Debate on President's Address

Order read for the Resumption of Debate on Question [31 August 2020].

"That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to:

'We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which she delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the First Session of this Parliament.'." – [Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan]

Question again proposed.

Mr Speaker: Senior Minister of State Sim Ann.

2.00 pm

The Senior Minister of State for Communications and Information and National Development (Ms Sim Ann): Mr Speaker, in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to participate in this debate.

A month ago, a young girl emailed me to inform me that she had seen me and my grassroots leaders working together to resolve school traffic problems in her neighbourhood. She also wanted to do her part for the community and had worked out a plan with her two sisters. They had pooled together her prize money from sports tournaments and their combined Edusave awards money. Their parents matched the sum dollar-for-dollar. They wanted to donate the entire sum to the community and asked me what use it could be put to.

It just so happened that my team has been distributing free meals to vulnerable residents at Clementi Avenue 4 since the start of the Circuit Breaker. The number of beneficiaries under this programme had increased from 30 to 90 people. I told the girls that their donations would help to cover the costs of five meals and invited their family to join us in the distribution. The residents were very moved to hear that such young girls had paid for their meals.

The mother told me that her father used to be a construction worker and they would have to go without meals at times because his job was unstable. Now that she has the opportunity of guiding her daughters to give back to the community, she has this special sense of satisfaction.

I was also very touched by the mother’s words. In fact, meal programmes are not new. Many charity organisations do this. However, this was a first in my community. Normally, we would issue cheques or grocery vouchers to residents who apply for financial assistance. During the Circuit Breaker period, we were worried that some of them would not be able to buy their own groceries and meals, which was why we decided to set up this meal programme. We observed that as many people walked past the distribution point, some who are in need would approach us and apply to join the programme. Those who are not in need also noticed and commended us for organising such an initiative. Some residents, like the three sisters, who are in a position to give, even offered to sponsor a few meals or some daily necessities to be distributed together with the meals, giving full play to the kampong spirit of looking out for one another. While the Circuit Breaker period has ended, some people still face financial difficulties and we plan to carry on with this programme for as long as we can.

This might be a small anecdote, but it does reflect that our community is undergoing changes because of COVID-19. The pandemic has hit the economy hard and affected the ability of some families to fend for themselves. However, it has also ignited the spirit of mutual help in our community. The Government has introduced many large-scale assistance programmes for Singaporeans, but there are finer areas where the grassroots can make themselves useful.

I have seen more residents engage in charitable work and even become volunteers. Our team of volunteers have become more like social workers, actively organising various assistance programmes. For us Members of Parliament, we also seem to have become a clearing house to match donations to needs. The items I have received and given out range from face masks and hand sanitisers to food, second-hand laptops and cash donations. We have been kept busy, but we also learn to adapt, transform and grow.

During the debate over the past few days, we have had in-depth discussions on economic issues. I would like to talk about the social aspect, especially the building of our society post-COVID-19.

While we will prevail against COVID-19 one day, life will probably not return to what it was. In her Address, President Halimah Yacob noted that the global and domestic situations have changed and there would be no going back to the status quo.

Rather than long for the past, we can seize the day and shape the future. Let me start with the ways in which we have surpassed ourselves in this pandemic.

While fighting the pandemic, Singaporeans have been surpassing ourselves in many ways. I am not only referring to the courage of healthcare staff or the dedication of frontline personnel. I am also referring to ways in which each and every one of us has been stretching ourselves.

First, many of us have acquired new DIY skills, especially during the Circuit Breaker – cooking, baking, growing vegetables and sewing masks, to name a few examples.

Baking is both a hobby and also a wage-earning skill. Sales of baked goods and desserts were suspended during the Circuit Breaker, but home baking also flourished. Now, when I make door-to-door visits, I sometimes am presented with cakes made by self-professed “Circuit Breaker Bakers”.

In the early weeks of the pandemic, face masks were in short supply. Those who could sew answered the call to make fabric masks for family, friends and strangers. I, too, joined in. In the process, I learned that my sewing machine was not as difficult to use as I had imagined – the key was whether I had the motivation to figure it out.

As for farming, we already have many enthusiastic hobbyists growing plants and vegetables in community gardens all over Singapore. But with the pandemic disrupting food supply chains, Singaporeans grew concerned about food security. When NParks offered free packets of vegetable seeds, the response was so overwhelming that they had to increase the number of packets from 150,000 to 400,000. Looks like we have hopes of grooming more urban farmers!

Second, we have become more caring towards the vulnerable in society. The meal programme I talked about at the start of my speech is only one among thousands of charity projects. From January to May 2020, Singaporeans gave about $90 million to the Community Chest, Community Foundation of Singapore’s Sayang Sayang Foundation and through Giving.sg. The amount received over this period is about equal to the overall donations received by the Community Chest and through the Giving.sg portal for the whole of 2019. Many also responded to the call to donate their $600 Solidarity Payment to help those who might need it more.

Third, we have become more appreciative of migrant workers and frontline personnel.

Most of the donated face masks and bottles of hand sanitiser that I had received were from donors who specified that these were meant for frontline personnel, such as cleaners, security guards and pre-school staff.

I have also had the privilege of participating in COVID-19 relief projects for migrant workers. Migrant Workers Centre, the Centre for Domestic Employees, the Textiles and Fashion Federation and many donors came together under project “MaskForce” to raise 870,000 mask kits for migrant workers and domestic helpers. Project Belanja, organised by several groups, including migrant worker advocacy group It’s Raining Raincoats, the Restaurant Association of Singapore and Blossom World Society, raised over $2 million to deliver more than 460,000 meals to migrant workers, of which more than $1.3 million was contributed by local bank DBS.

I hope these examples of extraordinary efforts would not be ephemeral, but set new benchmarks for ourselves in the post-COVID-19 society.

I hope that fellow Singaporeans who have acquired new DIY skills will continue to use them to the benefit of themselves and others. In a highly commoditised consumer market, just about anything can be bought ready-made. It hardly seems economically efficient to make anything on your own. But the pandemic has also brought about a “DIY renaissance”. If this leads to a more independent and sustainable approach to living, and greater appreciation for the labour of others, it is not a bad thing.

I also hope that our care and concern for the vulnerable, for frontline personnel and migrant workers will be sustained. The post-COVID-19 society should be one that is caring and cohesive. I hope those who stepped up to help will continue with long-term volunteering, and that donors continue to support those who need help. With times being hard, I can well imagine that cash donations will be harder to come by. But even so, I believe there are many who are willing to give their time, or give in kind. If we make a conscious effort to encourage, support and mobilise ground-up initiatives, then we would not lose this heightened desire to help one another as we transit into the post-COVID-19 society.

The pandemic is a grave threat but also a great force of transformation. The proliferation of work-from-home and flexible work arrangements demonstrates this. Digitalisation is also a good example.

The Government has been encouraging enterprises and individuals to go digital. Everyone understands the broad direction, but adoption remains uneven on the ground. When it comes to enterprise digitalisation, the most challenging segments are neighbourhood enterprises, such as stalls in hawker centres, wet markets and coffeeshops. Helping seniors go digital, such as learning to use smartphone features, was similarly challenging.

The two segments are closely linked. Neighbourhood enterprises count seniors among their most important customers, while many stallholders themselves are seniors. And the daily lives and consumption preferences of many seniors revolve around the neighbourhood. When encouraging stallholders to go digital, some will decline, saying that their customers would not go digital. When teaching seniors to use digital technology, some also decline, saying that they would not need it at hawker centres and markets.

These mindsets are changing with the pandemic. In particular, during the Circuit Breaker, many conventional F&B and retail businesses were affected, while e-commerce and food delivery boomed. Many neighbourhood enterprises began exploring going digital in earnest. More people also recognise the benefits of minimising the use of cash and using electronic methods of payment. These trends have created unprecedented conditions for us to help seniors and neighbourhood enterprises go digital at the same time.

For this reason, IMDA established the Singapore Digital Office to make a nationwide push for digitalisation.

We have recruited Digital Ambassadors who have reached out to over 16,000 stallholders from 112 hawker centres/markets and coffeeshops. The “Hawkers Go Digital” programme is progressing well. Five thousand four hundred 5,400 stallholders have already signed up for SGQR e-payment.

We have also launched Seniors Go Digital, to help seniors gain basic digital know-how. We know that many seniors have children and grandchildren who are digital natives. But they might not have the patience to teach the seniors how to go digital. Never fear – we have SG Digital community hubs where Digital Ambassadors are prepared to guide seniors one-on-one. We will also focus on cybersecurity awareness, so that seniors can remain vigilant against potential cyber-crimes and gain confidence in online transactions.

For those with financial difficulty, the Mobile Access for Seniors scheme can equip them with subsidised smartphones and accompanying data plans.

Our wish is for more seniors to be familiar with basic digital functions – that they can interact remotely with loved ones and friends, that they can make purchases electronically and to use digital forms of identification to transact online with the Government. I hope those who take up the challenge can become Digitally Savvy Seniors.

What would a day in the life of a digitally savvy senior look like? She could be any “ah ma” in the neighbourhood. In the morning, she gets on a bus to the market. At the bus stop, she checks the MyTransport.SG app to see when her bus will arrive. Since she has four or five minutes to spare, she takes a selfie and sends it to the family WhatsApp chatgroup to say good morning to everyone. At the market, she buys vegetables and groceries using PayNow on her mobile phone – no need to take out her wallet. On her way home, she swings by a parcel locker to collect prescription medication sent by the hospital, saving her a trip to the hospital pharmacy. She spots what looks like stagnant water in a drain and snaps a photo for the OneService app. After getting home, she checks her Healthy365 app to see how many steps she has managed and what rewards she can redeem under HPB’s National Steps Challenge. She browses YouTube for new recipes. Over lunch, she and her husband chat about new articles that they have read using e-Newspaper services on the NLB Mobile app. And, since her grandchildren are back home from school, she chats with them over videocall and asks them what they would like her to cook at the next family gathering. In the afternoon, her mobile screen lights up with the latest Gov.sg WhatsApp message on the COVID-19 situation. In the evening, after dinner, she sees a message saying that a pair of trainers she ordered online have now arrived and are ready for collection in-store at a nearby mall. She gets her husband to join her on a stroll to the mall, but not before checking spaceout.gov.sg to make sure it is not crowded. At the mall, she uses SingPass Mobile for SafeEntry. And, before going to bed that night, she browses all the well wishes sent by friends in her chat groups and wishes them good night.

Such is the daily life of some of our already digitally savvy seniors. We can and should redouble our efforts to help heartland enterprises go digital, so that more of the heartland shopping experience can be replicated online or in a mobile-friendly way. This is good for customers and also for business owners. With the on-going implementation of Pick!, the nationwide parcel locker network, we can also improve on last-mile delivery and collection for e-commerce. Add to that the efforts of SDO and our Digital Ambassadors, I believe even more seniors can enjoy the convenience and comfort of being digitally savvy.

Mr Speaker, times remain challenging. It is a tough road between now and the “post-COVID-19 society”. But, undeniably, we are seeing encouraging signs as we respond to the immediate challenges posed by the pandemic. The “post-COVID-19 society” is taking shape bit by bit.

I hope that the “DIY renaissance” will contribute to vibrancy and a sense of autonomy in the post-COVID-19 society. I hope our care and concern for the vulnerable will bring about a cohesive and heartwarming post-COVID-19 society. I also hope that by helping all to go digital, we can bring about more inclusivity, greater advancement, convenience and security in the post-COVID-19 society. Such a society would be better prepared for future challenges, including Disease X which Prime Minister Lee mentioned in his speech. Such a society would also be a Little Red Dot brimming with positive energy, always ready to forge ahead.

Mr Speaker, I support the Motion.

Mr Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam.

2.17 pm

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, I support the Motion of Thanks to the President for her Address. I would first like to express my gratitude to the voters of Aljunied GRC for giving me the opportunity to contribute in this House again. I cherish the trust that you have placed in my teammates and I, and we will do our very best to represent your concerns and work towards a better future for Singapore.

While we may be called the Opposition for historical reasons, we stand here not necessarily to oppose but to work with Parliamentary colleagues along and across the aisle to refine existing policies and propose new approaches to the challenges we face as a nation. Singapore's economic, social and security challenges have grown more complex over the years. The policy responses must rise to the challenge. To do so, we need earnest and robust discussions on substantive policy matters both in and out of Parliament.

Today, I would like to discuss ways in which we can improve how we care for some of the more vulnerable members of our society. I will touch on the concerns of people with disabilities, means testing, healthcare expenses and welfare of migrant workers.

First, on people with disabilities. People with disabilities, or PWDs, are not a homogeneous group but a diverse community. They include individuals with physical, sensory, intellectual and developmental challenges of varying degrees. I raised disability issues seven years ago, during my previous term in Parliament, specifically about improving public transport and pedestrian infrastructure accessibility for the visually impaired. I am glad to see some progress has been made since then, although some gaps still remain.

For example, most junctions with traffic lights still do not have audible pedestrian signals or APS and for those that do have them, the chirping sound is turned off at 9 pm or 10 pm to avoid disturbing nearby residents. This could pose a safety risk for visually impaired pedestrians who are out at night. I hope MOT will reconsider my proposal back then to add vibro-tactile walk indications at the crossings. These are special buttons positioned at the traffic signals which vibrate when it is safe to walk. These complement the APS and can continue to operate even late at night without disturbing the peace.

