained staff, our volunteers and also her local advisor. Moving forward, being illiterate and unable to read the papers will not stop her from knowing and learning broadly. But what excites her most is her newfound job, to become a part-time cook and to prepare nutritional food for the children at the nearby childcare centre.

Mrs Soh and her father-in-law would consistently be at the hub for half a day to contribute their know-how at the social enterprise that was established by their neighbours. This enterprise provides jobs for those in the community who require flexible work options. Through the social enterprise, they also found a network of friends who have strong passion on some causes and continue to set up their own initiatives to support these causes.

This, then, is how an integrated social hub for our seniors would work. If properly executed, these hubs will help, first, to raise awareness of this stage of life and will effect a longer-term positive social impact. Let me explain.

Most in the middle-age working group today play the role of caregivers and will, in the next two decades, become seniors themselves. Often, in their state of busy-ness, they will conveniently forget or ignore what lies ahead of them as they progress in their life stages. However, it is imperative for them to be aware at an early stage what it entails and be mentally prepared for life as a senior which involves, often times, discomfiting changes on various fronts − ranging from relationships with their families, preventive care and well-being both medically and socially, adaptations at the workplace and social acceptance in retirement.

Second, leverage our social capital to maximise resources and strengthen our social fabric. Diversity adds colour to a society, but it is the communal strength that defines us as a community and a nation. We do not, and should not, hope for unity to shine through only when we have difficult times. As Singaporeans, we can and should aim to build solidarity at different levels within the society. This is possible if we aspire to be a part of nation-building and want to define community involvement at all ages and in varying forms.

Shortage of labour will persist in our system, like many other developed countries, specifically in this area of caregiving. Singapore will compete with other countries, like Japan, Germany and Italy, for external caregiving resources. UN studies have shown that these countries will also have more than 25% of their population aged 65 years and above by 2030. Thus, the urgency and need for self-reliance and building resources that cater for the characteristics of our aged as they are strongly influenced by the culture within the country.

Third, to help to supplement and provide support at the community level to state-level welfare initiatives. Increasingly, we have seen that it is a social and economic cost to our society when older people are shut out from mainstream life. Loss of income, status and a positive role in community life means a greater likelihood of dependence on the taxpayer. In addition, the failure by society to use the experience of older people results in further costs to our communities.

Older people are as heterogeneous as any group in society and reflect the social and cultural mix of any cross-section of the community. Similarly, they have needs and aspirations which differ from their individual circumstances. For some, work has provided a sense of identity and recognition of their contribution to society. A substitute thus must be established in retirement to maintain their individual self-esteem.

In summary, through the integrated social hub, we can bring about a reinforced sense of social and human awareness, and inculcate values through intergeneration sharing, thus strengthening our social fabric. This way, we not only maximise resources, infrastructure, people, communication of policies and outreach; it also provides options for localised employment opportunities, promotes active ageing and lifelong learning. As such, it will slow down their health and mental deterioration, leading to healthier lifestyles and providing choices for these seniors to age gracefully.

The stories mentioned earlier may seem to be a dream to many. But is this a vision we can jointly turn into reality? The answer is yes. We can create an integrated social hub within each living community where the residents live, work and socialise. In a true sense, the kampong spirit is revived and this takes on a whole new dimension. I term this new village the "3G Village", one built with care and respect for all ages, as everyone has a meaningful role to play.

With that, Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion.

Mdm Speaker: Mr Chee Hong Tat.

4.55 pm

The Minister of State for Communications and Information and Health (Mr Chee Hong Tat): Mdm Speaker, I speak in support of the Motion.

Last year, we celebrated Singapore's 50th birthday. This year, we embark on our journey to SG100. Our first 50 years have not been easy. The odds were stacked against us. But our founding fathers and our Pioneer Generation had a "never say die" attitude. They took on whatever challenges they faced with courage and determination. Through hard work and innovation, they overcame many obstacles and brought Singapore to where we are today.

Innovation was critical to our success. As a newly independent nation, we faced many difficult issues for the first time. There were no templates and standard operating procedures to follow. We had to chart our own destiny and find new paths as we go along.

We started National Service and built up our armed forces to defend ourselves. Against conventional wisdom at that time, we attracted multinational companies and foreign investments to create jobs for Singaporeans. Dr Goh Keng Swee took a calculated risk to transform the swamps in Jurong into Singapore's first industrial estate. We also succeeded in many other areas, such as turning Singapore into a Garden City; creating a harmonious multiracial society and allowing many Singaporeans to become home owners through our public housing policies. All these achievements did not happen by chance. They were due to the hard work and innovation of our Pioneers.

As we developed, we continued to innovate. Mr Philip Yeo realised the bold vision of joining together smaller islands through land reclamation to form Jurong Island. Mr Tan Gee Paw and his team at the Public Utilities Board (PUB) successfully implemented NeWater and enhanced our water security. On the education front, we have created new pathways for our students. I was fortunate to be part of the MOE team working on some of these initiatives, including the establishment of Northlight School and Assumption Pathway School, for students who are less academically-inclined. These innovations in policy and implementation have benefitted Singapore and Singaporeans.

Some people claimed that Singapore lacked innovation. And they either attributed this to Singaporeans not being confident enough, or tried to put the blame on our education system, schools and educators. I respectfully disagree. If we had not been innovative, could we have survived after 1965 and become one of the most admired and prosperous cities in the world? Could we have improved our lives and transformed Singapore from Third World to First in one generation? As Mr Lee Kuan Yew said, "This is not administration doing a job. This is entrepreneurship on a political stage, on a national scale."

The President has highlighted our key challenges in the coming years and how we must create Singapore's future together.

Looking ahead, my worry is that we get trapped in the comfort zones of our current success and we start to lose our appetite to take risks and question the status quo. Will we end up playing it too safe by staying well within existing boundaries? Will we focus too much attention on complying with rules and procedures, instead of the outcomes we want to achieve?

It is fine if we just want to cruise along in maintenance mode and make small, incremental improvements. But it is not good enough if we want to deal with difficult challenges and bring Singapore to the next higher level. To do that, we need to embrace the enterprising spirit of our Pioneers and we need to innovate.

