President's Speech

Order read for the Resumption of Debate on Question [22 September 2025].

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

'We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the First Session of this Parliament.'." – [Mr Sharael Taha]

Question again proposed.

1.05 pm

Mr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.

Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir. I begin by declaring that I work in a global investment firm with investments in defence-related companies.

In the opening chapter of the Chinese novel, "Romance of the Three Kingdoms", we find a line that carries through the ages: "天下大势，分久必合，合久必分". Great powers come together after a period of fracture; and divide after a period of unity.

History bears out this pattern. Empires rise and fall. Regions fracture, only to converge again under new banners. The map of the world is never still. It is like the tide – advancing, retreating, flowing.

For small, open nations like ours, the world today is not only uncertain. It is like a gathering storm at an inflection point, where old certainties collapse into turbulence. The assumptions that once held steady – open trade, safe sea lanes, shared global norms – can no longer be taken for granted.

Supertankers and fleets of all sizes are shifting course, switching lanes and creating waves. For a small vessel like Singapore, the challenge is not to command the seas. It is to chart a careful passage through them.

This inflection point is not only geopolitical; it is economic and technological. The British Empire was powered by coal. America’s rise was fuelled by oil. The next era will be built on electrification – from renewable grids to new storage systems. The demand for coal has levelled off. Oil may be nearing its peak. Electrification is still in its early stages, but will rise sharply in the years ahead. Demand will shift. And the nations that adapt will lead.

As Ray Dalio warns, we are entering a period of “multi-dimensional conflict” – spanning economics, technology and geopolitics. He notes that the United States’ (US') relative position has declined, while China’s rise has been remarkable. If unmanaged, this could harden into greater confrontation. Singapore cannot sit back. We must prepare. And preparation begins with recognising this fundamental truth: Singapore’s security rests on two pillars – defence and diplomacy. One without the other leaves us vulnerable. Defence gives credibility to diplomacy. Diplomacy ensures defence is well-positioned. Together, they form the twin pillars of our survival.

I thank President Tharman Shanmugaratnam for his clear articulation of the challenges ahead. His words remind us: this is not business as usual. I speak today not only as the Chair of the Defence and Foreign Affairs Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC), but also as the Member of Parliament (MP) of Yio Chu Kang. From one vantage point, I see the shifting sands of geopolitics. From another, I hear the everyday anxieties of Singaporean families – about jobs, about costs, about our children’s future. These are not separate conversations. They are one and the same story.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Southeast Asia, once seen as an oasis of stability, is more fragile than we would like to admit. Border disputes simmer. Political transitions in our neighbours bring forth opportunity and uncertainty. Globally, wars in Europe and the Middle East shake supply chains and energy security. Great power rivalry between the US and China sharpens by the day.

Even in advanced democracies, societies fracture not with bombs or tanks, but with inequality, disinformation and digital disruption. If foreign policy begins at home, then the lesson is clear: when nations grow divided inside, they stumble abroad. And when they stumble, the shockwaves ripple across the world.

For Singapore, whose survival depends on stability abroad and cohesion at home, the stakes could not be higher.

First, Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry of Defence's (MINDEF’s) commitment to deepen ties with partners is vital. Strengthening ties with existing allies is good, but we must avoid over-dependence. We must also cultivate diversified relationships, even with non-traditional partners in the Global South, for example, emerging economies that share an interest in regional stability. At the same time, we have to carefully manage risks from states who may not always share our worldview and whose ambition may not always align with a rules-based order. Meanwhile, warfare is changing. Cheap drones. Cyberattacks. AI-enabled systems. These are not weapons of tomorrow. These are weapons of today. The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) must not just keep pace. It must set the pace.

But it is not enough to buy the most advanced systems. What matters is whether we can sustain and replenish them. A handful of elite systems may not decide the outcome. What will matter is scale and speed – tens, hundreds, even thousands of resilient systems that can be replaced and deployed quickly. This is where our defence industry plays a role. ST Engineering has shown what is possible with reliability and innovation. We must build on that and encourage more to innovate for the next generation.

National Service is evolving. We are redesigning vocations, harnessing civilian expertise. That is good. But we must also retain high-value technical talent, rather than lose them once trained. Total Defence volunteerism is expanding, but participation alone is not enough. We must measure outcomes in terms of readiness and trust, not just headcount.

Let us be ambitious. Our defence industry can provide high-value jobs, strengthen technological sovereignty and be a source of national pride. But ambition must remain sustainable. At around 3% of gross domestic product (GDP), our defence budget is prudent. The challenge is to sustain strength, while keeping it affordable.

Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, our foreign policy must adapt just as quickly. We do not choose sides. We choose principles. We stay open. We stay credible. We stay constructive. Principles are like a compass to set our long-term direction. Deepening ties with both the US and China demands careful, calibrated messaging. Openness to one must never be misread as turning away from the other. Ultimately, all foreign policy is domestic policy. When big nations clash, Singaporeans feel it – in the price of groceries, the security of jobs, the reliability of essential services. Our external relationships are directly tied to stability at home.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) remains our cornerstone. But consensus paralysis is real. Beyond trade and digital frameworks, we must explore institutional innovations that enable action – maybe not qualified majority voting in select domains – so that ASEAN is not paralysed by gridlock.

As the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) expands its missions in Africa and Latin America, the intent is right. But we must ensure that resources are not overstretched. Missions should deliver trade, partnerships and strategic footholds, not just symbolic presence.

Most importantly, diplomacy is about people. Personal relationships. Cultural understanding. The ability to pick up the phone, call a counterpart and have trust built over years. That is invaluable. In our own region, many of the old leaders have passed on. We must invest in the new generation of connections. We must have people who can sit at tables, share meals and build trust beyond formalities. Foreign policy is a long game. It requires credibility backed by defence, curiosity about the world and resilience at home.

Mr Speaker, Sir, security is not only about the nation. It is also about the resilience of our communities in Singapore. In my constituency Yio Chu Kang, I see how strong communities make strong nations. Dementia-friendly walkways. Food rescue programmes. These may seem small compared to geopolitics, but they are not. They build trust. They build solidarity. And solidarity is the true bedrock of resilience.

Here, I must commend the Ministry of Health (MOH) on Healthier SG and Age Well SG. As Vice-Chair of the Health GPC, I have seen first-hand how these initiatives are not just policies on paper, but create real impact on the ground. Preventive health, functional screenings, community fitness programmes and mental health outreach are transforming the way Singaporeans think about health. They bring care into the neighbourhood, where people live, know each other and can support one another. This is where resilience takes root – in the neighbour who checks in, in the resident who volunteers.

Yet, we must also address challenges to jobs and social mobility. Rising costs, low birth rates and an ageing population test our resilience. Still, most Singaporeans believe hard work can improve their circumstances. That optimism is not just individual hope. It is our collective strength.

In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, we have reflected on shifting tides of geopolitics and unpredictable challenges. We have looked at warfare today, from drones and cyberattacks to AI-enabled systems and the need for an SAF that is ready and resilient. We have considered foreign policy that is principled and practical, open but credible, designed to deliver for our people. We have seen how resilient communities, rooted in solidarity, form the foundation of national strength.

Through it all, defence, diplomacy and community must be sustainable, guided by careful planning and prudent stewardship.

Singapore is like a small vessel sailing in waters where giants move. Supertankers shift course, sometimes collide. If we drift without care, we risk being capsized. There are strategic dangers if great powers disengage and economic dangers if rivalries fracture supply chains.

Survival is never passive. To endure, we must see risks early, seize opportunities fast and equip our ship with radar, engines, reserves and most importantly, a disciplined and united crew.

Foreign policy is also personal. Recently, a Yio Chu Kang family came to see me at my meet-the-people session (MPS). A member had faced a serious road incident abroad. Delays in medical care, challenges with local authorities. MFA and our High Commission stepped in. Guidance, support and access were provided. The family returned safely. I met them recently during my community walkabouts. They shared with me that they were very thankful for the consular support. This is what foreign policy really means: the safety of citizens, the security of families, the assurance that Singapore will stand by her people, because foreign policy is not only grand strategy. It is the price of groceries, the security of jobs, the reliability of services. The assurance that when you are in trouble abroad, your country will not leave you behind.

So, when history looks back, in 2035, 2050 or 2065 when we celebrate SG100, let it record that we did not shrink from the challenge. We rose above it. We secured our sovereignty, held fast to our unity, and built resilience across generations.

This is our moment to ride out the storm. We must move with confidence, clarity and courage – together.

Mr Speaker, Sir, let us rise, not as individuals, not as separate communities, but as one Singapore. Let us SURPASS – Secure, United, Resilient – and ensure Singapore's safe passage through turbulent waters, today and for generations to come, and let us do so with a "we first" spirit, put our people, our families, our nation at the hearts of every step. When we act with purpose, stand together and refuse to be passive, there is nothing we cannot achieve.

And let us remember even a small state like ours has agency, if we are careful and united. Our credibility rests on three things: our economic success, our ability to deter threats, and our consistent, confident diplomacy. In a world of shifting tides, Singapore must always strive to be useful but never made use of.

Finally, let me acknowledge the men and women who make our defence and diplomacy possible – our soldiers, National Servicemen (NSmen), diplomats and public officers who carry the weight of safeguarding Singapore every day. We honour their service. I support the Motion.

Mr Speaker: Mr Ang Wei Neng.

1.19 pm

Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast-Jurong West): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Motion to thank President Tharman for his Address at the Opening of the First Session of this 15th Parliament.

President Tharman's call for unity, inclusivity and resilience deeply resonates with me, because these are not abstract ideals but real challenges we see on the ground. His Address is a timely reminder that while policies set the direction, it is a collective effort of Government, businesses, unions and our communities that will determine whether every Singaporean feels supported and included in this journey. I am committed to do my part in Parliament and in my Nanyang division to help translate this vision into reality for our people.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have stood in this House on at least six occasions since 2021, to sound the alarm and plead for stronger action against the notorious rise of vaping. At that time, the burden of enforcement fell almost entirely on the shoulders of the Health Sciences Authority (HSA), an agency I believed was not sufficiently resourced to combat this growing crisis. My belief was strengthened when I saw the dangerous infiltration of illicit products like Kpods into our schools and communities, and the possible involvement of criminal syndicates in trafficking vapes and Kpods.

So, it was with a profound sense of relief that I, along with many concerned Singaporeans, listened to President saying that "we must guard dangers at home, including vape". Similarly, Prime Minister Mr Lawrence Wong had earlier voiced his concerns about vaping, especially those laced with harmful substances, during the National Day Rally. He affirmed the urgent need for stronger enforcement and harsher penalties. And true to his word, swift and decisive action followed, powerfully backed by our dedicated Home Team officers, working closely with MOH and HSA officers.

What we are seeing now is the strength of a whole-of-Government response. A united front involving MOH, Ministry of Education (MOE), Ministry of Manpower (MOM), Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and MINDEF, is working to detect smuggling, and to protect our young people in schools, Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) and army camps. While I deeply wish this decisive move had come sooner to curb vaping's nasty spread, I am, nonetheless, grateful, for in matters of public health and safety, it is always better late than never.

This very success, which demonstrates what we can achieve when agencies work in concert, brings me to my next point, the critical importance of seamless coordination within our Government to truly serve our people.

We have come a long way since the famous "fish ball stick issue" was first raised in by then-backbencher Ms Low Yen Ling and mentioned by then-Prime Minister Mr Lee Hsien Loong during his National Day Rally in 2014. Today, Ms Low Yen Ling is a Senior Minister of State, and inter-agency coordination has undoubtedly improved. Yet, some stubborn challenges remain.

Let me share an example of the challenges we face in the fight against pest birds, whether they are pigeons, mynas, or crows.

Recently, Nanyang has seen more of such birds, and I believe many other parts of Singapore face the same issue. When I noticed people feeding birds, which technically counts as littering, I referred the matter to the National Environment Authority (NEA). But NEA explained that they only handle high-rise littering, such as when food is thrown from windows to feed the birds. On the issue of bird control, they told me it is not under their purview and referred me to the National Parks Board (NParks).

When I approached NParks, I was told that they mainly manage pigeons. For crows, they would request the Town Council to remove nests from trees. As for birds scavenging for food waste, responsibility depends on location. When the birds eat on the food waste in hawker centres, NEA steps in. If it happens at coffee shops, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) takes charge. If it happens at food courts in industrial estates, then JTC Corp is responsible – and the list goes on.

So, here is my question. If NParks is the main agency responsible for pest bird management, and this is clearly an island wide issue, would it not make sense for NParks to set up a taskforce with NEA, Town Councils, HDB, JTC and other relevant partners, so that efforts can be coordinated instead of fragmented? Surely, we should not need to escalate this, the fight against bird nuisance to our Defence Minister, who is also the Coordinating Minister for Public Services, to lead the war against bird nuisance.

Someone suggested we could consult ChatGPT. But, of course, ChatGPT or generative AI cannot chase away the birds for us. But it remains an important tool to help us tackle everyday challenges.

During my recent trip to China, I once again saw first-hand how technology is transforming daily life, from sophisticated self-driving functions in mass-market electric cars to simple voice commands that can open curtains or switch off lights in a modest three-star hotel, technology has touched everyone's lives.

What I witnessed shows us the true potential of AI. It can amplify human creativity, solve problems once thought impossible, and unlock entirely new levels of productivity. More than that, AI adoption creates new kinds of jobs, just like the rise of social media created opportunities for content creators and influencers. Yet, we must also acknowledge the very real concern that AI may displace jobs. As tasks become streamlined, some roles will inevitably be lost and this is where our greatest challenge and our deepest responsibility lie.

We must embrace technology but also ensure no one is left behind. We must not see displaced workers as collateral damage. They are our partners in this transition. Beyond the measures already introduced by the Government and our unions, I believe we can and must do more to support workers who may be displaced by generative AI adoption.

Firstly, we need to strengthen lifelong learning not just as a policy, but as a culture. Workers must feel empowered, not fearful, when faced with new technology. Instead of asking, "Will AI take my job?", we should encourage them to ask, "How can I use AI to do my job better?"

Secondly, let us look into community-based learning hubs. Just as we have libraries and community centres in every town, why not also create AI learning spaces, where residents, regardless of age or background, can get hands-on exposure to digital tools, guided by trainers and volunteers? This makes reskilling accessible at the heart of every neighbourhood.

Thirdly, we must build stronger partnerships with industry. Companies that adopt AI should not just think about profits and productivity. They should also take responsibility to retrain their workers, so that technology uplifts people rather than leaves them behind.

Finally, we should encourage and celebrate second careers. A displaced worker does not mean a discarded worker. With the right training, a driver today could become a remote controller of autonomous vehicles tomorrow; a cashier could become a digital customer service specialist; a technician could become an AI maintenance trainer. Each career transition is not an end, but a new beginning.

Mr Speaker, Sir, whether it is the fight against vaping, the nuisance of pest birds, or the disruption of AI, one lesson is clear. No challenge can be solved alone. Our strength lies in people working together: the Government, the unions, the businesses and communities. With unity and courage, we can turn every challenge into opportunity, protect every worker and ensure every Singaporean has a place in the future.

Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.

1.29 pm

Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, as we mark SG60 this year, it is clear that Singapore has attained significant achievements by most standards – from third world to first, from mud flats to metropolis, as the Singapore story goes.

Today, Singapore stands as the world's fourth richest country by GDP per capita, around US$93,000, according to the International Monetary Fund's (IMF's) 2025 projections and ranks 26th globally by a total of GDP, notwithstanding our modest size, making us ASEAN's second largest economy, surpassing in Thailand which has a population exceeding 71 million.

We often label ourselves as a small country with limited resources, no hinterland of our own, but, perhaps, in this century, physical size and natural resources have become secondary. Singapore's population exceeds most of the top 10 GDP per capita countries and many of which do not enjoy abundant natural resources.

Africa's struggles with the resource curse reminds us that natural endowments are no guarantee of prosperity. I am sure everyone knows of Nvidia, now the world's most valuable company at more than US$4 trillion or roughly $5.5 trillion, yet it employs merely 36,000 workers. Consider instead, one of the largest palm oil plantation companies listed on the Singapore Stock Exchange, which employs over 100,000 workers and yet creates far less value with a market capital of about $4 billion.

Which model do we aspire towards? Human capital and financial resources now loom larger than natural endowments or physical space. According to a recent article from The Financial Times, they believe GIC could well be the world's largest sovereign wealth fund, with assets worth somewhere between US$1 trillion and $2 trillion, a testament to Singapore's success in capital accumulation at the national level.

Yet the troubling paradox remains. According to ADP, 60% of Singaporeans are living paycheck to paycheck as of 2024, a figure that surpasses regional neighbours, like China, Korea, Japan, Indonesia. And why is the cost of living the top voter concern, according to the Institute of Policy Studies' (IPS') post-election survey, when we are supposedly one of the richest countries in the world? In our day-to-day interactions, we witness residents anxious about their financial security and seeking help through MPS.

Moreover, are Singaporeans truly happy and satisfied? Though ranked the world's third happiest city by the Institute for the Quality of Life in 2025, one cannot help but feel a healthy dose of scepticism as to whether this reflects the lived reality of most Singaporeans. Numerous surveys in recent years point to widespread workplace burnout. One in four primary school students experience bullying. And we see all these manifestations of anxieties and stress around us, from growing neighbour disputes and noise complaints, to road rage and superiors lashing out against junior employees. What gives?

Singapore's economy is at a crossroads. Economic growth, growing the pie has always been the Government's fundamental goal and the Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong recently affirmed that we should grow as much as we can, aiming for rates faster than the eventual 2% to 3% long-term target.

This is not wrong in principle. But we must now ask, is it more important to grow the pie or to grow most Singaporeans' share of the pie? President Tharman reminds us, "The old playbook is no longer sufficient."

Yet, in the short term, much remains largely unchanged. On the capital front, the focus remains on attracting foreign direct investments (FDIs) to anchor multinational companies (MNCs) here. Singapore is still keen to continue incentivising MNCs, in spite of Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) 2.0 and the global minimum tax. And with regulatory certainty and the rule of law in place in Singapore, as opposed to what we are seeing in other countries, including the US right now, I am sure there will be companies keen to locate themselves here.

On the labour front, again in this fractured world, there will be many who will want to call Singapore home. Non-resident employment growth continues to stay at elevated levels of 152,000 across 2023 and 2024, according to MOM statistics, reflecting both the demand and supply of non-resident labour. However, there are limits to growth by boosting capital and labour. The world's largest economy, the US, increasingly ties trade agreements to domestic investment for tariff reductions. How will global supply chains shift and will Singapore's economic relevance continue to endure in this new world order?

Meanwhile, Singapore's population has touched six million, raising questions: how much further can we drive economic growth through workforce expansion in one of most densely populated cities in the world? While the Government had anticipated for our population to remain well below the 6.9 million mentioned in the 2013 population White Paper, a 2% annual increase, which is the same rate as that of last year, would see us reach roughly 6.8 million by 2030; and at 1%, we would still hit 6.4 million.

So, Mr Speaker, I fully agree with our President that we need to urgently rethink our playbook. I acknowledge that we have been attempting to refresh our economic strategies and Singapore has never lacked taskforces or committees: the Economic Strategies Committee launched in 2009; the Committee on the Future Economy in 2016; which was followed by the Future Economy Council; Future Economy Advisory Panel; Industry Transformation Maps; then the Emerging Stronger Taskforce in 2020; and most recently, the Economic Strategy Review and Singapore Economic Resilience Taskforce this year. Many even have multiple sub-committees.

However, if you take stock of where we are today, our economy remains very much driven by attracting global MNCs and capital. This is a model that has prevailed since Albert Winsemius advised Singapore in the 1960s. Looking at the share of value-add to the indigenous workforce and citizen-owned companies, this has declined from roughly 70% in the late 1980s, to 50% to 60% in the decade prior to 2015.

Unfortunately, the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) shared, in response to my Parliamentary Question in 2022, that the Department of Statistics ceased indigenous GDP and gross national income (GNI) data compilation from 2011 and 2016, respectively, due to the perceived lack of public interest. But these numbers are crucial. The Yearbook of Statistics 2012 noted eloquently that Singapore's economic development depends heavily on foreign capital, foreign technology and foreign workers, with a large share of employee compensation and operating surplus accruing to foreigners and foreign enterprises. Per capital GNI, as conventionally defined on the residential basis, may not, therefore, reflect correctly the income accrued to Singaporeans. How then can we reverse this? How many homegrown Singapore firms have become global giants?

AI is the buzzword of the day, prompting reflection. You do not need huge physical space or underground natural resources. Mira Murati's Thinking Machines Lab is valued at US$12 billion, with just around 50 employees. Why do we not have our own open AI equivalent, despite Singaporean students having one of the best math and science scores in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), for decades? When local entrepreneurs succeed, many still choose overseas listings and foreign bases to access supportive ecosystems. This despite our financial hub status and acclaimed business friendliness.

Prime Minister Wong's Addendum to the President's Address highlights investing in productive capacity, ensuring stable tax, customs, regulatory environment and infrastructure investment. To me, these are necessary, but insufficient conditions. Because, as what President Tharman has said, "Above all, we must foster an outgoing and experimental spirit among our enterprises and people."

In the near term, it is crucial to prevent a lost generation by securing jobs. Young graduates are justifiably anxious. AI-driven seniority-biased technological change may disproportionately impact juniors and entry-level positions. Grades is a good start, but full-time entry-level role creation must also be incentivised. For example, reintroducing the jobs growth incentive for fresh graduates. If GRaduate Industry Traineeships @ Gov (GRIT@Gov) mimic full-timer duties, then the Government should take the lead in levelling pay and benefits.

Long term, re-invigorating our workforce demands that our education system fosters critical thinking and independent learning, not rote memorisation. As Alvin Toffler wrote back in 1970, the illiterate of the future are not those who cannot read or write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn and re-learn.

More pressing still is raising our total fertility rate (TFR), which slipped below one in 2023 and stayed low in 2024. Looking at our population pyramid, one might be forgiven for thinking we do not have an ageing population, thanks largely to immigration. We recently debated the Families Motion and without repeating myself, our low TFR remains an existential threat to Singapore and our identity.

President Tharman pledged, "in this term, we will do more to help parents better manage their work and family commitments and work with stakeholders, such as employers and community partners to build a culture that celebrates and values families".

Minister Indranee has said earlier that our marriage and parenthood policies are not incremental. But, perhaps, the most urgent task force we need now is one to tackle the critical challenge of our record-low TFR. Do we show the same resolve in tackling population as we do economic challenges? Because without enough Singaporeans, there will be no Singapore economy to speak of.

Ultimately, our greatest challenge, in my view, is how to refrain from rent-seeking or rent-maximisation behaviour as a society. To develop an entrepreneurial culture and let the thousand flowers bloom, we must encourage open-mindedness and diversity of ideas. More entrepreneurs mean more risk takers, but this also requires robust safety nets so Singaporeans can pursue entrepreneurial or vocational change without risking destitution.

We see rent-seeking across our society. Individuals buying investment properties, prompting Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty measures; companies prioritising property over their core business; even Government that focuses on maximising rents and nothing less than market value for land, lest it be seen as raiding the Reserves.

But such behaviour permeates every corner of the economy, raising costs. We must set the right tone at the top.

Policy should not inevitably reward the highest bidder at the expense of wider societal outcomes. I am encouraged that there are initiatives for more price quality tenders downstream; and as a matter of policy, whether it is for general practitioner (GP) clinics or hawker stalls, we need to move away from simply awarding sites based on the highest price alone.

I agree with Minister Ong Ye Kung in his response to the $52,000 monthly rental bid for a GP clinic at an HDB estate, where he shared that this must translate to higher cost of healthcare one way or another; and that the higher rental bids do not necessarily translate to the best healthcare that the community needs. Upstream, however, we must go further. State land forms part of our Reserves, but excessive land prices push up development costs and rents, impacting tenants and consumers.

As a local C-suite member of one of Asia's largest real estate groups recently shared, in Singapore, land costs now form roughly 70% of total project development expenditure, up from just 4% in the 1980s when Raffles City was built. These costs inadvertently get passed down and perhaps, it is time to consider reviving the two envelope or concept and price land tenders, focusing on desired developmental outcomes beyond just the highest bids. Mr Speaker, allow me to say a few words in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The 15th Parliament convenes at a critical juncture and we have a long road ahead. The nation faces severe challenges: geopolitics, the rivalry between the US and China, trade wars, and the revolutionary changes brought by AI will all test the collective wisdom and resilience of Singaporeans.

The President spoke passionately, emphasising unity, trust, a “we first” society . I believe that the spirit of unity and “we first” Singapore does not mean everyone speaking with one voice, but rather, that we can address issues by exchanging different opinions with a rational and open attitude. The Workers' Party (WP) Members of Parliament (MPs) have always been a minority in Parliament. However, I believe that the presence of WP MPs can demonstrate the value of diverse voices and better embody the “we first” Singapore spirit mentioned by the President and Prime Minister.

Especially in the coming five years, the variables in the international situation and the transformation of the global economy will become increasingly rapid. How to pool collective wisdom to respond to drastic changes is homework we must do. Therefore, I hope the Government can listen to different views from Singaporeans with an objective, rational and open attitude.

From a policy-making perspective, some core issues are interconnected, for example, the various problems brought by AI and economic transformation. The Prime Minister mentioned that Singapore should embrace AI to improve productivity and create new employment opportunities. We agree that AI and new technologies can indeed help enterprises improve efficiency and drive innovation but, at the same time, we must also see that it will permanently change the employment environment. If we do not prepare in time, many Singaporeans will be left behind.

To ensure that no one is left behind, we must strengthen employment stabilisation policies in the short term and encourage the public sector and private enterprises to increase employment opportunities. At the same time, WP also calls on the Government to strengthen the social safety net to respond to the impact brought by AI.

Most crucially, in the age of AI, education should not just be for examinations but should prepare people for life. We need to align education with economic needs and help students develop important soft skills. These human qualities cannot be replaced by AI and are essential for future social and economic development.

In summary, Mr Speaker, a “we first” society also requires us to uphold the principle that collective interests take precedence over individual interests. However, unity cannot be built on inequality. When the nation achieves success but many citizens still feel forgotten, trust becomes difficult to maintain. We need not just economic growth but also inclusive growth that ensures every Singaporean can share in the nation's future. The true measure of our success lies not in GDP rankings or the size of sovereign wealth funds but in whether young Singaporean couples can afford to start families, whether our elderly can retire with dignity and whether our children are willing to call this island home.

Mr Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.

1.46 pm

Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion of Thanks to the President for his Address and the measures in the Addenda announced by the various Ministries to take Singapore forward in an increasingly uncertain and turbulent world with a changing world order.

I am heartened by how our people and the Government have been working hand in hand to overcome the numerous waves of challenges pounding our shores. They emanate from continents far from our island – economic upheavals, armed conflicts, technology changes – yet, they have significant impact on our everyday lives.

On the one hand, I am confident of our ability to catch some of these waves to survive and thrive. On the other hand, let us never forget the need to protect the vulnerable amongst us and prevent these powerful waves from sweeping them under.

I am cognisant of the immense responsibility that my residents and fellow Singaporeans have entrusted me with. I applaud the great progress that we have made so far together to address some of the issues faced by our vulnerable groups. But our work is far from done and that is why I continue to champion change that will benefit Singaporeans and my residents and keep our country going in this new reality.