In my conversations with PWDs, the number one issue on their minds is jobs – not unlike many other Singaporeans. They are not asking for handouts but more equal opportunities in employment. However, PWDs face much higher hurdles and not just because of their disabilities.

One such hurdle is that it is common for employers to assume PWDs will not be able to perform on the job as well just because of their limitations. PWDs have shared with me their unpleasant job search experiences where they met all the job requirements, only to be rejected when the employer learned that they had a disability. In fact, with modern assistive technologies, PWDs can be as productive at work as their able-bodied colleagues.

The Government has done well to provide schemes like the Enabling Employment Credit and the Assistive Technology Fund. This needs to be complemented with better public education for both employers and the general public in order to clear misconceptions about PWDs in the workplace. We also need to ensure that employers do not discriminate on the basis of disability by introducing anti-discrimination legislation.

Another area that needs to move forward faster with the times is our approach to means testing for social assistance schemes. The process often requires too much paperwork and imposes an undue burden on the very people we are trying to help. Mr Leon Perera also raised this issue in a speech on Tuesday.

The application for public assistance, for example, requires applicants to submit at least 10 documents to prove their neediness. Some of these documents require applicants to log into Government websites with their SingPass and print out documents such as CPF statements, both of which can be an obstacle for those with no computers and printers at home. When they apply for assistance schemes with other Government agencies or need to renew their assistance, the same exercise has to be repeated.

The process for PWDs applying for disability support is not a walk in the park either. They need to get a doctor certification of their disability and pay the clinic for this service. Then, they need to repeat this process for every agency they are applying for support from.

All this is a painfully low-tech way of means testing. In fact, we already have the capability to integrate and automate such systems. For example, My Tax Portal from IRAS pulls data from multiple sources to fill in a taxpayer's income deductions and reliefs, and computes their taxable income after just a few clicks. The Government has also been building its capabilities and data analytics.

We clearly have the technical capabilities to collect taxes efficiently and seamlessly. Can we now develop the same capabilities for dispersing social assistance to deserving individuals and families? For PWDs, the Government could create a centralised system that keeps track of each individual's disability, which can be tapped into by various agencies to assess if they are qualified for disability benefits.

I am glad to learn from the Minister-in-charge of the Smart Nation initiative in his Addendum to the President's Address that all Government services will be digital from end-to-end by 2023. I hope our means testing process will be one of the first to go paperless and presence-less. By doing so, deserving citizens can receive the help they need more quickly and conveniently, and will not fall through the cracks just because they have difficulty gathering and submitting the necessary documents.

My third area of concern is helping Singaporeans cope with the burden of healthcare expenses. Chronic diseases are imposing an increasing burden on our ageing population. MOH has said in its Addendum to the President's Address that it will look into identifying best practices that can help us in our fight to better manage diabetes and other chronic diseases.

A key challenge in chronic disease management is ensuring that patients follow their treatment regimens and show up for their regular appointments with their family doctors. I have met residents who have lamented about the high cost of treatment for their chronic conditions. Some have shared about missing appointments because of cost concerns. In the long run, missed or delayed treatments will cost both the patients and the healthcare system more if their conditions worsen and they need to be hospitalised.

I welcome the introduction of the MediSave700 scheme, which allows patients with multiple conditions to draw up to $700 a year from their MediSave accounts. This is up from $500 a year currently. However, I remain concerned about the limitations of the scheme. Patients whose condition is not one of the 20 chronic conditions specified under the Chronic Disease Management Programme (CDMP) or whose treatment costs exceed $700 a year still have to fork out cash for their treatment.

I have two suggestions for MOH to consider. First, that MediSave withdrawals be allowed for the treatment of all chronic conditions, not just those on the CDMP list. This will ensure that no one is excluded just because they suffer from a less common chronic condition.

Second, the annual withdrawal limits for MediSave should be removed for patients with sufficient MediSave balances and are over the age of 60.

To reduce the risk of a buffet syndrome, these two changes can be rolled out first at polyclinics and restructured hospitals, where tight procedures are already in place to ensure that only medically necessary treatment is prescribed. Sir, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, healthcare costs are a heavy burden for many Singaporeans, especially those who have been battling chronic diseases for a long time. Therefore, I hope the Government will further reduce the restrictions on the use of MediSave and help the elderly to reduce the medical expenses that have to be paid in cash.

Many residents have complained to us about the high medical costs. Some even forgo follow-up treatment because they cannot afford it. In the long run, if a patient's condition deteriorates to the point where he has to be hospitalised, the burden will increase, both for the patient and for our healthcare system.

In view of this, I would like to suggest that MOH include all chronic diseases in the list of allowed MediSave withdrawals, and remove the annual withdrawal limits for people over the age of 60. I believe this arrangement will reduce the mental stress on elderly persons caused by medical expenses and allow them to seek medical treatment with greater peace of mind.

(In English): Sir, my fourth area of concern is the welfare of migrant workers. These are some of the most disadvantaged yet invisible members of our society. They are neither voters nor Singaporeans, but they are part of the Singapore community and their interests must be protected too as is befitting a developed country like ours.

At the heart of the many issues that migrant workers in Singapore face is their lack of bargaining power vis-a-vis other parties like employers, the Government and employment agencies. This makes them susceptible to being taken advantage of. NGOs have reported that migrant workers often pay as much as $10,000 to secure jobs in Singapore. The costs include agent fees, course fees and sometimes kick-backs.

When their contracts end, some are asked to make cash payments of up to $4,000 to third-party agents to renew their contracts or find subsequent jobs. For both these fees, they take up huge loans and spend many months servicing them on the back of their salaries of about to $500 to $800 a month. This makes them almost like indentured labour for much of their time in Singapore.

A few unscrupulous employers are in on the act, working with illegal agents to profit off the workers they employ. Because such payments are usually made in cash, there is often no paper trail to prove the offences if they file a complaint with MOM. Furthermore, workers risk losing their jobs if they are being sent home when their employers find out they have filed a complaint. Hence, many violations go unreported.

I urge MOM to step up enforcement and intelligence-gathering, so that errant parties can be taken to task and made an example of.

We could also set up a jobs portal for employers to list available jobs so that workers do not have to go through intermediaries to find new companies to work for once their contracts end. This will reduce the opportunities for collecting kick-backs and correct some of the power imbalance that currently exists.

Mr Speaker, it has been said that the true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members. The President alluded to this in her Address to. We have come so far as a country, uplifting the standard of living of generations of our people. Let us take this progress to the next level as we further improve how we care for the vulnerable members of our society.

2.31 pm

Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Speaker, I rise to thank Mdm President and speak in support of Her Excellency’s Address.

On 24 August 2020, I was privileged to be sworn in at The Arts House, being the Old Parliament House where our Pioneer leaders themselves were sworn in during their time. Standing in the same Chamber as they had decades before, drove home the sacred duty of being a Member of Parliament (MP), and the importance of what we do here in Parliament.

Like our forefathers, we too are charged with safeguarding the interests of this country.

We now face new challenges, some of which they may not have foreseen. But I am confident that, by adopting the same spirit that our forefathers had, we can overcome these challenges with perseverance, unity and the conviction to do what is best for our Singapore.

I concur with Mdm President of the need to look out for our lower-wage workforce, many of whom, such as food delivery riders, are also essential workers keeping Singapore afloat throughout the COVID-19 crisis.

Many of the people in this House may have heard about or watched the video concerning Mr Abdul Rahman, a food delivery rider who found himself at the tail-end of a National Day mobile column on 9 August this year. Seizing the moment, Rahman spontaneously waved to some of the onlookers, who then responded with loud cheers in return. This heartwarming incident was fortunately captured on video and quickly went viral on social media networks that very same day.

I subsequently discovered that Rahman is actually a resident of my constituency and I paid him a visit at his residence in Woodgrove recently. Rahman revealed to me that he works up to nine hours a day, six days a week to provide for his family. He also shared with me that delivery riders like him typically earn about $6 per delivery, and that he would sometimes lose part of his income due to summons while rushing to complete deliveries and meeting customers’ expectations.

Mr Speaker, being a food delivery rider is not an easy job. They earn their wages by being constantly on the road and weathering the elements as they go. Because of the nature of their work and the tight deadlines imposed on them, they are often at risk of incurring such penalties – around $70 for fines imposed by LTA enforcement officers and about $300 for unclamping charges imposed by the Managements of shopping malls. More or often than not, these are due to the lack of designated parking facilities for delivery riders.

In this regard, I am seeking the community’s support and the Government’s backing in implementing transitional parking of about 15 minutes grace period for food delivery riders, and also hope that all commercial malls in Singapore can provide designated food delivery pick up points. This will provide a win-win situation that reduces the risk of fines and clamping charges for illegal parking, enabling a smoother food collection and delivery process.

In recent years, the threat of climate change has grown ever more urgent, with reports of forest fires and floods making the news more frequently than before. While Singapore has not seen major environmental disasters in recent years, the world’s rising sea levels may soon become a profound danger that poses a risk to our safety and way of life.

But the world is taking notice of the problem, with many developed countries making a push for "green living" and sustainability to mitigate the effects of climate change. In a recent survey conducted by Morgan Stanley Research with their summer interns, more than three-quarters of those surveyed plan to increase recycling efforts, while almost half are willing to change their diet to more sustainable food sources. A sizable portion of them are also reported to prefer the use of electric cars.

We must do the same here in Singapore with regard to increasing awareness and taking action as a society. For the past few years, I have been involved with green living initiatives at a grassroots level, organising recycling drives for the Bukit Panjang community, and I fully intend to do more as part of what I call my "G.E.L." mission for Woodgrove, with the "G" representing "Green Living"; "E" meaning "Embracing Parenthood" and "L" being "Law Awareness".

On a national level, I agree with MOT that “transport is part of sustainable development of Singapore.” Apart from looking into improving and expanding the infrastructure of the public transport system, I would also like to suggest that MOT explore opening up carpooling rights to taxi operators so as to maximise the usage capacity of each vehicle. In so doing, hopefully, we can reduce the country’s overall carbon footprint.

Working towards a more inclusive transport system should involve more than just improving public transport per se. We need to look deeper to better support the less ambulant. Mr Speaker, kindly allow me to elaborate this point in Mandarin please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, many elderly residents in Woodgrove have told me that overhead bridges without lifts are useless to them.

Most of them will opt to take public transport or walk whenever they go out to buy groceries, pick up their grandchildren or go for regular check-ups at the polyclinics as these save money.

But due to the deterioration of their knee joints, it is very strenuous for them to go up and down the stairs of the overhead bridges. Whenever it rains, they would rather get drenched than to use the overhead bridge. It is even more difficult for those who have mobility issues, let alone those using crutches or wheelchairs.

If we want to encourage more Singaporeans, especially the elderly and the disabled, to use public transport, we should not just focus on how to improve public transport amenities as that may not solve the root of the problem.

We should at the same time, also improve the environment around these public transport. For example, ensuring that covered walkways are extended to all HDB estates, we have to make sure that these walkways access are barrier-free and that lifts are installed at overhead bridges, especially in areas and along the trails towards where the elderly and mobility handicapped would like to go to, such as Community Clubs, town centres, polyclinics, hospitals and shopping centres.

(In English): During the term when I served as the School Advisory Committee Chairperson in Zhenghua Primary School, I would conduct motivational talks to the Primary 6 students prior to taking the PSLE, and I would hold intimate chit-chat sessions with their parents before they receive their PSLE results. On these occasions, I shared with them my unconventional journey in becoming a lawyer, including the fact that I actually did not do well for my own PSLE. With this revelation, I took the opportunity to encourage the parents not to choose schools purely based on their children’s PSLE scores, but where their child’s passion may lie instead.

The late E W Barker once said and I quote, “Education should always seek to find and nurture the best in every student, inspiring him to contribute confidently and fully in the area of his own capabilities, rather than made to feel useless and ashamed for not having made it to the top of the school.”

I wholeheartedly agree with his words, and I therefore applaud MOE’s decisions that the PSLE will soon have wider scoring bands and Streaming will eventually be phased out. This will offer students more opportunities to pursue subjects at a level suited to their strengths and interests.

While this is a great leap forward for the country’s education policies, many Singaporeans are far more concerned with the perceived quality of the schools themselves, with the reasoning that only some schools are good, and only the best teachers are in good schools.

Mr Speaker, I am a firm believer that every school in Singapore is a good school in its own way, able to bring out the best in every child. My alma mater, Bendemeer Secondary School, is one such example.

Back then, my parents chose Bendemeer primarily due to convenience’s sake; it was just a two-minute walk away from our HDB block. They would often walk past the school when returning home and see the school motto – "From Each His Best", eventually growing fond of it.

My time at Bendemeer was formative. Till to-date, I remain eternally grateful for the opportunities and encouragements that my teachers had given to me, believing that a Normal (Academic) student can become a lawyer one day if she worked hard for it.

Mr Speaker, while it is true that schools like Bendemeer have conducive learning environments and teachers capable of inspiring children to pursue their own goals, it will require more effort to convince parents likewise.

When I was expecting my daughter back in 2018, the first question one of my friends had asked me was not about the name I was planning to give to my daughter, but whether I had planned on which kindergarten and Primary school for my daughter to enter in future.