There are three important things we could do to encourage innovation and enterprise.

First, we must face our problems and challenges with a positive attitude. We should view these as opportunities to develop new solutions and discover new breakthroughs. Innovation often involves bringing together ideas from different disciplines and sectors and also from other countries. Existing ideas from adjacent sectors can be applied to new problems to achieve a better outcome.

An example is how the Ministry of Health is working with Design Singapore and VWOs to bring together healthcare professionals, architects and community leaders to co-create a senior-friendly living environment at Kampung Admiralty. We want to develop infrastructure and solutions that encourage active ageing and intergenerational bonding. By combining ideas from different disciplines, such as healthcare, information technology, design and social behavioural research, we aim to provide better care and greater convenience for seniors in a home and community setting. The learning points from this project can be applied to other estates. This is a priority for Singapore as we need to be ready for an ageing population.

Many of our older towns already have a higher proportion of seniors. I see this when I meet my residents during house visits and constituency events in Toa Payoh. Some of my elderly residents are in good health and lead active lives. I met this 100-year-old lady who stays with her family in Toa Payoh North. She exercises regularly and joins her friends for outings and activities. She is more fortunate than some of her neighbours who are non-ambulant and require frequent medical assistance. We need to come up with innovative solutions to provide a conducive living environment for these different groups of seniors, so that they can age well and age in place.

Besides improving our quality of life, such innovations also allow our companies to realise commercial value from their products and services. The market is not confined to Singapore. Many other cities have rapidly ageing populations. By innovating and solving our problems, we will develop new ideas and create new value that can be exported overseas to grow our economy and provide good jobs for Singaporeans.

Let me share another example from my time at the Energy Market Authority.

Contestable consumers today can choose from many electricity retailers. These include independent retailers who offer innovative contracts, such as supply of electricity from renewable sources and energy management solutions like smart meters and demand response. But this was not always the case. Previously, there were no independent retailers in Singapore because we did not have an electricity futures market for independent retailers to manage their risks. Setting up the futures market was a complex and difficult task. Earlier attempts had failed because power generation companies did not want independent retailers to enter the market and compete with their retail subsidiaries.

But my colleagues and I did not give up. Together with the Singapore Exchange (SGX), we thought of different ways to overcome the obstacles. And after some initial setbacks and many months of hard work, we succeeded. Today, we have a futures market with three independent retailers – CPvT Energy Asia, Sun Electric Power and Sunseap Energy. I am glad their entry has led to more competitive prices and more choices for consumers. This includes my residents in Bishan-Toa Payoh. Independent retailers submitted the most competitive bids in our Town Council's latest bulk tender for electricity supply. This will translate into lower costs for our residents.

The second thing we could do to promote innovation is to encourage risk-taking and experimentation. We need an environment where people are willing to try new ideas and are not overly afraid of making mistakes. This spirit is a key success factor for British technology company Dyson, whose inventions include the bagless vacuum cleaner and the bladeless fan. Its founder, Mr James Dyson, said their engineers are not afraid of testing and failing, as that is part of getting to the final product.

When I was at the MTI, I visited Tan Seng Kee Foods (TSK). This is a family-owned Singaporean SME. It is now run by Mr Raymond Tan and his sister Annie. Their grandfather started the company. TSK manufactures noodles which they sell under the "Kang Kang" brand. These are not just any regular noodles. They are preservative-free, fresh noodles that can be kept for a month without refrigeration, far longer than conventional noodles.

So, how did TSK overcome the problem of fresh noodles having a shorter shelf life? With support from SPRING, they conducted R&D and found a simple but effective solution: pasteurisation. TSK adapted this process – typically used in dairy products – to extend the shelf life of their noodles without affecting the taste and quality. This makes it more convenient for their customers and allows TSK to export its noodles to overseas markets, opening the door to more business opportunities.

Like many who take the innovation route, TSK had to deal with risks, challenges and setbacks. But they were determined to keep trying. And SPRING supported them. They are building on their initial success to experiment with new ideas and products. I am proud of what TSK has achieved and wish Raymond, Annie and their colleagues continued success in their innovation journey.

As a society, we must not be intolerant of genuine mistakes and come down too hard on people who try and fail. We should encourage new ideas and accept that some of these ideas will fail. This is part and parcel of learning what works and what does not, so that we can refine our solutions and make them even better.

At the individual level, we need people with the gumption to take calculated risks and to push the boundaries when pursuing their passion; Singaporeans with the determination to press on in the face of adversity and the resilience to bounce back when they fail. This enterprising spirit is not only for startups and entrepreneurs, it also applies to other areas, such as how the Government formulates and implements new policies; how we improve our social services; and how we develop strong and caring communities.

Mdm Speaker, please allow me to now say a few words in Mandarin on how innovation can help to rejuvenate our neighbourhood shops.

(In Mandarin):[Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I believe that there are many people like me who patronise the heartland shops for daily necessities. These heartland shops have become part of our lives and they also contribute to the community by providing job opportunities for residents.

In recent years, heartland shops have encountered many challenges, for example, rising costs and manpower shortages and so on. Most of these shops are small businesses which are unable to derive benefits from economies of scale and find it difficult to invest to improve productivity.

Moreover, many proprietors of heartland shops are ageing and their children may not be keen to take over the business. I am worried that with this trend, our communities will soon lose their vibrancy and this unique aspect of local culture will be lost.

I have discussed with the Federation of Merchants' Association on how to help heartland shops improve productivity and enhance their products and services to attract more customers. In addition, how we can provide opportunities for young people to start their business within the community, to take the first step in becoming their own boss.

When I visited my constituency, I noticed that the vicinity near Toa Payoh West Market has attracted some young people to set up shop. One of them is a successful ice-cream shop known as Creamier. This shop was started in 2011 by three Singaporeans in their 30s. Their business is good and they have attracted many customers. They have subsequently expanded their business by opening a cafe named Sunday Folks at Chip Bee Gardens at Holland Village. Recently, during a visit to the National Design Centre, I found out that the handmade ice-cream created and produced by Creamier has won recognition from the centre as a top-class locally created product. This shows that their creativity and design are, indeed, outstanding.