MPs play an important role to help the Government to continue to review the effectiveness of our policies on the ground. Where necessary, we must be willing to recalibrate and make improvements to narrow the gaps and plug any loophole. Let us never forget that spirit of sensible policy-making and pragmatic government administration that has been a hallmark of Singapore's success.

Sometimes, the solutions can be deceptively simple and I would like to call upon us all, the people, private and public sectors, to be daring to raise practical and smart solutions, and our policy-makers to listen to good ideas from our people. This is how we stay united as a nation, by caring and looking out for one another. It is worth reminding ourselves that we are only as strong as our weakest link and the tides of change must not leave anyone behind.

I am assured and heartened by the commitments made by the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) in its Addendum to the President's address. I support the suite of enhanced and new measures to help our families cope during this challenging period. I support the enhanced employment support and opportunities for lifelong education for lower-income families and persons with disabilities (PwDs). Reviews and updates of ComCare assistance and payouts, and Family Services are timely. I welcome the introduction of a new Domestic Violence Act and the commencement of the Mental Capacity Act review, just to name a few.

Our social and healthcare workers play an essential and critical role in ensuring that appropriate help and care is provided in a timely manner. This was best demonstrated during the COVID-19 pandemic, but now that we have moved on from that crisis, it does not mean that we forget their roles and contributions.

In fact, I would like to urge the Government to consider dedicating more resources to our social care sector, in view of the needs arising from our rapidly ageing population, as our population pyramid starts to invert amid shrinking family sizes and changing social norms.

Our social care workers are professionals and they must be treated as such. They need to be equipped with more support and resources in order to achieve better outcomes for their clients. Much research worldwide over the last two decades have resulted in new findings in this field and we can tap on these to provide constant professional upgrading so that they can be even more effective.

In addition, we should elevate and accord better recognition of and compensation for their work. Due to the nature of their jobs, burnout and attrition rates are high. Their heart work is hard work. We have to do more to better retain our existing talent pool of social workers, while attracting new blood to boost our ability to care for our people. Foreign workers do help to fill many of the gaps, but let us not end up as a country that relies too heavily on others to take care of our very own.

Singapore is rapidly ageing. Our silver tide is here. We must accelerate efforts to strengthen community-based eldercare, expanding Active Ageing Centres, daycare facilities and home-based support services. These not only enable our seniors to age-in-place, with dignity and autonomy, but also reduce pressure on families.

Caregiving, often performed by middle-aged adults juggling work and family, must also be better supported. Caregivers want to be able to care for their families, but they also have their own dreams and aspirations. All too often, I have met residents who have had to sacrifice their careers to look after their loved ones. Indeed, they have chosen to do so out of love, and we need to celebrate that and provide them with better support. The toll that they experience goes beyond the physical and it is quite common that their mental well-being is also at risk.

I urge the Government to consider enhanced caregiver leave, more accessible respite services and financial assistance tailored to caregiver households. Our seniors are not a burden; they are a blessing. Let us honour their contributions not just in words but through concrete policies that uphold their well-being as well as that of their loved ones.

We have to double down on our efforts to support families holistically, so that they can remain strong and resilient in the face of change. For families under duress, our social care workers need to be empowered to coordinate with partners, such as mental and physical healthcare professionals, financial counsellors, schools, eldercare centres and so on.

Sir, poverty in Singapore may be less visible, but we still have families struggling even for basic provisions, including food. Families living in rental flats, often headed by single parents or elderly caregivers, face daily struggles. For children in these households, we must do more to ensure their well-being and that they can access healthcare, nutritious food and be able to focus on their education.

We must intervene early and effectively. Programmes like KidSTART are commendable and we need to go further in scaling them up, with holistic support for families – not just for children, but also for parents. Empower them with good parenting skills, stable employment, access to mentoring and even overcoming addictions, such as to vaping, alcohol and even drugs.

Sir, we have watched with horror how divisive many countries overseas have become, splintering along racial and religious lines, and increasingly along the lines of immigration and social economic backgrounds. There are heightened tensions between established resident communities and new arrivals, and distrust between the rich and the poor, manifesting in rallies, riots and violence. Almost daily, we see alarming images of looting, burning vehicles and buildings, and people attacking each other on television and social media.

Social harmony did not happen by chance. It is the result of careful stewardship, addressing root causes of problems as soon as they surface, building mutual respect and reaching the national consensus to agree to engage in difficult conversations, even over sensitive topics.

Yet in today's digital age, we face new threats, from misinformation, polarisation and imported ideologies that can erode trust and amplify division. How can we build unity in diversity? Inter-faith platforms like the Inter-Racial and Religious Confidence Circles (IRCCs) must be re-energised for a new generation. Many of our youths that I met have good questions and think about such issues very seriously. Let us support engagements for deeper, ongoing conversations about faith, tradition and coexistence, especially among our youths.

Civic education in schools should place greater emphasis on empathetic understanding of different faiths and worldviews. We must move beyond mere tolerance, to deepen our mutual understanding, appreciation and respect.

Strong communities are not built by governments alone. They exist when neighbours look out for one another, when residents take ownership of shared spaces and when there is deep trust among people, in our institutions and in our leadership. We must also support faith and community leaders who work quietly to build bridges. Our bridge-builders must be seen, supported and safeguarded against threats.

Our Community Development Councils (CDCs), Social Service Offices (SSOs) and grassroots organisations must continue to be strongly supported to work closely with ground-up groups and volunteers. Policies must enable not only professional help, but also "kampung"-style initiatives and mutual aid.

One example where multiple stakeholders came together to try to solve a long-running problem is the Skyville@Dawson sky gardens. For years, residents have been putting up with the disamenities of noisy and inconsiderate visitors who litter, smoke, urinate and cause disturbances even in the wee hours. Volunteers, despite feeling burnout, continue with patrols, even as we continue to engage with HDB, the Town Council, Residents' Committees, NEA, the Police and other Government agencies. Unfortunately, the disamenities continued and we sought to present alternative solutions which have been proven effective in other sky gardens, such as the Pinnacle @ Duxton. When problems remain unsolved and proposals are not accepted, it is not surprising for my residents to feel disappointed.

You may recall that in 2022, I moved an Adjournment Motion in this very House to explore solutions on how we can better manage our common spaces in housing estates. I will not hesitate to speak up for my residents if I feel that more can be done.

Securing Singapore's future lies not in grand slogans, but as our President put it, in everyday deeds and action, like little acts of kindness; helping an elderly neighbour with groceries; guiding a child in need; and lending a hand in crisis. These are the encounters that strengthen our social compact and build a "we first" society.

In closing, allow me to reiterate our first principles. To build a united and resilient Singapore, we have to be inclusive and caring, respectful of differences in diversity and united in core values. Every child who falls through the cracks, every elderly person who dies alone, every caregiver who burns out is a reminder of work yet to be done. Similarly, every neighbour who helps another, every volunteer who steps forward, every employer who provides a second chance, is a sign of the better Singapore that we are building together. Sir, in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, securing Singapore's future lies not in grand slogans, but as our President puts it, in everyday deeds and actions, like little acts of kindness: helping an elderly neighbour with groceries; guiding a child in need; and lending a hand in crisis. These are encounters that strengthen our social compact and build a "we first" society.

In closing, allow me to reiterate our first principles. To build a united and resilient Singapore, we have to be inclusive and caring, respectful of differences in diversity and be united in core values. Every child who falls through the cracks, every elderly person who dies alone, every caregiver who burns out, is a reminder of work that is yet to be done. Similarly, every neighbour who helps another, every volunteer who steps forward, every employer who provides a second chance, is a sign of the better Singapore that we are building together.

Mr Speaker: Mr Andre Low.

2.01 pm

Mr Low Wu Yang Andre (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, the world has fundamentally changed. It is a new world fraught with peril, but awash with opportunity, one that needs a new strategy to not just survive the challenges ahead, but to thrive despite them, a strategy built on security, investment and trust in our people.

Two great forces define our current moment: the great re-ordering of global power and the AI revolution transforming how we work. Together, they represent a convergence of challenges that invite a rethinking of how we approach governance and policy.

The World Economic Forum projects that 22% of jobs will undergo structural change by 2030. This is not some distant threat. It is a near-term reality already reshaping our economy. But this AI wave is fundamentally different from previous technological revolutions. Where past disruptions primarily hit the factory floor, this one targets the boardroom, the artists' studio, the claims desk. From administrative assistants to software developers, from graphic designers to even chief executives, AI capabilities can now match many tasks performed by these workers.

In Singapore, this threat is amplified by our unique economic structure. Nearly two-thirds of our workforce are professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs), precisely the demographic most exposed to AI displacement. Some of us call this the knowledge economy. Researchers from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) believe 60% of jobs in advanced economies will face AI exposure. But for Singapore, given our economic make-up, this figure is probably higher still. Half of these jobs could benefit from AI integration, boosting productivity and wages. But the IMF thinks that the other half face automation, creating downward pressure on wages and hiring in these sectors.

Singapore's success to-date comes from world-class execution of a sound playbook. But as we chart the course for tomorrow, we must question if yesterday's maps are still adequate for these new waters.

Mr Speaker, I acknowledge the Government's and Prime Minister's focus on assurance and cost of living. I agree with the diagnosis, but temporary reliefs are insufficient for the systemic challenges ahead. In an era of AI-driven disruption, we should acknowledge that our existing social safety nets are ill-equipped for the scale of the change ahead. A stronger, permanent foundation of security is required, and this is not charity, but is the cornerstone of national competitiveness.

The impact of this AI revolution can already be felt. Recent surveys of US employers showed 25% of AI users expected to hire fewer workers in the next six months, versus just 10% who intended to hire more. We can already see the same early warnings here in Singapore. Younger workers, lacking the tacit knowledge that accumulates with experience, are particularly vulnerable to task replacement from AI. This is not a hypothetical disruption. After my party colleague Eileen and I put out a call for feedback a couple of months ago, we have heard from many young Singaporeans who have shared their stories about struggling to start their careers, struggling with the job search as well as underemployment concerns.

So, the first pillar of our new foundation must be redundancy insurance for the AI age, not merely jobseeker support, but a comprehensive scheme designed for workers facing the reality of career churn in the digital economy – 40% of last drawn salary, capped at 40% of Singapore's prevailing median income, for up to six months. The scheme will be funded by small equal contributions from employers and employees amounting to 0.1% of your monthly salary. To put that in perspective, for a median income earner, that is just over $5 a month, and only half of that is paid for by the worker. This creates a true safety net that catches everyone, one that gives workers the confidence to explore new opportunities rather than clinging desperately to dying industries.

This represents a profound shift in how we should think about support for the unemployed. In the AI age, career transitions will become the new normal, not the exception. Workers need the security to retrain, to upskill, to reinvent themselves without the spectre of destitution haunting their choices.

Housing security must also evolve to acknowledge changing aspirations and economic realities. Build-To-Order (BTO) prices should be pegged to a house price-to-income ratio of three for first-time applicants. We should offer 70-year lease options at lower prices for those who prefer affordability over asset appreciation. The BTO access age for singles should be lowered to 28 and grants should be equalised for single parents who face unique challenges in building stable homes.

Housing is not merely shelter. It is dignity, stability and the foundation upon which families build their futures. As someone who has navigated this journey myself recently, I know the anxieties many young Singaporeans face. When we cannot settle into our first homes until our 30s, we are denied the chance to put down roots, to plan for families and to contribute fully to society's fabric.

Just as a home provides foundational stability for the family, our economy also requires its own form of security. Platform work has emerged as the primary economic buffer for this era, offering a crucial bridge for those transitioning between traditional jobs. The Platform Workers Act is a commendable first step to shore up this vital buffer. But it stops short of addressing algorithmic management, the digital boss that controls every aspect of the platform worker's existence.

Concerns about a "digital boss" are not new, but the AI revolution brings renewed urgency. These black-box algorithms determine job allocation, pricing, performance evaluation and even disciplinary action. Recent advances mean that they could become supercharged, rendering them even more powerful and even more inscrutable than before. Workers deserve to know when AI systems had made decisions about their lives and livelihoods, and they also deserve the right to human review as a fundamental backstop. We cannot allow the digital economy to become a digital dystopia where human dignity is sacrificed on the altar of algorithmic efficiency.

The freedom to explore and chase one's dreams should not be the exclusive playground of the bold or the privileged. By strengthening our foundation of security, every Singaporean will have the licence to try new things because should you fail, you will not have too far to fall.

But Mr Speaker, a strong foundation of security is only the first step. To truly thrive, we must build upon it. This brings me to the second pillar of our strategy: investment in our people.

The Government has rightly focused its efforts here through SkillsFuture and recent updates like the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme for mid-career workers are positive developments. The ambition is correct. But for all the good intentions, there remains a persistent disconnect, a "last mile disconnect" between training and employment.

Many workers still see SkillsFuture as a supermarket of courses, a system that provides plenty of choice but sometimes lacks clear pathways to career advancement. We hear from those who have diligently completed courses, only to find their new certificates hold little currency with employers who still prioritise degrees, certificates and linear work experiences. This is the paradox of our current system. We have built a comprehensive architecture for upskilling, but we have not yet solved the problem of market recognition.

The challenge, therefore, is one of pace and integration. Last year, the former Minister for Education articulated a vision for stackable micro-credentials and cross-recognition between our IHLs. We must accelerate this vision.

To start with, as we continue to push the IHLs to grow their micro-credential offerings, the existing careers and skills passport should evolve from a simple certificate library into a dynamic, living credential, a system where micro-credentials from any IHL can be seamlessly stacked over time, allowing adult learners to build towards a formal, credible qualification awarded by one of the universities or other IHLs. Backed up by the collective reputations of our renowned institutions, this would go a long way to bridging the disconnect between adult learners and employers. This acknowledges the busy, unpredictable reality of adult life and provides a flexible pathway for all Singaporeans to stay relevant.

Secondly, we must address the skills gap afflicting our fresh graduates. We possess world-class universities, but we hear of a persistent concern from both employers and graduates themselves, a gap between academic excellence on the one hand and the practical skills that are needed in a modern workplace.

Our polytechnics and the Singapore Institute of Technology have proven the value of structured work-integrated learning as a core part of the tertiary curriculum. Given this success, we should push for work-integrated learning to be the norm for as many tertiary students as possible, ensuring our graduates enter the workforce ready to contribute from day one. A targeted grant to help our local small and medium enterprises (SMEs) offset the costs of providing such placements could be a powerful catalyst. But crucially, payouts should be structured to incentivise retention and discourage exploitation. This ensures our graduates enter the workforce with the practical, real-world skills that the AI age demands.

Finally, as we pursue our national AI strategy, we must also ensure its benefits are democratised. SMEs should continue to receive assistance to adopt AI tools and AI literacy should be woven into our school curriculum. Students should be encouraged to command it as a creative and analytical tool. SkillsFuture credits should also be allowed to cover subscriptions to AI assistants and tools, ensuring that all Singaporean workers, regardless of their means, are able to utilise the latest and best tools to enhance their own productivity.

But above all, we must continue to be vigilant to ensure AI serves our workers, not replaces them. In an age of AI, our people's ability to learn, adapt and apply knowledge quickly is our single greatest competitive advantage. The right investments in our people will ensure that AI's promise translates into better wages and better jobs, not just higher profits for shareholders.

Yet, even the best-laid plans for security and the most ambitious investments in our people will fall short if they are not built on a foundation of mutual respect and this requires the final and perhaps, most crucial pillar of our strategy: trust.

Mr Speaker, I welcome the President's focus on trust as a national priority, but we must be more courageous in our definition of what trust means in a mature democracy.

To truly thrive, trust in Singapore must become a two-way street. We have long been asked to trust the Government's judgement, wisdom and intentions. In this new era, the Government must also learn to trust its people with information, with genuine dialogue and with the fundamental dignity of participation.

Trust is demonstrated through transparency in governance and that is why the WP has called for a Freedom of Information Act which shows that we trust citizens with the information necessary to hold the Government accountable. When the Government holds data that could inform public debate, it should be shared. When policies are formulated based on evidence, that evidence should be accessible to scrutiny.

Trust is also demonstrated through genuine dialogue rather than managed consultation. Defending robust debate shows we trust the wisdom of our people to engage with complex issues and reach sound judgments. The current Parliamentary committee system, while useful, lacks the teeth necessary for true legislative scrutiny. The WP again calls for establishing Standing Select Committees for each Ministry, with MPs from all parties properly resourced to provide meaningful oversight. The Government should share information openly with these committees and not jealously guard it as proprietary knowledge.

But the deepest trust of all is demonstrated through permissive discourse. When differences of opinion are tolerated – nay, celebrated – in our society, in civil discourse, in the media, in politics. It is why we believe that when disputes over facts arise in our public square, our independent courts and judges should have oversight on what is, or is not, a falsehood. Trust is, after all, a two-way street.

Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister has spoken of the need for us to be a "we first" society. It is a call we can all get behind. But as we heed this call, it is our duty in this House to give the vision meaning for the people we serve. So, if by "we first", the Prime Minister means a secure Singapore where every family has an affordable home and a robust safety net to catch them when they fall, then we are on the same page; and if by "we first", he means investing deeply in the skills and boundless creativity of every Singaporean, then we can work together; and if by "we first", he means trusting our people with the freedom to explore, create and find their own path, then we can take heart. These three pillars – security, investment and trust – form the foundation of a strategy for a thriving people. A compass for our next chapter and a promise about the society we can become. Mr Speaker, I support the Motion.

Mr Speaker: Minister of State Goh Pei Ming.

2.18 pm

The Minister of State for Home Affairs, and Social and Family Development (Mr Goh Pei Ming): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Motion. As one of the younger new political office holders in this House, allow me first to share my thanks, for what my generation has received. Then, Mr Speaker, amid the many challenges that Singapore faces, I would like to speak about our children and their childhood, and offer some suggestions on how we can help our next generation thrive.

I grew up in the 1980s and 1990s in a simple HDB flat in Bedok. Studying was important, but my fondest memories were from playing football during recess, going to the nearby playground and wandering around Bedok Town Centre shops and the library. A simple childhood, a heartland experience, like most Singaporeans. And I am grateful for what I had, for it shaped me into who I am today. My generation grew up proud of Singapore. Proud that our small country was able to punch above her weight as one of the four "Asian Tigers", proud that we stayed principled and resisted external pressures, proud that we were bold and planned long term.

We owe gratitude to our grandparents and our parents whose hard work and strong values enabled them to overcome tough cycles of retrenchment, global conflicts and the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic, so that we all can have a much better life than they ever did. Now, it is our turn to take on the mantle, to navigate through the dark clouds, to support and take care of our seniors and to raise our children well to become future leaders of Singapore. And if I may add, on a more personal note, it is precisely my heartland upbringing and my pride in Singapore that has kept me committed to serving in the SAF for many years as well as in the community as a grassroots leader through the past two decades; and now, to do even more, as I take this step into politics.

Just as our Pioneers had their challenges, my generation, our generation, will have ours to confront as well. As a nation we have no lack of issues to think about in our next lap. In a world of rapid change, geopolitical situations, climate change, intense economic competition, the opportunities and challenges that AI brings, the dominance of tech and mobile devices, the explosion of choices that face us all will be even more daunting for young minds. It is, therefore, our responsibility to help them thrive and we have to do as well as we possibly can. Singapore is already one of the best places for our children to grow up in, with a high-quality of life, safe and secure environment, excellent healthcare and schools. But with new uncertainties ahead of us, we need to ensure our next generation is ready to brave it and resilient enough to stay ahead.

We must help our young people develop in the right way, to shift from “what to think and do”, to “how to think and do”. So that they have the confidence and curiosity to navigate those winds of change. So that they develop the critical thinking for them to discern what’s right and what is wrong for them to possess the grit and perseverance to keep pushing when the going gets tough and to have the resilience to get up when they fall. To do so, we, as a nation, need to change the way we raise our children and that begins with changing our mindsets. Amongst all the shifts that we need to make, sometimes changing mindsets is the hardest. But just like how our grandfathers and fathers have prepared us well for today’s challenges, it is now for us, our generation to prepare our children for their future.

We all want our children to get the best possible start in life and the good thing is, many parents today already send their children to preschool, although starting ages differ. Our data shows that children who start preschool at three years old do better in primary school and, in fact, the benefits continue long afterwards. Children develop better and learn better, with preschool. So, I strongly encourage all parents to start your children in preschool early. Of course, parents need to be able to identify and secure a good preschool, especially if both parents are at work.

As a parent myself, I care deeply about my children’s education. Eight years ago, when choosing a preschool for my first-born, there was no vacancy in any of the nearby Government-supported preschools. Fast forward to today, as the Minister of State overseeing the preschool sector, I am glad to learn that our Government-supported centres can meet 80% of our population’s needs. This leaves options for some Singaporeans to pursue private centres. Furthermore, our early childhood educators, our teachers, are well qualified and committed. Preschool fees have also come down and we must continue to do better; and we will.

I had a chat recently with a young couple. Marine Parade is a mature estate, but we do have our fair share of young parents. They grew up in the East, like myself. They are happy, living and starting a family in Marine Parade. Even though they did start the conversation by telling me that they were disappointed they did not get to vote in the recent General Election. But it was a good reminder to me to never take our residents’ trust for granted. They subsequently went on to share their concerns about the academic pressures that their young child already faces. I want to make the point that the best start in life is not about pushing learning earlier. It is not about studying ahead of the school curriculum, and it is not about outdoing their peers academically. Growing up, I recall friends around me being drilled in abacus classes to help with their math and there are many more examples like that.

Do not get me wrong. Our children must develop and must have good numeracy and literacy skills, because it is important in life to go on. But I think Singapore as a country, we are already doing well in these areas. The way to give our children the best start in life, is to build them up well, to make sure they have a proper childhood. A childhood rich with opportunities to develop important values that will help them to become inventive, resilient and flexible. A childhood where they truly learn to be a good person, as opposed to just being academically clever.

When you are a young child, the most powerful lessons, the most powerful learning, comes not from books, not from tuition centres, but from experiences. Our children need a childhood where they can enjoy the freedom to explore and learn from their own experiences because that is how they learn best. I learnt about a butterfly’s life cycle from keeping a caterpillar. I was pretty good at playing marbles and that helped me quickly understand Newton’s Laws on Action and Reaction, many years later. It was my own experimentation and playful experience that taught me these powerful lessons and more.

Our children need such experiences to grow their curiosity for a lifetime of learning. Bring them out to our parks and playgrounds, they need to learn through doing and experiencing for themselves. Let the world be their classroom. But child development is not just about intentional learning experiences. There is much to learn through play, unstructured play. Increasingly, research shows that play enhances our children’s brain development. New neural pathways are formed when children play. These lay important foundations for problem solving, creativity and emotional regulation. There are important lessons from play that every child deserves. From playing five stones and zero-point, my generation honed our hand-eye, leg-eye coordination and learnt how to focus and persevere. From falling from a swing, we learnt about resilience. It is not how we fall, but how we get up and swing faster and higher. From the pain of blisters that came from playing football barefoot, we learnt about consequences and how to keep ourselves safe in the future.

Yet in our effort to want to keep our children safe, we sometimes deprive them of these lessons. While we ironically overprotect, in the real world; we may have under-protected, in the virtual world, allowing our children to indulge in their devices. After MOH’s advice on screen time for young children, parents are anxious. Parents say it is not easy to pull back on those devices. My own child will also argue with me that digital play is also a form of play. While that is true, the constant sensory stimulation releases dopamine. Not a bad thing in controlled quantities, but when done in excess, its effects are no different from gambling and substance abuse.

So, what can we do? We can do more to support our families to dial back on screen use. Not sudden, total withdrawal, but progressive changes. For a start, one simple change is to devote more time and energy to interacting with our children face-to-face and listening to them. Rebalance away from tuition centres, away from devices and cater more time for play.

Yes, it might mean sacrificing some peace and rest for us caregivers, but nothing beats spending quality family time together. And for those of us who need to work long hours to make ends meet, our communities and our schools can do more to engage our children meaningfully.

Finally, our children need to learn from and interact with other children; and from there, they can grow to become more communicative, more caring and more emotionally balanced. Growing up, I recall playing many variations of catching, at the playground, in the void decks, what the catcher can and cannot do. We made up our own rules and played by them. We learnt to convince, to negotiate, to compromise. We learnt how to share. We can be playing football and basketball on opposite ends of the same court. Through it all, more importantly, we found ourselves friends, best friends, friends that we can reliably call upon later in life. Friends that ChatGPT can never replace.

An article I read on World Suicide Prevention Day a couple of weeks ago, emphasised how important friends are in helping us navigate the stresses and storms of life. Through supporting one another, our children can learn about care, about compassion, about empathy. These are important in building a "we first" society. So, let us help families rebalance – more real time, less screen time; more play, less pressure; more emotional intelligence, not just artificial intelligence and give space for our children to learn how to learn, because when learning is fun, it becomes its own destination, rather than a means to live up to an adult's expectations.

As parents, our children look to us and what we emphasise and define as success influences them too. Is a child successful only because of straight "As" and a delightful co-curricular activities (CCA) record? As adults, how do we measure our own success? Is it only about our job titles and salaries? Is it about what vacations we take and what car we drive, if we drive?

Comparison is the thief of joy and in this age of social media, it is easy to feel that we pale, in comparison, to others. But social media is not an accurate reflection of most people's lives. Many of us will curate and share only the best and the most positive aspects of our life, while filtering out the mundane or the natural realities of everyday.

So, I want to encourage Singaporeans with this. Let us define our own success, our own sense of meaning, of purpose and this is how we can pursue our own dreams and our passions. Perhaps, the "kiasu" spirit is ingrained in all of us. Perhaps, this sense of exceptionalism is what got us this far in the first place. But let us channel this competitiveness more positively, away from rigid definitions of success, towards self-improvement, not for the purpose of outdoing others, but to become better versions of ourselves.

Mr Speaker, amid the many challenges that Singapore faces, I chose to speak about our children and their childhoods. Let me cite a quote that sums this up quite nicely: "I would give wings to children, but I would leave it to them to learn how to fly by themselves".

I would like to leave this House with one final image. The world sometimes calls parents "tiger moms". It is my hope that we become better known as "mommy bears" instead. I use "moms" and "mommy" carefully because that is how these phrases are coined, but it includes all the fathers, myself included.

Why mommy bears? Mommy bears are nurturing and warm, and very cuddly too. Mommy bears raise their cubs to be independent, to be able to survive, to hunt and to be able to explore on their own. Mommy bears allow their cubs to stumble, because that is how they learn and become more resilient. But when danger comes, mommy bears will defend their cubs ferociously.

This is the mindset change we need, from "tiger" parents to "bear" parents or, if I may call, "Bear-rents". If we do this, then our next generation will not only be able to face the future but also shape it with confidence, resilience and heart. Mr Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, hon MPs, good afternoon. It is my great honour to speak here today and I am deeply aware of the weight of this responsibility.

As a member of the younger generation, I want to thank our parents and grandparents for their hard work and dedication. They have weathered economic fluctuations, regional instability and the trials of the pandemic. Through their relentless efforts and perseverance, they have given us a better life. Here, I would like to say “thank you”!

The responsibility of building and safeguarding Singapore has fallen upon our shoulders. We must learn from the good examples set by the previous generation, and prepare for the future, planning ahead for the next generation. The future is full of uncertainties: geopolitical situations, climate change, artificial intelligence and the impact of the digital world will all bring new challenges. Singapore is one of the best places in the world for children to grow up but we cannot become complacent because of this.