I was taken aback by that at first, but she shared with me that this is actually a common question discussed by many parents in the "mummy" chatgroups that she had joined, where the common consensus is that the school which the first child enters is important, as that will make the applications for their subsequent children a lot easier.

As a result of this mentality, many parents when registering their children for Primary 1, typically find themselves vexed by the whole process. In this regard, I humbly urge the MOE to introduce measures to break this trend and think of ways to boost parents’ confidence regarding sending their children to other, more accessible schools.

One suggestion that MOE can consider is to introduce a framework for all schools in Singapore to adopt and work towards, akin to the Business Excellence certification set forth by Enterprise Singapore to recognise schools that have attained a commendable level of performance to achieve world-class standards of excellence.

The whole objective of meeting the targets as set forth by this framework is not for schools to eventually be carbon copies of each other, but allow each of them to explore ways to excel with the manpower and resources available to them, enabling their students to feel motivated and inspired to pursue their passion.

Mr Speaker, today, 4 September 2020, is incidentally Teachers’ Day. At this juncture, I would like to take this opportunity to wish all teachers, a very Happy Teachers' Day. [Applause.] Thank you for your dedication and hardwork, in bringing out the best in our students and inspiring them to pursue meaningful lives.

In relation to the courses to introduce for lifelong learning, I am suggesting for the MOE and MinLaw to collaborate and introduce courses targeting our seniors to increase their awareness and knowledge on certain aspects of the law, such as consumer rights and the importance of estate planning.

I was appalled to learn recently that the top 10 most common scams active during the first half of 2020 had stolen an estimated $82 million in that period of time, with e-commerce scams being one of the most commonly reported.

Mr Speaker, I serve as the Co-chairperson in the Law Society Pro Bono Services’ Community Legal Clinics’ Committee and had been running a community legal clinic in a Residents’ Committee centre prior to becoming a MP. More often than not, residents come to see us when they encounter unfortunate situations, such as when they were scammed of their life savings, or when their spouses had become critically ill or passed on abruptly. They are invariably helpless and financially-strapped during these periods of time.

My experience had informed me that prevention is better than cure. I therefore think that upstream legal education is important, equipping them with knowledge of their rights in order to better prepare them for potential situations concerning legal matters.

During the course of the past few days of the President’s Motion of Thanks debate, I have observed that everyone in this House – both from the PAP and the Opposition parties – have affirmed the need for our country to stay united and at the same time, keep our economy and society open, and not turn inwards.

I believe that speaks well of the consensus we all share in shaping the overall character and tone of our society. Ours must always be a diverse, inclusive and multi-cultural Singapore – a nation where everyone has a place and where everyone belongs. We must uphold the interests of all Singaporeans regardless of their backgrounds and origins. At the same time, we continue to welcome and integrate new arrivals who identify with Singapore and our way of life.

As Minister Josephine Teo had said in her speech, many of our new citizens and PRs are the spouses and family members of Singaporeans. This is what I have observed in my constituency as well. During house visits, I often meet residents who share with me that they have worked in Singapore for many years and subsequently decided to establish their roots here. They purchased a HDB flat and set up a family in Singapore. One day, I met a Caucasian resident who had married a Singaporean and later became a naturalised citizen. He approached me, and instead of saying, "Hi", he greeted me with a uniquely Singaporean "Ho seh boh?"

Mr Speaker, it has been almost 55 years since the First Parliament session took place. Many of the Members who were sworn in at the Old Parliament House are no longer with us today, or have decided to serve in other roles, making way for the younger generations to contribute in Parliament and elevate the country to the next level.

But what has not changed in all these years, is the unanimity in the conviction of the members, past or present, who have taken the oath of allegiance – to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of Singapore. In Parliament, we raise issues that are vital to our people. Outside Parliament, we listen and serve our people; all of which, we have endeavoured to do, to the best of our abilities for Singaporeans.

The late EW Barker once shared and I quote, "No Member will stray from the straight and narrow path if he always let his conscience be his guide." I will bear these words in mind as I assume the voice of Woodgrove constituents in Parliament and as a PAP backbencher Member of Parliament, speaking out on what is best for Singapore and Singaporeans. [Applause.]

Mr Speaker: Dr Tan See Leng.

2.49 pm

The Minister, Prime Minister's Office and Second Minister for Manpower and Trade and Industry (Dr Tan See Leng): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just like to provide a clarification to Mr Gerald Giam on the issue of the migrant workers.

I want to reassure the House that with regard to the point that the hon Member made about the exploitation of migrant workers and so on, we have in place multiple mechanisms to ensure that their welfare is being taken care of.

While the system itself is not perfect, but we are doing the best we can. And we continue to improve and it continues to be a work-in-progress in terms of how we want to cater to more of taking care of their needs.

In terms of their coming onboard, employment agencies have access to them first. There are two sets of employment agencies. The ones that are based in Singapore – they are subject to very stringent regulation by our Act to make sure that there is a fair benchmark in terms of the payment of the commissions to them for bringing them here.

I understand from the High Commissions that there is a separate set of employment agencies that operate outside of Singapore, that is in the home countries of these migrants coming across. This group of employment agencies, we have no jurisdiction over them. So, it is one point that you need to consider. We have repeatedly engage Embassy officials to highlight to them that they need to work closer with us in terms of working with these employment agencies, to make sure that some of them can be blacklisted, so that we can also identify who they are and dissuade them from coming and using these employment agencies.

The other thing is, we have separately also, through the course of their employment here, allowed for them to transfer employers toward the end of their contract. At a certain length of time, they require to get the approval of their existing employers, and once that period has shortened, has come to the end, when they cannot get the approval towards the end, they can change an employer without getting prior approval. So, we have actually implemented all that to make sure that there is no need for the migrant workers to go back to re-apply in order to come here again.

On top of that, we are also very thankful, we are very grateful to the multiple Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in working with them and continually giving us feedback.

On top of that, our Ministry, we are now thinking about how to come up with an end-to-end eco-system built because we think that we need to have a more sustainable system, moving forward. If you look at the bulk of them, actually the majority of them stay here for more than two contracts. Quite a number of them have actually been here for more than eight years.

So, I thank the hon Member Gerald Giam for bringing this thing up. If he has more ideas, this is constructive feedback, we would welcome them as well. So, thank you very much.

Mr Speaker: Mr Giam.

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Sir, I thank Minister Tan for making that clarification and I really appreciate the attention that is being paid to this issue.

One of the points I was trying to make was that it is important to be able to cut out this intermediary that workers have to go through. I understand that there are jurisdictional problems and being able to reach out to them when they are not in the country. But within the country itself, very often, when their contract ends and they need to find another job – I have heard what the Minister said about helping them to be able to find the next job – what I am arguing for is more transparency, not on the part of the Government but more transparency such that the workers will be able to find a job possibly on their own without seeing a need to pay somebody to find them another job.

We have to put ourselves in the shoes of these workers who are here; they do not understand the language here and they do not have the means to just hop on to MyCareersFuture and find a job. So, if there is a way that we can make it more transparent what jobs are available, then they can skip through this intermediary and they do not need to feel a need to pay this kick-back to the intermediary.

Mr Speaker: Minister Iswaran.

2.54 pm

The Minister for Communications and Information and Information (Mr S Iswaran): Thank you, Mr Speaker. In the course of this week's debate, Members have discussed the geopolitical, technological, economic and social trends that have compelled a point of inflection upon us. These are forces that are beyond our control. Yet, we have to address the dislocations they will cause to our businesses, workers and vulnerable groups. And, also, we must position ourselves to reap longer term opportunities. So, the decisions we make now will have a lasting impact on our economy and our society.

This is not new. Last week, as I took my oath in the old Parliament House, I vividly recall the first time I did so in the same Chamber in 1997 as a newly elected Member of Parliament of the Ninth Parliament of Singapore. So, Ms Hany Soh would be perhaps surprised to know that there still are a few in this Chamber who took the oath and that includes, if I am not mistaken, the Prime Minister, Senior Minister Teo and, also, I think, Mr Shanmugam.

But what it reminded me of is the major challenges that successive Parliaments have navigated and the tenets that have helped us prevail against adversity, whilst we held steadfastly to what defined us as a nation – whether it was handling a crisis like the Asian Financial Crisis, SARS, the Global Financial Crisis, or making important shifts such as in population policy or the use of our reserves. The stakes were high and we had difficult choices to make. And each time, we were honest with Singaporeans on the choices and trade-offs. We sought to foster understanding of our fundamental challenges and forge a consensus on the way forward. And Parliament was the key forum for this, and this time is no different.

So, the question is, what will determine whether this arc of inflection in our history bends in our favour? Ultimately, it lies in how we choose to respond. In particular, I believe it depends crucially on how we balance two fundamental tenets – staying open and being inclusive. And I would like to give my take on that delicate equilibrium and the role that Parliament must play in maintaining it.

Staying open means a willingness to engage with the world, embrace novel ideas and seize new opportunities. And on the face of it, the need and benefits seem self-evident. Indeed, even in the course of this week's debate, across the aisle, we all agree that Singapore must remain open in order to create jobs and opportunities for our citizens. But this is easier said than done. Staying open means greater competition, disruption and constant adaptation to change. The outcomes are uneven. In other words, there are winners and there are losers. Societies around the world have fractured because of this.

So, being inclusive is a critical and vital complement to this. Our efforts to embrace openness must be matched by an equal, if not greater effort, to achieve an equitable distribution of the benefits and the access to opportunities, to preserve a sense of fairness.

Again, we all agree on this and that we must invest in the skills of our workers, capabilities of our enterprises, have rules of fair play and redistribute benefits. As Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had said, we must redouble our efforts to develop everyone to their fullest potential, to take on new opportunities, flourish in their chosen pursuits.

So, where does the rubber hit the road? It is in the judgements that we have to make, in translating those principles into policies and putting them into practice; when the macro benefits do not necessarily square with the micro experience; when we have to persuade our workers and union leaders to support technological change that may threaten their jobs, but yet is in our long-term interests; when our economic agencies have to convince investors that they can rely on us to be consistent in our policies, including those that pertain to manpower, even as they make long-term commitments to Singapore.

Sustaining the dynamic economic and social balance between staying open and being inclusive is challenging in the best of times, what more at a time of economic uncertainty like the present? So, to do so, the foundation must be trust. Our citizens must know that their lives and livelihoods are always our priority, that we have their back.

As Prime Minister said on Wednesday, "The Government will always be on the side of Singaporeans. What is the point of creating jobs for foreigners, if it does not benefit Singaporeans?" Equally, our international partners must know that we are not just fair weather friends; that we have the political will to stay the course.

Building that trust is the duty of the Government, the Public Service, but, importantly, also of Parliament. It requires principled leadership. What we say, but also what we actively advocate in this House and ultimately what we do, must all be aligned – because they are all keenly watched.

We have painstakingly built an open and inclusive economy – that is able to create opportunities for Singaporeans by welcoming competitive enterprises and talent. It is a precious asset that we must not squander.

I was therefore reassured when the Leader of the Opposition recognised in his speech that the presence of foreign workers, and I quote, "gives Singapore a vitality that keeps us economically relevant and also provides jobs and opportunities to our fellow Singaporeans". I think this is an important signal and a good starting point.

In contrast, I was troubled when Non-Constituency Member of Parliament Leong Mun Wai lamented that we do not have a homegrown CEO for DBS. By all means, let us passionately argue the case to do more for Singaporeans. But, as Parliamentarians, let us also be careful about what our words convey; in this case, the message we send to those who – to paraphrase Mr S Rajaratnam – have chosen out of conviction to become citizens of Singapore.

How has our openness brought benefits for Singaporeans? Our portfolio of Free Trade Agreements or FTAs is a good example. As Minister Chan Chun Sing shared earlier this week, our network of FTAs is greater than the sum of its parts; each and every FTA adds to the network effect. Our network of 25 FTAs provides our companies preferential access to economies that together, represent more than 85% of global GDP. They also have rules that protect our companies' investments.

This combination of opportunity and stability, among other things has helped attract over 750 foreign companies to establish their regional headquarters in Singapore with nearly 30,000 employees. They also generate demand for local businesses and ancillary legal, financial and other services. We have also helped our SMEs to benefit from this market access; and invested in our people so that they can take on regional and global roles.

Digital Economy Agreements or DEAs are another way we are striving to keep Singapore open and connected. These agreements are the new frontier in the global economic architecture. To strengthen our hub status in the digital world, Singapore is actively developing an international network of DEAs.

Clear and harmonised rules, as well as interoperable standards and systems, will enhance cross border digital trade. With an open digital trade architecture and safeguards, data can flow more freely and securely across borders, between countries. This will help more businesses manage their global platforms and digital services out of Singapore.

These DEAs will give a further boost to our infocomm sector. It is one of our most promising growth areas, offering interesting and attractive jobs and careers for Singaporeans. From 2011 to 2018, our infocomm sector registered a 7.1% average annual growth rate in nominal value added to our economy. COVID-19 has given the sector, in an ironic way, a further boost, by accelerating the focus on the cloud, connectivity, collaboration because of remote working, and cybersecurity.