Apart from cafes, we can also consider setting aside some heartland retail space to create an entrepreneurial hub, so that startups, entrepreneurs and investors can set up shop in the HDB heartlands. In other words, extend The LaunchPad scheme for startups to the heartlands and bring venture activities to our neighbourhoods.

In addition, the heartland shops could also consider providing part-time or temporary job opportunities for residents. This would encourage more seniors to continue working and stay active. It would also help some Singaporeans to return to the workforce on a part-time basis. In this way, they will be able to take care of their families and earn some income at the same time.

We must be bold in thinking of new ideas. Only with innovation and determination can we achieve the desired outcome for these schemes. All stakeholders, including the Government and businesses, have to try out new ways of doing things.

I suggest that the Government appoint a designated agency to take the lead in promoting the development of heartland shops and, at the same time, work with other Ministries and the Federation of Merchants' Association to review relevant rules and regulations. When necessary, they should move with the times, improve existing policies and schemes to further support entrepreneurship and small businesses. A few constituencies can be selected to pilot these new ideas.

(In English): Mdm Speaker, I will now conclude in English. The third thing we need to do to promote innovation is that we must stay connected to the world and be open to different sources of ideas and talent. This includes attracting overseas Singaporeans to return home. They bring useful perspectives and networks from abroad. To be an innovative society, we also need to have a largeness of spirit to welcome and integrate international talent, especially in sectors where we are still growing our local talent pool.

Being open to international talent does not mean we dilute the focus on developing Singaporean talent. The two objectives are not mutually exclusive and can, in fact, reinforce each other. Ultimately, what we want is to strengthen Singapore to benefit Singaporeans.

When I met our local film producers and designers, they supported keeping Singapore open to international talent, so that our creative industries can remain vibrant and competitive. They also saw value in having young local talent work with these foreign experts, to broaden their perspectives, deepen their skills and build stronger networks that could lead to possible partnerships in future. We have to manage our population growth carefully. At the same time, we must not over-tighten the inflow of immigrants and foreign workers and send the wrong signal that Singapore no longer welcomes talent. That will hurt us as it will lead to slower economic growth, fewer jobs and a less vibrant society.

I know this is a sensitive topic to raise in a maiden speech. But I believe it is an important issue for Singapore's future, which we need to discuss and find the right balance. Let me tell you why.

Earlier this month, there was an article in The Sunday Times by Leo Lewis entitled "Japan's deflated generation". It described how Japan's ageing population, deflation and slow economic growth over two decades have produced a new generation of young Japanese who are afraid of taking risks. They do not dream big but look for small moments of happiness in their current situation. One of them, a fashion school student, said, "I often surprise myself. I am more conservative than my mother. I am more conservative than my grandmother. She lived in a time of war."

When I read the article, I asked myself, will Singapore end up like that? Or do we have the vision and courage to innovate and chart a different path?

One of our key success factors has been our ability to stay connected to the world and be open to new ideas and talent from abroad. We must preserve these elements if we want to remain an innovative society. The critical thing is that when we open up, we do not lose our identity and we must continue to ensure that Singaporeans remain at the core of everything we do. This is not easy to achieve and there will be tensions, but we must find a way to strike a good balance between these objectives.

If we simply do what is convenient and choose the path of least resistance, including pandering to populist sentiments or avoiding difficult topics, we are effectively short-changing our future generations. And we will end up like the Japan which Leo Lewis talked about in his article. That is not the future which I want to see for Singapore. That is not the kind of society which I want my children to inherit.

The PAP Government believes in facing difficult issues with courage and determination and working closely with Singaporeans to tackle our challenges. The Government does not have all the answers and we cannot do everything on our own. We need to work with partners from the private and people sectors. I see more scope for such collaboration going forward as our challenges become increasingly complex and multifaceted.

But it does not mean that we simply step back and do less. Having a reduced role for Government does not necessarily mean other sectors will become more innovative and dynamic. It is not so simple. What we want is to grow the pie for all stakeholders, and for the Government to catalyse and enable stronger collaboration and innovation. This is not a zero-sum game.

More importantly, we must have leaders in all sectors who walk the talk and who say what they mean and mean what they say. This is an essential element of trust. And without trust, there cannot be effective leadership. So, when the Workers' Party talks about the importance of transparency and having a Freedom of Information Act, I hope they go beyond talking about these ideas and to put them into practice, including in the running of their Town Council. After all, we know that actions speak louder than words. Singaporeans will judge politicians and political parties based on what we do and not just what we say.

Singaporeans are a pragmatic, resourceful and resilient people. We are the descendants of lion-hearted Pioneers who built this country. If we continue to stay united, work hard and embrace the pioneering spirit of our forefathers, I am confident that we will overcome our challenges and emerge even stronger than before.

Together, we have come this far and built this place from scratch. Together, we have created a country that we feel proud to call home. And, together, we will build a better Singapore for our future generations. [Applause.]

Mdm Speaker: Mr Zainal Sapari.

5.17 pm

Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mdm Speaker, our SG50 journey was characterised by a history of courage, faith, endurance and a sheer will to surmount all obstacles that Singapore faced. I have faith that the Singapore that we wish to see over the next 50 years will happen if the Government continues to take responsible actions with the next 50 years in mind.

The President's call "to develop a caring nation" and "renew our economy" resonates strongly with the Labour Movement. It is within the Labour Movement's DNA to care for our workers. Working with our tripartite partners, the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) has transformed our workers' lives through several forerunner initiatives, such as the Inclusive Growth Programme, Best-Sourcing, and Progressive Wage Model where thousands of workers have benefited through better skills, productivity, career and pay.

In addition, NTUC has been a strong voice to advocate changes for many groups of workers through all the various initiatives and help given by our support centres, such as U-Care Centre, Migrant Workers' Centre (MWC), U-PME, e2i, U-Family, U-Live and many others. The Centre for Domestic Employees (CDE) is the latest to join this spectrum.