We must help our children build confidence and curiosity – learn to think and make judgements – whilst cultivating resilience and tenacity, so that they can face future storms with composure. This requires us as parents to change our mindset. Academic results are certainly important, but they cannot be the only goal. What is truly crucial is giving children a proper and meaningful childhood.

Children should have the freedom to explore and play, to learn creativity and resilience through trying and falling. Research also shows that free play promotes brain development, laying the foundation for problem-solving and emotional regulation. At the same time, we must pay attention to the influence of the digital world. Many parents worry about their children becoming addicted to screens. I myself am often "persuaded" by my children to treat online gaming as a form of play. But excessive use can easily lead to dependency. We should gradually reduce screen time, replacing it with more face-to-face interaction and high-quality companionship.

Children also need to interact with their peers, learning empathy and care through communication, collaboration, and sharing. These values cannot be replaced by textbooks and tuition classes, but they are key to building a “we first” society.

Parents have a profound influence on their children. We need to rethink the definition of "success". Success is not just about grades, positions or wealth, but whether one can find direction and meaning in life. We should guide our children to pursue growth, not merely materialistic achievements.

Finally, let me conclude with an analogy: society often calls parents with high expectations "tiger parents", but I hope that Singapore's parents can become known as "bear parents”. Bears are warm and caring, they protect their cubs, but they also let the little bears explore independently, learning to stand up on their own after falling. Only in this way can children become truly resilient.

Let us work together to cultivate the next generation's character of confidence, resilience and compassion, so that they can not only respond to the future, but also shape it.

(In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion. [Applause.]

Mr Speaker: Ms Denise Phua.

2.36 pm

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): I rise to support the Motion of Thanks for President Tharman's address. My topic today is moving our society from fear to hope. But first, let us acknowledge the fears of our time.

At work, many of us worry: will technology especially AI threaten our jobs? Will it displace more jobs than it creates? Will we be qualified for the new "good" jobs? What happens to those who cannot catch up – some of the elderly, the disabled and those who are less skilled?

As a small nation, our survival depends on global stability and open trade – the rule of law. But what now, as these foundations weaken? As we live longer, will our savings last? For households already stretched, how will they endure the next disruption?

At home, the questions get more personal. What if my child does not do well in the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE)? Who will care for my ageing parents? Will our children have the same, or better, opportunities? Parents of children with disabilities ask: who will care and provide for them when we are gone?

These fears are not weaknesses. They are signs that we care deeply for our future and the home we have built. They mean we are invested and not ready to quit.

We can let these fears turn us inwards, making us suspicious of change and leading to paralysis or blame, or we can choose a different path. We can choose, as spiritual thinker Henri Nouwen urged, to move from fear to hope.

We must not let the world set our agenda. We must decide as a people. What questions do we want to answer? What values will guide us? Our shared destiny surely must be built on our shared values.

A central part of this is AI. How do we turn collective anxiety into collective agency and how do we build the bridge from fear to hope? Sir, allow me to propose three steps we can take: one, ensure that AI serves humanity and not the other way around; two, update our social and financial safety nets for this new age; and three, supercharge a culture of lifelong learning.

First, to ensure AI serves humanity and not the other way around. The sword of AI is double-edged. There is no denying the breathtaking opportunities it presents. Yet, we must also confront the risks with equal honesty. Automation is already displacing routine-intense jobs. I know this because I am always looking for jobs for some of our disabled and elderly. AI is also hollowing our middle skills and creating barriers for those less digitally-literate.

Today, this exclusion is starkly visible in Singapore. We see it as Neighbourhood Police Posts are shuttered and replaced with digital kiosks. We see it as services in public and private sectors close their customer-facing counters, forcing transactions online, leaving the less digitally-literate to find their own way. I was recently told by a healthcare worker, a volunteer of mine, that medical follow-ups must now be booked exclusively through an app. For many, this is not convenience; it is a barrier.

In our economy, this fracture manifests in the rapid automation of routine jobs, leaving behind seniors and persons with disabilities who struggle to navigate a world increasingly alien to them. The Government can and must lead this mission with compassion and foresight.

Technological revolution is not new. It is a constant of human progress, in every generation. But every such revolution risks marginalising a segment of the population. But as a Government, we do not have to decide that it is just too bad for them. We can set our own agenda, based on our value of inclusive progress, to always put aside a buffer resource for Singaporeans who are in that transitionary generation.

We can intentionally: one, fund human-centric services, maintaining in-person assistance when it is needed – phone hotlines and even printed CDC vouchers, as long as there are citizens in our midst who cannot catch up. These measures are not regressive. They are a vital lifeline of inclusion, especially in essential services like healthcare, security, transport, legal and so forth. And two, we should mandate inclusive design, require that every public-sector AI system complies with the highest accessibility standards. I saw the Government Technology Agency (GovTech) doing that as there was an exhibition at the hall, in Parliament last year. We can adopt universal design at the start and not as an afterthought.

I have raised questions in this House on the ways Government agencies what measures they have for those who are not digitally-savvy. The responses have been inconsistent, practices more inconsistent. And recently, I found out that autonomous shuttles are designed without wheelchaired users in mind. Sir, we can do better and mandate inclusive design.

But closing this gap is not the duty of the Government alone. To businesses, I say, adopt inclusive design, universal design at the start. Proactively ensure your services are also accessible. Create solutions that blend technology with the human touch. For example, banks that still provide personal counter services for seniors should not be rare exceptions. They should be commended. These should be the industry standard until there is no need for it.

And here is a challenge. Can some businesses deliberately choose not to automate every routine job, but instead preserve some roles for older workers and persons with disabilities? These are ways by which they can continue to contribute meaningfully, earn a livelihood and even engage socially outside their homes.

L'Oréal, a renowned cosmetic powerhouse company, once operated a special packaging and assembly facility in Taiwan dedicated to employing people with disabilities. That primary mission was social, not purely commercial and industrial. It is to provide meaningful, stable and supportive employment for people with various physical and developmental disabilities. It was a counter-intuitive move for business, I know. But L'Oreal set its own agenda and did it their own way. That programme was later successfully merged into a larger facility to expand its impact and also promote greater inclusivity.

And to the community, I say this: volunteer your expertise, advocate for accessibility. People like Mr Peter Ng, an IT specialist in Kreta Ayer-Kim Seng, for instance, have for years, coached seniors like his mother and her neighbours on using smartphones and the common apps that they should know. That sustainable, community-driven help is the model that we should commend and need.

Therefore, the is not if AI will advance, but what kind of society we will become. So, we must intentionally choose inclusive progress. Let us ensure AI is a lifeline for all, and a landmine for none.

Second, on updating our safety net for this new age. Singapore has built one of the most admired social safety nets in the world, anchored on the Central Provident Fund (CPF), MediSave, housing subsidies, transfers, SkillsFuture and progressive social transfers. These have served us well in an economy where jobs were relatively stable, careers linear and disruption more gradual.

But technologies, like AI, change that equation. AI has not only automated tasks, it will reconfigure entire industries. The churn will be faster. This is an economy and age where work is fragmented, transitions frequent and inequality risks are sharper. A safety net in this new age must be more than a cushion. It must be portable, following workers across jobs and platforms; preventive, addressing health and skills before crisis strike; and adaptive, responding as automatically as possible to economic shocks.

The task before us is not to abandon the pillars of CPF, MediSave, SkillsFuture and all the good things, but to adapt them for an economy such as this. Two suggestions on how we can start.

One, on expanding protection. Let us protect those who are most vulnerable to economic shifts – our freelancers, our gig economy workers and those in non-traditional employment. Their contribution to the new economy must be matched with a commitment to their security. For the larger population, accelerate the move towards portable benefits, like healthcare and insurance. They are tied to the individual and not the employer, providing a foundation of security in a world of fluid work.

And second, enhance retirement adequacy. The CPF LIFE system, which I think is brilliant, provides a secure retirement for members with substantial savings. However, a segment of the population, particularly those with irregular employment histories, remains financially vulnerable in their old age. We should develop targeted measures to augment the CPF savings of individuals who are not on track to meet their retirement needs, not just those who qualify for Silver Support.

We should conduct a comprehensive review of the Silver Support scheme, too, to ensure its parameters align with the original objective of providing a safety net. This review must account for contemporary economic pressures, such as inflation and longer life expectancy, to guarantee that that the payouts remain sufficient.

And third, to install an affordability assurance body. Rising costs are on everybody's mind. Think of this affordability assurance body like the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) for essentials: monitoring daily cost of food, utilities, healthcare, transport and triggering automatic action when thresholds are crossed. Move from reacting after the fact to at least guarantee or ensuring affordability upfront.

Sir, by innovating more boldly, Singaporeans can be more assured that no matter the disruption the basics of life will remain within reach.

And lastly, on supercharging our culture of lifelong learning. SkillsFuture was a visionary beginning. But now in its 10th year, we must propel it beyond a Government programme into a lifelong habit embraced by every Singaporean. This vision resonates with the direction outlined by Minister Desmond Lee at MOE's Work Plan seminar recently, where the Minister spoke not only about AI in schools, but also about creating a lifelong learning ecosystem, fostering a broader definition of success and meeting the needs of learners who are different.

Visionary Chinese education thinker, Prof Zhu Yongxing argues that the school of the future will, in fact, evolve from what is the traditional classroom into a network of open, flexible student-centred learning centres, breaking down the barriers of time, space, age and institutional structures.

I will talk about that hopefully in a speech next year. That vision of the school for the future is important. But there are now, a few ways that we can do to reach the lifelong learning ecosystem that is fit-for-purpose for the future.

One, build a true skills-based economy. A broader definition of success means valuing skills and competence as much as, if not more than academic qualifications. We need to review the current playbook in this space. As long as academic qualifications or certificates remain the default currency for school entry and hiring, Singaporeans, parents will rationally contribute or continue to chase them; to chase these paper qualifications and the pressures will cascade down into high-stakes exams.

How many times do you have the experience that I have, when I ask a parent, "How old is your child?" And the parent says, "PSLE year." I have spoken long about through-train, 10-year through-train and whether PSLE is still relevant or not, many times in this house, but again, that is for another occasion.

Today, coming back to building a skills-based economy, we need to create a labour market where employers, including the public sector, recognises competencies and experience and pay for them. And that includes recognising the value of jobs, what they call blue-collar jobs, such as our plumbers, our technicians, our rail technicians and our MRT technicians, our repair technicians and other blue-collared workers.

Next, on supercharging a lifelong learning culture. We should personalise learning for every citizen. AI can now make personalised learning possible at scale, providing rich and timely feedback. This principle is not new. Special education has long used individualised education plans (IEPs) to tailor learning to each child. I have seen this approach work brilliantly also for non-special needs kids in home-based education systems. With AI, we can extend this to every Singaporean through a personalised learning plan that guides lifelong growth far beyond the classroom, into every stage of life.

And third, ensure equal access to lifelong learning. Today, students with special needs benefit from our strong special education schools thanks to our political and Government leaders. But when they graduate, many face a devastating learning cliff. We have the school-to-work programmes, but they are transitional steps that last only a few years – a good, sincere attempt by SG Enable will need more visioning and resources. Ahead of our citizens with special needs, lies 50 to 60 years of life too often without structured opportunities to keep growing and learning, not acceptable for an inclusive society. We must re-imagine and revamp the continuum of learning, ensuring that they, too, have access to personalised and future-ready skills through lifelong learning centres.

Sir, by building a skills-based economy, personalised learning with AI and ensuring that no one is left behind, we can supercharge a culture of lifelong learning for all.

Finally, in conclusion, Sir, I began my speech today by sharing some common fears of Singaporeans. These fears are real, but they are not our fate. I have suggested three ways we can turn these fears into hope, by ensuring that AI remains a servant to humanity, by updating our safety nets for a new age and by supercharging lifelong learning. But let us be clear, we are not passive bystanders in this era of change. We are its architects. The future does not simply happen to us. It is built by us. It is shaped by the agenda and the choices that we make as the people of Singapore. We have done this before and we will do it again, and together we will move from a society of fear to a nation of hope.

Mr Speaker: Acting Minister Faishal Ibrahim.

2.53 pm

The Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Mr Speaker, 60 years ago, as Singapore became independent, many in our community faced a difficult choice: to cross the causeway where many of our friends and relatives were; or to stay in Singapore, face economic uncertainties and a precarious future and forge a shared destiny with our Chinese and Indian comrades.

Our forefathers chose to stay. They sunk their roots here, threw in their lot with Singapore and made this island their home. Our Pioneers, led by Malay leaders like Yusof Ishak, Othman Wok and Ahmad Ibrahim, strived hard to meet the social, economic and religious needs of our community. They were also crucial members of our Pioneer leadership team, united in the common vision of a Singapore for all Singaporeans. The courage, dedication and tireless work of our Pioneers laid strong foundations for our community to make progress generation after generation.

Last month, I joined many Singaporeans in celebrating our nation's birthday, and like many in our community, my heart swelled with pride as Lieutenant Colonel Firdaus Ghazali led the National Day Parade; and as Lieutenant Colonel Muhammad Iskandar led the F-15 bomb burst salute. This is just one of the many examples of how members of the Malay/Muslim community have excelled in their respective fields and continue to contribute to the Singapore story. As we celebrate SG60, it is timely to reflect on our progress as a society and as a Malay/Muslim community.

Over the last 30 years, I had the privilege of journeying with our community, through my community work and across six Ministries. I have seen first-hand what we can achieve when Government and the community strive with common purpose. Indeed, our community has grown in strength, in confidence and in our ability to rally and contribute to Singapore's shared future.

The M³ agencies and Malay/Muslim organisations (MMOs), which include the Indian Muslim organisations (IMOs), have worked together with Government agencies to better serve the needs of the Malay/Muslim community. However, the world is undergoing significant shifts: technological advancements, trade wars, climate change and geopolitical volatility are just a few examples.

The Malay/Muslim community must similarly confront these uncertainties. I am encouraged by the renewed vigour from many community stakeholders, such as our MMOs, to find new and better ways to engage, collaborate and synergise efforts to take us forward. As the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs, I hope to build on the good work of my predecessors and fellow community leaders.

I will deepen collaborations among the M³ agencies, MMOs, IMOs and the Government, to chart a stronger future for our Malay/Muslim community while contributing to our multiracial and multi-religious society. Since taking office, I have been engaging widely and listening actively. I have engaged our youth groups, mosque committees, working professionals, grassroots volunteers, MMOs and IMOs, arts and cultural groups and many more. I have also engaged the community at various settings, including coffee shops, markets and food centres and formal dialogues. I am touched by their stories of resilience and contribution, feel their concerns and inspired by their hopes and aspirations for community and the nation.

To achieve these, we must tap on our collective energies and abilities as well as imagination. Every member of our community should have the chance to be the best version of themselves at different stages of their lives. Let us share in the joy of each other's success and rally around those who stumble so that they can find their feet again.

For instance, Mr Muhammad Feroz Haron is the founder of Action in Motion (AIM) Society, which recently celebrated its sixth anniversary last month. Sharing his past experiences, Feroz founded AIM with three other ex-offenders to provide social and emotional support for others on the drug rehabilitation journey. His wife, Madam Salmah Johari, also founded Women in Support to Develop Outstanding Men (WISDOM), a support group for spouses and partners of ex-offenders.

Or the story of Dr Norham Erlyani, who inspires us through her pursuit of excellence. She holds a PhD in stem cell and developmental biology from the National University of Singapore Graduate School and currently serves as Head of Strategy and Public Relations at Hilleman Laboratories. Beyond her professional portfolio, she contributes actively to the community as the lead for Life Sciences under the MENDAKI Professional Networks and as a member of the Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS) Council.

I am committed to supporting people like Mr Feroz and Dr Norham Erlyani, who have taken diverse paths at different stages of their lives, so that they can do better for themselves, and give back to those around them. Let me elaborate on three areas where my fellow PAP Malay/Muslim MPs and I will focus on in the years ahead.

One, to give our community a better life through improved social and economic outcomes.

Two, to uphold the confidence of our community to practise our faith in a multi-cultural society.

And three, to preserve and celebrate our rich Malay arts, culture and heritage.

Sir, let me first speak on improving the social and economic outcomes for our people. We will focus on four areas: first, nurture strong families; second, invest in our children and youths; third, equip our workers to seize growth opportunities; and fourth, support our seniors to age with dignity.

Families form the bedrock of our society. They create stable and loving environments for us to pass shared values from one generation to the next, and for our children to realise their potential. Strong marriages are the first step to flourishing families. Over the years, we have seen good progress from our investments to support strong marriages. The number of Muslim divorces in 2023 have fallen by 30% compared to 2019.

We will continue to do more in this area, led by incoming Minister of State Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim. For instance, through the Bersamamu programme, which supports newlywed Muslim couples with religious guidance on marriage and family life, and with practical skills, like financial planning, communication skills and conflict resolution.

With strong families as a foundation, we will invest more in the development of our children and youths.

Education is key to provide our children with a good start in life. As a community, we can do more to encourage the enrolment of our young into preschool, and to sustain their attendance. We must also better support the learning of our students in primary and secondary schools, including after school hours. For instance, under Project Jalan Kukoh, MENDAKI, Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS), the People’s Association Malay Activity Executive Committees Council (PA MESRA), 4PM, and other Government agencies reach out to youths in the Jalan Kukoh precinct. I thank our community partners, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) and the Ministry of Education (MOE) for your support in these areas.

Outside of school, we will equip our youths to deal with the challenges of the future. Beyond the academics, we will also support them with career guidance, personal development opportunities and exposure to new experiences.

For example, Ms Sherlita Almeyra serves as the President of MudaSG, a youth-led organisation that has organised volunteer opportunities in sectors, such as community building, education, environmental sustainability, and social outreach, encouraging youth to contribute to society while fostering a spirit of care, collaboration and service.

I recently announced the formation of a Malay/Muslim Youth Taskforce. This will bring together youth champions to advocate for the needs and aspirations of Malay/Muslim youth and co-create initiatives in support of the national SG Youth Plan. Minister of State Rahayu Mahzam and incoming Senior Parliamentary Secretary Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi will lead this effort.

I hope that these efforts will position our youths to seize new opportunities in our fast-evolving economic landscape. The workforce in the years to come will look very different from today and our workers must be prepared to ride the waves of growth in the future economy.

This will require a culture of lifelong learning, underpinned by the partnerships between the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), MENDAKI and other MMOs. Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamed and labour MP Dr Wan Rizal will helm this area to develop community platforms to complement national-level programmes to support our workers.

In particular, I hope that more of our workers can tap on opportunities in growth sectors like advanced manufacturing, technology and professional services like finance.

As we progress, we cannot forget our seniors, particularly those in the Pioneer and Merdeka generations. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong outlined Singapore’s plans to improve long-term care options through the Age Well Neighbourhoods for our seniors and their caregivers at the National Day Rally. This initiative builds upon national programmes like HealthierSG and Age Well SG. I similarly hope to mobilise our community, so that we can better meet the healthcare, social and emotional needs of our seniors. I look forward to the support by Members.

For instance, how can we tap on the experience of our seniors to benefit the community, as they transit into retirement? Or how can we better support caregivers through active ageing services and caregiving networks?

To this end, the Santunan Emas programme by Masjid Al-Muttaqin, in collaboration with Ma:een and Muhammadiyah Active Ageing Centre, is a commendable effort. The programme provides holistic support for our elderly – from spiritual guidance through lectures by former Mufti, Ustaz Dr Mohamed Fatris Bakaram, to physical and social activities led by volunteers from Muhammadiyah for their overall well-being.

Let us continue to explore new ways to collaborate with various partners in support of our seniors.

I have spoken about improved social and economic outcomes. Let me now turn to how we will support the community to practise our faith in our diverse society.

Our faith is central to our character as a Malay/Muslim community. It guides our values and how we engage one another, whether family members, neighbours or fellow citizens. Our faith also guides us to live harmoniously with others in a multicultural and multi-religious society. Since taking on this role, I have visited different mosques each week. These visits gave me the opportunity to meet congregants from all walks of life and speak with them on religious life in Singapore, among others.

Let me highlight three areas of feedback and what we are doing in these areas.

One, is the need for more prayer spaces, particularly in newer residential areas. I have announced further details about the new mosques in Tampines and Tengah, and we are exploring ways to bring forward the completion of these mosques. We are also exploring how interim prayer spaces can be provided while mosque upgrading and development works are underway.

Our mosques and prayer spaces are fully funded by the community. So, we must be prudent in designing them and maximise our existing spaces by conducting second sessions for Friday prayers.

Two, beyond physical spaces, we must groom the next generation of religious leaders. Our asatizah play a critical role in guiding our community and should be recognised and fairly compensated for their work, as Mr Sharael Taha mentioned earlier. As we navigate a more complex world, they must be keenly attuned to global changes while appreciating our local context. The new Singapore College of Islamic Studies (SCIS) represents a significant investment in this future by equipping our asatizah with robust Islamic knowledge and practical skills to serve the community, be it in the religious sector or in adjacent sectors like counselling and social work. I also agree with Mr Sharael Taha that SCIS’ partnership with the Singapore University of Social Sciences will be important in exposing our future asatizah to diverse academic experiences and develop them not just as capable religious teachers, but also compassionate community leaders who can help the community navigate contemporary social challenges.

Three, our religious institutions must develop new capabilities to guide the community in contemporary issues. Recent fatwas on cultivated meat and alternative proteins, and carrier screening for severe genetic diseases and antenatal testing have helped our community navigate new questions about food technology, environmental sustainability and medical sciences. These rulings exemplify how our Fatwa Committee and asatizah can provide guidance that is both religiously sound and practically relevant. We will continue to empower our asatizah to guide the community in these complex issues and in so doing, deepen trust in our religious institutions.

Importantly, the ability to maintain confidence in our religious life depends on the trust in our religious institutions and the partnerships with the broader network of Muslim organisations. We will strengthen these networks of trust and partnerships to address the religious needs of our community. Together, I am confident that we will engender a fulfilling life for our Singapore Muslims who actively contribute to their community and society.

I have spoken about improved social and economic outcomes, and about practising our faith in a multicultural society. Let me now speak on how we can celebrate our Malay arts, culture and heritage. This is an integral part of Singapore’s cultural diversity and national identity.

Pak Zubir Said's composition of our national anthem, "Majulah Singapura", is a prime example of how Malay artistic expression has shaped our national identity. Contemporary Malay artists like Madam Som Said are instrumental in championing Malay dance in Singapore, while writers like Djamal Tukimin have become cornerstones of Singapore’s Malay literary scene. We also have practitioners dedicated to preserving our living heritage and craft, such as Yaziz Hassan who is passing down the knowledge of crafting and repairing traditional Malay drums to future generations.

In my engagements, many in the community have told me that they hope we can hold fast to what has nourished our hearts and souls over generations, even as we pursue economic growth and prosperity. My team and I hope to galvanise the community to celebrate and develop our arts, culture, and heritage sector, showcase the vibrancy of our unique Singaporean Malay culture and preserve our cultural traditions for future generations.

The reopening of the Malay Heritage Centre in April next year represents a significant milestone in this effort. It will provide a new platform to celebrate the stories of the Malay community and recognise how their contributions have shaped Singapore's development and national identity. The refreshed centre will enhance representation of Malay ethnic sub-groups, showcasing the diversity that exists within our community, with increased focus on women's contributions to education, literature and the arts. The centre will also see newly commissioned works by both emerging and established Malay artists in support of contemporary cultural expression.

This is part of a wider national plan. We strive to develop Wisma Geylang Serai as Singapore’s first social, arts and cultural heritage hub where culture is not just preserved but also experienced. The National Heritage Board is also partnering with community and precinct stakeholders in Kampong Gelam to strengthen its distinctive cultural identity and heritage value.

Our culture should be celebrated and enjoyed by all. We will continue to support the People's Association Malay Activity Executive Committees Council (PA MESRA) and the Malay Activity Executive Committees (MAECs) in various events to preserve the Malay culture, whether through performances during festive seasons, or through cultural festivals and activities. Mr Speaker, allow me to continue my speech in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Sir, our Malay/Muslim community has made much progress over the last 60 years. This is borne out of the courage, dedication and resilience of our pioneers, such as Yusof Ishak, Othman Wok and Ahmad Ibrahim, to make this country home – a place where we belong. They worked alongside fellow Singaporeans to build a strong foundation for the nation and enabled us to progress as a community and society. I hope to build on the good work of our past leaders, together with our community.

Since taking office as the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs, I have engaged widely with various segments of our community, from youth groups, arts and heritage groups, mosque committees, professionals, grassroots volunteers, Malay/Muslim organisations and many more. I am deeply grateful for the feedback and feel inspired by their ideas to strengthen our bonds, uplift lives and realise our potential.

My fellow People's Action Party (PAP) Malay/Muslim MPs and I are committed to continue supporting the Malay/Muslim community. We will focus on three key areas in the years ahead.

One, we will improve social and economic outcomes by nurturing strong families and investing in our children and youth. We also want to equip our workers so that they are able to seize opportunities in emerging sectors, and support our elderly to age gracefully and with dignity.

Two, we will support the religious life of the Muslim community within the context of Singapore's plural society, and provide for evolving needs. This includes increasing prayer spaces, and ensuring strong religious guidance through asatizah development and the upcoming SCIS.

Three, we will preserve our Malay arts, culture, and heritage which have nourished our hearts and souls over generations. With the reopening of the Malay Heritage Centre next year, we will have more opportunities to showcase our unique Singaporean Malay culture and enrich Singapore's cultural and national identity.

Mr Speaker, my team and I have outlined a shared agenda and vision for our Malay/Muslim community, based on our broad engagements and consultations with the community. However, we will constantly refine it through continuous engagement with more members of our community. In tandem with rapid social and economic changes, we want to provide opportunities to every community member to be the best versions of themselves and thrive, regardless of their background, and also be able to contribute actively.

We will also need new ways of integrating partnership networks with Malay-Muslim organisations and other community groups to galvanise their efforts and strengths in addressing the three focus areas that I have just outlined.

As we hoist our sails to harness the winds of opportunity, I hope that we also anchor our work on three values – trust (“Amanah”), sincerity (“Ikhlas”) and gratitude (“Kesyukuran”) – which our forefathers and successive generations of leaders have embodied.

Sir, the President reminded us earlier in his Address that we must aspire to be a society that puts "we" before "me", where we look beyond our individual needs. We must consider how our actions and choices contribute to the well-being of the larger society. By looking out for each other, we can go far together.

Our goal for a “Stronger Future Together” is not a destination, but a continuous journey of growth, adaptation and mutual support. It is not just for the Malay/Muslim community but the whole of Singapore. Therefore, I call upon every member of our community, regardless of age, profession or background, to contribute to our shared success.

Our pioneers and the past generations played a pivotal role in writing the Singapore Story. They chose to build a multiracial and multicultural society regardless of race, language or religion. Now, it is our turn to expand the Singapore Story and write the next chapter that charts the journey and progress of the Malay community, in particular, and the wider society. It encompasses our efforts to celebrate strength in diversity, forging close ties between communities to strengthen our solidarity and work alongside fellow Singaporeans. This solidarity is key in helping Singapore navigate uncertainties ahead and build an endearing home for all.

Let us embark on this journey together, guided by lessons learnt and wisdom gained from past endeavours, as well as with the hopes and dreams of our community to contribute to the happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation. Thank you, and Mr Speaker, I support the Motion.

Mr Speaker: Ms Mariam Jaafar.

3.22 pm

Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): When we speak of social mobility or inequality, we often talk about wages, jobs, housing, even cars. But we talk less about how socioeconomic background also shapes health, education and opportunity – across a lifetime.