An estimated 22,000 jobs were created in the last three years alone with a median gross salary of about $6,000. More broadly, the total employment in the infocomm sector has grown over 11% from 2016 to 2019. Despite this rapid growth, the proportion of locals has held steady at 70%. This is no mean feat, especially when you consider that the fast growth has also resulted in an intense global competition for scarce talent in this sector.

We want to further increase opportunities for Singaporeans in the sector. But our talent policy must take into account the variegated landscape of the tech eco-system, with firms of varying sizes and business models, at different stages of growth, with diverse needs and thus, different staff profiles.

There are the digital giants like Google, Facebook and Amazon, who have anchored their regional headquarters in Singapore. These firms are at the forefront of global digital innovation and are critical to our ecosystem. They hire many Singaporeans, both here and overseas. But, because of the nature and scope of their business, they need a globally diverse talent pool; for example in product development and some of the regional headquarter's functions.

Therefore, the proportion of locals may not be as high as the national average, now or even in the steady state. For example, firms like Google and Twitter have APAC engineering teams here. The talent they require include highly skilled product managers and AI scientists, who are globally scarce.

In the long term, these companies can help Singapore become an innovation centre and catalyse the growth of our local tech ecosystem. Google has collaborated with us on the programme Skills Ignition SG, which will train up to 3,000 Singaporeans for roles in growth areas like digital marketing and cloud technology.

We also have local unicorns like Grab and SEA. They started with and maintained a Singaporean core, but with their rapid international expansion, they too need a strong complement of regional and global talent to be able to compete. At the same time, their increased reach allows Singaporeans in these firms to venture overseas and gain global experience.

Our Large Local Enterprises like Singtel start in the sense from the other end of the spectrum, with a high proportion of local because of where they began. As they grow internationally, and branching into new tech areas like cybersecurity and cloud based services, they increasingly are seeking out global talent to complement their Singaporean Core.

Then there are the IT services companies, which play an important role in supporting many other sectors such as finance. Here, as Minister Josephine Teo has explained in detail, there is more that we can and will do to reduce concentration and over-reliance on foreign manpower while strengthening the pipeline of jobs for Singaporeans.

Some had suggested that we could offshore some of their functions as a solution. I want to echo Minister Ong Ye Kung's caution. This is not straightforward, as often there are linkages across different functions. We should also recognised that with increasing digitalisation, that the scope to work remotely has increased and this, as Minister of State Alvin Tan talked about, earlier this week, can work in our favour or against us. Do they want to locate those services, the people providing them in Singapore, or would they rather do it remotely. And we want them to choose in our favour, when the jobs are the type of jobs that we want Singaporeans to have.

So, we need a differentiated approach for this diversity of companies in the infocomm sector. Our challenge is to work with these companies to continue creating career opportunities for Singaporeans, while recognising that we must allow them to have the necessary access to talents that are diverse, especially in emerging areas, in order to strengthen our overall position as a digital tech hub.

As with globalisation, the digital transformation of our economy must also be inclusive with opportunities for every worker, regardless of his or her background; and every business, regardless of its size or stage of growth. MCI's vision is for every business to be digitally-empowered, for every worker to be digitally-skilled and every citizen to be digitally-connected.

We are intensifying our efforts, working with the industry and unions to transform sectors, ease business transitions, create opportunities for jobseekers and reskill workers. Indeed, the digital economy is a bright spot, offering more than 18,000 jobs and skills opportunities under the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package.

Our goal is to have as many skilled Singaporeans as possible to take up these roles. That is why we are scaling up our efforts, both in pre-employment and continuing education. In the last three years, our Autonomous Universities (AUs) trained about 1,000 local ICT graduates annually. This has almost trebled and today, the undergraduates' enrollment collectively, is about 2,800. We also have around 4,500 Polytechnics and ITE graduates annually.

The Tech Skills Accelerator or TeSA progamme has successfully placed about 6,600 Singaporeans in tech jobs to date. Looking ahead, IMDA is working to place and train an additional 5,500 Singaporeans in good tech jobs over the next two to three years in functions like digital marketing, software engineering, cybersecurity and data analytics, including 2,500 mid-career professionals aged 40 and above.

At the enterprise level, we have enhanced the Productivity Solutions Grant and Enterprise Development Grant, to help our companies, adopt digital solutions and succeed. For SMEs in particular, we have the Start Digital, Go Digital and Grow Digital programmes to help them, as the names suggests, at different stages of growth, from when they are formed to as they scale, and eventually as they venture overseas.

We also want to ensure that our digitalisation journey includes every citizen. As such, as MCI has stated in our addendum to the President's address, we will ensure that all Singaporeans have a baseline level of affordable digital access and digital skills. We will help Singaporeans acquire the tools and skills necessary to participate meaningfully in our digital economy and society. These include affordable devices, mobile and broadband connectivity, e-payments tools and bank accounts, SingPass and a National Digital Identity to transact securely,

We will provide targeted support for our seniors and low-income households. Senior Minister of State Sim Ann has shared extensively about our digital inclusion efforts, including the Seniors Go Digital Programme and the SG Digital Office, a mobilisation of 1,000 Digital Ambassadors and many more volunteers to galvanise a national movement towards digital transformation.

In short, we will spare no effort in making sure that no one is left behind in our digital transformation efforts.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have outlined in detail how we seek stay open and be inclusive in the ICT sector, in order to create opportunities for Singaporeans. We do this in every sector, through the work of the Future Economy Committee chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Heng, the National Jobs Council chaired Senior Minister Tharman and, indeed, a slew of other efforts.

Over the past few days, we have witnessed intense debates on a range of issues – our policy priorities, whether and what we should change, and specific measures to be considered. We have articulated the policy choices and the aspirations and concerns of Singaporeans. In this important and ongoing effort to strike a balance balance between staying open and being inclusive, and building a better future for our citizens, I believe Parliament can and should play a significant role in three ways.

The first is to be the Voice of the People. The Leader of the Opposition used the Latin term for it, I will stick to English. The aim is this: we must express the hopes, aspirations, concerns and fears of our citizens at highest forum in our country. But, we should not and must not stop there.

We must also be the Voice of Reason. To be candid about the challenges we face, honest about the choices and trade-offs, not just about what we want but also what we have to give up to get it. And ultimately, what we believe to be in the long-term interest of our citizens.

And finally, and perhaps most importantly, we must be the Voice of Hope. Now more than ever, as we deal with unprecedented challenges and seek solutions, we must work with Singaporeans to draw confidence from what we have built up over the past five-and-a-half decades, the challenges that we have faced and overcome, have deep conviction in our strengths and capabilities, and look to the future with belief.

If we do this, then I think we would have made a signal contribution to our nation building efforts, with a deep engagement of our citizens.

In that spirit of deep engagement, we have paid close attention to calls to broaden access to Parliamentary proceedings, for example through live broadcasts or streaming online. This is a point that has been made in the past by Mr Pritam Singh, Mr Leon Perera – I think in this Parliamentary session – Mr Faisal Manap. We had others who have articulated this and, in fact, in today's Forum page in The Straits Times, Mr Wong Weng Fai has also made this plaintive call.

The former Leader of the House and others have previously explained that we already provide timely and comprehensive access to Parliamentary proceedings. Anyone can watch these proceedings in person from the Strangers’ Gallery. Every speech and exchange in Parliament is recorded and made available online. Clips, categorised by topic and speaker, are uploaded within hours of each sitting. The Hansard is a full written record of Parliamentary proceedings and is available online. These already give us the full benefits of transparency, accountability and accessibility.

We have been reluctant to go further for both practical and policy reasons. Demand for such live broadcasts, even of major speeches, is generally low – only 10% of that of free-to-air television news, for example.

Parliament is a forum for serious debate on national issues. The debate in Parliament should be vigorous, but the tone should be sober. An element of cut-and-thrust is unavoidable, even necessary because Members want to show Singaporeans that their concerns are being expressed, and questions asked and answered in Parliament. However, it is equally important that Members come to grips with the issues and their complexities and not simply play to the gallery. Live broadcasts risk compromising this.

At this point, I am sure Members of the Opposition think this is same line as before. And I want to say that we still hold these reservations. Nevertheless, we also note the global and technological trends which have made online streaming commonplace and seen legislatures live streaming their proceedings in many countries. The Government therefore agrees in principle to the live streaming of Parliamentary proceedings. My Ministry will study the technical and implementation details. Our aim, as always, will be to achieve transparency, accountability and accessibility while preserving the integrity and dignity of Parliamentary proceedings. Mr Speaker, I know that you too are supportive of this move and we will announce details soon.

Mr Speaker, Sir, to conclude, at a time that is fraught with anxiety about our future, as we take on unprecedented challenges and seek out novel solutions, and as we draw on our strengths as a people, I look forward to the Fourteenth Parliament of Singapore serving with distinction as the Voice of the People, the Voice of Reason and the Voice of Hope. Sir, I support the Motion. [Applause.]

Mr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.

3.21 pm

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his speech and the point about live Parliamentary broadcasts. I welcome the Minister's comments that the Government is going to look into this matter.

Since the issue has been brought up every now and then, my colleagues and I have reflected on the Government's reasons for not proceeding with live broadcasts. I note Minister has shared that Government still has those reservations. I believe the Senior Minister of State in the previous session, Mr Chee Hong Tat, used the word "theatrics" – there was a concern about Parliament being turned into that sort of a forum.

I understand and my colleagues and I have tried to reflect on this. But it is our view that that element of theatre will be exposed and the public will conclude fairly quickly, if not immediately, fairly quickly who is here to turn Parliament into a theatre and who is here to be serious about Parliament as a forum where serious matters are discussed. So, I just wanted to make that point and hope it provides some assurance for the Minister in his deliberations on this matter.

Mr Speaker: Minister.

Mr S Iswaran: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his assurance, which is given in earnest. And I think we all accept that all of us in this House are committed to ensuring that the dignity and integrity of Parliamentary proceedings is preserved, notwithstanding how it is conveyed to a larger audience.

However, I think it is important to also bear in mind the experience of other countries does not give us a lot of reason to be optimistic, in terms of the tone and nature of debates in Parliament and the impact such streaming or broadcasting will have. Is there a causal relationship? We do not know for sure. But there is reason to have concerns and that is why I articulated what I did. So, what it means is that at the end of the day it is not axiomatic one way or the other, and it depends on all of us as Parliamentarians to maintain the decorum, the dignity and the integrity of our proceedings through vigorous debate, based on facts and focused on the long-term interests of Singaporeans.

Mr Speaker: Mr Leong Mun Wai.

Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker. In response to Minister Iswaran's point, I would like to reiterate and confirm that PSP is committed to an open and inclusive society and economy. However, we have differences with the Government, probably, with regard to the many issues on how we want to go about achieving that. And I think this Parliament has started the ball rolling to get us in that direction.

Over the last few days, I think we have debated on the issues of foreigners and jobs. There are differences there. PSP would like to see this population growth being slowed down, would to see a cap on the foreigners, at least for the immediate future, and to ensure there is skills transfer. The disappointment that I expressed —

Mr Speaker: Mr Leong, are you seeking clarification or are you making a new speech?

Mr Leong Mun Wai: I am seeking clarification on —

Mr Speaker: Come to the point, please.

Mr Leong Mun Wai: — on the point that our disappointment on DBS still not having the homegrown CEO now is because of the process. I want to ask the Minister whether the debate that we are conducting over the last few days when we are questioning certain issues, rebalancing certain issues that we are looking for is against the spirit that he is trying to explain to us just now.

Mr Speaker: Minister, can you attempt to respond to that?

Mr S Iswaran: Mr Speaker, I thank the NCMP for his clarification. Let me start by saying this. The process of reviewing and evolving our policy predates the Fourteenth Parliament, predates the Thirteenth Parliament. It is, in fact, an on-going venture and if you look at any one of our policies – and the foreign worker policy, the manpower policy is no exception to this – it is an evolutionary effort because it has to respond to the economic environment, the population's needs and concerns; and we have to then adapt and move along.

Indeed, in this Parliament, if the Member had heard the detailed exposition by the Minister for Manpower, for example, we are taking even further measures. And the Prime Minister has already spelt out that the Government will look at various policies in detail, but never compromising on the fundamentals and always keeping our eye on the long-term interests of Singaporeans.

So, the issue is not about process. The process can continue. And, indeed, in my comment, I have made the point that we can always advocate the case for doing more for Singaporeans and I have no problems with that.

The issue is when we lament that a Singaporean occupying a certain position is somehow not homegrown. Then, I think we really have to ask ourselves the question: as Parliamentarians, as elected representatives, what is the message we are sending to our citizens? I am not sure what the Members means by homegrown, but all our citizens but also, in particular, to those who have, as I said, out of conviction, chosen to be Singaporeans, given up their home citizenship to take up Singapore Citizenship. And also, what does it say to those who are the spouses, the children of Singapore Citizens who have become naturalised Singaporeans?

So, the question I would put to Mr Leong is after this debate and all the information that has been shared, does he still lament that DBS does not have a homegrown CEO? Does he acknowledge that as one example – and I am only talking about DBS because he raised it – whether he acknowledges that, in fact, much has been done in the organisation. There are, in fact, a large number of Singaporeans at the senior levels. In fact, this is a clarification made by one of our colleagues Derrick Goh. Unfortunately, the Member was not in the Chamber when the clarification was made.