Through our Social Enterprises, NTUC has helped Singaporean workers and their families stretch their dollar and made essential goods and services more easily available. These Social Enterprises brought together a platter of opportunities for work, live and play. Moving forward, our Social Enterprises will rethink, redesign and reinvent products and services to cater for the changing life-cycle needs of Singaporeans.

Singapore has changed remarkably over the past 50 years and the Labour Movement is presented with new challenges as we continue to grow. The business environment is evolving rapidly. Technological advancement, globalisation of jobs, shorter product cycles and future manufacturing demand that we think out of the box to ensure that the Singaporean workforce can adapt to these changes and our economy remains competitive.

Our workers' profiles have changed as well. Workers are now better educated and have greater aspirations. We also see an increasingly older workforce. They are choosing alternate career paths, such as freelance and contract jobs. This re-emphasises the importance of the Labour Movement in reinventing itself, not only to remain relevant and continue to be the strongest voice of workers, but also to be part of Singapore's effort "to develop a caring nation".

Mdm Speaker, international reports of the fiscal outlook for 2016 all point to a not-so-rosy climate in the year ahead and the next. We are facing a tight labour market and slowing workforce growth, coupled with structural unemployment and shortage of skilled labour. These are worrying trends that must be addressed as we renew our economy.

And in weathering these, my deepest concerns are on the widening income gaps that affect our workers in the lowest percentile of the economic pie. The real income growth could have been worse for this group of workers if not for numerous interventions, such as providing Workfare Income Supplement, introducing mandatory Progressive Wage Models in low-wage sectors, making specific National Wages Council (NWC) recommendations for low-wage workers, and providing training to upgrade and deepen their skills. We must take bolder steps to address the widening income gap and, at the same time, ensure sustainability of our efforts and their outcomes. Mdm Speaker, we either find a way or make one to reduce this widening income gap.

I strongly call for more affirmative action to give a hand to our low-wage workers to cushion the oncoming impact. There are several areas that I would like to bring to the House's attention.

It was a laudable move in 2012 when NWC made specific recommendations to help low-wage workers. Unfortunately, many workers in non-unionised companies and those working in outsourced industries still had not received the recommended dollar quantum increase.

Employers out there view NWC recommendations as merely guidelines. Therefore, I strongly call for legislation on some sections of the recommendations. The dollar quantum wage increments should be made mandatory for employees in the 20th and 30th percentile, in terms of basic salary. Alternatively, the Government could explore making this mandatory in three industries – cleaning, security and landscape − by factoring these as part of the licensing conditions.

There is another aspect that can bring about better pay packets for our workers. The Government can play a greater role in encouraging their service providers with many low-wage workers to give annual increments (AI) and annual wage supplement (AWS). Government procurement officers can be more worker-centric by being more proactive to look into the welfare accorded to the outsourced workers by their potential service providers. All these moves, with the Government taking the lead, will create a ripple effect, gradually evolving to become an industry norm.

The Government has shown strong support for the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) in the three low-wage sectors. Beyond these three sectors, PWM should be introduced to other sectors to better the livelihoods of more low-wage workers. All Government-linked companies must be encouraged to be the catalysts to take the lead in implementing PWM by insisting that all major projects and tendering should incorporate PWM for the workers.

We have moved from price-based outsourcing and have been advocating best sourcing over the past decade. The nuances of this mechanism have allowed the stakeholders to take advantage of some loopholes. Eventually, this bad practice has ended up hurting the people who should be most protected – the workers employed on contracts for services. Therefore, we have to venture further into employing a Public Private Partnership (PPP) model as another tool to address our widening income gap, with greater emphasis on the human resource practices of the partners from the private sectors.

The second big area that I would like to touch on is the President's call to "renew our economy". Renewing our economy will entail restructuring to improve productivity. Productivity improvement is key in maintaining our competitiveness. It is also the major driver of sustainable real wage increases for our workers. NTUC and its affiliated unions will give its strong support to companies to adopt technology and innovation in their work processes.

Our Government has invested heavily to encourage productivity. Management should leverage on this and spearhead the productivity drive within the company and build a culture that supports innovation at the workplace. Without doubt, the unions and our workers will do our part to support new ways of harnessing technology and innovation and by contributing ideas for improvement at the workplace.

As raising productivity requires labour-management cooperation, teamwork and sustained efforts, companies must also adopt a more proactive gain sharing mindset to ensure that workers will benefit from their share of productivity improvements. This is to ensure such efforts gain momentum and sustainability in the long run.

When companies restructure, it would bring about a need for new skills to facilitate operations. This will demand that both companies and employees invest in continuous training and skills upgrading to ensure that the workforce remains competent and relevant to the changing needs of the industry and resilient at all times.

While employers may bring in new employees, this also presents an opportunity to strengthen our fort on the Singaporean Core. This is even more so with the Government's move to reduce reliance on foreign manpower. Hence, it is imperative that our SkillsFuture initiative must achieve the desired outcome. There should be no compromises and our SkillsFuture initiative must achieve its key deliverables. Mdm Speaker, please allow me to address in Malay.

(In Malay):[Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] For the Malay/Muslim community, we must be prepared since Singapore's economy is expected to go through a challenging phase and this will affect many local workers here. Many training opportunities to enhance skills or perform new jobs are made available with the Government's assistance. It is important that these opportunities are used in order to help their employers make the necessary restructuring measures to improve their competitiveness. Currently, the number of Malay workers undergoing training for skills upgrading is still lower than workers from the other communities. This can affect the ability of our Malay workers to get good jobs when Singapore's economy undergoes renewal.

The Government should also take more aggressive steps to help workers, especially the low-wage workers, to overcome this challenge. NTUC would like the Government to give more focus and attention to low wage workers, since the income gap is becoming wider, compared to other workers. In order for low-wage workers to enjoy better pay increments, I propose that the NWC's recommendation for pay increments for low-wage workers be made compulsory for all employers.

(In English): Mdm Speaker, the tripartite partners must champion new approaches to improve productivity by reinventing business processes, rethinking creative use of robots and machines and redesign deployment of manpower.