And the data is stark. In the domain of health, a 25-year-old Singaporean with below secondary education can expect to live almost six years less than a peer with higher education. Six years less time with their loved ones.

Those with primary education are up to three times more likely to have diabetes, hypertension and high cholesterol. Residents in rental flats are hospitalised and re-admitted more often, even after adjusting for their conditions. And preventive care – the very thing that could break the cycle – is patchier, with fewer screenings, fewer follow-ups, fewer regular doctors.

Behind these statistics are people. Like my Woodlands resident, Mr K, a lift technician and father of two who came to my Meet the People session to appeal some parking fines. His wife had walked out on the family. He works nights, so he brings his children along. They wait in the car in the unloading bay, hence the parking tickets, while he does his work. This happens a few times every night. His children lose sleep, lose focus in school and sometimes, they skip school. He himself suffers from depression but cannot afford treatment.

Or Ms S, living with chronic mental illness and hypertension. She wants to work, but her workplace makes no accommodations. Each day she cannot bring herself to go in to work, she slips further away from the stability she craves.

Or Mr Z, whose wife has diabetes. When the dialysis centre in Woodlands was closed for renovations and her dialysis treatments were transferred to Ghim Moh, their transport subsidy lapsed. Months of trying to re-apply failed. In despair, he asked me, "Should I just stop taking her and let her die?"

Mr Speaker, when poor income, poor health and poor education reinforce each other, the cycle of disadvantage is brutal. And breaking this cycle must be a most urgent duty. We have strong foundations. KidSTART supports parents and children from the earliest years. The Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Task force (UPLIFT) narrows achievement gaps, improves attendance and well-being. Grow Well SG and Healthier SG help families build healthier habits and access preventive care, Age Well SG keeps our seniors active and ComLink+ brings in family coaches and Progress packages.

Each is valuable. But support today is still too fragmented. Families face many schemes, many officers, many forms that strain their already strained mental bandwidth. There is a lot of coordination and referrals, fewer active interventions. Too much is left to chance – whether a child or senior shows up for vaccination, whether a family completes a form correctly.

What we need are not more and more piecemeal programmes, but joined-up longitudinal pathways that follow a family through an extended period of time – structured where necessary, empowering where possible, that provides support, while building personal agency. Pathways that ensure no child, no parent, no senior falls through the cracks.

I propose three pathways: an education pathway, a health pathway and a career pathway, all linked together with ComLink+.

First, the education pathway. We know early childhood education is one of the strongest levers of social mobility. Yet, today, about one in four children from ComLink+ families do not attend preschool regularly. That is too high.

It is time that we make preschool the default for ComLink+ families, unless they opt out. And the journey should not stop there. It must continue though primary and secondary school, not only after school and tuition, but also enrichment in arts, sports and coding, because talent is not the exclusive domain of the wealthy and must not be capped by income.

Integration between KidSTART, UPLIFT and ComLink+ must be seamless – no six-month gaps, no missed transitions. A child's progress should be tracked, with early interventions when they fall behind – whether in literacy, attendance or well-being. The goal is not just to graduate more students, but to graduate them resilient and ready to seize the opportunity.

Secondly, a health pathway. Here, too, we need integration. From KidSTART to Grow Well SG, to Healthier SG, to Age Well SG, a continuum of care, one longitudinal journey. Family coaches, or dedicated health coaches must go beyond health coordination and referrals. They must actively intervene. If a child misses a vaccination, reschedule it. If medication is not taken, find out why. If meals are not nutritious, connect the family to food support. Families "graduate" only when children are healthy, with acceptable body mass index (BMI) and vaccinations, adults are enrolled in Healthier SG and adhering to chronic disease plans and the family has demonstrated health literacy and food security.

And for working adults, let us pilot Health Secure Jobs – workplaces where chronic illnesses or caregiving duties do not mean job losses. Instead MOH and MOM partner with employers to keep workers employed in jobs, while managing conditions like diabetes or depression, because health must not mean unemployment.

Third, a career pathway. Employment remains the engine of mobility. The ComLink+ Employment Package is a step forward – with coaching, training, retention incentives and wraparound support. But we must aim higher.

Jobs should not be just any job. They must provide progression, skills and dignity and build confidence. Here we can learn from the US programme "Year Up" , which offers six months of intensive training, tuition free, in skills that today's employers need followed by six months of corporate internships – coupled with mentorship, coaching, professional development and the possibility of college credit for coursework, along with stipends and other support services and essential resources, such as, housing, food, transportation and childcare to remove any barriers to participants' success. Its graduates earn significantly more – 30% more – than similar peers who did not participate six years later. And while the program structure is very resource intensive, over a seven-year study period, every $1.00 spent on" Year Up" produced a $2.46 benefit to society. A good return-on-investment.

We could roll this our in Singapore, where a young person from a disadvantaged family who once felt locked out of opportunity, gains not only skills and networks, but also confidence, dignity and hope. I believe talent is Everywhere. Opportunity is sometimes not. But we can build this.

The three pathways: education, healthcare and career cannot stand alone. They must be linked and linked by ComLink+. If a child struggles in school, it should trigger a check on nutrition or sleep. If health appointments are missed, it should prompt a check on school or work attendance, because no one lives life in silos, and neither should our policies.

Housing is a good example. For individuals or families facing homelessness, unstable arrangements or constant conflict at home, or those who are returning from prison or institutionalization, providing stable housing by granting that rental flat or allowing that third HDB loan. It is not just about shelter. It is a health intervention. It is an education intervention. It is a social intervention. Policy must empower our offices to act holistically and not within narrow silos. If we can link the pathways effectively, we should end up achieving more by doing less. Without linking them, each silo can feel like it is pushing on a string – much effort, little outcomes – and gets pressured to invest even more in its own silo.

Underpinning all of this is our care workforce: family coaches, social workers, healthcare teams. They are the ones who journey alongside families on each pathway, not for weeks, but for years. Studies have shown how having that one mentoring figure, whom you have a genuine connection with, a genuine relationship, can make all the difference in changing the life of a low-income person. We must invest in their training, understand their workload and reward them fairly. We must select and empower them to be not just case workers, but life-changers.

Mr Speaker, I also want to address a point raised by the hon Member Mr Fadli Fawzi in his maiden speech yesterday, which he delivered in Malay. I listened quite carefully to it. He paints meritocracy as corrosive, an ideological belief to justify and explain away inequality and the lot of those left behind. I must disagree. Meritocracy in Singapore is not an ideology. It is a principle of fairness. The danger is not in practicing meritocracy but in abandoning it, because success would depend not on effort or talent, but on connections and privilege.

That is not a "we first" society. That is a “some first” society. Our meritocracy is not a perfect system. And that is why we are here, to refine it, to strengthen it, to make sure that meritocracy in Singapore remains fair and real, not just in principle but in practice.

The truth is meritocracy in Singapore has never stood still. We have broadened and deepened the definition of meritocracy precisely to address the risks Mr Fadli Fawzi raised. Let me elaborate on how this has played out in practice.

First, merit is no longer exclusively seen through your exam scores and the schools you go to. Today, we have multiple pathways – university, polytechnics, the Institute of Technical Education (ITE), SkillsFuture, we have subject-based banding. Success is not one-size-fits-all.

Second, we have moved from equal treatment to equitable support. Those who have less, get more help. I have talked about KidSTART, UPLIFT, Comlink+ earlier. Yes, we can push further, but all are designed to level the playing field.

Third, we now explicitly recognise unequal starting points. This has been mentioned by both our Prime Minister and our President. Our policies deliberately give more subsidies in housing, healthcare and education to lower-income families.

Fourth, we also now recognise that merit is not just about individual effort, but as something shaped by community, family and society. Many initiatives bring together Government, volunteers, employers to uplift families together. And among the most visible are in our Malay community, where under the auspices of M³@Towns, our "gotong royong" spirit shines through, whether it is in Kelas MateMatika (KMM), Mendaki Tuition Scheme (MTS) or youth mentoring. And lastly, we celebrate values and character, not just grades or how much money you make. At every Edusave awards, we give the Edusave Award for Achievement, Good Leadership and Service (EAGLES) award and the Edusave Character Award (ECHA) award. Resilience, service and contribution to society are part of how we define merit.

What I have just described cannot possibly be seen as an elitist meritocracy. Ours is a progressive and compassionate meritocracy, one which recognizes effort and ability, while also investing heavily in those with fewer advantages and we keep improving. Framing meritocracy as an ideology risks dismissing these hard-won efforts.

I do not discount that there are many families, including many in our Malay community who are really struggling. I see them at my Meet the People session. I shared some of their stories today. But there are many issues at play, that weigh families down regardless of effort or merit. And while we must keep improving our system, I humbly remember both Member Fadli Fawzi and I are, ourselves, beneficiaries of Singapore’s meritocracy. It is this system that enabled us, children from ordinary families, to study, to work and now to serve in this House.

So, there is no need to disparage or dismiss the system that has uplifted and continues to uplift so many. And certainly, there is no need to mischaracterise it to our community as promoting the belief that "those who succeed are entitled to their success because they have worked hard, while those who are left behind deserve to be left behind because they have not worked hard enough".

Firstly, I am sure that, like me, Member Fadli Fawzi eschews this belief. But secondly, words like this do not help families who are struggling. What helps them is when we, as leaders, acknowledge the gaps honestly and work together on solutions. This includes lingering experiences of prejudice and discrimination, perceived or otherwise. Our work to strengthen our multiculturalism is itself a work-in-progress and must continue to go on. A "we first" society is not built by tearing down the ladders of opportunity, it is built by strengthening them and adding rungs below, so no one is left behind.

Sir, when I entered this House five years ago, my primary motivation was clear: to keep social mobility alive. This is not an abstract goal to me. My own journey, I know that of many in this Chamber and many, many more outside this Chamber, and it is proof of what Singapore has made possible.

But 60 years after Independence, our society has changed. If we do nothing, cycles of disadvantage will harden. But if we act boldly, we can give dignity, stability and hope to every family, no matter their starting point, and benefit from the talents of our only natural resource – our people. So, we must be more ambitious and that is why I rise today, to urge us to look harder at the evidence, to think deeper about the gaps and to act with courage, using my vantage point as Chair for the Health GPC, a member of the Social and Family Development GPC and a past member of the Education GPC.

The Minister of Health who is also now the Coordinating Minister for Social Policy happens to be my anchor Minister in Sembawang group representation constituency (GRC) and I seek his understanding that no matter how good a job the Government is doing on this topic, I will always press us to do more, do better. Because social mobility is not just a policy goal. It is the promise of Singapore. Mr Speaker, it is an enormous honour to stand here in this House again. I look forward to working with Members of this House to heed the President’s call.

3.38 pm

Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 3.38 pm until 4.00 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.00 pm.

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair]

President's Speech

(Debate on Address of Thanks - second allotted day)

Debate resumed.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Senior Minister of State Ms Sim Ann.

4.00 pm

The Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs and Foreign Affairs (Ms Sim Ann): Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. I will speak on how our foreign policy is adapting to geopolitical shifts and the growing presence of foreign interference, and how Singapore can remain vigilant against it.

As noted by previous speakers, the global economic and strategic order is indeed shifting. As a small, open and trade-dependent country, Singapore is especially sensitised to these shifts. Let me briefly elaborate on some of the key geopolitical trends affecting us.

First, great power contestation between the US and China is intensifying. The Asia Pacific region has become a primary arena of their contestation which spans trade, security, ideology and technology. The South China Sea is an example of how tensions between major powers could have direct implications for peace and prosperity in our neighbourhood.

Second, geopolitical conflicts weigh heavily on the international system. Some wars continue unresolved and are difficult to end, while others have been rekindled in recent times. They have resulted in immense humanitarian suffering and generated strong emotional resonance in many countries, including ours. Such conflicts have also delayed or impaired decision-making at regional or international groupings, making cooperation more difficult.

Third, nationalism and protectionism are on the rise. Countries are taking a narrower and more transactional view of their national interests. Declining strategic trust between countries has also led to increased contestation. We are seeing the fragmentation of global trade and technology ecosystems, export controls on sensitive technologies and competing standards in areas, like AI. Consequently, multilateralism and rules-based international trade are under considerable strain.

These trends are keenly felt by Singapore, an open economy and global business hub, whose security and prosperity have been boosted in the post-war era by favourable conditions, such as an extended period of relative peace in Southeast Asia, a rules-based international order largely shaped by US leadership and China's success in reform and opening up. We now face greater risks, narrowed room for manoeuvre and sharpened trade-offs in our foreign policy decisions. In the face of these geopolitical shifts, it would be natural to wonder whether Singapore’s foreign policy should change significantly.

But in fact, Singaporeans can expect to see more continuity, rather than change, in our foreign policy; and this is because we have never taken for granted favourable global and regional conditions. We took pains to develop a diversified diplomatic strategy, just we have built a diversified economy. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) has invested as much effort and energy into advancing Singapore's contributions at multilateral fora and regional groupings, as we have in maintaining bilateral accounts with our partner countries, which together, constitute a broad geographical spread.

We have also remained consistent in being a trusted friend and honest broker to our partners, adding value wherever we can, but also accepting the limitations of being a small country. While there will be some adjustments to our diplomacy, these will not be abrupt shifts. Let me elaborate.

Mr Deputy Speaker, we are doubling down on existing international partnerships and networks. At the core of this effort is ensuring that our relationships with our closest neighbours – Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei – remain strong, wide-ranging and forward-looking. We have embarked on long-term projects to enhance connectivity and strengthen economic and people-to-people ties, such as the Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone (SEZ) and the Rapid Transit System (RTS) Link. We will also expand our partnership into emerging areas like renewable energy and human capital development.

ASEAN remains a cornerstone of our foreign policy. Deeper economic integration within ASEAN remains vital to unlocking the vast potential of our region. We will work towards this by upgrading and fully implementing our trade agreements, deepening cross-border digital frameworks, developing the ASEAN Power Grid and advancing green economy standards.

We will also expand ASEAN's network of partnerships, ensure key international players have a stake in our region's success and maintain an open, inclusive and ASEAN-centred regional architecture. Singapore's upcoming chairmanship of ASEAN in 2027, which coincides with ASEAN's 60th anniversary, will be an important opportunity for us to help amplify ASEAN's voice, effectiveness and relevance globally.

We have built strong relations with major powers over the years and will continue to do so. The US is our top trading partner in services and our largest foreign investor. We are also the US' only Major Security Cooperation Partner.

China is our top trading partner in goods and we are China's largest foreign investor. Our bilateral interactions with China are multi-tiered, led by the Joint Council for Bilateral Coorperation at the Deputy Prime Minister level, and comprising three government-to-government projects and eight province-level economic councils. We see much potential to advance mutually beneficial bilateral cooperation between Singapore and the US and between Singapore and China, in multiple areas.

However, the space for us to do more together would narrow if US-China contestation were to escalate. We must remain clear-eyed and have the resolve to make decisions that are in Singapore's long-term national interest.

We have also been deepening strategic relationships with other partners, such as Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), India, the European Union (EU), Australia and New Zealand. We have strong economic and security cooperation with Japan and the ROK, as well as a like-minded approach towards free trade. I look forward to the upgrading of our relations with the ROK to a Strategic Partnership next month.

With India, we upgraded relations to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership and are working to expand collaboration in forward-looking areas, such as digitalisation, connectivity, advanced manufacturing, fintech and space.

With the EU, our Free Trade Agreement and latest Digital Trade Agreement have given Singapore businesses preferential access to one of the world's largest markets, while our cooperation in sustainability and green transition opens up new areas of growth.

As we embark on the next round of our Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Australia, we are exploring initiatives with a regional focus, as well as collaborations in frontier areas, like critical technologies and space. With New Zealand, we are upgrading our Enhanced Partnership to a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with significant initiatives across the defence, trade and economic, and supply chain and connectivity pillars.

By anchoring trusted partnerships across different regions, we will reduce our exposure to volatility, such as supply chain disruptions, and strengthen our national resilience in key domains, such as defence, energy and technology, and continue to serve as a "safe deposit box", not just for capital but also technology and innovation, and be a trusted and secure node in the global network, where ideas, data and partnerships are protected, nurtured and scaled.

Singapore has also been building new partnerships and networks with countries in emerging regions of growth, such as Africa, Central Asia, the Middle East and South America, to avail our companies of new opportunities and partnership, and nurture coalitions among the like-minded to pursue shared objectives. We are planning to open new diplomatic missions in Africa and Latin America in the coming years.

In addition, through our Development Partnerships Directorate, MFA will enhance the Singapore Cooperation Programme to share Singapore's experience and best practices in areas where we have relevant strengths. This is part of our diplomatic toolkit to deepen relationships with partners. And when humanitarian crises strike, we will contribute where we can and seek to deliver practical assistance to alleviate the immense civilian suffering and displacement. We have done so when a magnitude 7.7 earthquake struck central Myanmar in March 2025 and are providing ongoing aid to the civilians in Gaza, something that we discussed in this House yesterday.

The rules-based international order may be under strain, but many countries still believe that there is more to be gained from cooperation than contestation and that like-minded partners can continue to cooperate on initiatives like digital economy agreements, green economy partnerships and global governance initiatives, albeit on a smaller scale, and we are among them.

This is why we will do our utmost to support multi-lateral institutions, enhance international law, contribute to global governance discussions and promote peaceful dispute resolution. We contribute actively to the development of global norms, by leading groupings like the Forum of Small States and the Global Governance Group, to discuss issues affecting small states and to champion practical cooperation on issues, such as respect for international law, climate change adaptation and digital transformation.

Singapore's chairmanship of the Open-Ended Working Group on Cybersecurity at the United Nations (UN), from 2021 to 2025, led to the establishment of a UN Global Mechanism on Cybersecurity. The Agreement on Marine Biodiversity in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction agreement, successfully concluded under the leadership of Ambassador Rena Lee as President of the Intergovernmental Conference, has just crossed the threshold of 60 state ratifications and will soon enter into force.

Singapore has also made contributions to the world Intellectual Property Office (WIPO) Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge, and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, particularly, the development of carbon markets.

Singapore will also continue taking up leadership roles in international bodies where we have significant expertise. For example, at the International Civil Aviation Organization, the International Maritime Organization, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs and WIPO, as mentioned earlier.

To this end, the Singapore Government has nominated Ambassador for International Law Rena Lee as a candidate for Judge on the International Court of Justice; and Mr Daren Tang for re-election as the Director-General of WIPO, with both elections taking place in 2026.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I turn now to foreign interference and hybrid threats, an increasingly prominent feature in this contested global landscape. To be sure, countries have long interfered in other countries' domestic politics, overtly or covertly, to advance their own interests. This is not new.

What is new is the landscape in which foreign actors conduct these operations. The ubiquitous digital environment and development of advanced digital tools have supercharged their ability to mount hostile information campaigns (HICs) to advance their interests. By exploiting the internet, digital and social media, foreign actors can mount HICs at scale, speed and precision.

Colleagues may have heard of the "sprinter" network, a complex web of fake accounts that spread disinformation on the war in Ukraine, manipulated public opinion and amplified politically-charged content. There is even disinformation-for-hire. In 2023, the Guardian uncovered a team of contractors that conduct disinformation operations for private companies, intelligence agencies and political campaigns.

With a diverse population that is highly digitally connected, Singapore is an attractive and vulnerable target. Last July, MHA had to issue Account Restriction Directions under the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act (or FICA) to block a network of social media accounts alleging that Singapore was in the pocket of a foreign actor, and that the foreign actor was behind the selection of Singapore's fourth generation leader. The network could have been used to mount other HICs against Singapore.

In October 2024, the Government blocked 10 websites set up by foreign actors masquerading as Singapore websites, including by using AI to generate content with local features. At the same time, traditional methods of interference continue apace, through local and influential proxies.

In 2024, the US arrested and charged a former CIA analyst for allegedly acting as an agent for a foreign country, while an Australian court convicted a businessman for secretly attempting to improperly influence an Australian federal minister through donations, in order to advance the aims of a foreign power.

Singapore is not immune to these examples of interference.

MHA has therefore taken preventive measures, one of which was to define persons who are directly involved in Singapore’s political processes, including Members of Parliament, and designating several other individuals, as Politically Significant Persons under FICA.

Transparency requirements and reporting are imposed on these individuals. Foreign interference tactics will evolve and grow in sophistication. They touch on our everyday lives – through what we see, hear and read in an increasingly permeable infospace. Our defences must therefore grow stronger too. To this end, MHA plans to amend FICA to update and strengthen our levers to address foreign interference threats.

Mr Deputy Speaker, foreign interference aims to weaken the targeted country, for instance by sowing division and internal strife. It could also aim to influence the targeted country’s policies, including its foreign policy.

Vigilance against foreign interference is therefore a shared concern of Governments and foreign policy circles throughout the world. But this does not mean that we discourage the public from learning about and discussing foreign policy. On the contrary, we would like Singaporeans to continue being interested in and knowledgeable about global affairs, because it affects our security and prosperity.

MFA is stepping up engagement efforts with domestic audiences, including students, youths and businesses, through closed-door dialogue sessions and workshops to help Singaporeans better understand Singapore’s operating context and foreign policy considerations.

Even as we consume and exchange views on foreign policy, let us remain alert to the possibility of external attempts to influence our foreign policy by shaping our people’s perception of, and support for it. Through manipulating public sentiments, including through local opinion leaders, in addition to spreading misinformation and fake news.

We encourage Singaporeans to be discerning about the news and messages we are constantly receiving, including on social media, from a wide variety of sources. Always question what you see, hear or read – ask where the information came from; is it true and what is the intent?

I would like to share a few scenarios where it would be particularly useful for Singaporeans to exercise more vigilance and remind others to do so too.

First, where discussions grow emotional. Inflamed sentiments can hamper judgement and create rifts between groups of Singaporeans that are hard to repair, especially if race and religion are involved. Let us maintain calm and mutual respect when discussing current affairs, including global developments.

Second, where discussions centre around which countries Singapore should be closer to, or which countries’ lead Singapore should be following. Such chatter, though not uncommon, does not reflect how Singapore conducts foreign policy. Those who find themselves in such conversations could gently remind their friends and associates that Singapore bases our foreign policy on our national interests.

Third, where leaders of local institutions and groupings or those with a following, find themselves commenting publicly on international developments. In such instances, it would be useful to consider the content carefully beforehand, and check if it can be construed to mean anything other than the view of a Singaporean who is well-versed in our national interests.

Mr Deputy Speaker, over the past weekend, I spoke to a group of mostly young people who attended a workshop that unpacks how foreign actors might seek to interfere in another nation’s policies against the nation’s interests and I was heartened that they were so keen to know more about Singapore’s approach to foreign policy And supportive of the need to safeguard Singapore’s autonomy and agency in a complex world. Through more of such engagements, I hope that youths and community leaders can spread the word in their own circles.

Mr Deputy Speaker, foreign policy starts at home; we have repeated this many times in Parliament because it is not an abstract slogan, but a vital shield. Singapore’s relevance to the world depends on our ability to create value. We can be reliable and trusted by other countries only if we remain principled and consistent. We can only achieve this if we speak with one united voice and this stems from domestic stability as well as public trust in the Government. If our social fabric frays, our international credibility will weaken. Malignant actors may seek to exploit our divisions for their own interests.

Support for our foreign policy does not mean unconditional agreement with all decisions, but a shared commitment among Singaporeans to safeguarding Singapore’s sovereignty and long-term national interests. National unity and domestic support allow our leaders to stand firm under external pressure, to say no when it matters most and to negotiate confidently on behalf of all Singaporeans to protect and advance our interests.

The Government will continue to do its part through legislation, broadening education and regular engagements with different segments of society to raise awareness and understanding of our foreign policy considerations and Singapore’s global contributions.

But more crucially, we must, as a nation and as a people, be alive to attempts by foreign actors to interfere in our politics, policies and way of life. Legislative levers can only do so much, and they are often brought into play only ex-post. The ultimate line of defence against foreign interference is an aware and discerning people. Mr Deputy Speaker, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Deputy Speaker, the international order is being weakened day-by-day, the world is also not very peaceful. Under such circumstances, we need to guard against foreign interference and hybrid threats. MHA plans to amend FICA to strengthen our levers to address foreign interference threats.

There are many objectives for conducting foreign interference. Foreign interference aims to weaken the targeted country, for instance by sowing division and internal strife. It could also aim to influence the targeted country’s policies, including its foreign policy. Vigilance against foreign interference is therefore a shared concern of governments and foreign policy circles throughout the world.

But this does not mean that we discourage Singaporeans from learning about international developments and discussing foreign policy. On the contrary, we would like Singaporeans to continue being interested in and knowledgeable about global affairs, because it affects our security and prosperity. Therefore, MFA is stepping up engagement efforts with Singaporeans, including students, youths and businesses, to help them better understand Singapore’s operating context and foreign policy considerations.

Even as Singaporeans consume and exchange views on foreign policy, we need to remain alert to the possibility of external attempts to influence our people’s understanding of international developments and change their perception of, and support for Singapore’s foreign policy. This could be done through manipulating public sentiments, including through local opinion leaders, as well as spreading misinformation and fake news. We encourage Singaporeans to be discerning about the news and messages we are constantly receiving, including on social media, from a wide variety of sources.

There are a few scenarios where it would be particularly useful for Singaporeans to exercise more vigilance and remind others around them to do so too.

First, where discussions grow emotional, inflamed sentiments can hamper judgement and create rifts between groups of Singaporeans that are hard to repair, especially when sensitive topics such as race and religion are involved. Let us maintain calm and mutual respect when discussing current affairs, including global developments.

Second, where discussions centre around which countries Singapore should be closer to, or which countries’ lead Singapore should follow. Such chatter, though not uncommon, does not reflect how Singapore conducts foreign policy. Those who find themselves in such conversations could gently remind the speakers that Singapore bases our foreign policy on our national interests.

Third, where leaders of local social and business institutions comment publicly on international developments. In such instances, it would be useful to consider the content carefully beforehand and check if it can be construed to mean anything other than the views of a Singaporean well-versed in Singapore’s national interests.

Mr Deputy Speaker, “foreign policy starts at home” is not an abstract slogan but represents a vital shield for Singapore. Singapore can be reliable and trusted by other countries only if we remain principled and consistent. We can only achieve this if we speak with one united voice. This stems from domestic stability as well as public trust in the Government. If our social fabric frays, our international credibility will weaken. Malignant actors may seek to exploit our divisions for their own interests.

Support for our foreign policy does not mean unconditional agreement with all foreign policy decisions, but a shared commitment to safeguard Singapore’s sovereignty and long-term national interests. National unity and domestic support allow our leaders to to stand firm under external pressure, to say no when it matters most, and to negotiate confidently on behalf of all Singaporeans to protect and advance our interests.

(In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, we are facing uncertain times, but Singapore has never been fatalistic. We have agency.

We have succeeded by staying united at home, relevant abroad and nimble in adapting to change. I believe that with the trust and support of our people, we can continue to secure a better global future for Singapore and Singaporeans. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Motion. [Applause.]

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Fadli Fawzi, you have a clarification of a speech given by a Member in this debate, do you?

4.27 pm

Mr Fadli Fawzi (Aljunied): Yes, Sir.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Which Member?

Mr Fadli Fawzi: On the hon Member Mariam Jaafar's speech.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Proceed.

