Debate on Annual Budget Statement

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of Budget 2026.

Over the past week, many have moved between reunion, Ramadan and reflection – with meals shared around the table. Some tables are full, while others have empty seats. Elders with their time-honoured recipes, children pulled up close with baby chairs and extra seats pulled out at the last minute. We make space for each other, instinctively.

Budget 2026 is delivered at this festive and reflective moment, set against a backdrop of profound structural change. The global order is fracturing, job augmentations facilitated by technology are accelerating and economic competition is intensifying. The World Economic Forum's (WEF's) Future of Jobs Report projects that nearly 40% of skills being used in today's workforce will change by 2030. Global trade tensions continue to intensify, with the value of goods hit by new tariffs quadrupling in the past year to the highest level in over 15 years.

But there is another transformation, which is equally consequential that we must confront. As of this year, we are now an officially super-aged society, with more than 21% of our resident population 65 or above. At the same time, our resident total fertility rate (TFR) stands at less than half the replacement rate. The issue is personal, existential and urgent.

An ageing society is not simply about older persons. It reshapes childhood, work, caregiving, retirement and community life for everyone. If we prepare late and view ageing as a burden, we will have to manage decline. But if we prepare early, perhaps we can design longevity with meaning through our years.

Today, I will speak about how we must respond across the life course, so that every Singaporean continues to have a place at our national table.

Sir, in an ageing society, every cohort of children grows smaller. This means fewer classmates, siblings, workers and caregivers. In 2024, 29,237 new Dragon babies were born – one of whom was our son Mizan. Every child is not just precious, but pivotal in securing Singapore's place in the world.

When couples consider parenthood, they are not just calculating financial costs across their children's lifetime; they are assessing confidence – be it in childcare access, sufficient housing, quality of life, our climate, the way the world is going in what the stakes are like to raise a child. Before we were fortunate to have Mizan in our sixth year of marriage, my husband and I would often talk about the kind of parents that we hope to be, the kind of Singapore that he might grow up in.

Budget 2026 includes financial measures, such as Child LifeSG Credits and Community Development Council (CDC) vouchers, and for some parents, this means a few months of milk powder covered, which is much appreciated.

Over the past two years, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong highlighted the Government's support for a Singapore Made For Families. One substantial policy shift has been the expansion of paternity and additional 10 weeks of shared parental leave during that precious first few months. Beyond monetary support, these are the kind of changes that help to make family "feel" possible in Singapore.

We must build on this momentum, through changing mindsets about shared responsibilities and consider adjusting childcare leave proportionately to the number of children a couple has; enhancing flexible working arrangements which are crucial for many modern, dual-income households; normalising career pauses and supporting re-entry for both men and women; improving opportunities for access to housing with more space or that are nearer other family members for support.

This is the invisible infrastructure of fertility – when parents trust the system, there is less anxiety about parenthood and there may be a greater willingness to give it a go. As every child is precious, we must also make sure that every child is safe. Preschool and student care oversight needs to be strengthened, so parents have peace of mind when leaving their children for the day. Our systems must also hold the most vulnerable of children with care and competence.

Whether under child protection, in residential care homes or in the juvenile justice system, we must strengthen safeguarding standards and empower officers working with these children, through adequate resourcing and coordinated support across agencies to intervene and tackle the root of the issue. The system must fight for them, not fail them, as these children are part of our national family too.

Demographic change also reshapes our workforce. The number of citizens aged 80 and older have increased by approximately 60% over the past decade. Budget 2026 strengthens workforce support, such as the expansion of AI training under the TechSkills Accelerator. But disruption is already here – long-term unemployment of those under 30 is higher than pre-pandemic norms and mid-career transitions are lengthening.

For youths, I hope to see more structured, meaningful internships for learning, not as proving ground, to become the norm. Today, some stack internships out of pressure, not purpose. Students from lower-income families sometimes feel torn about pursuing an internship they are passionate about versus the opportunity to work for their households. And when some graduates turn to internships instead of full-time roles, we must ask how else we can support the school-to-work transition.

Organisations like The Astronaut's Collective, Access Singapore and Halogen run programs that help facilitate exposure to career opportunities for, among others, disadvantaged students to broaden their horizons to the possibilities they may not even know of. I hope that such important work can further be scaled.