We will face failures as we chart forward, but we should not be discouraged because every wrong attempt presents an opportunity to move a step forward more intelligently. The difference between the impossible and possible in SG100 will depend on the determination of every Singaporean to make it happen. With that, I support the Motion to thank the President for his Address.

Mdm Speaker: Mrs Foo Mee Har.

5.28 pm

Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Mdm Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion to thank our President for his Address. The 13th Parliament commences at a time when Singapore is entering a new phase of its development.

SG50 celebrations helped Singaporeans from all walks of life appreciate how far we have come as a nation, but, as the happy year drew to a close, the new one began on a rather grim note. The President is right to recognise that the journey ahead will not be an easy one as we cope with the challenges posed by a slowing mature economy, an ageing population, greater social diversity and continuing threats of terrorism.

Amongst the five key aims that the President has laid out for this term of Government, I would like to focus my speech on how we may renew our economy. It is critically important that we transform our economy to meet the needs of the global marketplace of the next 50 years, for only then can we hope to provide for all that Singaporeans wish for, whether it be good jobs, security, housing, healthcare, transport or welfare for the less privileged.

The figures are sobering. Our economy grew at a modest 2.1% last year, the weakest rate of growth since the financial crisis of 2009. Analysts have downgraded their growth forecasts for 2016 from 2.8% to 2.2%. Forty-four percent of companies expect a drop in profit margins. The year 2016 has gotten off to a rocky start, with tumbling stock markets, slumping commodity prices and world news dominated by security incidents.

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Charles Chong) in the Chair]

The International Monetary Fund rated China at the top of their list of concerns in 2016, and the impact of its reduced rate of growth will continue to reverberate through Asian economies, not least in Singapore, because of our open economy.

Sir, whilst we focus our attention on building longer-term competitive advantage, we should also help Singaporeans get there. Help the more vulnerable amongst us to ride out the coming storms. I am particularly concerned about how certain segments, such as the older PMEs, will cope. Once displaced, they often find it hard to rejoin the workforce. Targeted Government interventions can help this group transition to new opportunities.

So, I urge the Government to do more to systematically retrain career switchers, to provide mid-career Earn and Learn Programmes to help them secure new jobs. We should explore how IE Singapore can tap the rich experience of older PMEs to help companies expand overseas, especially into emerging markets. Many of these are wizened and street-smart from years of hard knocks. They could represent an invaluable resource for companies trying to internationalise. In fact, mature PMEs, whose children have already grown up, may be raring to find their second wind in foreign lands, flying the flags of both their employer and of Singapore.

The Government has announced the setting up of a 30-member Committee for the Future Economy to develop strategies to position Singapore for a vibrant and resilient economy that creates opportunities for all. I have some suggestions for the committee to consider.

First, despite the efforts of many in the past few years, productivity growth continues to elude us. Our annualised productivity growth of 0.3% over the 2010 to 2014 period fell far short of the target of 2% to 3%. We must now be prepared to make drastic changes. It is time to do away with generic Government support schemes that served more as subsidy schemes to help businesses defray fixed and equipment costs, rather than to address their underlying lack of competitiveness. Future schemes should focus on helping firms create new, innovative and differentiated products and services that are truly competitive internationally. Schemes should also be tailored at the sectoral level and streamlined for easy access.

Sir, I hope the Government will reflect on our heavy reliance on MNCs to bring technology and expertise. We must also make a concerted effort to invest in indigenous Singapore technology – innovations made in Singapore. In fact, developing globally competitive local firms was already listed as a key objective of the Economic Review Committee recommendation in 1998, yet we are still far from realising this ambition. To achieve this, we need to take bold steps to create an ecosystem that enables targeted growth clusters to proliferate, multiply and develop depth in capabilities that are competitive internationally.

There is much we can learn from South Korea on how the Government can enable growth of new clusters and build indigenous capabilities. The Korean government rolled out a comprehensive strategy to build the movie, drama and music industry as a new cluster, after the Asian Financial Crisis. As many K-Pop and soap opera addicts amongst us will attest, this has also promoted the Korean brand internationally.

Some of the more significant government initiatives include lowering entry barriers by providing artists access to many movie-making locations, government seed funding and assistance in market development with the Busan International Film Festival and the encouragement for chaebols, the large Korean groups, to enter the entertainment industry in order to provide the investment needed to produce blockbusters.

The government also played an active role to foster talent by promoting majors in entertainment, including pop singing, film making and acting, and even setting up top-quality master's degrees, such as the Hanyang Entertainment Master's degree, for the development of management and leadership skills in the entertainment industry.

Another innovative government initiative is the setting up of the Korea Technology Finance Corporation (KOTEC), a special purpose financial institution to provide funds to technology-innovative SMEs with weak collateral capabilities, in the form of credit guarantees for new technology. As part of its credit guarantee programme, KOTEC also developed a sophisticated and patented credit rating system to assess technology level and business feasibility, on very different lending criteria than the traditional banks, thereby enabling emerging technology companies to access funding efficiently. It has played a leading role in supporting technology startups with compelling business cases, in the form of billions of dollars in credit guarantees.

Sir, we must develop our own "next big thing" as a key engine of our economy and not be so dependent on foreign intellectual properties.

Sir, companies in Singapore can also benefit from better linkages and collaboration. For example, companies, large and small, can benefit from collaborating with one another when they venture overseas. Large Singapore corporations which have secured overseas projects should be encouraged, perhaps through tax incentives, to bring along a whole collection of smaller Singapore suppliers as part of their expansion internationally. This will help smaller SMEs kick-start their overseas ventures.

Companies can also benefit greatly by collaborating in skills development, jointly uplifting talent for their industries. This is the norm in some of the most competitive and innovative economies in the world, such as Switzerland and Sweden. We should explore incentives for companies to come together to set up shared training facilities and to co-develop training programmes.

Under the Swedish Higher Vocational Education (HVE), the system basically has a training provider, together with a steering group of employers, to define the industry's demand for manpower and skills over a specific time horizon. And through a competitive bidding system, the Swedish government funds the programmes that most clearly link industry requirements to training provision. So, Sweden has elegantly built training demand and employer support into the design of continuing education, and HVE programmes have achieved strong outcomes. I hope a similar approach can be adopted by Singapore industries and supported by the SkillsFuture movement.