Mr Speaker: Mr Leong.

Mr Leong Mun Wai: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for the clarification. I still hold on to my disappointment. I still keep to that, although I do appreciate the clarification given by Member Derrick Goh on the senior management of DBS Bank. In terms of why I want to keep to my statement is because when I gave the speech, when people listened to the speech, including the new citizens and foreigners in Singapore, they would have appreciated that I said it was over a period of 22 years. Why did the Government not put in certain safeguards in the process or certain other rules to ensure that we have the skills transfer. Localisation is not the word anymore, but at least to ensure that Singaporeans will be groomed to take over the job.

In that context, I do not think that it will taken very, very negatively by the international community. Singapore is open enough. Foreigners know that we are very, very open. In fact, if we failed to do certain things to safeguard the interests of Singaporeans, I am afraid we may be laughed at.

Mr Speaker: Mr Ong Ye Kung.

The Minister for Transport (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think I have to reiterate some of the things that I have said on Tuesday, when I explained and traced back – and I went into some detail – how from the 1960s, Singapore started as a foreign exchange or FX trading centre. Then, from there, the first banks that came in and did FX trading, they were foreign banks. Bank of America was the first. Gradually, we brought in investment banking, wealth management, insurance, so on and so forth. Now, we are doing green finance and fintech.

That whole process started 40 to 50 years ago. That process started when we brought in foreign expertise and then put in a lot of effort to groom local talent. Grow our own timber, learn from the foreign expertise and from there, many of our own rose up to take senior positions.

I gave quite a lot of data requested by various Members to show that we are holding our own by being open to the world and I think that is the best way for us to grow, that is the best way for us to serve Singaporeans. Do not make ourselves a pond. A small pond. Live in the pond and feel that we are great because we are a big fish in the pond. But open out to the lagoon, open out to the sea. Have a much more exciting and diverse eco-system but also invest in our own people and hold our own. That is what we have been doing for decades. But we have never reached a stage where we say the only way to achieve this – set the quota. Set the rule. It must be a Singaporean CEO and born here, before we declare it a success. I think that would be the wrong approach.

Mr Speaker: Minister S Iswaran, would you like to add on.

Mr S Iswaran: Mr Speaker, I think Minister Ong has made the point very clear.

I just want to go back to a point I made in my speech. As Parliamentarians, we must be not just the Voice of the People. That is important, which I think the Member has been articulating – the concerns of the people that he has spoken to. But we must also be the Voice of Reason.

Do not take that lightly. Because what we say cannot be unsaid. It is there for the record, for the future and everyone. Singaporeans, new citizens or Singapore born. Others who are here will all be looking at this. I think we in this House as elected representatives must hold ourselves up to a higher standard. If we do not, then I think we fail our duties as Members of Parliament and I think we ultimately do a disservice to Singaporeans.

Mr Speaker: Mr Chee Hong Tat.

The Senior Minister of State for Foreign Affairs and Transport (Mr Chee Hong Tat): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sir, I would like to just clarify a factual point on something that Mr Pritam Singh mentioned earlier. He said I used the word "theatrics". I think we can check Hansard. I do not recall using this word in my response to Mr Pritam Singh when we were having a discussion on this issue when I was with the Ministry of Communications and Information.

If my memory serves me correctly, I think we were talking about whether we should have live broadcast of Parliament proceedings and I was explaining to Mr Singh that the demand for such broadcasts was not high. And then later, we had a discussion about whether instead of a broadcast, maybe it can be done through live-streaming. And again, if my memory serves me correctly, because this was several years ago, I did say that this is something that we can discuss and review. So, I just wanted to clarify that factual point. I do not think I used the word "theatrics" in my response to Mr Singh. Thank you, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Mr Singh.

Mr Pritam Singh: To the Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat, I do apologise if indeed my memory failed me. For some reason, that word "theatrics" was in my mind. But I think the larger point was about concern that Members of Parliament would play to the gallery. I believe that was the point but rest assured, I do not mean to misrepresent what the Senior Minister of State said at that point.

Mr Speaker: That is why the Hansard is even more effective than live-streaming. [Laughter.] Dr Tan See Leng.

Dr Tan See Leng: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to raise a point of clarification to Mr Leong. I think that this whole idea of talking about using DBS as an example, maybe I would like to share a perspective having come from the private sector and especially having run a public listed company.

Public listed companies have their own boards. They have independent directors on the board and there are committees, sub committees, under the ambit of the main board. Some of the committees are nominating and remuneration committees, and you have the audit and risk management committee.

All of the transactions, I would say, are done at arm's length basis and the process of selection of a CEO and managing director of a company is subject to a very rigorous process of going through an international search firm, by virtue of meritocratic principles and the best person for the job.

There are many listed companies, which I think many funds have invested in. I think Mr Leong himself as the CEO of Timbre Capital, a private equity firm, would have made significant investments in terms of wanting to secure returns for his limited partners (LPs) and people who have invested in his fund.

Perhaps, he can clarify that in companies where we clearly state quotas or perhaps, a certain percentage of the senior management has to be of a certain nationality, would it be something that his private equity firm would freely and happily invest in?

Mr Leong Mun Wai: Thank you, Speaker. I thank Minister Tan. When we do our investments, we actually look more at – of course, now, we are talking about private equity investment, venture capital investment. We are more concerned whether the company is – when we want to invest in a particular market – we are more concerned whether the company really has the local connections and so by implication, whether they have enough local talents, including the CEO on the company. That is what we are more concerned about in terms of making the investment decision.

Mr Speaker: Thank you. Mr Pritam Singh.

Mr Pritam Singh: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just a quick matter of propriety, in view of what Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat has said and he is indeed right. My memory on the matter was inaccurate and that attribution to him was also inaccurate. I refer to a letter sent by the press secretary of the former Leader of the House, Minister Grace Fu, and this is dated 15 May 2020. This is what was said in that letter to the press: "Live broadcast of Parliament risks turning the House into a form of theatre and do not add to the transparency," the spokesman for the Leader of the House Grace Fu said on Friday, 15 May. This was in response to a letter from a TODAY reader. So, just to make the point clear to Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat. And to put on record, my incorrect attribution.

Mr Speaker: Thank you. Order. I would like to invest the next 20 minutes in a tea break. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.00 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 3.40 pm until 4.00 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.00 pm.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate on the President's Address

Debate resumed.

Miss Rachel Ong (West Coast): Mr Speaker, may I express my appreciation to the President for her thoughtful Address to our nation. May I also thank our residents in Telok Blangah Division for welcoming our team and I.

Mr Lim Hng Kiang has served our nation with distinction over the past 29 years, and our residents and I appreciate him so much and we propose to build on his work. What a privilege it has also been to work with a team of committed volunteers and leaders across the West Coast GRC. To the Public Service agencies and NGOs who often go the extra mile to support the needs of our people, we thank you.

The Singapore we have today is a nation by design. At the SUTD Ministerial Forum in 2018, our Prime Minister Lee noted that nothing we have in Singapore is by chance. Our racial harmony, economic growth, international standing are the products of deep deliberation of issues, leading to options that were proto-typed, tested and delivered.

Without using the term, our founding fathers employed design thinking approaches to overcome the many impossibilities to be the Singapore of today. The challenge of re-inventing Singapore continues. I believe we now have the opportunity to become a nation by design, not just through the collective efforts of our leaders, but also by the collective efforts of a people empowered to live a life by design.

What does it mean to live a life by design? And how might we empower our people to do so? These are the two questions that I would like to explore this afternoon.

The first – a life by design. In the past 25 years, serving in the corporate and social sector, I remain energised by two things: to see every youth succeed and to see adults flourish in all that they do. A life by design starts when a person's passion and skills intersect with the needs of the world – also known as "finding your niche". Here is what I notice when one is operating in their niche. You know who you are and who you are not. You are energised by what you do and you know the people group you are called to serve.

When a person finds his or her niche, learning is no longer out of necessity, but a desire. Discipline flows naturally. You can continually seek out new opportunities to grow so that you can give your best, whether it is at home front, school, work or the community. You make these places better than when you first found it.

The second question – how might we empower a life by design? Mr Speaker, may I propose three ways we can empower individuals to live a life by design. The first is to clarify possibilities of growth at every age and life stage. I have shared recently about a colleague of mine who, 10 years ago, then in her late 40s, joined our team. Her question during the interview was "Am I too old to start a new career in a new sector?" We assured her, "Your age qualifies you. It is precisely your age and your experience that we value." Today, at 58, she is flourishing at work. Her experience, competence and who she is, are impacting lives, honouring both people and results. We continue to cheer her on, believing for even greater years ahead of her! We often hear this: "You are too old to do this" or "You are too young to do that". There never seemed to be a right age. But if we do not see age as a barrier but rather as a qualifier, then there is nothing stopping us in exploring new possibilities for our lives.

We do not have to be afraid. Your age qualifies you. Instead of focusing on limitations, what if we could help our family and our residents identify what they can do at every age and every season of their lives? This is not about having a positive mindset, but a mindset of possibilities. We do not have to be limited to traditional career paths. Entrepreneurship, volunteerism, participating in the gig economy are also productive options to discovering our niche. Whether a person is a young graduate, stay-at-home mum, working single, working parent or retiree, we can carry valuable skillsets that our community needs. We should support our people to build a holistic life portfolio instead of just a work-focused one.

They should include competencies beyond formal employment, such as transferable skills and experiences from care-giving, volunteering and personal interests we pursue. A familiar example is our stay-at-home mothers, who may aspire to work from home because of the recent work trends. Many are skilled in wide-ranging areas but may not be sure of their fit in the workforce.

If we continue to find ways to help our people to consider alternative pathways and identify their full range of skills at different life stages, we open up new possibilities for them and, in the process, strengthen our Singapore Core.

The second thing we can do is to provide opportunities to explore possibilities. A life by design requires deliberate exploration. Time and space must be given to explore. My friend Mag was in the real estate industry for 20 years before making a switch to become a speech therapist.

This was not an overnight choice. As she crossed her 10-year mark in the industry, she could not see herself doing this work for the rest of her life. In the journey of exploring possibilities, she was encouraged by friends to volunteer to help children. Mag discovered then that she really enjoyed being with children. She went on to take an early childhood education degree, which led to an advanced diploma in special education and, subsequently, a Masters in Speech Therapy.

Today, Mag is 50 years old and has been a speech therapist for the past five years and she loves her work. But her story will not end here. As a hobby, she has taken up photography, and I am inspired by what she said recently: "Who knows what will happen post-speech therapy?" Mag had time and space to explore possibilities and a boldness to design her life.

We recognise that not everyone will be able to make time and space for themselves like Mag. For many, this space has to be created for them. We must build school and work cultures that allow time, mental and physical space for our people to pilot-test their growing vocational interests in the same field or different ones. At the same time, we need to improve towards a work culture that respects the need for rest and recreation. For those who face social and economic barriers to access these resources, we will need to work towards a sustainable solution.

Mr Speaker, a life by design does not just explore current possibilities alone but creates new ones.

This brings us to the third point – nurture creativity that opens possibilities that are yet to exist. Singapore has a super resource still to be maximised – the creative capacities of our people. As oil is fuel to industry, so is creativity to the mind. The difference is this: creativity is renewable. The more it is used, the more of itself it generates.

But the opposite is also true, that if we do not tap into the creative capacities of our people, it will diminish and we will miss out on the multi-fold possibilities for our people and our nation. Together with our people, we can build a workforce that not only takes up jobs in the new economy, but also creates jobs in economies yet to exist.

We can and should be intentional to complement training critical thinking skills with creative thinking ones. These will have broad implications on not just the "what" of education and training, but the "how" of doing so, requiring intentional shifts in our PET and CET approaches.

Mr Speaker, may I summarise the three ways to empower our people to live a life by design.

First, we can support our people to identify possibilities at every age. Second, provide time, space and resource to explore them. And third, nurture creativity to form new possibilities for Singapore. I am fully persuaded that if our people live a life by design, we will uncover a new strength of Singapore yet to be seen before. Our workforce will be increasingly versatile, our families and communities will flourish. May we continue the legacy of our forefathers to be a nation by design, transform from the inside out. With this, Mr Speaker, I support the Motion. [Applause.]

4.10 pm

Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong (Jurong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion of Thanks to the President. I would like to declare my interest as a Director of an investment company.

Being the final speaker on the list, you have given me the privilege to listen to my colleagues' full-hearted views on what Singapore needs to do going forward. We debated on Singapore's immediate concerns surrounding COVID-19, the Singaporean Core, support for SMEs and strengthening of social compact. We shared our hope for the future in emerging trends, sustainability and sci-fi.

In this speech, I wish to focus on relevance. This requires an exploration of our history, a deep reflection of who we are, a stoic acceptance of reality, and a call to stand united in our relevance in the year 3000 and beyond.

There is a Chinese saying: "夫以铜为镜，可以正衣冠；以史为镜，可以知兴替；以人为镜，可以知得失." To better reflect on our future, it is not enough to dip our fingers into the changing of winds. To build our starship, we must weigh anchor, raise the sails and adventure to the past of Bugis pinisi, Chinese junk, Arab dhow and Chola kappal.

Singapore had a history steeped in uncertainty. We were tossed in the storms of relentless competition, and weathered storms of successes and failures. Please bear with me for a moment as I recount what is often forgotten.