Mr Fadli Fawzi: Mr Speaker, I believe that the hon Member has mischaracterised what I said in my speech. I did not say to abandon meritocracy. What I was saying was that meritocracy, when it is taken to the extreme, it discourages our solidarity with the vulnerable.

And I believe even in her speech, she gave a lot of examples of the people who are falling through the cracks of the system. And I think, ultimately, these are the people who both are advocating for.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Mariam Jaafar, would you like to respond to that?

Ms Mariam Jaafar: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I think the Member now says that his point was if meritocracy is taken to the extreme. But that is precisely the problem of his argument. In Singapore, we do not take meritocracy to the extreme. We adapt it, we make it work and we are practical in our application of meritocracy.

As I said in my speech, I do not discount that there are people who are really struggling. I meet them every day and I try my best to help them every day. But you cannot blame that on meritocracy.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Fadli Fawzi, do you have a clarification of that? Proceed. Mr Fadli? Proceed, please.

Mr Fadli Fawzi: I have no further clarifications.

Debate resumed.

4.30 pm

The Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (Mr Ong Ye Kung): I will try my best to keep it within 40 minutes.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. At each Opening of Parliament after a General Election (GE), it is customary for the PAP Government to reflect on our continuing political journey, what the people have told us with their votes during the GE. We then take stock of where we are, and what we need to do from here. This is what I will do today.

GE2025 was held against a global backdrop of war and uncertainty. It was also the first GE since the leadership transition. The stakes were therefore very high, as the outcome would shape how Singapore responds to the challenges ahead and would set the tone for our politics over the next five years.

It was a hard-fought election. In the end, Singaporeans made a decisive choice. Singaporeans gave the PAP a clear mandate to govern. We held our ground and increased our vote share from 2020. At the same time, the WP consolidated their ground in the constituencies they won in 2020 and increased their representation in Parliament by gaining two Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP) seats.

We are witnessing first-hand this outcome reflected in the Chamber today. The PAP, with a decisive majority, and in a position to act fast and adapt to changes in our environment, for the benefit of Singaporeans. And at the same time, the WP is now the only opposition party in Parliament, with a sizeable presence to provide a check on the ruling party.

This is the outcome Singaporeans chose. Voters have clear expectations of the role they want each party to play: the PAP, as the Government they want; and the WP, as the opposition they want. Each party now has the important task of fulfilling the roles the electorate expects of us.

How we perform our respective roles will influence our nation's political development. This is just as critical as our economic or social development. Because having the right politics that preserves our values, and maintains trust in the system of governance, is essential. It helps keep our social order intact and allows individuals and communities to flourish. Without the right politics, our society will be broken, and no amount of economic growth or Government programmes will be able to put things right.

So, what is right for Singapore? And how, should we, as elected representatives, do right by Singapore and Singaporeans? As we reflect on GE2025, these are my key takeaways and there are four.

First, GE2025 showed that Singaporeans value a stable and effective Government that will safeguard our well-being. The uncertain global and economic environment was undoubtedly on Singaporeans' minds when we went to the polls. Voters therefore leaned towards stability, choosing a government with a proven track record of steering the country through crises. We did so after "September 11", the Global Financial Crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Given the global circumstances, I believe Singaporeans also want a government that not just takes care of domestic concerns, but also defends Singapore's interests on the global stage, ensuring that Singapore stands tall among the community of nations.

We, on this side of the House, therefore cannot be complacent. We will continue to step up our efforts to engage Singaporeans, understand the people's concerns and address them. We will uphold the PAP's ethos, always think and plan long-term, to serve the current and future generations of Singaporeans.

The second lesson is that our political system is still evolving. The GE2025 results show that Singaporeans want the PAP to remain in Government and to act decisively for Singapore. At the same time, the people also want an opposition in Parliament, as an alternative voice, and to provide a check on the Government.

Let me share a story. Not long after GE, I went to a coffeeshop, queuing up for "tze char". After I ordered, I chatted with fellow patrons, a middle-aged couple. They turned out to be my residents. They said they live in Sembawang. And we had a good chat. They were very friendly to me. They said opposite their house, Bukit Canberra, there were a wonderful swimming pool, a polyclinic and a hawker centre. And finally, when they got their food, they were leaving, they said, "Minister, I want to tell you. I did not vote for you because we have to give the opposition a chance". After all that friendly talk.

But this is the reality the PAP is facing. We may work hard, we deliver for residents, who may even say they like us. Yet, they vote for the opposition, while expecting that the PAP will still return to government.

Voters like this couple did not form the majority in Sembawang during GE2025. If their numbers had been bigger, I might not be standing here today, neither will Ms Mariam Jaafar.

The PAP understands and accepts our voters' desires for an opposition. That is why after GE2020, then-Prime Minister Lee formalised the position of the Leader of the Opposition. In GE2025, even before the campaign began, we said that the chances of an opposition wipeout were zero and we were right.

The election outcome suggests that Singaporeans are judiciously balancing between having PAP as government and an opposition presence as a check and balance. Calls for one-third of the seats to be held by the opposition did not sway voters. The WP, in fact, deliberately chose to contest fewer than one-third of the seats. I do not think this was solely for lack of suitable candidates. It was a considered, strategic decision, reading the mood of the electorate.

Collectively, Singaporeans decided to maintain the Parliamentary composition of the previous term. I infer that voters must have felt that it worked well for Singapore in the previous term of Government. After all, with a decisive majority, the PAP attended to important matters of the state and could guide Singapore through a devastating pandemic crisis. On issues such as cost of living, the opposition amplified ground concerns in Parliament. Each played the role the public expected.

Through GE2025, I believe voters are saying to us, "Make this composition work for Singapore once again".

Any future shift from this current composition will, no doubt, be carefully weighed by Singaporeans. Voters' judgement will depend on many factors, such as the quality of the candidates on both sides, the performance of the PAP as the ruling party in leading the country, our sensitivity and response to ground concerns, the performance of the WP as a responsible opposition voice, as they characterise themselves and the standards of honesty and integrity displayed by both parties.

This is a dynamic balance. It is not fixed in stone. It is quite possible other opposition parties besides the WP will come in the next time. They certainly are working hard to remain players. This is part of our political evolution.

The third lesson is that Singaporeans continue to be moderate and pragmatic in our political philosophy. Voters expect our politics and politicians to reflect that. Significantly, we did not see the surge in populism that has occurred in many countries. To be clear, every politician hopes to be popular. But to be a populist and practise populism, that is entirely a different thing.

Populists tend to employ an "us versus them" framing, which pits one group against another. They gain support by presenting themselves as champions of "the people", standing up fighting against elites, the institutions, or outsiders.

Further, populists offer simplistic solutions to complex problems and appeal mostly to emotions. Upon closer scrutiny, people will realise these simplistic solutions do not work. But when people are disillusioned and they are disgruntled, they hope for a silver bullet and they may give these simplistic solutions a chance.

Across the world, we have seen the rise of populism. It can be on the extreme left; it can be on the extreme right. For example, left-wing populism has a long history in Argentina – heavy taxes on the rich and on businesses to fund social spending, and a fight for labour rights. There is nothing inherently wrong with those positions and those policies. But when pushed to the extreme, businesses in Argentina prefer to go elsewhere. Jobs are destroyed, confidence evaporates, the currency collapses, and the economy goes into a tailspin. In the end, the workers and the ordinary people are the ones who suffer. This has happened to Argentina many times over the decades, but the populist movement persists in the country.

More common now is right-wing, far-right populism, often attributed to higher levels of immigration. We see it in the US, in Europe, in United Kingdom (UK), even in Australia and Japan. When the population starts to feel uncomfortable with the size of the inflow of immigrants, far-right politicians seize the opportunity to stoke nativist and anti-immigrant sentiments.

Populism takes societies on the road to ruin, creating irreconcilable rifts between communities, and fuelling xenophobia and racism. With no consideration for the long-term consequences or broader impact on society, eventually, either their fiscal system goes broke, or the society breaks apart.

Let us not think Singapore is immune to populism. We have witnessed populism in this Chamber too. This is for the benefit of new Members. Soon after GE2020, there were allegations by the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) that our Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with India, the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA), allowed professionals from India "a free hand" to come work in Singapore, and that was the cause of the employment challenges faced by Singaporean professionals.

It was a seductive and simplistic argument, which took on an ugly racial tone. CECA-themed websites sprouted, filled with disturbing xenophobic views. Minister Shanmugam called out the behaviour in Parliament. I was a former trade negotiator. I knew that the allegations were false, and I volunteered to deliver a Ministerial Statement on how FTA works, to debate the PSP and to clear the air. Then Minister Tan See Leng explained what the Government was doing to address the challenges faced by Singaporean professionals, which were not caused by the FTAs.

More constructive engagement helps build up our defences against populism. But the best defence against populism is for the people to reject it. To our great relief, that was what happened during GE2025. No party or candidate won any seat by proposing unsustainable social welfare programmes, tearing down institutions, or by stoking anti-foreigner sentiments. Instead, our better angels prevailed.

But we must understand this: populism does not appear out of nowhere or out of thin air. It arises from genuine, understandable concerns among the people, over the inequality they see in society, or excessive competition for jobs and space from foreigners.

Hence, the seeds of populism exist in every society. The question is whether these seeds are allowed to take root and grow. Anyone who peddles soft, partial truths, easy but incomplete solutions, waters these seeds; anyone who refuses the hard cognitive work of formulating rational policies provides fertile ground for the seeds.

The PAP government's job is to be keenly aware of what Singaporeans may be concerned about, address these concerns early, openly, and sensibly, and not let them fester and turn into something ugly that feeds populism. We did that hard work during the last term of government and we will continue to do so.

I should also add that although we kept populism at bay during GE2025, we came dangerously close when race and religion got mixed with politics. The Prime Minister himself had to call this out in the middle of the campaign. If things had played out differently, there would have been dire and lasting implications for the unity, harmony and very fabric of Singaporean society. We will have more to say about this later in this debate.

The final lesson from this GE is that Singaporeans are holding political parties to higher standards. This includes demanding more substantive information and arguments during an election.

Digital media is here to stay. It has led to a torrent of memes and attention-grabbing short videos popping up online, especially during the campaign. Many offer nothing more than a moment of entertainment or an emotional outlet. Some amount of such froth and frivolity is unavoidable during election season. But I do not think that the average voter has therefore become frivolous as a result.

On the contrary, Singaporeans are becoming more discerning, demanding quality information on policies put forth by various parties. The fact that Singaporeans take their duty as voters seriously was particularly apparent during GE2025, when voters attended rallies, if they missed these, they watched them online, some watched a second time Many turned to long-form podcasts, invested time to listen to candidates’ motivations and opinions; they left thoughtful comments and suggestions for candidates to think about.

Voters showed us that they are not easily persuaded by slogans or catchy phrases alone. They carefully weighed in-depth opinions and substantive explanations of policy proposals; while populist and simplistic proposals were treated with suspicion.

This willingness to take the time and trouble over political issues that we saw emerge during GE2025 may well be the defining characteristic of the Singaporean voter, but we cannot take it for granted.

Shortly after the hustings, the Leader of the Opposition appeared on a podcast with Keluar Sekejap in Malaysia and said that the PAP avoided engaging on difficult issues during the campaign.

I have a different view from Mr Pritam Singh. In fact, I think there was substantive discourse during the GE2025 campaign. When the issue of Goods and Services Tax (GST) came up again during the GE, the Prime Minister repeated the reasons for the increase. Ministers spoke at rallies and went on podcasts to further explain our policy positions.

The fact that the subject of GST did not catch fire during the campaign does not mean there was no discourse. It means that the PAP’s explanations went at least some way to soothe people’s natural unhappiness over a tax increase. Hence, more importantly, political discourse should not just happen during election campaigns. A hallmark of good governance is sustaining it throughout the term. And we have been engaging Singaporeans in this House, in and outside this House, on issues such as housing, cost of living and immigration. The WP themselves participated actively when we have debates in this Chamber.

As politics in Singapore mature, this is what Singaporeans expect. They want to hear different perspectives, and see a contest of good ideas, so that the best ones can be used to take Singapore forward. This is a much more meaningful discourse.

This is why alternative visions and pathways matter. The PAP has its set of governing principles and policies to take Singapore forward. Opposition parties can play an important role by setting out their long-term ideas, presenting clear alternative visions for governance, and outlining the pathways and policies to get there.

For alternatives to be meaningful, they must go beyond tweaking at the margins of Government proposals, or simply jumping on the bandwagon every time an issue goes viral. Singaporeans want to see clear, well-considered visions that allow them to weigh real choices about our nation’s future.

We see this dynamic institutionalised in other mature democracies. In the UK for example, the Tories were in favour of Brexit; while Labour was pro-EU. There was a referendum, Tories won. In Germany, the Christian Democratic Union is more conservative; the Social Democratic Party leans towards social spending; the Greens champion environmental sustainability. In the US, the Republicans traditionally favour low taxes and a small government; the Democrats, the opposite.

These distinct futures entail very different sets of policies. Such as how government taxes and spends, how it grows the economy and creates jobs, tackles inequality, brings about greater social mobility, or protects the environment. Different political parties ought to make clear these differences in their pitch to voters.

The WP has perhaps done this from time to time. For example, calling for zero growth in the number of foreign workers as opposed to a controlled inflow; or their preference for other forms of direct taxes instead of the broad-based GST; or spending more of the income from reserves on the current generation of Singaporeans, instead of an equal apportionment between current and future generations, which is the PAP’s position.

The Leader of Opposition had mentioned in a podcast I heard, describes Singapore as a "1.5 party system", with WP as the 0.5. I feel that if WP is positioning itself as the 0.5 in the 1.5 party system, I think it needs to present a principled, consistent and coherent approach to the main challenges facing Singapore.

In a maturing democracy, voters deserve and want more than positions that agree with the PAP’s policies in general but suggest "let’s do a bit more", or offer something that appears to be more generous, more compassionate, and yet requires fewer hard choices. This falls short of being a real alternative. A real alternative promises gains with accompanying trade-offs, so that voters can make informed decisions and not be lulled into comforting illusions.

The PAP, for example, we say we must continue to fund healthcare with an ageing population, and to afford that GST has got to go up. That is a real proposal.

In a mature democracy, these are the kinds of issues that should form the substance of political debate. It should be a design feature, not a bug. That way, a vote for the PAP is not just a vote for a government that is decisive and nimble, but also an endorsement of the PAP’s principles and tried and tested methods of governance. A vote for the opposition is not just a vote for checks and balances, but also the policies and directions that will follow from that vote.

I should further underscore that each vote is also an endorsement of the character and commitment of the candidates standing behind the party’s banner. This is how our democracies should work. And if voters vote wisely, this is how we can continue to strengthen trust, accountability and good governance in Singapore.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in the lead-up to and during the hustings, I appeared as a guest on several podcasts. On one of them, the host asked me, in all seriousness: "Why can’t the political parties just get along? Someone come with a good idea, you say 'That is a good idea, lets work on it together.' Why can't you do that?" My response to him was along the following lines, but today I am elaborating a little bit.

Humans are the only living things capable of living in large and complex societies, where different groups with diverse, sometimes diametrically opposed interests, aspirations and affiliations can co-exist peacefully. One might hope that such harmony be a perpetual state of affairs. But harmony is never guaranteed. In fact, in the earlier civilisations, humans formed tribes and kingdoms to compete against and kill one another. Tragically, this is still happening in some societies today.

Our ability to co-exist in complex societies rests primarily on good governance. In societies with the right preconditions, democracy plays a big part. Various groups find their representation in political parties which then contest elections. The winners secure a mandate to govern in line with the vision and plans that they campaigned on. Not everyone will be happy with the outcome, but in a mature democracy, the minority will accept what the majority have chosen. The majority may also make compromises so that the minority can better accept the outcomes. As for the parties that lost, they will bide their time, and hope to topple the winner in the next electoral cycle. This is how a democracy works. What would have been brutal wars and bloodshed amongst competing factions is now replaced by political debate and a democratic contest between political parties. Better jaw-jaw than war-war.

Contest, debate, compromises and political parties trying to outdo each other are therefore inherent to our society and system of governance. It was a serious response to a serious question on the podcast. My hosts made light of it, but I think they were disappointed, even worried. They may have good cause to be. We have seen, elsewhere, how political contestation has hardened into divisive politics often tied to identity and driven deep wedges between communities. Voters and politicians alike take increasingly polarised positions. Politics then turns into an all-out struggle. The result is entrenched division and lasting discord. But this need not be the inevitable outcome of political contest. The true test of a good system of governance lies in its ability to hold a diverse society together despite disagreements, thereby strengthening unity and cohesion.

To do this, society must get its politics right.

All of us in this Parliament have a role to play, by conducting ourselves in a manner worthy of the trust Singaporeans have placed in us. I have gone through my takeaways from GE2025 to remind us of what these roles are.

To my fellow Singaporeans, I say: continue to be discerning, demanding of information, insights and alternative visions and pathways for the nation, so that collectively, we can decide the kind of future we want, and who best to lead us there.

To my fellow MPs, I say: address the needs of our residents at the local level; discharge our roles as legislators in this Chamber; and most importantly, perform our duties with integrity and with honour.

As for the PAP, the ruling party, we will always strive to address issues that are of deep concern to Singaporeans. We commit ourselves to be a Government for all Singaporeans, including those who did not vote for us, like the couple I met at the tze char stall, including those who are too young to vote, including the future generations yet to be born. We must uphold the principles of governance that brought us here. We must recognise the trade-offs in every policy move and carefully balance the various considerations and then explain to the people our decision. Above all, we must always think long term for Singapore.

And as for the WP, I hope you are, as you have described yourself, a loyal and responsible opposition, deserving of your significant presence in Parliament. That means remaining loyal to Singapore, to our people and to the national values that have brought us peace, stability and progress over the last 60 years. As the sole Opposition party in Parliament, the WP must justify its standing and develop its own alternative vision, policies and pathways for Singapore. An alternative path and vision are the essence of democratic discourse, and also what a more discerning and informed populace expects to see. And there are some cardinal rules that all political parties must abide by, whether in or out of Parliament.

Integrity in politics is crucial, on both sides of the aisle. Singaporeans have come to expect high standards of honesty and accountability from the government and the governing party. These same standards must apply to opposition parties, particularly those which present themselves as a serious alternative. Whether it is the Prime Minister or the Leader of the Opposition, the same standards must be upheld, both by the persons themselves and by the public.

Unfortunately, from time to time, we will have members that commit acts that are unethical, even illegal. Human nature being what it is, no political party is immune to that. But when that happens, how we respond as a political party matters. We need to acknowledge the shortcomings, take decisive actions, take responsibility, reflect and do what is necessary to prevent future occurrences. We have an overriding duty to preserve the integrity of our institutions and of the political system as a whole.

The President also spoke about needing to prioritise our unity and resisting any politics that seeks to divide Singapore and Singaporeans. Regardless of which side of the House we sit on, we must never allow foreign actors to influence what is for Singaporeans to decide. We must not exploit foreign controversies for domestic political advantage, nor allow foreigners to exploit our domestic politics to drive a wedge in our society. We must protect our common space. Reject populism. Never pit one group against another, nor sacrifice the common good for narrow interests or short-term political gains. I hope everyone in this Chamber will agree with what I just outlined.

It is my sincere wish that both sides of this House will come together in this long-term endeavour to forge a strong system of governance for Singapore and all Singaporeans, regardless of race, language, religion, or political affiliation. Only then, can politics truly serve the greater good of our country. Only then, will we continue to draw strength from our diversity, as we always have so far. That is, and must remain, our unique Singapore advantage. That way, Singapore will be better governed than most. We will stand tall in the world. We will remain proud to be Singaporeans – who sing the same national anthem, recite the same pledge, and call this little red dot home. And we will know, deep in our hearts, that we are unbreakable as one people. [Applause.]

Mr Deputy Speaker: Leader of the Opposition, you have a clarification of the speech by the Minister? It is a clarification of the speech?

5.03 pm

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): I have three clarifications —

Mr Deputy Speaker: Please proceed.

Mr Pritam Singh: Clarifications for the hon Minister. I must say I never expected a report card of the PAP performance and GE2025, so I will respond as how the Minister delivered his speech in that order as far as I can.

The Minister made a point that at the conclusion of the elections, the PAP will work hard for those who did not vote for it as well. I second that position because immediately when the results were announced, when I thanked voters of Aljunied GRC, I made the same point to the voters in Aljunied GRC: you may not have voted the WP – and about 40% of them did not – my commitment to them, as was the commitment I made to them in 2020, was we would serve them equally.

Taking that as my preamble, the first point I would like to make is about a point I know the PAP harps on a lot, which is a demand for alternative policies, ideas and so forth. The Minister spoke about mature democracies, he used the example of political systems in the UK, in Germany, real choices.

We have to look at both these societies as what they are and how deep the political systems are compared to ours. We have had a one-party dominant system since Independence. These two societies are very different, so it is inevitable that alternatives would be a key function of what each of these parties – be it democratic socialists, christian socialists, labour, conservatives – what they bring to the voter in their societies.

Our system is very different. We deal with significant asymmetries of information.

I move onto the next point the Minister made. He made it a little bit earlier about the WP in his view, in his opinion, deliberately choosing to contest less than one third of the seats. We had roughly, if I remember correctly, one and a half months from the time the electoral boundaries report was released and Nomination Day – thereabouts. In that time the opposition, specifically the WP, we have got to organise the individuals we have, the members we have, and persuade them to stand for the GE. It is a short period of time, and in that period of time, you also have to deal with the reality of new single member constituencies (SMCs), sometimes new GRCs. So, we are not clairvoyant. Unlike the Government, we do not have the capacity to conduct survey after survey to understand where the population is on certain issues. So, the realities are quite different.

But in spite of that, I take the Minister's point that Singaporeans want an alternative and since they want an alternative, we do our best to present it to them. We put together some collaterals for members of the public to review, put together a manifesto, where we differ from the PAP, and put together our ideas for the voter to consider.

I disagree with the Minister when he says there is no chance of an opposition wipeout. In the circumstances that the PAP is in, and the opposition are in in Singapore, given the tremendous resources that are available to the PAP to reach out on a day-to-day level in the constituency, through the Peoples Association (PA), for example, it is chalk and cheese.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Singh, if I could invite you to kindly progress to your clarifications, rather than preamble it with a long speech? I have listened very carefully, and I am trying to thread through what you are saying based on what Minister Ong Ye Kung has said. I think you can get to your clarifications in a little bit more efficient manner. So, I invite you to go to your clarifications, Mr Singh.

Mr Pritam Singh: So, my clarification really has been already shared in terms of the Minister's view of whether there was a deliberate decision made to contest fewer seats. Like I said, we are not clairvoyant, we put the best people we can find forward and present what we can in the circumstances, to represent an alternative for Singaporeans.

The last clarification that I would like to put forth is with regard to what was shared with the Minister in the podcast, where I think the words were "why can't everyone work together?" The Minister used a very interesting analogy, which I probably would not. "Jaw-jaw and war-war" if I remember, was used by Churchill in a very aggressive way.

I would say the question that we face as a society now is a little simpler. We are at a very interesting juncture, an important transition in our history as a country. Are we prepared to accept, is the PAP government prepared to accept for example, an opposition MP who has the mandate from the public welcoming new citizens into Singapore? Is the Government prepared to allow opposition MPs to be present and to welcome these new citizens as part of our society? Because that would reflect a certain maturity that I believe is where Singapore has arrived at, and if I can be so bold, it may well be something that Singaporeans demand of the PAP.

So, as much as the PAP wants us to consider alternatives, which I think you are entitled to, I think the PAP should also consider from the WP's perspective, how we can be more united as a people.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Singh, if I could kindly request you to summarise your last point? You have gone a little bit further than what the content of Minister Ong's speech was. I have given you leeway. Please summarise your last clarification in order for Minister Ong then to reply if he so wishes.

Mr Pritam Singh: So, I would suggest that as much as there is scope for alternatives from the opposition, there is scope for the PAP also to play a part in building a more united Singapore with the opposition in mind.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister Ong Ye Kung, would you like to respond to those clarifications?

Mr Ong Ye Kung: Certainly. It should not quite be presented as clarifications, so I will try to respond in general.

The people demand many things of us, both as ruling party as well as opposition. I think the people will increasingly demand coherent alternatives from WP, put together principles, philosophies. What is your vision? What is the pathway? How do we get there? What is the set of policies? And to your credit from time to time you have mentioned some of them but the people will demand coherent set of consistent policies and principles. And they will demand likewise PAP to do better and for all their demands, we will have to reflect, "What can we do better for the people?

The Leader of Opposition mentioned a couple of his pet peeves, one is boundaries coming out a month and a half before the election. I should say this: most PAP MPs in this House, when the boundaries reports come out, everyone scrambles, we were equally scrambling. Whenever the boundaries come out, suddenly you have an SMC, suddenly you have to form another division, re-deploy your volunteers. We may have an advantage because we are present in every constituency, so maybe there is an advantage there. But we are also scrambling every time the boundaries reports come out.

But we know it is necessary. The population changes, new developments, a group of civil servants look at the data and they propose new boundaries. We have to let them do their job and adapt to it.

The Leader of Opposition mentioned PA and citizenship ceremony. I will just say, under the Constitution and the law, an elected MP has two functions. One is to be a legislator in this House, the other is to manage the Town Council. There is no PA. PA and grassroots work is a policy of the PAP Government. That we decided to set up a Statutory Board, gather as many volunteers as we can, and gauge the ground, bring communities together, help the children grow up well, help parents cope with parenting, help the seniors stay healthy, promote exercise – none of this is in the law or Constitution. But we do that to help our constituencies and our residents.

Citizenship ceremony is one such event. I do not know of any country where you become a new citizen, the grassroots hold an event and talk to you about being Singaporean, what it means and then sing the national anthem and gather together. So, these are all part of the PAP policies to engage the ground.

The Leader of Opposition talks about no chance of a wipeout. In the hearts of Singaporeans, they know that there is no chance of a wipeout. And reading the ground, we know there is no chance of a wipeout.

The desire for a check on the PAP is very strong, precisely because we have a good majority. And that desire is so strong we see cases all the time, like what I mentioned, the couple at the tze char stall, friendly to us, like what we are doing, "want you to be Government", want me to continue as Health Minister, but "I am not voting for him, I need to support the opposition".

You have a role here. The opposition has a role in the governance of Singapore, and we have to take that seriously and accept there is no chance of a wipeout. There is no equilibrium, it is a dynamic balance. From term to term, people will have a different balance in their mind, but we must accept that people now want the PAP government; for now, they want the PAP government, but they also want an opposition presence.

Mr Pritam Singh talked about our circumstances being different from the UK or US. In 1963, this was a much smaller Chamber with 13 Barisan Sosialis Members, minority, small minority. But they stood for a different vision, with different sets of policies. They disagreed with the PAP on big issues of the day – merger with Malaysia, teaching of language, particularly Chinese, National Service. After 1965, of course, it then became PAP-dominant.

But over the years, we saw WP come some way – from one to two single seats, they now have two GRCs, plus a couple of single seats and two NCMPs. Mr Pritam Singh is now the Leader of the Opposition. There is no chance of a wipeout, in our view, and people expect WP to play an important role. And in this GE2025, the WP were quite close to winning another two GRCs. Next election, no doubt, it will be even more tough. And when you have come this far, I do believe the people will demand and Singapore will need WP to come up with alternate policies, as in the past, Barisan Sosialis did with a small number of seats.