SkillsFuture is a key initiative to sustain Singapore's competitiveness by raising the quality of our workforce and refresh our value proposition in the global marketplace with new skills and capabilities. I hope the setting up of a new Statutory Board, SkillsFuture Singapore, under MOE, will enable as robust and strong a sector in continuing education as is currently the case with our formative education sector.

At this point, I wish to declare my interests as CEO of the Wealth Management Institute and Temasek Management Services Academy, in the interests of transparency.

Sir, an important starting point for a robust continuing education sector is knowing what to train for. The Government has announced sectoral manpower strategies to identify medium-term manpower and skills plans for each key sector in order to support industry growth and deepen expertise. But for the sectoral manpower strategies to be successful, we need employers and employees to be fully on board. The skills ladder identified must be owned by the industry, anchoring training efforts. Career and pay prospects must also be commensurate with skill and competency levels.

Targeted training solutions should be readily available to enable individuals to advance their career by climbing the skills ladder in their area of interest. I have received feedback that many programmes in the continuing education sector are too generic and not targeted enough. There is an urgent need for training solutions to be aligned to the skills ladder, enabling individuals to achieve mastery and expertise in their jobs. To jump-start the sector, I strongly suggest that SkillsFuture Singapore consider the Swedish HVE model to bring industry and training providers together, in the way I had described earlier in my speech.

We have all heard the saying, "What gets measured gets done". We should, therefore, develop a set of metrics to track the outcomes of our lifelong learning initiatives, with clear plans to achieve a certain goal or reach a certain level, within a specified time. Furthermore, we need to leverage SkillsFuture to develop a strong Singaporean Core in the workplace, especially amongst PMEs. Companies with unusually high dependence on foreign EP holders should be required to submit a detailed plan on how they intend to train and develop Singaporeans for those jobs. And the success of their EP applications and renewals should be influenced by the extent to which they fulfil their obligations to train and develop locals.

Sir, I wish to end with some comments on how we may build a culture of innovation. For innovation to thrive, people must be willing to experiment and explore. But the fear of failure drives Singaporeans to "play safe", rather than "play to win". We must foster a culture that is more tolerant of mistakes, where failure is less stigmatised and missteps are seen as merely learning opportunities. No successful Silicon Valley entrepreneur is ashamed to tell you of his mistakes. Instead, they are proud to tell the tale of how they picked themselves up, dusted themselves off and bounced back from adversity. They are willing to try again because failure is not a "bad word".

Beyond the willingness to take risks, most successful entrepreneurs also possess an infectious belief in the cause they pursue. They have a strong sense of purpose and mission in life and will not be easily deterred from chasing their dreams. Many believe they are working for something bigger than themselves. And it is this faith that will lead others to overcome obstacles and drive innovation. Whether it is to find the cure for cancer, to be the biggest star on Youtube, or to save the planet, the dreams of Singaporeans will light the way to our tomorrows. We must nurture this precious spirit and inspire beliefs, arm Singaporeans with the fortitude to deal with adversity and infect them with the hope of success and then set them free to create and build a better life for others. We must teach them what it means to "play to win".

Sir, Singapore finds itself, once again, at a crossroads in its journey. The Singapore of SG100 will depend on the deliberations and decisions of our generation. We will have to take roads less travelled, where the paths will not be easy and the obstacles will not be small.

But we have never been in better shape to do so than we are today. We stand on the shoulders of giants, bolstered by strong Government and institutions, a sound financial base and a resourceful people. We can draw inspiration from our history of turning local disadvantage into global advantage. And come what may, we will always have one another. May this House lead the way, with the clear-eyed determination, courage and wisdom of our forebears. With this, Sir, I support the Motion.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Darryl David.

5.43 pm

Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, I thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of the Motion of Thanks to the President.

I agree with the first line of the President's Address that "SG50 was a defining year for Singaporeans". As we now move into SG51, we are entering a new era. Many citizens whom I have spoken to, feel a sense of excitement and optimism. Yet, this is also tempered with some caution and concern, due to the new challenges that Singapore is facing.

Externally, we are dealing with an increasingly borderless world that military strategists would term as volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous, or "VUCA". This VUCA world presents economic, security and environmental challenges to a small country like Singapore.

At home, we have a more pluralistic Singaporean society defined by a greater multiplicity of voices, perspectives and opinions on what is best for the country. The new generation of Singaporeans has to deal with education, transport, housing and healthcare landscapes that have evolved, and will continue to evolve, over the next few years. Indeed, we are not so much talking about a "new normal", but a "New Singapore".

Sir, I would like to highlight two areas that are important to help navigate this new paradigm that we are facing today. I would first elaborate on how we can develop the next generation of Singaporeans and imbue them with the resilience and the necessary life skills to navigate this increasingly complex global and social landscape.

Second, I would like to comment on how we can better strengthen our social fabric and community ties in this pluralistic society, so that we can tap on the collective wisdom of the crowd, while avoiding divisive forces that might segment our nation.

Our early leaders and Pioneers lived in a unique era where the exceptional circumstances that surrounded Singapore at that time produced tough and resilient men and women who were mature beyond their years. While it is impossible to replicate the exact same political climate and social settings of that period, I believe that it is important for us to imbue our youths today with the spirit of resilience that kept our Pioneer Generation going when things got tough.

I have heard "resilience" being mentioned quite a few times in this august Chamber in the past few days. My "resilience" is defined by the American Psychological Association as "the ability to adapt well in the face of adversity, trauma, tragedy, threat or significant sources of stress." Contrary to what many people would think, resilience does not require extraordinary fortitude and strength. In fact, it is a concept that can be taught.

Renowned psychologist Dr Martin Seligman created the Penn Resilience Program at the University of Pennsylvania for young adults and children. This highly successful programme has been run in many schools ranging from those in the US suburbs and inner cities, to schools across China.