Earliest known settlements arose in maritime Southeast Asia more than a thousand years ago. Temasek then was one of many ports. In the west, there was Lambri in present day Aceh between the 13th and 14th centuries. And in the east and north of Singapore, Langkasuka in today's Kedah and Tambralinga in south Thailand. Competition was fierce and there was a fight for relevance and survival.

Temasek grew in relevance at the end of the 13th century. It did well by being part of sub-regional systems of economic exchange between the peoples in the hills and coastal settlers, and by connecting these local and regional networks internationally – its true, unique competitive advantage to exist.

Wang Dayuan, a Yuan Dynasty traveller, documented his travels to South Asia and Temasek. In his book, he recollected that Temasek offered products that distinguished it from other ports. It was "top-quality hornbill casques, lakawood and cotton". I emphasise here – "top quality". Hornbill casques, a highly sought after substitute for ivory, were found only in the Malay Peninsula, Temasek, Borneo and the Riau Archipelago. Lakawood was used as an incense, a red dye and as a disinfectant. Interestingly, it was available in 19 other regional ports, but only five offered good-quality Lakawood, and Temasek was one of them.

Temasek's open and connected nature, coupled with its competitive edge, allowed it to thrive and prosper within a short span of 50 years. But Temasek's prosperity eventually waned. It reflected several factors.

For one, its success drew much interest from regional powers, including Ayuttaya to the north and the Majapahits based in Java. According to some records, without the ability to defend herself, Temasek was brought under the influence of Ayutthaya and its revenue was forwarded to the court. Temasek was also overly dependent on trade with the declining Yuan Dynasty in China.

To exacerbate the decline of Temasek, a new port settlement at the Melaka River, seized opportunities offered by the new Ming Court, fundamentally changing trading networks. This led the merchants who were previously based in Temasek to hollow out and move to the new port-settlement. Internal conflicts that led to a foreign invasion dealt the final blow.

Eventually, Temasek was ceded to Melaka in exchange for an annual payment of gold and was swapped away like a common chattel, with no control over its own destiny. For the next hundred years. Temasek, became nothing more than a feeder port.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is now a brave new world. The age old threats have not disappeared but are supplanted by pandemics propagated by pathogens – created or evolved. Discord has moved online, anonymous and lethal, disrupting our hard-earned relationships. An interconnected world makes us vulnerable to the dictates of others. And to add to this conundrum, climate change poses a threat to our future generations.

Mr Speaker, Sir, we must be a nation that embrace the realities of this changing world. Only with this understanding, can we seek relevance. We are a city-state, competing with the most driven. Relevance is not a simplistic yes or no, one or zero. We must remember that competition is relative. Being relevant today does not equate relevance tomorrow. This is the perennial Darwinian test. Singapore's Future must be relevant to the world.

We must have strong and deep relationships. I agree with Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat that Singapore needs to find new ways to be a vital node, with rich and deep interconnections with the rest of the world. Our international and regional outreach must continue. This responsibility is not just of the state's but on every Singaporean. We must believe that all of us can be ambassadors of Singapore. We will develop friendships, advocate for opportunities, and explore areas of cooperation that makes Singapore relevant.

We must operate as an ecosystem of differentiated capabilities. We can no longer operate linearly, as a single company, a single domain or group. We must collaborate, and build one another's strength to be a formidable entity that is multi-faceted.

As an example, legal services have been expensive and time-consuming. The emergence of Machine Learning and AI have changed the legal landscape. We are now in a digital age of cross-disciplinary collaboration where lawyers and technologists will work hand in hand and new positions such as legal engineers are becoming part of the profession.

This next example struck a personal chord with me as I first published a peer reviewed journal research on Bi-jective Neural Networks just 15 years ago, building blocks of learning algorithms.

SmartLaw, a home-grown company, has developed an AI tool that leverages powerful natural language self-learning algorithms, which can sift the most relevant references and judgments, from an immense number of documents, within split seconds. SmartLaw is working closely with local law firms to create competitive solutions. According to market estimates, the APAC legal industry is a $100 plus billion market that is growing at 5% CAGR and Singapore legal industry is about $2 plus billion. There is a huge potential for this industry which will create more jobs for Singaporeans.

The most successful companies today are established because of their ability to develop an ecosystem of capabilities. Think Google and Alibaba. They are able to build layers of different capabilities and products, enabling their users to remain within their ecosystem, adding to their relevance and resilience. This must be of the future. A dynamic and resilient ecosystem that is differentiated in all levels, layers, and domains.

Mr Speaker, Sir, to remain relevant, we must strive to do exceptionally well in whatever we choose to do. The years volunteering in the grassroots and organisations such as Tasek Jurong, enforced my belief that we must continue to be open, and open the world for our young to a range of possibilities. We should encourage our children to learn how to learn, to have omni-directional capabilities. I am heartened by the emphasis in the Addendum to the President by MOE on broad based common core curricula.

At the same time, we must encourage expectation that, it is crucial to achieve mastery in the subject matter of choice. Mastery cannot be purchased or outsourced. It requires a culture of embracing its arduousness.

This discussion brings to mind Dr Mark Lim, a teacher with a passion for physics. He is a co-founder of Aliena, a homegrown space tech company, which literally believes that the sky is not the limit. The deep space plasma engines that Aliena is developing aims to bring Singapore's first satellite to the Moon and beyond. In addition, Aliena has commissioned the region's largest privately owned jet propulsion test facility and nanosatellite integration centre, promoting an eco-system for the co-development of critical satellite platforms.

A good example would be the collaboration between local IoT company NuSpace and Aliena. Together, they developed the world's smallest nanosatellite platform that is equipped with a fully functional Hall-Effect thruster or better known as an Ion thruster, with record breaking operational power. This satellite will be deployed out of a SpaceX Falcon 9 in second quarter of 2021.

I say this with great enthusiasm because I too was a plasma dynamics researcher 16 years ago. Then, we replaced mechanical flight control surfaces using plasma dynamics. Aliena and Dr Mark is a prime example of how through the pursuit of mastery, young Singapore companies and individuals can leverage on expertise within their domains to do well on a global stage and to break new ground in emerging frontiers such as space, And how an ecosystem fosters the translation of technology to the market in a domain that seem inaccessible.

Mr Speaker, Sir, to remain relevant, we must invest in the future of technology. Through history, technology has never failed to contribute toward the evolution of industries and our way of life. With rapid scientific discoveries and high tech engineering, cities and societies, if complacent, can become irrelevant and disconnected from the rest of the world.

We must be courageous to be the leader in emerging technologies. Technologies such as Quantum computing, AI and advanced materials will eventually shape the future.

Mainstream quantum computing may arrive sooner than anticipated and we must be ready. Its value extends beyond solving problems faster than conventional computers and holds untapped potential to address global challenges, including climate change, cyber-crime, discovery of drugs and vaccines.

Just last year, Google's quantum computer achieved a significant milestone when it solved a 10,000-year problem in just mere seconds. From a medical standpoint, this would enable researchers to crunch data on more than 40,000 genes from 17,000 genetic samples, approximately 2.5 billion genetic combinations. This effort may better allow us to better understand the COVID-19 virus strain and to synthesize a viable vaccine. In fact, this was what happened at Oak Ridge National Lab in Tennessee just recently.

When the first generation of computers became commercially available, it revolutionised the workforce and created new fields of jobs that never existed. We must be ready to ride on the next wave of opportunities.

Singapore leaders have had immense foresight. Twenty years ago, in the desire to remain relevant, we started our biomedical industry. Today, the world faces shortage in technology and equipment in the fight against COVID. My work involves addressing this gap, and I witnessed how Singapore is able to bring to bear capabilities in diagnostics, therapeutics and vaccines. For diagnostics, we developed the Resolute test with Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Diagnostic Development (DxD) Hub and A-Star. C-Pass with Prof Linfa with Duke-NUS. In Therapeutics, we have Tychan, Hummingbird and DSO.

Years ago, had we not had the ambition, the foresight, the guts to make these investments, and put in the hard work, all these would just be a pipe dream, and Singapore would have been dependent on others for survival.

This courage must be coupled with sound strategies reflected in MTI's Addendum to the President's Address. I am heartened by the emphasis. I agree with many of our colleagues including the hon Ms Jessica Tan, Mr Melvin Yong, Mr Don Wee and Mr Edward Chia, that these decisions will need to support local SMEs, the bedrock of our economy. I agree as well with the hon Mr Patrick Tay, that economic incentives will need to result in proactive and sustained knowledge and skills transfer to Singaporeans.

Mr Speaker, Sir, to remain relevant, we must also have a deep understanding of our national identity. No empire, nation state or city state existed in the same form forever and the important factor is distilling the essence of being Singaporean, such that the very core of who we are, does not wane and flow with the tides of time. Deep trust and mutual respect will need to form the basis of the relationship between fellow Singaporeans, earned through the help and sacrifices that we give one another. We need to maintain a profound respect for plurality in Singapore and find shared layers above this diversity.

As I listen to matters highlighted in this debate, I want to acknowledge the tough decisions and hardiness of those who came before us, which under wise stewardship, brought Singapore peace and prosperity. As a nation, we were never endowed with the best cards, but we never used it as an excuse from what needs to be done. Singapore's progress is not build on mere rhetoric. Singaporeans are resilient people that have weathered numerous storms. Today, there is a new fight.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as you reminded us last week, "All hands on deck, as we embark on this next lap of journey together", and indeed I hold the same wishes of "god speed, fair winds and following seas, as we seek safe habour from this almighty storm that we find ourselves in".

Prime Minister Lee's statement struck a very deep chord in me, "Jewel will shine again, Changi will thrive again and SIA will be a great way to fly once more. The economy will prosper anew and Singapore's children and grandchildren will continue marching forward to build a fairer, ever more just and equal society". I am hopeful.

We will be relevant. We are constantly looking into the future but are well aware of our history. We are small, but courageous in our ambition. We are diverse but united in our cause.

Mr Speaker, Sir, We will not be relevant unless we make ourselves relevant. We will be ordinary unless we make ourselves extraordinary. We will, prevail. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion. [Applause.]

Mr Speaker: Minister Desmond Lee.

4.30 pm

The Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, Sir, this House has spent the past week debating the Government's response to COVID-19 and sharing their views for Singapore under the auspices of this Debate on the President's Address.

It has been an engaging discussion, with many ideas and suggestions.

It is clear to us all that COVID-19 has completely transformed our reality. Externally, Singapore's position – economically, geopolitically – is under threat. We are disproportionately affected by the global nature of the crisis and tensions between bigger powers. Within Singapore, our lives have been significantly disrupted and businesses have had to adapt rapidly to survive.

Many of us hope for a quick recovery back to "normal". We are finding ways to live and work with the cloud of the pandemic over us, and stay physically and emotionally healthy. But I doubt that we will return to life as it used to be. We must adapt to the waves of change that are upon us.

I would like to make three points as we reflect on the debate and think about what the future holds for Singapore.

First, we have to focus our attention on our immediate challenges but also prepare ourselves for the longer term. Second, we must renew our compact as a society with justice and fairness as our pledge. Third, we must engage one another well, both in Parliament but also outside Parliament, and translate our conversations into action.

We are still in the midst of an unfolding crisis. The pandemic is still raging across the world without any clear end in sight. Globally, more than 25 million people have been infected and an estimated 860,000 people have died in just eight months.

To support economies and jobs that have been devastated, governments around the world have committed trillions of dollars, and debt levels are at record highs. Our Government's immediate focus is to navigate Singapore through this pandemic and the serious economic downturn because of the very significant risk to our people's lives and livelihoods. The Government has committed $100 billion in the last six months, drawing on our reserves to cushion the economic and social impact of COVID-19 on our people.

Two weeks ago, Deputy Prime Minister Heng further extended support to firms and workers. This week, we heard Minister Tan See Leng and Minister of State Gan Siow Huang share how tripartite partners are helping workers to retain their jobs or find new ones.

But Members have also rightly emphasised the need to think longer term and position ourselves for a strong recovery. We cannot simply hunker down and wait for things to get better. Instead, we must prepare ourselves now so that we can capture new opportunities when they come.

We are not starting from scratch, but are building on strong pillars and steady improvements over the years. In the last 10 years, we have invested heavily in early childhood and continuing adult education, enhanced our healthcare and social service architecture, implemented Industry Transformation Maps to strengthen different economic sectors. These fundamentals stand us in good stead to navigate the winds of change now confronting us.

Let me just share one sector and how it is dealing with its present circumstances while seeking to keep an eye on the future.

COVID-19 has dealt the construction sector a very heavy blow. Due to clusters in the dormitories and work sites, companies have had to put projects on hold for months. Even after workers were cleared, it has not been easy to restart. Many changes were needed to ensure that workers were safe and despite significant Government support, many construction firms and workers continue to suffer badly. But this experience has also strengthened our resolve collectively to transform the construction sector, when the situation stabilises.

We have to drive digitalisation and adopt more advanced building technologies to enhance productivity, and, through this transformation, try to attract more Singaporeans to join this sector. It will require the collective efforts of firms, workers and the Government.