Work-study pathways should be integrated into curriculum, not peripheral as just stand-alone programmes and industry co-development of curricula should deepen.

For mid-career workers, reinvention must be normalised. In a potential hundred-year life, this may translate to multiple careers across our lifetime. Conversion programmes should be strengthened with concrete employment outcomes, so that these transitions feel like renewal, not regression.

It is clear that our Government takes an active stance on ensuring that: one, there are high quality jobs for Singaporeans; and two, that Singaporeans are well equipped with the skills to take on these jobs. Having said the above, we should also consider the social and emotional dimensions of how an older workforce responds to such rapid change and support them. Sir, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): Sir, family is the bedrock of our society's strength. However, the reality we must face is that the total fertility rate (TFR) of Malays is now below the population replacement rate, at 1.58 in 2024.

Among young people, marriage plans are increasingly being postponed because they need to prioritise building their careers and financial stability to cope with challenging living costs. For young couples who fall into the “sandwich generation”, pressure and time constraints lead to decisions to have one or two children, something that requires significant consideration. Therefore, we need to rebuild the “kampung” for our families and strengthen support networks. Whether these are families transitioning from rental flats to their own flats, single mothers or fathers raising children or caregivers who sacrifice their careers to care for elderly parents, all Singaporeans need to feel that support is always available, and systems are easily accessible for them to get help.

Some families in our community still depend on a single source of income. This makes them more vulnerable to economic uncertainty. When their source of income is affected, they worry whether their daily needs can be met. Whatever choices families make in childcare arrangements, women who take career breaks should always feel that the door remains open for them to return to work and fulfil their aspirations if they choose to do so.

I applaud initiatives, such as MARA Mentoring by MENDAKI and the SkillsFuture Job Seeker Support Scheme by WSG. However, in an era of rapid change, more support is needed.

I would like to call for opportunities for mid-career workers continue to be strengthened, including mentor programmes and buddy systems for those going through transition phases. I hope that every family in Singapore will continue to have faith – that we will stand together through thick and thin and remain confident that the prosperity we build will be inclusive and benefit every family.

(In English): By 2030, around 100,000 seniors are expected to require assistance with daily living. While many rely on foreign domestic workers or care services for the day to day, caregiving does not end at the door. Sons and daughters from the sandwiched generation continue to carry the quiet responsibilities with love – the emotional vigilance, decision-making, unexpected hospital appointments and the guilt of not being able to be there.

Enhancements to the Home Caregiving Grant (HCG) are very welcome. But we should also encourage structured parental care leave frameworks and employers who go the extra mile to support employees. Today, many rely on annual leave and career often competes with caregiving responsibilities until a point where one feels like they have to tap out of the workforce, especially for women who tend to disproportionately carry the caregiving load; having stronger caregiver support frameworks, including hospital post-discharge protocols, as well as helping caregivers begin again after their loved ones are no longer around. I hope we broaden the qualifying criteria of the HCG to include those who are unable to work due to mental health conditions, instead of only assessing by ADLs.

And finally, we must keep an eye out for particularly vulnerable double ageing segments, such as the persons with disabilities and caregiver dyad. An ageing society with changing family structures requires caregiving language and norms to evolve – we cannot keep stressing family systems until they break.

Finally, the generation of seniors today, is more digitally savvy and living longer than before. By 2050, nearly half of Singaporeans are projected to be over 65. That represents valuable wisdom and experience which should be tapped on. Ageing is also about dignity and purpose.

In Ang Mo Kio, 40% of our residents are over 60 years old. Their life stories and gentle resilience, inspire me deeply. While efforts, such as the Enhancement for Active Seniors (EASE) 2.0 and the Silver Upgrading Programme make ageing in place more possible, we must continue to design empowering upgrades and inclusive spaces so they feel confident to participate in community life instead of taking a deficit-based approach to thinking about what they cannot do. And in the midst of all the upgrading and construction to do so, we must also be mindful in the process, how even changes in pedestrian walkways, lack of lifts or escalators at overhead bridges, can result in our seniors being fearful of leaving their house to do their favourite market run and end up staying isolated home alone.