Youths and young adults who had undergone the programme were found to be more optimistic; they were more likely to interpret setbacks as temporary and regard them as learning opportunities; and they were less likely to display depression-like symptoms later in life. In short, they were more resilient than their peers.

While training our youths in resilience will prepare them to ride the waves of change and challenges that will undoubtedly come their way, we also need to give them the tools that will allow them to master their own future. That brings me to my next point: creating the "I" shaped graduate.

Since the early 2000s, MOE has been advocating a "T"-shaped education where students are equipped with deep subject-matter knowledge and, concurrently, a breadth of other areas of knowledge that would give them the ability to operate across different fields. But we now need a new paradigm of learning. This is the concept of the "I" shaped graduate that some polytechnic colleagues and I have been advocating.

Allow me, Sir, to speak more on this concept. The horizontal bar at the top of the capital "I" is the breadth of knowledge that is embodied by the same horizontal bar that denotes the T-shaped education mentioned earlier. The vertical bar in the "I" is the depth of subject matter knowledge and technical skills that will help our students master the key competencies of the field of their choosing.

What I believe is important and is currently lacking, is the horizontal bar at the bottom of the "I". I believe that the bottom stroke on the "I" should be anchored by life skills. While there is currently no one recognised universal standard of what might constitute a "life skill," Ellen Galinsky, co-founder of the Family and Work Institute in the US, gives us some insight. She highlighted seven essential life skills that she believes could provide a useful framework that will help individuals to continue to grow and learn throughout their life. They are: (a) focus and self-control, (b) perspective taking, (c) communicating, (d) making connections, (e) critical thinking, (f) willingness to take on challenges, and (g) self-directed and engaged learning.

The International Baccalaureate (IB) is a programme that is being increasingly adopted by independent and autonomous schools in Singapore in place of the GCE "O" and "A" levels. The IB Learner Profile is designed to facilitate 21st century learning and aims to provide the platform for lifelong learning and to give its graduates all the characteristics that are necessary to succeed in a 21st century society. Ultimately, IB aims to provide students with life skills that make them: (a) inquirers, (b) knowledgeable, (c) thinkers, (d) communicators, (e) principled, (f) open-minded, (g) caring, (h) risk-takers, (i) balanced, and (j) reflective.

These are skills that will allow our youths to not only move across different career stages and pathways, but also allow them to traverse the diverse and sometimes, uncomfortable scenarios that this VUCA world will throw at them. Just as the base stroke of the capital "I‟ is what differentiates it from a "T‟, so, too, will these skills and attitudes strengthen and anchor the character of our youths.

As an educator, I was heartened to read about MOE referring to the concept of "holistic education" to develop "life skills from a young age" in its recent Addendum to the President's Address. I would thus strongly urge MOE to examine how we can incorporate such life skills into the pedagogical content and curriculum of our schools as early as possible.

The aim should be to go beyond broad and general statements in textbooks and to adopt a deep-rooted approach in building these skills into the whole learning experience. In this way, these skills will become second-nature to our youths by the time they reach adulthood. This will help us build a generation of confident Singaporeans who can rise above adversity and grasp their future, and Singapore's future, firmly in their hands.

Sir, I would now like to move on to the second portion of my speech on strengthening our social fabric and communal ties in a more pluralistic society. Singapore has always prided itself as a multiracial and multi-religious society where no one is disadvantaged or discriminated against because of the colour of their skin or because of their faith. While we continue to work through various grassroots organisations and committees to ensure that Singapore remains a tolerant society, we also have to acknowledge that the communal mix of Singapore today has changed over the years.

Among us are foreigners, Permanent Residents (PRs) and new citizens who have decided to sink their roots into our country, which highlights the social reality that the "New Singapore" is facing today. This reality was acknowledged by the President in his Address when he commented on how we are becoming more diverse, and posed the question as to whether we will "remain a cohesive society, or will our differences pull us apart?"

The oft-repeated message that Singapore has its roots as a migrant society and that immigrants need to be introduced in a calibrated manner to augment the low fertility rate is something that has been absorbed into the collective consciousness of Singaporeans. What we need to do, however, is to think about how we can better integrate these PRs and, especially new citizens, into our social fabric. An emerging challenge today is not so much one of integration among ethnic groups, but perhaps one that is between Singaporeans and new citizens.

At a community event welcoming new citizens last year, I observed that there were quite a few new citizens who had trouble communicating because of their inability to speak basic English. Grassroots leaders have also provided feedback that some of the new citizens tend to not get involved in community activities, because they feel that they are not able to communicate with their fellow residents of different ethnicities.

Sir, my esteemed colleague, Mr Seah Kian Peng, earlier talked about how Singlish defines us as Singaporean. To respond to that, I would like to say, "I double confirm, agree, with what my brother says lah". However, I would also like to add that English, specifically standard Singapore English, is possibly the most common language that is used in Singapore. It is the main language of commerce, information and, more critically, of communication across the different ethnic groups. It is, in short, our lingua franca today. As such, it would be useful to explore how we can make it mandatory for potential new citizens to attain a basic level of English language proficiency before they are given Singapore citizenship.

Another pre-citizenship requirement could be to consider mandating annual community service hours for the new citizens in their local neighbourhoods or with an NGO of their choice. This would allow them to develop a deeper understanding of the wider community and society that they are in.

For Singapore to progress as a country, I believe that we need to attract the best talent from around the world and bring in new knowledge and skillsets that are not available locally. However, I would urge the Government to consider introducing language and other assimilation requirements for PRs before they are granted Singapore citizenship. These measures would, undoubtedly, help new citizens assimilate and integrate better into our social and community fabric and that, in turn, would allow them to better contribute to Singapore's growth and development. This would also allow all Singaporeans to have what the President referred to as, "a shared understanding of what unites and binds us to one another."

Sir, Singapore has achieved much in the last 50 years. On the horizon is a "New Singapore" that faces a set of radically new challenges that are different from what we once encountered. While we will adapt and adjust to meet these new challenges, let us also continue to hold true to our unassailable principles of democracy, meritocracy and equality of ethnicities and religions. This will ensure that Singapore will always be that special and unique place in the world that Singaporeans are proud to call home. Together, we will navigate these uncharted waters with courage and look ahead to SG51 and beyond. On this note, Sir, I support the Motion of Thanks to the President.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah.