This crisis is neither a "pause" nor a "rewind" for Singapore. Instead, if we face this with the right spirit, we can turn this to a "fast-forward". Re-imagine new industries and markets for Singapore, learn new skills and discover new careers for ourselves and our children. Even as we deal with present challenges, we must prepare ourselves for the longer term. We must keep our resolve and look forward to emerging as a stronger society.

The second area that Members discussed extensively is the social impact of COVID-19 and the challenges it has wrought in our society. COVID-19's impact is universal, but it is not equally felt. Some of us are fortunate to have jobs that allow us to work from home, or we are in sectors that have seen strong demand, like e-commerce. Others have suffered much more. In the hardest-hit industries, such as aviation, tourism, retail and F&B, workers face steep pay cuts and job losses. The road to recovery is rocky and uncertain.

Older workers are worried about rising retrenchment figures. Breadwinners will struggle to keep up with financial commitments if they lose their jobs. While essential workers, such as medical staff, cleaners and public transport operators, do not have the luxury of working from home. They face risks daily to keep our country running.

COVID-19's unequal effects on jobs and workers have thrown up difficult questions for all of us, as it has for many societies around the world: an increasing socio-economic divide between those who have more and those who have less; a re-evaluation of the value of different jobs and how much essential workers are paid; the kinds of financial assistance that might be needed to mitigate income and job losses in the medium to longer term; and deep-rooted assumptions and biases and how we interact with one another online and offline.

This virus has shown us, quite starkly, that "none of us is safe until all of us are safe".

The broader point is that our well-being very much depends on one another. President Halimah has called for this generation of leaders and Singaporeans to forge our new compact. If we want Singapore to stay united and strong, we must renew our shared understanding of who we aspire to be.

Minister Maliki said that we must strive to build a fairer and more just society, with equal opportunities and a sense of progress for all. Many Members, such as Mr Louis Ng, Ms Cheryl Chan and Mr Leon Perera, echoed similar sentiments of inclusiveness and unity. These values of justice, equality and unity are enshrined in our Pledge and underpin what Singapore stands for. We would do well to keep these as our North Star.

Our challenge is, therefore, to find relevant and timely ways of building on what we have.

Some Members, such as Mr Fahmi Aliman and Mr Dennis Tan, have called for us to strengthen social safety nets and even out inequalities. As the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister have explained, the Government has enhanced social safety nets significantly as our economy matures, introduced wage support for lower income workers, and supplemented retirement and healthcare support for seniors. At every point, these social programmes were designed with compassion for the vulnerable in our community and with care for those who need a leg up to grasp opportunities. With deeper economic uncertainty in the years ahead and an ageing society, we will commit to do more to help our people.

There have been different suggestions on how to do this, including introducing a minimum wage or unemployment insurance, in addition to existing approaches we have adopted, such as the Progressive Wage Model, Workfare and increased support for lifelong learning and job matching. We will study all these ideas seriously while ensuring that our overall system remains fair and sustainable for generations to come.

But we must also go beyond what the Government can do alone. It is far more impactful and powerful to have a community of care that provides an eco-system of support. What Mr Seah Kian Peng said in this debate struck a chord with me. He shared how a person's challenges can be incredibly complex, with interlocking stressors, such as poverty, domestic abuse, disabilities and mental health issues. And I am sure that many of our Members here, in your work on the ground, have seen how some lower income families struggle with these day-to-day issues. What we need is not just many helping hands but hands that help in a more coordinated and personal way to unlock specific shackles that constrain these individuals and families from progressing in their lives.

We must set aside organisational differences and better coordinate across social service agencies, community and self-help groups, charities, religious organisations and Government agencies. Harness technology to improve case management and processes. Preserve our human touch of building trust and empowering and respecting the individual and family. Not just meeting needs, as Ms Carrie Tan had put it, but partnering them to grow and progress with dignity and respect.

Singaporeans care. Many have demonstrated this spirit, especially during this tough period. One example is Candi and her daughter, Caitlyn. A mother-daughter team, they distributed masks with Team Nila and hand sanitisers with the Temasek Foundation. Caitlyn is seven years old, but Candy, her mother, believes that it is never too early for her to imbibe and learn to help others.

This leads me to my final point on engaging with one another well and turning from dialogue to concrete action.

Sir, our democracy is maturing. We have seen and will continue to see a greater contestation of views and ideas – here in Parliament, in civil society, in online discourse. We will differ on how best to take things forward for Singapore. But as the Prime Minister emphasised, we cannot afford to allow a diversity in views to lead to distrust or polarisation.

Our Fourteenth Parliament reflects Singapore's diversity. Across political affiliations. Members hail from different backgrounds. We have different genders, ethnicities and faiths, studied in different schools, worked in different fields. I am glad that Members have sought to represent Singaporeans' diverse concerns and spoken on a broad range of topics in the last few days.

Mr Derrick Goh, Mr Don Wee, Mr Edward Chia and Mr Christopher de Souza spoke on behalf of enterprises – their value, their challenges and how to seize more opportunities for growth. Ms Mariam Jaafar, Mr Desmond Choo, Mr Sharael Taha and many others voiced the deep concerns of workers – how to help them develop their skills all through their careers and protect them from unfair practices at the workplace.

Many Members also highlighted the importance of building a strong Singaporean Core while remaining open to complementary foreign talent. Prime Minister Lee and Ministers Josephine Teo and S Iswaran have addressed these. While Ms Poh Li San, Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Ms Raeesah Khan spoke up for youth and women. Mr Xie Yao Quan, Ms He Ting Ru and Mr Yip Hon Weng suggested ideas to improve senior care. Dr Wan Rizal spoke about education; Dr Tan Wu Meng, healthcare; Mr Chong Kee Hiong, housing; Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, culture and sports, and many more.

We thank Members for contributing your views and suggestions.

We have had a vigorous debate these five days and I am sure for many more parliamentary sessions to come. We may not agree on every issue but, as Mr Murali Pillai and Mr Lim Biow Chuan have pointed out, we can deal with disagreements constructively. With empathy and an open mind, using facts and reason, have frank discussions with one another.

We should acknowledge that there are no book answers or straightforward solutions for the challenges that we face. We will need to grapple honestly and openly with the difficulties that our society faces and will face in all their complexities – whether on our foreign manpower issues, raising the wages of lower income Singaporeans, tackling inequality and many more issues. So that through our debates, we not only share with Singaporeans more about the issues, trade-offs and possibilities, but also help find a better way forward for our country.

This may not always be our default way of engaging others in this House. Sometimes, emotions will run high and we will be tempted to push our point to the fullest. But as long as we commit to putting Singapore's interests before our own, it will be possible to find common ground and move forward together. This will enable us to retain and harness our diversity as a strength and avoid the partisan division and polarisation that we see in other countries taking root here.

Constructive dialogue and engagement extends beyond Parliament to all Singaporeans. Ms Tin Pei Ling, Mr Darryl David and Ms Nadia Samdin spoke about the need to engage all segments of the community to tackle issues together and build consensus across different generations and backgrounds. and Minister of State Tan Kiat How and Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam spoke about how we should encourage such constructive dialogue, especially online.

That is one reason why we launched the Emerging Stronger Conversations. Minister Edwin Tong has explained how we hope to harness these as platforms to engage Singaporeans from all walks of life in honest and respectful conversations about the kind of Singapore that we want to build together.

I have hosted several of these conversations where a myriad of topics were discussed – such as social mobility, racism, xenophobia, our treatment of migrant workers. Participants were candid and raised suggestions that are worth exploring further. For example, some suggested setting up forums where people can talk openly and safely about difficult issues like differences in race, religion, language or class; or reframing how charities work by using new funding models like social impact investing.

We invite all Singaporeans to participate in these conversations, reflect on our experience together during this pandemic and take part first-hand, in the important work of forging a shared consensus. But I hope that our conversations will ultimately lead to action and that we will solve problems together and pursue fresh ideas together. This is the heart of Singapore Together and we have some examples of this.

In the social sector, for instance, we formed SG Cares Community Networks within each town, bringing together public officers from different Government agencies who work together with the social service professionals, local community partners and grassroots organisations, to befriend and support more vulnerable households.

But another area we will need collective action is in building a greener and more environmentally sustainable Singapore. Minister of State Desmond Tan and Minister of State Alvin Tan spoke passionately about this. It is an existential challenge for us. There is no vaccine for climate change. And as an island city, we are especially vulnerable to its consequences, such as rising sea levels and increasing temperatures. That is why we are doubling down on efforts to build a low-carbon climate-resilient Singapore, for our grandchildren and their children.

In the coming years, we will transform Singapore into a city nature, plant One Million Trees together with Singaporeans. We will green our buildings, towns and transport network.

Our economy also needs to be more resilient. Our industries can be more energy-efficient, and we should use more renewable energy like solar power. In pursuing green growth, we can build expertise that opens up new opportunities – specialised financial or legal services and clean technology. We need everyone to be part of this effort to reduce the energy we use, reduce the waste we produce and care collectively for our environment.

We launched the Singapore Together Action Networks to help translate our conversations into real actions. In June, we shared that we have three such existing networks. One of them is the Youth Mental Well-being Network, which Minister Edwin Tong also spoke about earlier.

I want to highlight the markedly different approach that we took for this network. First, we made the network open – anyone could sign up. Second, we gave the network space to shape their own agenda.

Early on, one participant asked me what the Government aimed to achieve through this network, and I said that we did not want to predetermine where the network would go. It is not about the Government setting the agenda all the time, then seeking input from the public. Instead, the community comes up with ideas and decides what they want to work on, while the Government supports them.

Some participants have stepped up and volunteered to drive this process. They have crafted problem statements, eight areas of interest that they want to dive into, such as mental health at school, in the workplace and within families. We are excited to see where we will go and the fruits of such collaboration.

Since June, we have also identified a new Action Network – the Beyond COVID-19 Taskforce for our social sector. This Taskforce headed by Ms Anita Fam, President of National Council of Social Service (NCSS), has already gotten down to work. The genesis of this Taskforce emerged from engagements that NCSS had with many of our charities. There was a yearning desire to come together, work on common challenges they faced, magnified during COVID-19, in order to reimagine and develop a social sector that can effectively meet emerging social needs, post-crisis.

And as more themes emerge from our Emerging Stronger Conversations, more Action Networks can be formed in the months ahead.

In the economic domain too, we have set up the Alliances for Action, which are industry-led coalitions aimed at quickly developing and testing new ideas for growth. They too represent a wholly different way of doing things – again, not just industry providing feedback to Government, but industry actually taking the front seat, taking the lead, and Government as active partners.

For example, COVID-19 has shown the importance of keeping our supply chains running, especially for a small and open economy like Singapore. One of the challenges is that many players are involved along the entire supply chain – from shippers and carriers, to air and sea port operators, legal and financial service providers and government regulators. Along the chain, cargo details need to be tracked, verified and communicated accurately. But different players may have different standards, formats and platforms, which complicates the process – some things that are sometimes taken for granted, all this while.

Industry says if we can use digitalisation, make the supply chain more efficient, we can harness opportunities for growth, seize this opportunity during this crisis. The Alliance for Action on Supply Chain Digitalisation aims to achieve this. The Alliance has organised seven workshops to engage players across the supply chain, involving close to 50 organisations from MNCs to SMEs and many government agencies.

I joined one of these workshops and heard from participants that this was, to them, the first time something of this scale and nature and complexion was being attempted. There was great energy in the room as the participants exchanged many exciting ideas.

More than ever, in these times, we need all hands on deck to steady the ship. Every Singaporean can contribute in one way or other.

To young Singaporeans – we need your energy and your fresh ideas. The path ahead may be uncertain, but the best way to predict the future is to seek to create it. We will need your creativity in many exciting areas, your willingness to challenge the status quo.

Climate change, which I mentioned, is one area, but there are many others, such as new applications for digital technology and new ways of organising society to help the low-income and vulnerable.

To our older Singaporeans – we need your deep experience, your wisdom and your fighting spirit. You have seen Singapore through difficult times, from SARS to the Global Financial Crisis. At the same time, you may be called upon to learn new skills or trades. It will not be easy but we will support you all the way.

To our enterprises and workers – we need your nimbleness to keep up with the latest changes and your commitment to long-term transformation.

COVID-19 has shown us that our economic growth needs to be more sustainable and more resilient to shocks. We will help you prepare for the future, but we need you to do the same for your workers – to retrain and redeploy them instead of letting them go, groom and develop them, and bring them along your journey.

To our community partners, NGOs, civil society and volunteer organisations – we need your enthusiasm, your spirit, your understanding of the ground and your extensive networks. The Government cannot reach all the right people at the right times. You can be first responders, who can identify and befriend those facing challenges. We will partner you closely in these efforts.

Mr Speaker, we are entering a period of great stress and unpredictability. We do not know what the future holds ahead of us and Singaporeans are understandably concerned. But we are starting from a position of strength – learning from our past experiences in fighting disease outbreaks, drawing on fiscal reserves that we have built up over decades and generations and, most importantly, standing united in the face of challenges and adversity.

Singapore Together is one of the rallying cries and spirit that will guide us through this crisis, our commitment to leaving no one behind, making space for differing views and doing our part. So, as we lift our heads high, let us face our challenges head-on, dream of a brighter future for our children, and dare to make those dreams a reality. [Applause.]

Mr Speaker: Mr Patrick Tay.