I say all these not that I wish it will come true. But should WP really rise to the occasion and do this and be able to stand and contest the ruling party as the democrats and republicans do each other in the US, or Tories and Labour do each other in UK, actually, life will be harder for PAP. Contest will be so much more intense. People will be so much more discerning with who they choose. But it is the right political direction for Singapore; focus our energy.

I take the Member's point about "jaw-jaw" and "war-war". We are not really fighting, but we are arguing. We are presenting different views. We are arguing the merits and trade-offs of those directions, and those visions when Singaporeans choose. If we focus our energy on such discourse, I think it is the right direction for Singapore. [Applause.]

Mr Deputy Speaker: No further clarifications, Leader of the Opposition? None. Then, we will move on. Mr Saktiandi Supaat.

5.17 pm

Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I thank the President for his Address and I support the Motion.

As the President reminded us, we are living in "a more unsettled and chaotic world". These external uncertainties are beyond our control. But what we can control is how we strengthen our social compact at home. That is how we ensure peace, security and prosperity for our people.

Mr Deputy Speaker, as the President also reminded us, fairness is a work never finished. Singapore has long held meritocracy as a core value, that effort and ability should determine success, not birth or background. While aggregate inequality measures have not worsened materially in recent years, the lived experience tells a different story. Basic costs, housing and education opportunities still weigh more heavily on some households, and perceptions of unfairness remain real. This is what academics call the gap between macro trends and lived realities. If left unaddressed, it can weaken trust in our social compact.

Equality, like fairness, is never absolute but our duty is to keep narrowing the gaps so that opportunities and security are shared across society. So, I will focus on three areas: protecting livelihoods, ensuring retirement adequacy and empowering every Singaporean, young and old, to co-pilot our shared future. Mr Deputy Speaker, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] As the President has reminded us, Singapore must always uphold the principle of "we first" – ensuring that economic growth benefits everyone and that no one is left behind.

The inflation rate has declined from 6.1% in 2022 to 0.8% in June this year. Nevertheless, families still feel the pressure at the market, at clinics and when paying utility bills. Prices today are much higher compared to three years ago. However, Government measures, such as the Assurance Package and CDC vouchers, have helped significantly. But as the Prime Minister reminded us, these are not long-term solutions.

While inflation affects everyone, its impact is most keenly felt by low-income families. Meritocracy only works when basic needs are met and opportunities are distributed fairly. Equality of opportunity does not come naturally. It must be pursued through policies that provide protection to those most affected.

Therefore, I would like to propose an automatic Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) mechanism. Additional relief to schemes, like ComCare or Silver Support, can be activated when inflation for essential goods exceeds a certain threshold. With smart monitoring using artificial intelligence, this relief can be delivered accurately in a timely, targeted and predictable manner.

To make this proposal more practical, I recommend three key features. First, essential basket trigger based on inflation in food, utilities, transport and healthcare. Second, automatic activation. When inflation exceeds 3% to 4% on an annual average, assistance is adjusted in the next cycle. Third, scaled and controlled. More assistance is given to those who are less fortunate, with limits to ensure fiscal sustainability.

This is not something new. In the US, social security benefits are automatically adjusted according to inflation. Canada and many European countries also adjust pensions and social welfare annually. Even Japan links pensions to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), despite experiencing periods of low inflation. This shows that COLA mechanisms are not excessive promises, but prudent measures to protect dignity and stability.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I am aware that Singapore's inflation rate is on average, low, around 2%, and now below 1%. But what matters more is our people’s actual experience when food or utility prices increase much faster than the average CPI. For families living on tight budgets, even moderate inflation feels very burdensome. This is why a targeted COLA mechanism can provide assurance where it is most needed.

I also acknowledge concerns that such a mechanism might be seen as fiscally unsustainable, seemingly creating unlimited liability when inflation spikes. But that is not my proposal. Singapore's version must be targeted, capped and reviewed annually. It would only apply to certain basic schemes, activated only when clear thresholds are exceeded, and assistance provided according to need. In this way, we balance compassion with fiscal discipline, building a safety net for the most vulnerable, while maintaining Singapore's traditional prudence.

Additionally, we should also consider a Caregiver Credit or Support, similar to the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme, to recognise and provide better support to those who temporarily need to exit the workforce to care for children, elderly parents or relatives with disabilities or chronic illnesses. Such a scheme could provide CPF contributions or direct financial support, so that caregivers do not have to sacrifice their long-term security while caring for family. I heard all these during the M³ post-National Day Rally dialogue last year, where I received appeals from caregivers requesting improvements, for instance, on the issues of caregiver leave and financial assistance for them.

(In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will now continue in English. Beyond helping families manage today's cost pressures, we must also think long-term, about retirement adequacy and how Singaporeans can age with dignity. The President reminded us that fairness is a work never finished. One of the key tests of fairness is how we care for seniors after a lifetime of work.

By 2030, one in four citizens will be aged 65 and above. We must ensure retirement adequacy for all. We should be prepared for more elderly couples living on their own, as more and more young Singaporeans aspire to live independently sooner. Ensuring the retirement adequacy of each and every Singaporean is, therefore, critical in our goal for our seniors to age actively with dignity and purpose.

Our CPF system is rightly regarded as one of the most sustainable in the world. Having previously been involved in the earlier round of CPF changes as a member of the CPF advisory panel, there is broad consensus that our CPF system works, even as we try to figure how we can tweak it to make it better. In contrast, rising life expectancies, inflationary pressures and changing work patterns have caused many pension systems abroad to falter because benefits have not kept pace with inflation, or because public finances are overstretched. We must act early to guard against these risks. I have some suggestions.

First, predictability. While MOM has announced that it will raise the Basic Retirement Sum for future cohorts, can we give Singaporeans more certainty by setting out a 10- to 15-year path of increase? This way, families can plan ahead with confidence and each increment will hopefully be less politicised or face less sceptical questioning of its motives.

Second, inclusivity. We should further strengthen CPF top-ups and matching schemes. The Matched Retirement Savings Scheme has helped seniors with smaller CPF balances, but its income ceiling and eligibility criteria are presently narrow. We could, perhaps, expand it to include part-time workers, caregivers re-entering the workforce and even selected groups of younger workers in their 30s and 40s, so that interest compounding works in their favour earlier in life.

Third, protection. To protect retirees from spikes in inflation, I propose an inflation-linked CPF LIFE options, so payouts rise in line with the cost of living. Currently, CPF LIFE only offers lifelong monthly payouts on the decreasing Basic plan, the constant Standard plan or the increasing Escalating plan. Under my proposal, the base payouts may start slightly lower, but they will rise in tandem with the CPI. As with the other plans, this would be on a voluntary opt-in basis and it should assuage members who fear the erosion of purchasing power after they stop working.

Fourth, equity. It may also be time to review the 4% interest floor on Retirement Accounts, which was set back in 2008. A modest increase, or alternatively, on a tiered floor for the first $60,000, would especially benefit lower-income seniors who have smaller CPF balances.

Fifth, Mr Deputy Speaker, flexibility. Simplify the Lease Buyback Scheme and create a family buyback option, letting children co-purchase part of the lease to provide parents retirement cashflow, for example.

Sixth, dignity in work. Enhance re-employment incentives, longer contracts and phased-down roles for seniors, while keeping CPF contributions meaningful.

And finally, seventh, Mr Deputy Speaker, healthcare assurance. Explore a combined MediSave retirement plan, setting aside part of payouts for healthcare, with an opt-out for those already well-covered, where part of payouts are automatically set aside for healthcare expenditure in excess of what is covered by MediShield Life. This would reduce anxiety for seniors, who often fear that a single hospital bill, a single hospital bill, could wipe out their retirement savings. This can be implemented with an opt-out mechanism for seniors who are adequately secured by hospitalisation or accident insurance.

Mr Deputy Speaker, these proposed refinements will together boost confidence in our retirement system and its ability to see each of us through life. They will give assurance that no Singaporean, after a lifetime of work, will be left to face old age amidst insecurity.

Mr Deputy Speaker, as the President also noted, we must give every citizen confidence about their place in society and that begins with our youths. They must be co-pilots of our journey and not passengers. Youth unemployment is higher than national average and many worry about employability in an age of AI.

So, first, evolve SkillsFuture into a family credit system: more credits when more family members upskill together. Second, the suggestion will be to expand the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme to Singaporeans below 40, so that younger workers can also upgrade and pivot. Third, broaden the definition of success. Let us celebrate entrepreneurship, trades, the arts and sports, not just traditional jobs.

For the arts, perhaps, the expanded National Arts Council scholarships could also explore a "dual career" pathway, similar to what spexEducation provides for our Team Singapore athletes. This would reassure talented artists that they can pursue their craft with confidence, while also having academic and career options to fall back on. It would make a career in the arts not just inspiring, but also sustainable.

And fourth, prioritise mental well-being. With one in three youths facing severe stress or anxiety, we must normalise seeking help, expanding counselling access and create safe spaces.

Mr Deputy Speaker, research from the National Institute of Education at the Nanyang Technological University and others finds that many young Singaporeans perceive our meritocracy as too narrowly focused on early academic performance – narrowing definitions of success and straining student well-being. We must broaden our pathways if equality of opportunity is to remain real.

At the same time, vices like vaping pose risks. Enforcement alone is insufficient. So, we must guide youths back through positive communities – in gaming, arts, social causes or professional networks. Our youths are our future and our promise for the next 60 years.

Mr Deputy Speaker, whether facing global storms or domestic challenges, we must keep our social compact strong. As the President reminded us, fairness is never finished. It must be renewed in every generation. And if fairness is never finished, then equality and meritocracy are also work never finished. It is not enough to reward effort – we must also level the playing field, so that every Singaporean, regardless of birth or background, has a true chance to rise.

Singapore’s story has never been written by Government alone. It has always been co-authored by our people – families, workers, entrepreneurs, communities alike.

If we hold fast to this spirit of partnership – recognising that putting “we first” does not mean neglecting “me first” – that our personal success is strengthened when our community succeeds. We can forge a new compact: one where growth is inclusive, every Singaporean has a stake and our youths are inspired to lead the future. Together, let us carry Singapore forward with confidence, courage, unity, equality so that social mobility is always a possibility. [Applause.]

Mr Deputy Speaker: Senior Minister of State Dr Koh Poh Koon.

5.32 pm

The Senior Minister of State for Health and Manpower (Dr Koh Poh Koon): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the President’s Address has set out the vision for the next chapter of Singapore’s journey. This includes enhancing assurance at every stage of life as our economy transforms and enabling long-term employability and protecting our vulnerable.

MOM supports this vision. We will empower Singaporeans to prepare for the future economy, support our workers through their life stages and uplift and protect vulnerable workers – leaving no Singaporean behind.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Since the last President’s address in 2023, MOM has worked hard to create good outcomes for workers and businesses alike, in close collaboration with our tripartite partners.

We launched Career Health SG to empower workers to chart out meaningful and resilient careers. Workers can also reskill into jobs in growth sectors through Career Conversion Programmes. We supported businesses to transform and remain competitive while providing good jobs for Singaporeans. We strengthened retirement adequacy for Singaporeans born in 1973 and earlier through the Majulah Package, with CPF top-ups to support their retirement and healthcare needs.

We improved protection for vulnerable groups, such as the Jobseeker Support Scheme for those who lost their jobs involuntarily and uplifted the wages of lower-wage workers through the Progressive Wage Model (PWM). We also legislated stronger safeguards for platform workers through the Platform Workers Act. We advanced workplace fairness and inclusivity through the Workplace Fairness Act and Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement Requests (TG-FWAR).

We will continue to be agile and adapt our policies to a rapidly changing world.

Geopolitical tensions and the fraying of the multilateral trading system are disrupting our traditional trade and supply chains. As a small and open economy, our businesses feel these shocks acutely. Technological changes are accelerating, with significant advancements driven by AI. Our workforce is evolving too.

By 2030, one in four Singaporeans will be 65 or older. This presents challenges, but also opportunities to harness the wisdom and experience of our senior workers.

Our youths are more educated, globally connected and want to chart their own paths. Many desire careers aligned with their passions and values. A National Youth Council survey found that more young Singaporeans wanted to, I quote, “discover, design or invent something new”.

Against this backdrop of change, we must press on together with workers and businesses – to learn continuously, adapt and move forward as one.

MOM will focus on four key thrusts by empowering Singaporeans to navigate the future of work; supporting career longevity; expanding opportunities for workers and businesses; and ensuring inclusive growth.

Let me start with the first thrust on how we are empowering Singaporeans to navigate the future of work.

Whether the challenge is demographic, technological or geopolitical, we will support workers to pivot and seize opportunities that emerge from each wave of disruption. For many Singaporeans, digital disruption, particularly by AI, is top of mind. Many are excited about the opportunities that AI provides because if leveraged well, these advancements can automate routine tasks and allow workers to take on more fulfilling roles. On the flipside, many worry about the impact AI might have on their job security.

On our part, the Government will work together with workers and businesses across all levels – at the national, enterprise and individual level – to strengthen our human capital, so that we can leverage on AI positively. At the national level, under the Economic Strategy Review and our National AI strategy, MOM will support our workforce to develop broad-based AI literacy and competencies. At the enterprise level, MOM’s initiatives like the Enterprise Workforce Transformation Package, which will couple support for business transformation with workforce development, ensuring that technology elevates rather than eliminates workers.

MOM will also work closely with NTUC, the Singapore National Employers Federation and unions to redesign jobs and equip and empower every worker. At the individual level, we will help Singaporeans build more resilient careers and navigate AI disruption. To support our national lifelong learning movement and ensure that skills training leads to good job outcomes, MOM launched Career Health SG, a SkillsFuture initiative, in July this year. Career Health SG uses AI tools to equip Singaporeans with jobs and skills insights, career guidance and employment facilitation, matching them to good jobs where their skills are most relevant and valued. It is about realising the potential of Singapore’s most precious resource – our people. Through digital tools under MyCareersFuture, such as the Careers and Skills Passport and CareersFinder, we help individuals explore more career choices and options, and chart career and skills upgrading plans towards their career aspirations. Those who want to get started on their career health journey can visit the Career Health SG website, a one-stop portal consolidating the resources available to support Singaporeans and employers.

Beyond digital tools, employed individuals who prefer in-person guidance can receive personalised career support from certified coaches to plan ahead under our Polaris programme. Jobseekers can also tap on peer-level support from our Volunteer Career Advisors, who offer sector-specific insights and practical guidance based on real-world industry experience.

We will also strengthen the ecosystem of career and employment services to better match jobseekers to jobs, and better match potential to opportunities, even as our labour market grows increasingly diverse and complex. To achieve this, we need deeper partnership and collaboration with the vibrant network of private sector recruitment and job placement agencies, and online job portals. We have therefore launched an Alliance for Action on Advancing Career and Employment Services (AfA-ACES) to co-create with industry players innovative solutions to redesign jobs, enhance talent management and deepen our human capital.

As Singaporeans gain new skills throughout their careers, they also build strong relationships, grow vast networks and hone their leadership skills – these are soft skills that are not easily replaceable by technology and AI.

Even as we pursue these longer-term strategies, we recognise the anxieties that Singaporeans face over jobs today, especially from fresh graduates who are entering the workforce. Even though the employment rate of graduates in the 2025 cohort as of June has increased by four percentage points compared to the 2024 cohort at the same time last year, there are significantly more fresh graduates who have been actively looking for jobs. This increase in active jobseekers – about 1,700 more as compared to 2024 – may have contributed to a stronger sense of job competition among fresh graduates.

Global factors including economic headwinds from increased trade tensions and geopolitical conflicts, as well as growing concerns over AI taking over entry-level jobs could have further amplified the anxieties of fresh graduates.

We have therefore launched the GRaduate Industry Traineeship (GRIT) programme to boost opportunities for fresh graduates, help them gain industry-relevant experience, and facilitate their transition into full-time employment should they face difficulties in their job search. Minister Tan See Leng has already given a lengthy discourse on this at the Question Time earlier today, so I shall not elaborate further but surprise to say we will continue to support young workers so that they can start well and progress in their careers.

I will now turn to the second thrust on how we are supporting career longevity and strengthening retirement adequacy.

As we live longer and the global economy transforms, our lives will no longer follow a linear path of education, work and retirement. As new industries, jobs and skills emerge, we need to continually upskill and reskill to stay relevant. The healthcare sector is accustomed to this, due to the fast-changing nature – medical technologies. New drugs are coming onstream every so often, new treatment protocols, new trial results are coming out every month and so healthcare workers are used to this. But now other industry sectors are also experiencing a similar increased pace of technological change, maybe not as fast as healthcare but, certainly faster than what they were used to before so they must also embrace lifelong learning and continual education just like our healthcare workers. The DNA and the mindset of our workers must change.

For seniors, we will make available good opportunities and support so them can continue working with dignity and security.

We will also explore how to facilitate flexible arrangements at work or short career breaks for those who wish for a better balance between their career aspirations and caregiving needs. These needs are expected to increase as our population ages. Many seniors have also told me that they do not see work and retirement as all-or-nothing. They want to rightfully reap the rewards of their many years of hard work, by taking a break, travelling the world, having more time with their grandchildren. At the same time, they wish to stay engaged in the workforce and in society, in ways that bring them fulfilment and purpose.

The Government will support Singaporeans in their multi-stage careers and work-life aspirations. This includes workers with caregiving responsibilities, who will benefit from the Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement Request, which outline how employers should handle FWA requests based on business needs.

MOM and our tripartite partners also convened the Tripartite Workgroup on Senior Employment, which will reimagine ways to support career longevity. As Co-Chair of this Tripartite Workgroup, I have heard from workers, unions and employers on their aspirations and challenges regarding senior employment.

Those who are dropping out of work in the early 50s – years before their retirement age – shared with me that they are unable to balance their caregiving needs or need more support in upskilling to remain relevant and competitive in the workspace.

Employers have also shared their challenges in supporting multi-generational workplaces, which can effectively tap on the experience and expertise of senior workers, whilst combining the energies and skills of the younger generation.

The Tripartite Workgroup is hard at work studying the gaps and challenges faced by different workers and industries and will update on our recommendations by early next year.

The TWG-SE has also launched an AfA to partner employers in piloting innovative solutions that help to empower Multi-stage Careers for Mature Workers. One of our prospective partners is Unilever, who plans to pilot their “Value In Value Up” programme under the AfA. The pilot aims to redesign jobs and train mature workers to integrate AI capabilities into their functional expertise and may subsequently engage these workers in fractional or project-based roles in Unilever. These roles include areas such as streamlining of operational processes and AI research. The pilot meets Unilever’s need for agile talent while providing mature workers with meaningful fractional work opportunities.

Another issue close to the hearts of our seniors and future seniors is whether they have enough for retirement. Our CPF system is designed to help Singaporeans plan and save for this stage of life. It is built on a strong social compact that reflects our values – the belief in shared responsibility. This means individuals taking charge of their own retirement savings, while family, the community and the Government will also come in to provide help for those in more vulnerable settings.

MOM will continue to review and strengthen the CPF system, such that those who work and contribute consistently to their CPF can be assured of meeting their basic retirement needs in their golden years. This includes raising the Basic Retirement Sum for cohorts beyond 2027, to set aside more savings in CPF LIFE, which will provide lifelong retirement income and peace of mind that comes with this guaranteed income stream.

For those who are unable to save enough despite their best efforts, society as a whole must collectively come in to support them together. We have put in place several measures to strengthen their retirement adequacy. First, the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme supplements the income and CPF savings of lower-wage workers while they work. Second, the Matched Retirement Savings Scheme provides a matching grant for top-ups, including from loved ones or others in the community. Third, the Silver Support Scheme provides targeted help for seniors who have earned low incomes during their working years and now have less in retirement.

With rising costs of living and higher aspirations in retirement lifestyles, we also want to empower Singaporeans to start earlier and plan ahead for their retirement across key milestones in life. In this vein, I encourage everyone to leverage on CPF's new one-stop financial guidance platform called Plan Life Ahead, Now! (PLAN), which will support members to make more informed and prudent financial decisions across different life stages. Mr Speaker, Sir, I will now say a few words in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] As Singaporeans' average lifespan extends, more senior workers hope to achieve a better balance between career goals and caring for their families.

Employees, unions and employers have shared with me their expectations and challenges regarding senior employment. The Tripartite Workgroup on Senior Employment will explore how to better support employees in extending their careers and will release its recommendations next year.

Through the AfA on Empowering Multi-Stage Careers for Mature Workers, we will collaborate with employers to pilot innovative solutions. The Government, employers and unions will work together to help senior workers have fulfilling careers, be it in their existing jobs, adopting flexible work arrangements, taking short career breaks or finding re-employment through learning new skills.

Another issue of concern for seniors and those approaching retirement is whether their retirement savings are sufficient to cope with the current rising costs of living. In this regard, we will continue to strengthen the CPF system so that Singaporeans who continue contributing to CPF can be assured of meeting their basic retirement needs in their golden years.

(in English): Sir, now let me go onto the third thrust on expanding economic opportunities for all, empowering the broad middle of workers to progress in their careers.

For mid-career workers, we are expanding opportunities and pathways towards better jobs. Our Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs) have seen success, with more than 37,000 individuals reskilling into jobs in growth sectors over the last five years. About nine in 10 CCP participants have remained employed 24 months after the programme, while six in 10 earned more than their last drawn salaries.

Take Mr Wong Kok Sin, who was reskilled through the CCP for Electronics, after being in the industry for more than 20 years. As the Director for Internal Manufacturing Production at ams-OSRAM, Mr Wong is responsible for strategic planning and process optimisation, as well as mentoring teams and driving operational excellence. The AI tools he picked up through the CCP allowed him to explore how smart manufacturing and prompt engineering can streamline operations and enhance decision making, leading to increased productivity.

For those who aspire to climb the corporate ladder, we are expanding opportunities for them to gain critical experience to do so. In keeping with our position as a global business hub, many businesses have told us that overseas exposure is key for Singaporeans to move on into senior roles. To that end, we will support businesses to send employees with little or no overseas market experience abroad, to gain exposure through the Overseas Markets Immersion Programme (OMIP).

OMIP will complement existing programmes that support overseas posting and leadership development, which we are doubling in capacity. Since the programme's launch in November 2024, 70 locals have been emplaced in overseas roles. This includes three biotechnologists from Lonza Biologics, who were sent to Switzerland. In Switzerland, they worked alongside subject matter experts and gained expertise in plant set-up, troubleshooting and process optimisation – knowledge that strengthened Lonza's operations here in Singapore. This stint has provided them with the international exposure, making them better-positioned for leadership roles in future.

MOM will focus on four enablers to grow the economy, help business to thrive and create good jobs in our next bound of growth. First, transforming our workforce to meet business needs. With rapid technological advancement and geopolitical tensions, many businesses are looking to reorganise their operations, reconfigure their supply chains and redesign jobs. MOM has, thus, set aside over $400 million for the Enterprise Workforce Transformation Package to spur workforce transformation, through the SkillsFuture Workforce Development Grant and the redesigned SkillsFuture Enterprise Credit. This will enable workers to upgrade their skillsets and businesses to adapt to the evolving economic landscape.

Second, expanding access to talent from around the world that complements our workforce. Singapore must continue working with and learning from the best, from around the world. Access to global talent also attracts foreign investments and MNCs to grow the economic pie and continue creating good jobs for Singaporeans.

Third, uplifting the human resources (HR) profession. HR plays a critical role in how businesses attract, manage and develop talent. The Tripartite Workgroup on Human Capital Capability Development will strengthen HR practices and level-up human capital capabilities across the economy to maximise workforce potential and support business growth.

Fourth, reducing compliance burden. This includes using the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Pro-Enterprise Rules Review to streamline regulations, especially for SMEs, to help businesses remain competitive in a pro-enterprise environment.

Our fourth thrust is to ensure that our growth is inclusive, so that all Singaporeans benefit from the opportunities created. MOM will work with tripartite partners to raise the bar for safe, fair and inclusive workplaces that provide opportunities for everyone to thrive.

MOM has been working closely with all stakeholders, including sector agencies, employers, unions and workers to raise WSH standards, tackle emerging risks and reinforce a culture of safety. We will continue to strengthen these efforts to keep fatal injury rates below 1.0 per 100,000 workers and meet our WSH 2028 target.

We will continue to enhance employment standards and protections for our workers. Earlier this year, Parliament passed the Workplace Fairness Act, strengthening protection against discrimination at the workplace. This is a major step forward in assuring workers that they will be treated fairly and based on merit.

We are also undertaking a review of the Employment Act to account for evolving forms of work and the changing labour force profile, including a greater proportion of PMEs. Through the review, we will ensure that protections remain relevant for different groups of workers while streamlining compliance for businesses.

As the future of work continues to unfold, we must address needs of different groups of workers. For example, we now recognise platform workers as a separate category of workers with their own set of protections via the Platform Workers Act. The Platform Workers Act, effective January this year, provides work injury compensation, CPF contributions and a representation framework where platform workers and operators can be represented by Platform Work Associations.

In response to concerns raised by platform workers and Platform Work Associations, the Platform Workers Trilateral Group was formed with representatives from MOM, MOT, NTUC and platform operators to address illegal activities in the platform sector and the lack of transparency in payment and incentive schemes. The 10 recommendations were announced earlier this month.

With increasingly diverse forms of work and work arrangements, we will continue studying how to better support platform workers, self-employed persons and freelancers in terms of workplace protections, reskilling and career pathways.

In this world of accelerating change, we will ensure that opportunities remain open to all. For those who stumble despite their best efforts, we will help them bounce back with confidence. We have introduced the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme to help displaced workers who are actively searching for jobs to re-enter employment, providing up to $6,000 in temporary support over six months for eligible individuals.

Lower-wage workers will remain a key focus, with MOM pressing on with efforts to uplift and support lower-wage workers amidst our economic transformation. This includes the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme, which was recently enhanced; and the new Workfare Skills Support (Level-Up) scheme will provide added support for lower-wage workers to upskill and reskill.

The PWM remains central to raising wages and in creating career pathways that are closely tied to training and skills development. Together with tripartite partners, MOM is reviewing the next set of wage schedules for all PWMs, covering seven sectors and two occupations. The Government recently accepted the Tripartite Cluster for Retail's recommendation of a three-year schedule of sustained wage increase from 1 September 2025, along with enhancements to job ladders and training requirements.

These changes will benefit workers, like Natasha and Joey, who work at Far East Flora. For Natasha, who started as a part-time cashier, the structured increases provide a pathway to financial security, presenting her with an opportunity to progress into management roles. As for Joey, who has spent over a decade in the retail industry, formal supervisor training has improved his job knowledge, giving him confidence that he can continue to advance further.

In addition to PWM, the Government has introduced and continually reviews the Local Qualifying Salary, which ensures that local employees are employed meaningfully, rather than on token salaries for firms to gain access to foreign workers. We will also work to foster multiple pathways to success, including for Singaporeans who are more inclined towards "hands-on" and "heart" jobs. We will work with tripartite partners, trade associations and our IHLs to develop more structured pathways for progression in the skilled trades, to better value the essential work of skilled tradespeople.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the challenges ahead are real. But Singapore has never shied away from tough challenges. Time and again, we have adapted, persevered and emerged stronger. Our success rests not just on policies or programmes, but on the trust and unity that we share.

The President and Prime Minister spoke about building a "we first" society, where we look out for each other and put the collective good above narrow interests. In manpower, this spirit comes to life through tripartism. We should not take this for granted. In many countries, workers and employers stand on opposite sides of the table, locked in conflict. In Singapore, we sit on the same side, seeking win-win outcomes for Singapore. This has allowed us to uplift wages, strengthen worker protections and grow businesses, all at once, striking a very good balance between all the partners.