5.56 pm

The Senior Minister of State for Finance and Law (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you for allowing me to join the debate. In his speech earlier, Mr Dennis Tan raised a few points which really touched upon the work of the Ministry of Law and I thought it might be helpful if I responded to them.

His two main points under the Legal Aid and the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme can be considered under the broad rubric of access to justice. Mr Dennis Tan had called for a review of the $10,000 cap on the means test for legal aid.

I thought that I should share what has been done because, sometimes, the perception is that that parameter of the $10,000 cap is too strict. In fact, what we have done over the last couple of years is to expand the coverage, even though the amount of $10,000 has not itself increased.

In 2013, we amended the Legal Aid and Advice Act to take into account the current cost of living. The net effect of the amendments was to expand the coverage of legal aid to include more vulnerable applicants. To qualify for legal aid, the individual must have an annual disposable income of $10,000 or below, and disposable capital of $10,000 or below. So, it is a double-barrelled test, meaning you have to meet both the income test and the capital test.

The thing about the income test is that most people have the impression that when we say $10,000 income, that means your gross income. They think that so long as you earn more than $10,000 per annum, that disqualifies you. What we actually look at is disposable income. So, you look at the gross income, minus off all the things which you can deduct, like the cost-of-living expenses and so on, and you see what remains. What remains is the disposable income, and, if that is $10,000 or less, then you would qualify.

So, someone could have a gross income of $30,000, for example, but if after deducting all the items that are permitted to be deducted, your disposable income is, let us say, $9,000, then you would qualify.

What we did in 2013 was to increase the deductibles, so that more people would qualify. Prior to the amendments, the coverage of legal aid was about 17% of Singaporeans and PRs. With the expanded means test, it was envisaged that legal aid would cover about 25% of Singaporeans and PRs, which would translate to about 300,000 additional persons who could be potentially covered under the Act. This extended coverage does not even take into account the Legal Aid Director's discretion to depart from the general means test in certain circumstances.

Just to reiterate the point I made earlier – although we have not increased the $10,000 cap, we have, nevertheless, increased and expanded the coverage of legal aid.

I move on now to criminal legal aid. Mr Dennis Tan noted that more people had stepped up for pro bono work and called for others to step up as well. I should say here that we are completely in agreement that more volunteer lawyers and others who are in a position to do so, should step up for pro bono legal work. What I want to do is to highlight what the Government has done in the last couple of years and to indicate that it is also our mission to encourage pro bono work.

In May 2015, the Minister for Law Mr K Shanmugam launched the Enhanced Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS). Under the enhanced scheme, what the Government now does is that it provides the bulk of funding, comprising $800,000 for start-up costs and an annual commitment of up to $3.5 million to cover operational costs, honoraria and disbursements. This is given to the Law Society. The Law Society is the organisation that runs the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme. The lawyers deal with the Pro Bono Services office of the Law Society. But the funding now comes directly from the Ministry of Law, given to the Law Society. This increased funding enables increased legal aid. The increased funding covers the honoraria, operational costs and disbursements.

We should have a look at the contrast before and after the provision of funding.

In 2014, there were 1,780 applications for criminal legal aid, out of which only 431 were granted. In contrast, I note that Mr Thio Shen Yi, Senior Counsel, the President of the Law Society, mentioned at the Opening of the Legal Year in 2016 that last year, that is, in 2015, the CLAS lawyers helped 1,300 poor people accused of crime, an increase of 300% from 2014. The volunteer lawyers are paid an honorarium. It is not the same as market rate, but that honorarium goes some way towards defraying their legal fees. And the disbursements are covered. In effect, by providing the increased funding, my Ministry is supporting criminal legal aid.

I should also say that there is another aspect of access to justice. I talked about legal aid and criminal legal aid. There is another category of cases where it may not actually be necessary to have a lawyer because of the nature of the claim, but you, nevertheless, want to have your dispute resolved. Two very good examples of this are the procedures under the Prevention from Harassment Act and the Community Dispute Resolution Act 2015.

Those two Acts were specifically designed to allow individuals to make their claims in person, and not to have to incur legal costs and expenses.

If you take these three things that I have mentioned, you can see that, very slowly, what we have done is, we have been boosting and supporting legal aid, we have been boosting and supporting criminal legal aid, and at the same time, increasing access to justice by simplifying procedures and making it easier for individuals to have their disputes resolved.

Moving on to another point that Mr Dennis Tan raised, which is access to counsel, the rights of an accused person to legal counsel are set out in Article 9(3) of our Constitution, which states "where a person is arrested, he shall be informed as soon as may be of the grounds of his arrest and shall be allowed to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice". Our Courts, in interpreting the Constitution, have determined that this right to legal counsel is to be exercised within a reasonable time after arrest and not immediately after arrest. What amounts to a reasonable time would, of course, depend on the circumstances of the case. I think it has been explained in this Parliament before that we need to strike a balance between the right of the accused person to consult his legal counsel and the public interest in ensuring that the Police is able to effectively investigate each case.

Permitting an accused person to communicate with third parties before the Police can wrap up their investigations may compromise the investigations, especially so in cases where the Prosecution relies primarily on the testimony of witnesses and accused persons to lead them to the crime scenes, accomplices and other corroborative evidence.

At the end of the day, we have to carefully balance the needs of the accused person on the one hand and the public interest on the other hand, and that means to enable the Police to conduct complete and thorough investigations. Every country must find the right balance that suits its circumstances.

Our system is well-established; it has proven effective over the years to help keep Singapore safe and secure and our crime rates low. On criminal discovery, there are provisions in place for criminal discovery and our Courts have set out what these obligations entail.

In essence, the Ministry of Law remains committed to the promotion of access to justice and we will work with the other Ministries, including MHA, to ensure that we have the right kind of system that takes into account the rights of the individuals and yet balances that with the needs of society. Sir, with that, I support the Motion.