4.56 pm

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): "We will be together through thick and thin. As one country, we will fight this virus and win. We will fight with our hearts, our minds and our souls, protecting this island that we call Our Home."

Mr Speaker, Sir, over these past five days, 74 Members have spoken in support of the Motion including the Prime Minister. This includes new Members who have made their maiden speeches, and returning Members who have shared their concerns on the back of the uncertainty amidst the COVID-19 crisis.

I am encouraged by all our Members' conviction to improve the lives of all Singaporeans as one Singapore. And thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to round up this debate.

As many of the Members of this House had put forth, we are tackling a crisis of the generation and we are at an inflection point in our history. This is indeed an unprecedented crisis that has brought about significant impact to the lives of Singaporeans and businesses.

But it has been a crisis that has also brought out the best in us.

Many have and continue to step forward to volunteer their time, talent and treasures. Many ordinary people have done extraordinary things including showing appreciation to frontline workers or supporting a community need. Take, for example, Jacob Neo, a Primary 6 student from Fairfield Methodist Primary School, who penned the lyrics, as quoted in my opening, and melody to an inspiring song "Singapore, Unite as One", as a tribute to healthcare workers earlier this year.

There were also hawkers who delivered meals to the hungry, as well as generous organisations who returned their Job Support; and individuals who selflessly donated their Solidarity Payments to charity; and countless initiatives launched by many people to look after and support our migrant workers, as they continue to labour for us.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in her Address, the President highlighted five key aims that the Government hopes to fulfill to unify us as one, and take us forward. As I listened and read all the speeches delivered by Members of this House, I will endeavour in this closing of mine to string all the recurring themes together into five important areas.

First, sustainability in the midst of change. Change is necessary, moving forward, and this also requires us to change mindsets. In every crisis, there are also opportunities that we must tap on the COVID-19 crisis, to transform and to emerge stronger than before. Our ability to work effectively together to transform the economy will determine how we come out from this storm.

By identifying new opportunities for growth, we will ensure the survival and success of Singapore, improve the lives of Singaporeans and build a sustainable eco-system for many generations to come.

Different industries have been impacted differently with several facing structural disruption. Some sectors such as aviation, aerospace, marine and offshore, and tourism, will take a longer time to rebound. But if we stay true to the core capabilities, which we have built over the years, we will come out from this storm stronger.

Some promising ideas mentioned by Members include environmental sustainability, smart commerce, supply chain digitalisation and Industry 4.0 and we should take heart that Singapore has benefited from early investments in digital transformation and while we had a head start in the race, COVID-19 has forced us into a sprint while we were mentally preparing for a marathon. These new areas and business models will create new jobs and new ways of thinking. We need to stay positive and see these risks and challenges as opportunities to transform the way we do things.

In the past six months, I have seen firsthand for myself companies which have stagnated and went downhill. I have also seen how some companies stayed positive with a growth mindset and pivoted quickly and remained afloat and profitable.

Many Members have rightly pointed out equipping the workforce with the right skills and, more importantly, mindset is crucial in driving this transformation. SkillsFuture, especially the additional support for older workers to re-skill, upskill and the focus on skills over people's qualifications at a workplace is a step in the right direction for our society.

Last year, in support of SkillsFuture, I underwent a fintech foundation programme with our Singapore Fintech Association to get a better understanding of the fintech space and picked up useful knowledge to help me navigate in the fintech space. The learning has enabled me to gain an understanding of fintech and also open my eyes to new opportunities and possibilities in the fintech space and, of course, emphasising the importance of staying ready, relevant and resilient.

I would also like to thank Deputy Prime Minster Heng for his response to my opening speech on his support to further enhance our Industry Transformation Maps to further develop our people and create more jobs for Singaporeans. As we review and formulate strategies for industries to transform and diversify, we will need to create an even stronger linkage in the form of skills maps, job redesign, job retraining and re-scaling of our workers to take on these jobs. This will not be an easy task.

In the past five months alone, I have used more virtual conferencing than the past 25 years of my working career. I believe many of you would agree we had to learn the use an entire spectrum of virtual meeting and conference software, from Webex, MS Teams, Big Marker to Zoom, Skype and Google Meet. It is really quite a mouthful to swallow. In a short span of one month during the Circuit Breaker, I have to convert a storeroom of my home into a home office and had to move plans and furnishings in my home into the storeroom to improve my backdrop for live webinars and Facebook live sessions.

Second, securing jobs for Singaporeans. As highlighted by President and many Members, jobs remain a core priority for Singapore at this juncture and in the years ahead. The economic and social disruption brought about by COVID-19 coupled with geopolitics and trade tensions have only served to heighten insecurities and anxieties about jobs for many segments of society, including young fresh graduates from our ITEs, Polytechnics and Universities, low-wage workers as well as older workers.

I am encouraged that many Members have spoken passionately about the Singaporean Core. In fact, I was doing a count, as we progress through the speeches, and the phrase "Singaporean Core" has been mentioned over 40 times in the last four days alone.

Strengthening our Singapore Core is not and must not be something which divides us. I take heart that every call to strengthen our Singaporean Core made in these Chambers has not been a call to divide but one to unite. I take heart that the ideas put forth have been in the pursuit of our key tenets of fairness, equality and with the ultimate aim of progress and growth for our people and our country. I take heart that while each of us has marked our own journeys, we share the same destination, where we keep our economy strong and competitive so that in turn our workers can have good jobs, not just good jobs, but quality jobs and opportunities that meet their aspirations and improve their lives.

All around the world, anti-foreigner sentiments are on the rise because of the anxieties of job security, especially when they see that their jobs are overtaken by foreign manpower. When Singaporeans lose their jobs, but find that foreigners are still holding onto their PMET jobs, many become unhappy. We have heard multiple anecdotes from many Members the past week of jobs being filled by foreign manpower and who may not even be as academically qualified. Intense competition from the influx of foreign manpower and incidence of unfair employment practices by employers who display a clear preference for foreigners.

I am heartened by Minister Josephine Teo's announcement that MOM is reviewing and taking a close scrutiny of companies whose Singaporean Core has been weakening and that Minister Ong Ye Kung has shared that the Monetary Authority of Singapore will ensure fair hiring opportunities while grooming Singaporeans as leaders and specialists in the financial sector.

In these uncertain times, it is ever more important for all employers to play their part in building up their Singaporean Core and in circumstances where retrenchment is unavoidable and is the final option and employers have to choose between a foreigner and a Singaporean. I strongly urge the employers to lean towards keeping the Singaporean.

Mr Speaker, for a country to remain on a sustainable path, I agree with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong that Singapore cannot look inwards. We will need to grow our economy to create good jobs for Singaporeans and raise the living standards. To do this, we need to continue to remain open to attract Investments. We cannot close our doors to foreigners and foreign investments. More Singaporeans will be able to take up the opportunities that these foreign investments create. There is a need to bring in foreign manpower to supplement the local workforce and ensure the transferability of niche skills. Local companies including SMEs will also need skillsets and expertise to grow their business. I do not think we just want to settle with having the cake and eat it but we want to grow and enlarge the cake, thereby giving Singapore and Singaporeans a bigger and better and also the best slice of it.

As some of the jobs support measures will ease in in the months ahead, there will be fewer job opportunities and, perhaps, even more retrenchments. More workers will be impacted and we need to enable them to adjust and bounce back through this crisis and beyond. It will be especially tough for some group of workers, including low-wage workers and older workers. To continue to uplift our low-wage workers, we will need to ensure they acquire the skills to progress, not to forget the Triple Uplift formula of the Progressive Wage Model plus Workfare Income Supplement and, of course, the National Wages Council recommendations.

At the same time, we must not forget our older workers who are generally more vulnerable and are at a higher risk of being retrenched. For this group, it will be harder for them to look for another equivalent job and more so at the same pay. Retraining and upskilling older workers will enable employers to continue finding value in them and be less likely to make them redundant. I appreciate the call to respond to older workers with a heart, H E A R T which stands for H "holding on to jobs"; E "employment assistance", A "to act fairly", R "relief", T "to tough it out", and to redesign jobs, shift workplace culture and HR policies to institutionalise new possibilities for a maturing workforce.

Government, businesses and citizens must work together and expand opportunities for our senior workforce. As mentioned Prime Minister, the best unemployment insurance is, in fact, the assurance of another job.

Third, President Halimah also called on all of us to build a fair and just society and to look after our low-wage workers, especially during this crisis. As we negotiate through these stormy seas, we must not leave anyone behind. The digital disruption and economic transformation in the next normal and low-touch economy, therefore, must be even more inclusive and further fortify social cohesion.

The new social compact must be practical, balancing the needs of Singaporeans in the areas of social security, affordable and quality housing, healthcare, education, public infrastructure and environment with their aspirations and dreams. To facilitate social mobility, I look forward to the Government's continuous investment in our people with the necessary training and opportunities. As we deal with the major changes in the economy and labour market, it is important to strengthen our social safety nets and keep inequality in check.

Our starting point in life should not dictate our ending point. With hard work, ability and ambition, we can succeed. We must strive as much as possible to level uneven starting blocks and to provide opportunities at every stage of life. It is also our hope that our education system will always remain a social enabler so that everyone, especially those who may have started with less, can have the hope and confidence that in Singapore, they have equal access to opportunities to do well, achieve their aspirations and find happiness.

There was also recognition of the trade-offs and sacrifices that women make in their careers to look after their children and to reduce the burden of care-giving. I was especially reminded by hon Member Mr Louis Ng's example of Oasis water park ladies' toilet in Nee Soon East which he used to illustrate the issue of gender stereotypes.

Related to gender and poverty is a larger conversation about discrimination in our society. We need to expand our empathy to our minority communities. It is essential that we rise above our differences and find common ground. Occasional setbacks need not trip us in our perseverance to continue to make progress.

Harmony in diversity will always be a work-in-progress. We may not always agree, but we cannot let our disagreement turn into division. Otherwise, change will cause a rupture in society as we have seen elsewhere.

Our first President Yusof Ishak did not see our diversity of race, language, religion as an obstacle to progress. He saw this as our strength. He saw the diversity as exactly what would make Singapore dynamic and progressive. Diversity and inclusion is an important area which we must hold dear and fast, too.

Fourth, strengthening our Singaporean identity. It is the heart and spirit of Singapore which is embodied by the Singapore Tapestry, woven out of diversity and adversity. Its colours brightened by the idealism and energy of our youth or as hon Member Mr Darryl David put it "more like a quilt, nicely handcrafted patchwork", close and dear to us. Its thread tightly bound by a shared sense of community, culture and, ultimately, destiny.

To our youths and young people – never stop dreaming or lose that sense of optimism. This is not a lost generation and you are definitely not a "strawberry generation". When I see youths and young people, I see vitality, vigour, tenacity, great courage and ideas. They are like arrows. There may be attention exerted to the string at the start but when we release the bowstring at the right pull and tension, it will hit the target and mark with perfection and accuracy. To our youths and young people, we want to support you for you to realise your dreams, to overcome the crisis of a generation by uniting fellow Singaporeans and leave behind a more beautiful and tightly knitted tapestry as a legacy for generations of Singaporeans to come.

Deep trust and mutual respect will need to form the basis of the relationship between fellow Singaporeans, earned through the help and sacrifices that we give one another. We need to maintain a profound respect and plurality in Singapore and find shared layers above this diversity. I hope we can continue to build a culture of openness and trust, and one in which the Government listens, consults and engages regularly and widely with all.

We need to continue to fight for a more caring, compassionate and inclusive society, one with a strong heartware. Given the upheaval caused by this pandemic, it is our hardware and software that will save lives and livelihoods, but it is about being inclusive in our heartware that will determine whether we will get through this pandemic as One People, One Nation and One Singapore.

Last, but not least, Mdm President shared that Singaporeans have new aspirations and expectations, including a desire for more diverse voices to be heard, and stronger checks and balances. At the same time, new leaders are emerging to take Singapore forward.

Moving forward, both the Government and the Opposition must share the common goal of working together to better Singapore for our people. We do this with dignity, respect, integrity, courage and grace – not forgetting the hon Member Mr Murali’s exposition of the rhino and lion, and also the indomitable neck-sticking giraffe.

Members in this House have also applauded the Government for recognising the Leader of the Opposition. It is crucial to have constructive rational debates to further the interests of Singapore and Singaporeans.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore may have its beginnings forged in the crucible of crisis, but time and again, we have proven our mettle and prevailed against the odds. For our forebears had fought to bring Singapore forward, for the many storms we have weathered since our independence, including the Asian Financial Crisis, SARS and the Global Financial Crisis, we have prevailed.

We will and we must prevail again today. We must continue to rise to the challenge, adapt and emerge stronger. We will need to prepare our lives to overcome this crisis and after this crisis. We will need to reset, refresh, review, reinvent and rethink our strategies to become successful in the next normal. We must unite so that our economy will again prosper anew. We must unite even more so as external forces seek to divide us. We must unite so that we can leave behind a better society for children and their children.

I urge all of us to come together to build a liveable and sustainable society and country founded on mutual trust with opportunities for all. Let us continue to have faith and be of good courage. Listen well, look out for one another, stay strong and communicate with grace and empathy. I now call upon all the Members of this House to join me in thanking the President for her Address. [Applause.]

Resolved,

"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.'."