In an uncertain world, our unity will be our greatest asset. Tripartism is the living expression of our "we first" mindset and must remain at the heart of our workforce transformation. As long as we preserve this trust, we can continue creating good jobs and fulfilling careers for Singaporeans. Together, let us move forward as one people, one nation and one Singapore, leaving no Singaporean behind. Sir, I support the Motion. [Applause.]

Mr Speaker: Dr Wan Rizal.

5.59 pm

Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. The President called on us to build a "we first" society, where growth uplifts everyone, and trust remains the foundation of our nation. This message resonates deeply in the Labour Movement.

For me, as a representative of workers and their families, this means ensuring that every worker matters, no family is left unsupported and no individual is left to struggle alone. Today, I will speak on three areas: supporting our lower-wage workers, strengthening employability in the Malay/Muslim community and finally, addressing an issue very close to my heart – mental health.

Mr Speaker, I begin with our lower-wage workers, the backbone of our society. They are the quiet hands and steady feet that keep Singapore moving each day. Over the past decade, we have made substantial progress. The wage gap between lower-wage workers and the median worker has narrowed. Real incomes of workers at the 20th percentile rose cumulatively by 30% from 2013 to 2023, faster than the median worker's 22%. Today, more than 155,000 lower-wage workers across nine sectors and occupations are covered by the PWM.

This is progress we can take pride in. It shows that when we walk together, Government, employers and unions, we can shift the escalator of social mobility upwards. But we must not stop here. Allow me to make three calls.

First, enhance funding for PWM and the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS). The PWCS has been instrumental in helping employers support wage increases. Over $2.7 billion in PWCS was disbursed in 2022 and 2023, benefiting more than 520,000 employees. I urge the Government to extend these enhancements until Singapore reaches the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) benchmark of the 20th percentile being two-thirds of median income.

I also call for the wage ceiling to be raised beyond $3,000, so that as wages rise, PWM workers in sectors like security, waste management and lift and escalator maintenance remain covered.

Second, let us address how wage increases can lead to a loss of social assistance. Sir, on the ground, we have heard from workers who hesitate to accept wage increases. They fear they will lose eligibility for Workfare or ComCare. And I find this very troubling. Workers should never be penalised for progress. I call for a comprehensive review of our wage support and social assistance schemes, so that no one is forced to choose between a higher salary and essential aid.

Third, future-proof upskilling of our lower-wage workers, including training in Artificial Intelligence. I call for AI training to be extended to PWM workers, such as, administrators who can leverage AI to optimise workflows. NTUC LearningHub already offers an AI learning ecosystem, covering skills across different proficiency levels. So, let us make this accessible to all workers, including our lower-wage workers, so that they, too, can benefit from the AI economy.

Mr Speaker, let me share the story of Ms Nur Shafiqah Irwandy, a 24-year-old lift supervisor at Fujitec. Starting from ITE, she pursued a Work-Study Diploma while working, overcoming challenges in a male-dominated industry. Today, she leads a team maintaining 600 lifts across Sengkang and Punggol.

The Progressive Wage Model has transformed her career. Before PWM, lift maintenance was low-paying, but today, she earns a stable income that supports her family and future. Mr Speaker, her story shows why PWM matters, not just for wages, but for dignity, skills and opportunity.

Sir, when the lowest-wage worker progresses, Singapore progresses. That is how we build an inclusive growth. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Sir, with AI transforming industries and jobs, we cannot allow Malay/Muslim workers to be left behind and must support them to succeed. Through Focus Area 4 (FA4) under M³, we pay special attention towards enhancing the marketability of Malay/Muslim workers. With close collaboration between NTUC and MENDAKI, we will build a robust support ecosystem to help workers adapt to the increasingly changing job market.

We will continue to strengthen support, especially for mature PMEs, as well as our youth who will inherit the challenges and opportunities of the future economy. For mature PMEs, support will focus on empowering them with new skills, including digital and leadership skills, so that they can remain relevant and trusted by industry. We also need to further expand the network of career advisors to help them adapt to market changes and pave the way towards a meaningful second career.

For our youth, we need to provide more diverse pathways. This includes apprenticeship programmes, work-study schemes as well as development opportunities in new fields, such as green technology, artificial intelligence and the care economy.

Next month, we will organise the Youth Skills and Career Fair @ SCAPE on 6 and 7 October. This event will be a great opportunity for youth to explore career pathways, receive expert advice and build the skills needed to succeed in an increasingly challenging job market. Additionally, e2i together with the Happiness Initiative, will launch a special workshop for youth and young professionals aged 18 to 35 years. The focus of this workshop is to build mental resilience, by equipping participants with skills to manage stress, and building confidence when seeking employment or starting a new career.

When every community can progress together, Singapore as a whole will become stronger and more resilient.

(In English): Mr Speaker, I now turn to an issue that I have been championing throughout my stint in Parliament. An issue that cuts across workers, families and communities.

The President reminded us that our responsibility is to give Singaporeans assurance at every stage of life. Mental health is that assurance. The statistics tell us sobering story. Nearly 47% of workers in Singapore report feeling exhausted after work. The prevalence of poor mental health remains at 15% in 2023, higher than the pre-pandemic levels. The economic cost of mental health conditions is estimated at $15.7 billion annually or 2.9% of the GDP.

Behind each statistic is a worker, a family and community. Their struggles with stress and burnout remind us that productivity cannot come at the expense of health. As the co-chairman of the PAP mental health group, I have continually engaged stakeholders from the healthcare professionals, community partners, to employers and workers. And together, with my colleagues, we tabled a Motion of mental health in the last term to place this firmly on the national agenda.

But that Motion was not the end. It was the beginning. In this new term, we intend to move forward further, ensuring that mental health remains a sustained national priority.

Sir, international studies shows that young people are especially vulnerable during school-to-work transitions. Locally, nearly half of workers already report exhaustion at the start of their careers. In my Malay speech earlier, I had spoken about employability initiatives for our youths and young professionals under the FA4 initiative. Employability must go hand in hand with resilience. Skills will get our youths a job. Resilience will help them to keep it, grow in it and strive in the long run.

Sir, our youths today also live in a digital first world and we must strengthen their healthy digital habits and depend our understanding of the impact of social media on mental well-being. We must build emotional resilience in all schools and IHLs alongside academics skills.

Our youths should not only survive the pressures of school and work, but thrive with confidence and work. I continue to call for mental health and well-being literacy to be embedded within the curriculum, so that everyone is equipped with the skill. And as we progress as a nation, everyone can play their part better.

Sir, many young parents juggle work, childcare and caring for ageing parents. NTUC hears their concerns about long hours and blurred work-life boundaries. To protect their well-being, we must strengthen safeguards for rest, expand flexible work arrangements as a norm and enhance community support for caregivers. But beyond that, we must call for stronger workplace mental well-being initiatives, so that employers build cultures where mental wellness is part of daily practice, not an afterthought.

For our seniors, dignity is not only about medical care, but also about connection, purpose and being seen. As seniors age, they may face loneliness and other mental health concerns, but it can also be a stage of renewed contribution if the right support is given. We must continue to expand community facilities, so that help is never too far away.

Finally, I turn to our workers who cut across the different ages and I have a few calls to make.

First, stronger rest protections. The "always-on" culture must be challenged. Workers need adequate rest between shifts and more explicit guidance on after-hours communication. Otherwise, exhaustion will erode both well-being and long-term safety.

Second, preventive approaches. Employers should go beyond ad-hoc wellness talks and make mental wellness training a mandatory part of management development. Leaders must be equipped, not only to deliver results, but also to recognise early signs of stress, to intervene with empathy and to create psychologically safe workplaces. At the same time, companies can and should tap into the Company Training Committee grant, not only to invest in new technology and upskill their workforce, but also to redesign jobs and workflows with workers' productivity, well-being and dignity at this centre.

So often the perception is that innovation is seen as a way to squeeze more output from the same worker. But that cannot be our approach. Instead, we must harness innovation to ease the pressures of long hours to streamline repetitive tasks and to allow workers to focus on higher value and more meaningful work. When we do this, productivity gains will be matched by healthier, more motivated teams and by workplaces, where people feel proud to contribute and confident about their future.

Third, inclusive return-to-work practices. Returning to work after a period of illness, injury, or a mental health challenge is never easy. Many workers tell us they feel anxious, worried that their colleagues may see them as less capable, or that their employers may judge them for needing more time to recover.

That is why the return-to-work journey must not add to their stress. Instead, it should be a bridge of support, where adjustments are made to help them regain confidence at their own pace. Employers can and should tap into the resources from the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices and the Workplace Safety and Health Council to implement Return-to-Work policies, policies that ensure workplace safety while also fostering understanding and compassion.

When a worker is supported in this way, they are more likely to bounce back stronger, to contribute meaningfully and to inspire others. And when we care for our workers in their most vulnerable moments, we strengthen not just productivity, but the bonds of trust in our workplaces.

Mr Speaker, our nation's strength never come from size or the resources that we have. It comes from trust. Trust between people and the Government, between employers and workers, with the unions at the centre of everything and among, of course, citizens themselves. As we turn the page after SG60, let us reaffirm the trust by standing with our workers, uplifting every community and safeguarding the mental health and well-being of every Singaporean.

Let us show that in Singapore, progress is not for the few, but for all. And this is how we will build not only a stronger economy, but also a stronger society. One where every worker has dignity, every family has assurance and every community has hope. Mr Speaker, I support the Motion.

Mr Speaker: Mr Shawn Loh.

6.15 pm

Mr Shawn Loh (Jalan Besar): Mr Speaker, I am the first one speaking among the backbenchers from the class of 2025 from the PAP. Thank you for this opportunity. Before I begin, I declare my interest as Deputy Group Managing Director of Commonwealth Capital Group.

We are a Singaporean global enterprise operating businesses across the food value chain – from cold-chain logistics to food manufacturing and to food services. Collectively, our businesses steward more than 1,000 livelihoods and we provide nourishment to thousands of Singaporeans daily.

Mr Speaker, I support the Motion of thanks to the President.

Let me also thank our residents of Jalan Besar GRC and Whampoa for their support for me and my team mates. Dr Wan Rizal and Ms Denise Phua spoke earlier. I was introduced only in April this year, just one month before the GE. I am grateful for their trust in me. This trust will not be misplaced. I will do my best to do our residents of Jalan Besar GRC and Whampoa proud and give them a voice in Parliament.

I have been a civil servant for more than a decade and I have had the pleasure to be involved in previous speeches by the President at the Parliament’s Opening.

Invariably, the speeches cover the following themes: one, the world is a dark and dangerous place; two, the economy is the solution to many of our problems; three, we need to address the challenges of an ageing population; four, we need to build an inclusive society; and five, we need to keep Singapore united.

These themes were from the 2025 speech. But if you thought these themes were from the 2023, 2020, 2018, 2016, 2014 or 2011 speeches, you would also be right! That is not to say the President’s speech was boring nor is it an indictment of the speechwriters. Rather, it demonstrates that our challenges are enduring.

However, I submit that below the surface of these high-level challenges, there are emerging trends within each theme that require us to rethink and reimagine our policies in this term of Government. I will spend the rest of my speech to share some thoughts about these trends and, importantly, their implications.

First, the international economic order has changed, permanently. Bridges have been replaced by barriers.

Our earlier economic growth strategy was premised on foreign MNC investments riding the wave of globalisation, which enabled firms to headquarter in Singapore, while the bulk of markets and operations would be outside the country. But now, foreign MNCs, even if they want to invest in Singapore, may find themselves torn between other geopolitical considerations.

Manufacturing investments are being onshored in other countries. And because headquarters are increasingly sited nearer to manufacturing or nearer to markets, Singapore is actually at a disadvantage.

It is, therefore, critical to have a renewed policy focus on growing our own Singaporean MNCs that are more deeply rooted in Singapore. Yes, we can press on with anchoring investments from foreign MNCs. My former colleagues at the Economic Development Board (EDB) do a valiant job. I, myself, spent a couple of years at the EDB looking at how to grow our Singaporean MNCs. And now, I lead a local company that aspires to be an MNC one day.

Based on these experiences, I am convinced that our policies can do more to support our local firms to scale beyond the SME-level. To grow above the current SME threshold of $100 million in annual revenues to become MNCs closer to $1 billion in annual revenues or more. Perhaps the Government should consider supporting a new class of local enterprises that are larger than SMEs, but smaller than your $1 billion-listed companies. These are some issues that I hope to explore as part of my role on the GPC for Trade and Industry.

Second, the technological cycle has shortened significantly. AI, which many Members have spoken about, represents a stepped increase in technological advancement. Some have likened this to the discovery of the steam engine that catalysed the industrial revolution and disrupted many jobs. But even before AI, the pace of job creation and destruction felt like it was already accelerating. Make no mistake, this means that skills will become obsolete faster.

Today, we can no longer rely on what we learnt in full-time education to carry us on to retirement. Perhaps there may even come a point in time where what we learn in the first year of tertiary education will become irrelevant by the time we graduate. We see this manifest in greater anxieties amongst our new graduates and our older PMETs. I have spoken to many in Jalan Besar and Whampoa. And I feel for them.

What does this imply for the direction of Government policy?

Many Members have actually spoken up about this. Mr Andre Low gave the suggestion of the redundancy insurance scheme. I appreciate him for raising that idea. I agree with the intent that it is about reducing the anxieties that many of our workers feel. However, I respectfully disagree in the implementation of the idea for two reasons.

The first is that we have just implemented a Jobseekers Support Scheme. The Senior Minister of State for Manpower has spoken about this earlier. It is still early days, but our residents are already benefiting. The scheme provides the support required for our workers to get the assurance they need if they fall into redundancy, for a targeted group.

The second reason is because I am not sure whether the numbers add up. Let me explain. I looked at the suggestion in quite some detail.

The Member suggested that if you contribute 0.1% of your monthly wage, you would have enough in the insurance pool to cover the redundancy payouts. From the back of an envelope calculation, 0.1%, which he said was about $5; grossed up to a year, which is $60; grossed up from the whole population of 2.2 to 2.5 million Singaporean workers, that gets us about $150 million of collection for the insurance pool.

However, I am not sure whether that is enough because in the Jobs Support Scheme, the MOM budget was already $200 million and this was for a targeted group of unemployed individuals. So, a national unemployment or national redundancy insurance scheme should cost more, and not less.

However, I think the greater point is that there are other ways in which we can resolve this issue.

I believe we should pivot our policies towards a greater emphasis on employer-led training and away from broad-based SkillsFuture initiatives. Do more to help employers give workers jobs and then train them on the job. We call these place-and-train programmes.

The logic is simple. The best place to pick up relevant skills is in the workplace, working for best-in-class companies, hopefully local companies, that are closest to the market and closest to the frontier of innovation.

Businesses can be incentivised to hire Singaporeans and then train and re-train them in those jobs. The Government can help through expanding time-limited wage subsidies for new hires. And Singaporeans will benefit because they have the assurance of a job first, before they commit to training. The GRIT programme is a step in that direction.

If I had it my way, I would call it the Graduate Employment Assistance through Training programme, or the GREAT programme. I am glad to be able to look into this further in my role on the GPC for Manpower.

Third, extreme longevity will raise new questions for town planning and policymaking. For the first time in our history, there are now two generations in retirement at the same time. In Whampoa, I encountered someone above 90 years old at almost every block visit. And quite regularly, someone above the age of 95. I think it is the same for many Members of this House. I see the future complexion of Singapore in Jalan Besar and Whampoa.

Our town planning assumptions will have to change.

Looking ahead, we will need to design our towns for the extreme user – the 90-year-old, not just the 70-year-old. A 10-minute walk means very different things for these two individuals.

At Whampoa, our ramps on our overhead bridges are increasingly useless. My elderly residents tell me that it is too tiring to walk up the ramps. And if we do not plan ahead to build lifts and other infrastructure early enough, we will end up isolating many of our oldest seniors and this will be a growing problem with senior frailty. It also means that the provision of senior care and other social support services may need to be more distributed in the neighbourhood, even if it means a less efficient model.

Beyond planning, our policies will also have to be updated. We cannot make policies assuming that all those above 65 are a single monolithic block with the same needs.

The Government has acknowledged this in its packages for the Pioneer Generation and the Merdeka Generation and I believe there will be a need for another package in this term, for a subset of these seniors. Mainly because, after a certain age, perhaps 85, they would all have lived beyond what they expected to live when they first retired. None of them would be automatically included in CPF LIFE. Not all would have Silver Support. But almost all of them would be anxious about the cost of living and they would not be able to benefit directly from the higher wages that a strong economy may bring. Can we, therefore, contemplate a more broad-based level of assurance, perhaps an expanded Silver Support scheme, for the oldest 5% of our population?

Fourth, the work to build a more inclusive society is far from complete. The new challenge of this generation is to address wealth inequality. It is no longer just about income inequality or the inequalities of starting points in life. Earlier terms of Government focused on equalising opportunities for our young and improving wages of our lower-wage workers. This is no doubt important and I strongly support it. But an important assumption here was that incomes and education would continue to be the best way to close the gaps in life outcomes. What if this assumption turns out to be only partially true?

We are already seeing early signs that wealth inequality is becoming worse. And if we do not address this fast enough, it will threaten to divide society. We would be broken into a million pieces, and we cannot go back.

At my weekly meet-the-people sessions, some residents struggle with affording a basic HDB rental flat. I regularly appeal to lower the rent of these rental flats. At the same time, my constituency set the record for the most expensive Design, Build and Sell Scheme flat transaction, at more than $1.5 million. That is more than 100 years of rent for the HDB rental flat, just think about that. And I do not even have landed properties in my area, where many have complained about higher property taxes.

With smaller family sizes, wealth will get passed down to fewer children and could become increasingly concentrated. I worry when I hear people say that the only way to be rich in Singapore is to be born rich. If the greatest predictor of wealth is who your parents are, then I think we have a big problem.

If we are serious about addressing the issue, then perhaps our fiscal system should be used as a means to reduce wealth inequality. How can we ensure that the returns to labour and effort, exceed the returns to other assets, such as real estate investments? How can our asset tax system, including property tax, be even more progressive? And how can we build a more effective form of wealth redistribution?

On that note, we actually have some interesting learning points with our CDC vouchers, which are universal and have provided some basic level of assurance. I was privileged to have had the chance to work on the CDC voucher scheme at the Ministry of Finance (MOF) as a civil servant and I look forward to interrogating these big questions in my role on the GPC for Finance.

Let me now conclude on the last theme – keeping Singapore united. Since the GE, I have seen an upswell of interest to volunteer in my community of Whampoa and Jalan Besar, especially among our youths.

I cherish this dearly. It makes me very optimistic about our future because it shows that Singaporeans, especially the next generation, cares not just about themselves, but about others in the community. These are the first fruits of a "we first" society. And over time, I hope we will even move towards becoming a "you first" society, a society where Singaporeans are more others-centred and put others first, not only because they identify as belonging to the same community or the same "we", but simply because putting others first is the right thing to do as human beings.

I have witnessed firsthand how strong community bonds can overcome local challenges – neighbours helping other neighbours in times of need, fighting fires together, carrying less mobile seniors down the staircase to evacuate a flat. And I hope that as the Government makes policies at the national level, we would also do more to encourage the building of these local community bonds at the local level.

One thing I have learnt as a new MP, is that no community can be fully served by our national policies or our Government agencies. There will still be gaps in the last mile of policy delivery. So, we will always need a strong community to make sure that the gaps are filled and that the last, the lost, the least, and the lonely are taken care of. This is not something that I came up with myself. This is something that my wife who coincidentally celebrates her birthday today, always reminds me about. And when our communities are strong and united, our country will likewise be strong and united.

With that, Mr Speaker, I support the Motion and wish the Government and all civil servants the very best in delivering on the policy agenda. [Applause.]

Mr Speaker: Mr Gho Sze Kee.

6.32 pm

Ms Gho Sze Kee (Mountbatten): Mr Speaker, it is a privilege to deliver my maiden speech in this House to register my support for the President's speech. I am a brand-new Member of the House. Thus, I seek your guidance and the indulgence of other Members of the House as I begin my parliamentary journey.

Sir, Singapore is still a young nation, as nations go, but we have come far in our national journey. Today, we are a first world nation with an advanced economy. There are many measures and metrics that we can feel proud of. But most importantly, for our people, around two-thirds of our workforce are PMETs. Similarly, around two-thirds of our households are middle class by OECD's definition.

These numbers put us in the leaders' pack globally. They are a reflection of decades of good governance, careful planning, and investment in the future. But these are not numbers just to feel good. More importantly, they are indicators that we have built a just and inclusive society, where opportunities and prosperity are not limited and concentrated in a few, but broadly shared. It is a validation of our social compact and the promises of our founding fathers made good.

Yet, we must never forget the fundamental and unchanging hard truths of our nation. We are small, with no natural resources. We are highly connected, and therefore highly exposed, to the rest of the world. Changes to the winds and currents of the outside world will affect us deeply. We must always remain clear eyed and unflinching in the face of challenges.

As the President has noted, we are sailing into choppy waters. Shifting global economic currents, a changing new world order, and AI-driven disruptions in the workplace make for some powerful headwinds. Each alone has the potential to reshape our society in profound and lasting ways. Our national resilience will be tested. Our social compact may be strained. It is in this context that I would like to speak on some of the challenges ahead and share thoughts on how we can approach them.

The most immediate challenge before us today is, of course, jobs, jobs and jobs. There are many factors churning our job market. But of all these, I believe the AI disruption will have the most pervasive and consequential impact. It is also an accelerant and amplifies the effects of all other challenges that we face.

There are three aspects of the AI disruption that we should take note of.

First, the speed of change. The rate of technological disruption today is unprecedented. Previous waves of tech disruptions, from personal computing to the Internet, unfolded over decades. Societies had the relative luxury of time to absorb and adapt. AI has up ended that timeline completely. To put things in perspective, ChatGPT reached 100 million users in just two months. Entire sectors, and entire industries, could be reshaped in a flash.

Second, the breadth and depth of change. The AI disruption will touch every sector of our economy. It will strike further up the value chain, at knowledge intensive and cognitive tasks, tasks which are the very heart of PMET roles. It is also impacting tasks once thought to be uniquely human, such as creative and artistic endeavours. What is not displaced, will be reshaped and redesigned.

Consider the tech sector, which gave us the very tools of this disruption. Today, one can create, debug and deploy a website or an app without writing a single line of code. The work of junior developers, routine programmers and similar roles is rapidly becoming obsolete.

Third, the inequality of change. AI does not affect everyone equally. It will create winners and losers. Those who can harness and adapt to the disruption will surge ahead. Others will struggle to adapt. Adoption will be uneven, outcomes will diverge. We will see high skill, high pay jobs created, even as many entry- and mid-level PMET roles are hollowed out or displaced. Those who climb up the value chain will advance rapidly, while others risk being pushed into lower value work. This will not just be a disruption in the workplace. It is a potential widening of social disparities.

So, what does this mean for us?

As I noted in the beginning, about two-thirds of our workforce are PMETs, which is actually one of the highest proportions in the world. Our advanced economy is also knowledge and services heavy, exactly the sectors where AI disruption will move fastest and hit the hardest. For our PMETs, this presents real pressure.

Entry and mid-level white collar roles are the most vulnerable. Without timely upskilling and adaptation, many may find themselves displaced.

The knock-on effects will be wide ranging. Entry and mid-level job opportunities may shrink in the near future. New graduates may face tough prospects, a trend we are already beginning to see. Mid-career PMETs will encounter greater uncertainty. Conventional assumptions about career progressions and success may no longer be taken for granted. Many jobs will be reshaped; hard earned skillsets may be rendered obsolete in short order.

The narrowing of opportunities also risks trapping more on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder. Income and social inequality may widen.

All of this presents a comprehensive challenge for our Government, for it will impact not only the economy, but also the very fabric of our society. And time is short. The pace of change and breadth of disruption means there is far less time for the Government and our citizens, to react.

It is also not only a distant problem. We are already seeing it unfold. Recent news of hiring freezes and layoffs among big tech companies in the US and other advanced economies, highlight the tangible, near-term impact of the AI disruption. We will not be immune.

The first waves are already hitting our shores. Among my Mountbatten constituents, I am seeing fresh graduates struggling to find full-time jobs, and mid-career PMETs trying to pivot after losing theirs. The mid-career PMETs, with much heavier obligations, are having a hard time.

Mr Speaker, I make no apologies for the frankness of my remarks so far. But I would be remiss if I do not highlight that this challenge, while daunting, carries with it enormous promise. The Chinese term for "crisis" – "危机" – combines the characters for danger and opportunity. The AI wave will be both. It will be disruptive, and perhaps painful in the short term, but it also holds immense potential for Singapore to advance, to innovate, and to capture new growths.

While some jobs may become obsolete and displaced, entire new industries will emerge. New professions, new jobs will be created. Work that we cannot yet imagine will become part of the economy of tomorrow.

Singapore is uniquely positioned to ride this wave. We have a highly educated, tech-savvy workforce. We have the supporting advanced infrastructure. And also, our high proportion of PMETs, in particular, can be our strategic advantage. With the right choices, together, we can transform this disruption into an era of renewed opportunity and prosperity.

Conventional wisdom in economics holds that growth slows down in advanced, mature economies like ours. AI may just be one of the key enablers that allows us to break that mould. This could be the greatest opportunity of our generation.

The choices before us are clear and stark. In truth, it is not even a choice. The AI disruption is here. It is unstoppable. We can either learn to ride it and thrive or be left behind. This is a challenge for our society and for every Singaporean.

I am glad to note the Government has already moved decisively to position Singapore ahead. The GRIT programme will begin soon. Our national AI strategy, launched in 2019, well before ChatGPT entered our daily lives, sets out a clear and comprehensive roadmap to prepare our workforce, our infrastructure, and our economy for the transformations ahead. I actually encourage everyone to read the latest 2.0 version.

The work of the Economic Strategy Review Committees will be critical in shaping the policies and initiatives that ensure Singapore is ready to confront the challenges and embrace the opportunities ahead. I look forward to their recommendations.

Next, some thoughts on the Government’s response. This is a systemic challenge. It is not enough to look only at jobs and the economy. To ride this wave successfully, we must pay attention to the social impacts. In particular, we must guard against the inequality of outcomes. These stresses will be felt across society, but not equally.

The most vulnerable and impacted segment of the AI disruption will, of course, be our PMETs, but they are also the ones who will power our transformation. The PMETs also form the core of our middle class. Together, they constitute the broad middle ground of our society.

A healthy society always has some degree of social mobility. Some people move up, some move down. As long as we ensure that the pathway up is equally accessible to everyone, that is natural. That is to be expected. But we must guard against too many sliding down. We must especially guard against the hollowing out of the middle because when that happens, it erodes the very centre that holds us together and shakes confidence in the whole.

Mr Speaker, our centre must hold. Not only are they the bedrock of our economy and drive our progress but they also embody the success and promise of the Singapore Story. We are successful, only because they are successful. Most crucially, this is because the broad middle is the one that anchors our social compact. A thriving middle class is therefore essential to our social stability and cohesion. If our middle-class shifts or gets squeezed, the ground beneath all of us becomes less steady.

Our middle class has been feeling the squeeze for a long time. The pressures come from many fronts: job insecurity, a tightening labour market, inflation, rising cost of living and household debt. Many also shoulder the burdens of the sandwich class, supporting children on one side and caring for elderly parents on another. My ward, Mountbatten, has the full range of the socio-economic demographics, from rental flats to standalone bungalows. In my conversations with constituents, it is from the middle-class residents that I sense most anxiety and frustration.

Our focus has always been to uplift those on the lowest rungs of the economic ladder and rightly so. They must get the most help, and they do. The wealthy, by large, can weather the storms. They are better insulated from the pressures that buffet the rest of society. But it is our middle-class that often bears the heaviest burdens. In the challenges ahead, it is this group that stands most exposed. And it is this group that has the most to lose.

Mr Speaker, I worry for this particular group of people. They have been carrying the rest of us. Beyond preparing them to seize new opportunities, and guiding and supporting those who may face setbacks, I hope we can do more to lift some weight off their shoulders. I intend to speak up more for our PMETs and middle-class in this house.

Lastly, some words on trust. Sir, the social compact that exists between this Government and our people rests fundamentally on trust. It is trust that underpins the partnership between Government and citizens, and it is this partnership that has allowed us to navigate many past crises together. The same will be true for the challenges that we now face. This trust is not abstract. It is derived from performance legitimacy. Performance legitimacy is formed in people's minds not from numbers and words, but from their lived experience, from what citizens actually see and feel in their daily lives, from how policies and initiatives land on the ground. Trust is not a permanent quality. It is also a finite quality. It cannot be assumed, nor can it be taken for granted. It can be eroded and must be earned and re-earned every single day.

Sir, allow me to illustrate this with a concrete example, the MyCareersFuture Jobs Portal. The primary purpose of this website is laudable, to connect locals, especially PMETs, with job opportunities and to ensure that locals are given first consideration for jobs before foreign hires are brought in. After all, while we welcome foreign talent as a necessity, we should never be disadvantaged in our own country. Yet, the consistent feedback that we see online paints a rather different picture. Many reported very low call-back rates and few positive outcomes. Most applications appeared to go unnoticed. The prevailing perception is that many jobs are merely posted to meet the legal requirement of 14 days, a performative task or exercise for employers before they could go on to apply for an E Pass for a foreign candidate who has already been earmarked.

To me, this is a missed opportunity and a great pity, not because the intentions were unclear, but precisely the opposite. I know the Government's motivations. Our people are truly at the heart of everything that this Government does. I spent years with the grassroots before entering this House and I have witnessed this first-hand. Yet, I know good intentions and good policies alone are never enough. Without effective execution, without thinking through how things will land on the ground, even the best initiatives can fall short of their intent.

We must always be mindful of the fragile and finite nature of this trust. Each time the lived experience of our people falls short of the intentions of policy, each time the execution falters, or lands wrongly on the ground, trust gets eroded. A deep reservoir of trust still exists between the Government and our people. That is the only reason we are still here. We do live in an imperfect world and no government is perfect. But this Government is the Government of the day. The awesome responsibility of governing Singapore and the trust of our fellow citizens rests with this party. We can and we must aim to do ever better.

The seeds of today's Singapore were sown by our founding fathers 60 years ago. 60 years hence, most of us who are here in this House today will not be around. But our children, and our children's children, will be. We now stand on the cusp of a brave new world. What we do here in this House for the rest of our term, is not just for the Singaporeans who are here today, but for generations yet to come. So, let us never forget that.

6.51 pm

Mr Speaker: Mr Andre Low you have a clarification to make?

Mr Low Wu Yang Andre: Yes, I have a clarification to make.

Mr Speaker: Please go ahead.

Mr Low Wu Yang Andre: My clarification is to the hon Member for Jalan Besar GRC. I thank him for his point on the Jobseeker Support Scheme. We are in agreement on many of the objectives of that scheme. I think the WP differs on implementation. So, through the Jobseeker Support Scheme we think it is a good start, but it actually excludes even the median income earner in Singapore, because the qualifying criteria is $5,000 monthly income and also annual value of your property of $31,000 or less. Our proposal covers everybody. It is a social insurance, it is a risk-pooling approach that will allow for PMETs, which, as in my speech, I had mentioned, almost two-thirds of the Singapore workforce to largely qualify as well.

Secondly, to his point on whether it is fiscally sustainable. Our approach is to have this scheme be funded largely by the premiums paid by employees and employers, and we think this is more fiscally sustainable than the Jobseeker Support Scheme, which is funded by taxpayers. The way this scheme can work is for the premium reserves to be built-up in times of relative stability, like today. So, we would say that this would have to be implemented as soon as possible so that over time these reserves can be built up and then they can be drawn down from in times of disruption.

6.52 pm

Mr Speaker: Mr Shawn Loh.

Mr Shawn Loh: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Member for the clarification as well. I actually wanted to clarify my own speech, so I will make two clarifications. One, my own speech; and then, two, in response.

In my own speech when I mentioned the numbers for the Jobseekers Support Scheme, as well as my back-of-the-envelope calculations for the premium collections, I may have misspoken. I said billions instead of millions; it should be millions. So, MOM's estimated budget for this year for the Jobseekers Support Scheme is $200 million and back-of-envelope calculation for the premium collections on an annual basis is on the parameters that the Member outlined. It is about $150 million.

I take the Member's point that he wants to build up premium reserves over time. I do, however, acknowledge that the MOM's budget calculations and estimates are for this year, this year's Jobs Support Scheme, not for the future but this year. That means this year, MOM expects to spend $200 million of taxpayer dollars to support the workers who need help. If that is the case, then we will not be able to build up the reserves over time if the estimate is only $160 million from this year. But the broader point is that we probably want to look at the numbers a bit closer to see what is the appropriate premium collection amount that could reflect that proposal more accurately. So, for example, if it is a targeted scheme which the Member has also acknowledged that cost $200 million this year, then a national insurance scheme should collect more premiums this year even though it is to build up its reserves over time.

Mr Speaker: Mr Alex Yeo.

6.56 pm

Mr Alex Yeo (Potong Pasir): Mr Speaker. I rise in support of the Motion of thanks for the President's Address. First, I wish to take this opportunity to thank the residents of Potong Pasir for their warm welcome to my team and me. Potong Pasir SMC is almost as old as Singapore. Formed in 1968, it has grown in population size by 2.6 times. The transformation that it has undergone is a fair reflection of a cross-section of our Singapore society. On the one side of Upper Serangoon Road, the mature estate of Potong Pasir with its landmark sloping roofs, rich heritage and a high number of seniors; and on the other side, the young vibrant families of the Bidadari Estate. As I spent these last few months getting to know my residents and understanding their concerns and aspirations, I find myself reflecting on the notion of well-being.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, well-being is defined as, "With reference to a person or community, the state of being healthy, happy, or prosperous; physical, psychological, or moral welfare."

Today, I would like to speak a little about being healthy and happy. When I speak with retired seniors in the community, they often tell me that they hope to be physically and mentally healthy. Having led active lives in their younger years, they worry that their silver years could become mentally meaningless, physically debilitating or financially a burden to their families. For our seniors, staying healthy with affordable healthcare is about living with dignity and peace of mind. In a "we first" society, how do we ensure this? Dignity is about the quality of life in a senior's silver years. Conditions, such as cognitive impairment or the loss of any of the Activities of Daily Living, reduce their quality of life significantly, and in the eyes of a senior, his or her dignity.

As the Prime Minister shared in the National Day Rally Speech this year, while we now live longer, the years that we live in good health is on average 10 years shorter. Ideally, our lifespan and our health-span should be closer. The concern that we live long but not well, is real.

The increasing number of seniors who reached out to me over the last nine years, first in Paya Lebar and now in Potong Pasir to certify their Lasting Power of Attorney (LPAs) on a pro bono basis, is both heartening and concerning at the same time. While on one hand, seniors are making conscious choices with awareness on what is a very difficult and life-changing issue; on the other hand, it is clear to me, that more seniors are anxious, worried and unsettled about what could happen to them as they age.

They say prevention is better than cure. Preventive healthcare for our seniors can reduce years of bad health while increasing their quality of life. With this in mind, in 2019, I helped launch the Health and Wellness Programme in Paya Lebar. The Programme provided seniors with fully subsidized flu and pneumococcal vaccinations as well as screenings for pre-dementia and osteoporosis. Many seniors in Paya Lebar benefited from the Programme. We focused on Brain and Bone Health because these are common and potentially debilitating conditions that our seniors increasingly face. The results were concerning. They showed that an overwhelming number of seniors were unaware that they suffered from mild to severe cognitive impairment and/or poor bone health.

When Healthier SG was announced in 2023 with its focus on preventive healthcare, including various screenings and fully subsidised flu and pneumococcal vaccinations, it gave me cause to cheer quietly to myself as it meant that we had been on the right track. Unfortunately, Healthier SG has yet to cover screenings and support for conditions, such as pre-dementia and osteoporosis. Dementia is debilitating and scary for our seniors. Poor bone health on the other hand, leads to deteriorating mobility for our seniors, particularly after a fall. Both conditions take a tremendous toll on caregivers in the family.

Pre-dementia screening and bone density tests, therefore, allow for early detection, timely intervention which can slow down the progression and better long-term planning, which gives our seniors and their families the time and opportunity to make necessary adjustments. I am, therefore, happy to announce that next month, we will be launching a similar ground-up Community Preventive Healthcare Programme in Potong Pasir for seniors where we will focus once again, on brain and bone health. We are also working on adding other aspects of preventative healthcare, such as vaccination for shingles.

I hope that in the near future, the Government will consider expanding the ambit of the Healthier SG Programme, to include screening for pre-dementia, bone density tests, fully subsidised shingles vaccinations and other areas of preventive healthcare so that we can augment and support the efforts of our seniors to remain as healthy as they can be, in their silver years.

Mr Speaker, for preventive healthcare to be at its most effective, we must ensure that our seniors age well in an environment that provides the right care, support and amenities tailored to their needs. If this can be created in a familiar environment within the estates that they live in, all the better.

I therefore read with great interest, Minister Ong's remarks last month about Age Well Neighbourhoods. I believe that if we succeed in the four areas of expanding our Active Ageing Centres, introducing the Community Health Posts, Home Personal Care and upgrading the physical environment of such estates to suit the needs of seniors, we can create an environment where seniors can live and socialise in surroundings that they are familiar with, stay active with friends and care for their health through easily accessible preventive healthcare programmes.

I understand that Toa Payoh has been selected to pilot the Age Well Neighbourhoods. Since Minister Ong is not in the Chamber, but perhaps, I could very humbly, on behalf of the seniors in Potong Pasir, make a pitch for our estate to be next.

Sir, to seniors, having affordable healthcare is about having peace of mind. In Singapore, we have a thoughtfully planned healthcare financial assistance framework of S+3Ms, namely, Government Subsidies, MediSave, MediShield Life and MediFund, which provides Singaporeans with support for their medical bills at public healthcare institutions.

As set out in the 1993 White Paper on Affordable Healthcare, the framework is premised on providing a sustainable healthcare system, based on the objectives of personal responsibility, avoiding over-reliance on state welfare and providing good and affordable medical services to Singaporeans.

To qualify for Government subsidies, means testing applies. This has a two-prong approach. First, the per capita household income (PCHI) is assessed. If the household does not have PCHI, then the annual value of the residence is considered.

By and large, it has been a progressive and fair assessment regime aimed at providing targeted assistance to Singaporeans who need it the most and many have benefited over the years. I wonder, however, if it is time for us to review the framework, particularly the assessment of our seniors' eligibility for Government subsidies, given the changing demography of Singapore and their evolving needs and circumstance.

From 1990 to 2024, the median age of Singaporeans grew from 29.8 to 42.8 years. Those above the age of 65, grew from 6% to 18% of the population. As shared widely by other Members in this House, this number is set to become about one in four by 2030.

At the same, time, an increasing number of seniors above the age of 65 either lives alone or alone with their spouses. In 2024, this makes up about 38.5% of households with above 65-year-olds in Singapore.

Many Singaporeans above the age of 65 years are retired, or nearing retirement, often with a significantly reduced income. Conversely, their healthcare needs increase. One can argue that in the 1990s, around the time the White Paper was released, we were a younger nation, with a vibrant workforce underpinned by a strong growing economy. The general healthcare needs of a smaller pool of seniors could be supported by a larger, younger workforce.

Today, however, our demographic has evolved. We have many more seniors with smaller families. They wish to live independently. Using the Annual Value (AV) of a senior's residence as part of the means test may not reflect a senior's means or financial ability. Even where seniors live with their families, financial circumstances can be challenging.

Let me share an example of Mr Jeffrey Tan, which I do with his permission. I got to know Jeffrey in the middle of 2024. Jeffrey and his wife were in their 60s and, at that time, lived in a larger HDB flat. Jeffrey's father was in his 90s and was previously living in a smaller HDB home in Toa Payoh where Jeffrey grew up. As an only child, Jeffrey had arranged for his parents to move in with him.

As a result of this, however, when Jeffrey’s father grew older and had more healthcare needs, Jeffrey realised that his father's entitlement to Government subsidies was significantly lower due to the AV of Jeffrey's home. Given that the household had no income, the added cost caused the family financial challenges. To his credit, in all my conversations with him, Jeffrey did not advocate for universal healthcare nor complain about the financial burden. He however shared that others like him, who had no income but had to care for their aged parents, face similar financial challenges when the ability to afford and the assessment of the level of subsidies was based on the AV of the home that they lived in. He wondered if his decision to be a responsible child, even though he himself was in his 60s and retired, had effectively penalised him and his father, financially.

Mr Speaker, we have a healthcare system that is world class and serves Singaporeans well. As Minister Ong shared during the Committee of Supply debates earlier this year, the Government takes a practical approach, balancing the trade-offs in achieving the three objectives of affordability, availability and quality in our healthcare policies. It is, without a doubt, a delicate balance.

In fact, the Government had recently revised the thresholds for both per capita household income and the AV criteria to include more Singaporeans within the threshold.

This is an acknowledgment that public policy is contextual with time and when there are opportunities to refine, address gaps and/or respond to fundamental shifts. We must, as we always have, continue to do so. The shifting demographic and social paradigms mean that there will be more situations like Jeffrey's, each with his or her own unique circumstances.

It is in this spirit that I hope that this House can, in this term of Government, consider reviewing and removing the means-testing regime for the application of subsidies for seniors in our public healthcare system.

Mr Speaker, our seniors belong to a generation who put the "we" before the "I" in the endeavour of nation building. We have a duty to try to give them the best opportunity to live a life of quality with dignity and peace of mind in their silver years.

Sir, I would now like to turn to the second aspect of well-being, which is happiness. At the recent Emmy Awards, the Netflix show Adolescence swept up awards for eight categories. Its grim, yet compelling portrayal of children, smartphones and social media resonated globally because it reflected a reality many of us recognise.

As a father of two Gen Alpha children, I wish for them, as all parents do, to enjoy an ideal childhood, like a gentle spring season: fresh, full of promise, and unburdened by the storms of life, a time for imagination, exploration, and forming lifelong bonds with family and friends.

Yet, my wife and I worry. Where once parents told children to beware of strangers outside the home, today, we must also guard against the "strangers" and dangers lurking within – in the digital world. Technology offers promise, but it has also dramatically altered childhood experiences, self-worth and social relationships over the past decade.

The harmful effects of excessive screen time and social media on the young are well-documented. I am therefore heartened by the plans announced in the Ministry of Digital Development and Information's Addendum to the President's Address, to establish an Online Safety Commission and to promote healthier digital interactions for children and youth, study interventions in other countries, build on existing measures for age-appropriate access and encourage positive norms for digital well-being. I believe, Mr Speaker, that we are at an inflexion point as a society.

Aside from online safety, the data and literature on the harm caused to the overall well-being of children and youths, growing up in a digital environment is well-researched and publicised. Many Members of this House would be, for example, well-versed with Jonathan Haidt's book, "The Anxious Generation".

We have also all read reports that indicate that while our children are well-connected in the digital world, they remain lonely and disconnected in real life.

The 2024 Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy-Institute of Policy Studies' Youth Survey found that more than half of young people find it easier to communicate online and feel anxious when they interact with others in person. Younger respondents also report higher levels of social isolation and loneliness. A CNA-Institute of Policy Studies survey found that youths aged 13 to 19 spend an average of 8.5 hours daily on screens. These are deeply worrying statistics.

I recall watching The Emoji Movie with my children. I am not sure if Members have watched this movie. But imagine all the emojis come together, through animation, in a story about young people expressing their inner thoughts through emojis to interact with each other.

To me, the movie was an excellent depiction of how our young are growing up socially in a digital world. To be fair, adults also regularly and, as a matter, of course, express emotions through emojis. However, most adults of today grew up in a less digitally enabled time and therefore are more likely to be equipped with strong relationships and real-life experiences with family and friends in the "physical world".

I for one am glad that the Government is keeping a close watch on this trend and is prepared to take steps to intervene by introducing the appropriate legislative safeguards to protect our young.

But will this be enough to shape behaviours especially when the digital space is all pervasive? Even if we manage to somehow reduce or limit access to the digital world for our young, it is likely to leave a gaping void that needs to be filled. While we use legislative levers to address immediate concerns and shape future behaviour, there is also a need to intervene directly in our communities and facilitate social activities and interactions for our young to fill the void.

We have done this successfully for our seniors with our Active Ageing Centres. In fact, we could consider co-locating centres for our children and youth with our Active Ageing Centres. I believe both our seniors, children and youths will benefit from being close to each other with opportunities to interact.

I am confident that we will have the support of many parents for such centres. In the Bidadari Estate, I have been approached by parents of young children who are prepared to put in the time to set up and run such community spaces to keep our youths engaged. They recently shared their proposal with me and I would like to share their vision statement with this House. I quote, "To create a space where parents and children can connect, learn and grow, strengthening their bonds and building resilience together. By fostering a culture of well-being, we aim to nurture a new generation of healthy, confident children and resilient, supported parents. We believe that when families flourish, communities do too", unquote.

There are many like-minded parents in our community who are prepared to work with us to provide safe and engaging spaces for our youths within the community. I strongly urge the Government to leverage on the interest, resources and expertise in the community to set up such community spaces so that our young have opportunities to spend time interacting with friends, family and grow bonds in the community, the old-fashioned way, face-to-face, in person.

Mr Speaker, as we work towards nurturing a "we first" society beyond SG60, we must ensure that we continue to look after our collective well-being. We are only as strong as our weakest link. We have a duty to support our seniors and for the future of the nation, ensure that our young grow up healthy, happy and safe both in the digital and the physical realms.

Together with the foundations of resilience, unity and fighting spirit as a people, I am confident that we can overcome our challenges and shape a future in which we will continue to not just survive but thrive. I support the Motion. [Applause.]

Mr Speaker: Mr Edward Chia.

7.12 pm

Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Speaker, Sir, it is an honour to rise in this House and to continue serving the residents of Holland-Bukit Timah GRC, especially those in Zhenghua. My heartfelt thanks to all residents.

First, I would like to declare my interest as an entrepreneur within the circular economy space, specifically running a food circularity business. I also serve as an Exco member of the Restaurant Association of Singapore and as an advisor to the Singapore Association of Ship Suppliers and Services, the National Instructors and Coaches Association, and the Visual, Audio and Creative Content Professionals Association (VICPA).

I echo the President's call to refresh Singapore's economic strategies, and to build a future that is both resilient and inclusive.

The world around us is shifting rapidly. Global markets, once seen as stable, are now weighed down by war, protectionist tariffs, and domestic upheavals. Multinational corporations are recalibrating supply chains and rethinking strategies, while trade itself is increasingly weaponised. In this climate, countries are competing fiercely with subsidies and incentives to win investments.

Singapore cannot and should not compete on size or subsidy. We must compete on relevance, on the strength of our ecosystem. And this is why SMEs matter. They provide the embedded networks and value that anchor investors here, and they give Singapore its relevance.

In uncertain times, agility often trumps scale and agility is where our SMEs shine. They are adaptable, deeply rooted in our communities and reflect the entrepreneurial spirit that built modern Singapore. Strengthening them is an economic imperative and also a social one. They enrich livelihoods, sustain communities and make Singapore a more cohesive nation.

To unlock this potential, we need a mindset shift, to see SMEs as co-creators of our national transformation.

To unlock the potential of our SMEs, I put forward eight recommendations. These recommendations fall under three themes, providing targeted relief with accountability, fostering collaboration that scales, and driving structural reforms that reward both economic performance and social impact.

First, I propose a Targeted Restart Grant to support viable firms, particularly in sectors, like F&B, logistics, tourism and services, that continue to grapple with global supply chain disruptions and a subdued business outlook. Crucially, a Restart grant ensures that entrepreneurs with deep experience and networks are empowered to restart so that the jobs they create, the communities they anchor, and the know-how they carry are not lost, but preserved as economic and social value for our nation.

This support should be conditional. It must be tied to forward-looking transformation plans, such as digitalisation, process redesign, internationalisation and workforce upskilling. The aim is not to prop up outdated business models, but to catalyse renewal and innovation.

Support should be structured with clear milestones, co-funding ratios and sunset clauses. Firms that meet their transformation goals could tap into productivity credits and other grants. Those who do not should exit the support framework to safeguard public value. In short, Mr Speaker, we must help experience restart, not expire.

Beyond restarting, SMEs will also need time to rebuild. This is why my second proposal is to give SMEs more breathing space when it comes to financing. This could include extending loan tenures, offer repayment flexibility or introducing principal moratoriums, especially for firms undergoing transformation. These measures should be calibrated with risk-based pricing and require recipients to commit to basic financial reporting and cashflow transparency.

In my maiden speech, I called for repayment schemes to go beyond rent arrears. Today, I reiterate that we should extend them to a wider range of obligations – personal guarantees, insurance bonds, trade financing and term loans. Just as the COVID-19 framework gave many businesses a lifeline, such calibrated extensions can give SMEs the time and confidence to press on with transformation.

At the same time, we cannot rely on traditional banks alone. Alternative financing models must be expanded – revenue-based financing and venture debt designed for SMEs. These instruments are especially crucial for high-growth sectors, like agri-tech, clean energy, health tech and the digital economy, where upfront investment is heavy but long-term returns can be transformative for Singapore’s future. In short, we must give SMEs not just capital, but also time, because time is the oxygen they need to grow, adapt and thrive.

Third, we must actively encourage SMEs to form consortiums and project joint ventures. Forming consortiums allows SMEs to pool talent, share resources and punch above their weight for larger contracts. To facilitate this, agencies can provide higher grant quantums for firms that collaborate in enterprise around projects, seeking greater collaborative ventures. Beyond this, the Government should enhance grant support and offer favourable financing terms for consortiums, including joint training programmes, shared intellectual property frameworks and common procurement platforms.

Trade associations and chambers of commerce should act as neutral convenors and custodians, ensuring accountability and fair distribution of benefits, while giving SMEs the confidence to collaborate at scale. In short, by encouraging collaboration, we multiply the impact of our SMEs, turning small firms into a connected ecosystem that strengthens Singapore’s competitiveness and resilience.

Fourth, we must improve payment terms to ease cash flow for SMEs. Delayed payments from large corporates or Government-linked entities can cripple small businesses. The Government can lead by example to commit to shorter standard payment terms, ideally within 30 days. In addition, I propose introducing automatic late-payment interest clauses to encourage discipline and predictability. This should also include the timely disbursement of grants once project milestones are met. To institutionalise this further, we implement procurement performance scorecard that tracks payment timeliness and SME participation across the public sector.

Fifth, I call for a more efficient regulatory system. For SMEs, every month spent waiting for approvals is a month of lost opportunity. We must set clear standards with publishable timelines, expand "silent approvals" for low-risk applications and adopt sandboxes so that new business models can be tested safely. And to make this stick, we should institutionalise a scorecard that tracks timeliness of approvals across public agencies.

My sixth proposal addresses the issue of rising manpower costs. While the PWM is a critical and necessary step toward uplifting lower-wage workers and affirming the dignity of labour, we must also acknowledge the strain it is placing on our SMEs. Many are struggling to keep pace with mandated wage increases, especially when productivity gains take time to realise and passing on costs to consumers risks pricing them out of the market.

This pressure is further compounded by the rising total cost of foreign manpower, fuelled by higher dormitory costs, steeper qualifying salaries and persistent foreign worker levies. Let us recall that these levies were originally intended to guard against wage suppression. But in sectors already governed by PWM, where wage ladders are clearly structured and enforced, such levies are increasingly redundant, even counterproductive. They burden SMEs without offering meaningful additional safeguards for workers. I, hence, urge the Government to undertake a comprehensive review of the foreign worker levy framework in PWM-covered sectors. Targeted levy reductions or time-bound rebates, similar to those introduced during the pandemic, should be considered.

My seventh proposal addresses rent, a structural issue that continues to weigh heavily on our SMEs. For years, SMEs have called for greater rent data transparency. Why? Because transparency levels the playing field. It ensures fairer negotiations and it allows businesses to make informed decisions.

In the residential property market, URA already publishes rent and property sale values, giving tenants and buyers clarity. Government landlords have also published land and rental data. These are positive precedents. This is why I call on URA to extend this practice and publish commercial rent data in a format similar to that used for residential properties. In addition to transparency, as the largest landowner in Singapore, the Government has the opportunity and also the responsibility to shape how market systems evolve.

I propose that public tenancy evaluations scale and expand the Price Quality Method. Crucially, "quality" component should reflect not just financial bids, but also social and environmental value. This can be aligned with the Corporate Purpose framework under the Company of Good by the National Voluntary and Philanthropy Centre, where firms are assessed not only on profits, but on their contributions to people, society, governance, environment and the economy. Firms recognised with one to three hearts, or as Champions of Good, could then be awarded proportionate scoring in tenancy evaluations.

Because, Mr Speaker, our enterprises are not just economic agents, they are also social change agents and a rent model that rewards placemaking, inclusivity and sustainability will strengthen businesses and enrich Singapore.

Lastly, we must acknowledge that automation requires space, both physical and financial. Automated operations often involve additional infrastructure. For example, an automated production line may require space for conveyance systems, robotic arms, storage buffers, or automated sorting and quality control stations. These spatial needs can significantly increase upfront costs and logistics complexity, particularly for SMEs operating in compact facilities.

For such businesses, I propose that the Government offer property tax relief, accelerated capital allowances, longer lease tenures, calibrated foreign worker levy reductions, provided these are tagged to productivity gains and worker upskilling outcomes. Such support would lower the barriers to automation adoption, while ensuring that public resources lead to real, measurable improvements in efficiency, skills development and competitiveness.

Mr Speaker, Sir, our SMEs already contribute 50% of our Singapore's GDP and employ nearly 70% of our workforce. That alone shows how vital they are and how much more we can unlock if we support them better and support them now. It may be tempting to focus on larger enterprises for quick wins in GDP and jobs. But SMEs are not just smaller versions of multinational enterprises (MNEs). They are the backbone of our ecosystem. They provide the networks, the know-how and the connections that make Singapore attractive to global investors. And when MNEs bring in technology and market access, SMEs gain, scale-up and innovate.

Stronger SMEs mean better jobs: progressive, higher-value, future-ready jobs for Singaporeans. They anchor communities, build skills and nurture innovation. By growing our SME sector, we create a pipeline of local global champions. We stabilise our economy. We build resilience. And we ensure Singapore remains relevant, wherever and whatever the future economic order may be.

Strong SMEs, better jobs, a resilient and inclusive Singapore. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion.

Mr Speaker: Mr Sharael Taha.