I hope that over time, public spaces and Active Ageing Centres can evolve into intergenerational hubs, where grandparenting sessions are a norm, seniors mentor youths and take on micro-work opportunities, even as some recover in community.

Mr Speaker, Sir, at reunion dinners and at iftar, we instinctively make space for one another. It may be slightly jarring going between lohei and terawih in this period, but this is also, what it is, as the beauty of a multi-religious and multiracial society. This Budget challenges us to do the same at a national level.

It is the first Budget of our super-aged phase. We must think structurally, not incrementally and across life stages from childhood confidence, to workforce resilience, to ageing with purpose as one congruent Singapore story. If we design intentionally and strengthen the compact between generations, then longevity will not feel lonely and will not weaken Singapore.

And whether one comes home to a large reunion, bringing the next generation along, or a small gathering, or a community who becomes family – every generation of Singaporeans should know, that they always have a place at our national table.

Mr Louis Chua.

Mr Patrick Tay.

Mr Singh, you have a clarification to make.

Mr Patrick Tay.

Ms Joan Perera.

Mr Speaker, Sir, home is where our heart is and therefore, I am starting my speech on the Budget speech talking about our homes. It is so important to come home to a space where one can feel safe and rested. Our Housing and Development Board (HDB) projects are the pride of our nation. But more and more of our HDB blocks are also crossing the 50-year mark.

It is good news indeed that we had managed to achieve a Budget surplus of over $15 billion for 2025. The surplus will be added to our reserves, where we can generate investment income streams that will contribute to our future Budgets. This money gives us the ability to plan for and secure our future with greater certainty.

I will like to start with an appeal to the Government to invest more expeditiously in the rejuvenation of our older HDB estates. We have to ensure that our maintenance and replacement works can continue to uphold the standard and quality of our HDB housing. Buildings do not age uniformly. Some may suffer from more issues than others. When one has to deal with unexpected and recurring problems, such as water ingress, mould and spalling concrete, our homes can become sources of stress and anxiety instead.

Take for example my residents at Henderson Crescent estate. Life at home can be stressful because they constantly have to watch out for leakages and check their ceilings and walls. They worry about the effect the persistent mould have on their health, especially the children and the elderly. The repairs also put a strain on their finances, especially for the elderly and families with lower incomes.

As the HDB Home Improvement Programme (HIP) takes place only twice during the span of the 99 years, residents are left waiting and are appealing for a more lasting and sustained solution to the myriad of problems affecting their blocks. To deal with the systemic deterioration of such HDB blocks, could the HDB review its HIP policy, and consider an additional round of HIP which is more flexible in scope to take into account the specific issues faced by a particular HDB estate?

It is important to rejuvenate problematic HDB blocks so that they remain good homes for our people and remain attractive enough for prospective buyers. If that cannot be done, I would like to call upon the Government, on behalf of my residents, such as our residents from Henderson Crescent, to grant their request for Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS). If there are no plans for SERS, can the Ministry review the criteria for Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS) on a case-by-case basis, depending on the particular condition of the blocks? This is not a request to help residents enjoy a windfall, but a request for every Singaporean to go home to a pleasant and liveable environment.

Sometimes, homes become a source of distress because of disamenities. Most Singaporeans live in a compact environment, in close proximity with our neighbours. Hence, being part of a “we first” society, it is important to be considerate and be aware of our actions and behaviours on our neighbours and fellow Singaporeans.

This next issue that I would like to raise is almost ad nauseam – the disamenities suffered by my residents of Skyville at Dawson. Unfortunately, some of the problems continue to persist and it is a reality that my residents continue to face, day in and day out. Many years have passed and I hope that time has allowed the Ministry of National Development (MND) to observe thoroughly the problems and possibly have a fresh perspective on possible solutions.

Residents of Skyville at Dawson continue to suffer disturbances and nuisance caused by inconsiderate visitors to the roof and sky gardens at their HDB blocks, especially during the weekends, eve of festive seasons and public holidays. Excessive noise disturbances, smoking and drinking, urinating at staircase landings, litter and rubbish, obscene activities. These problems have not abated, even with the concerted efforts of our grassroots volunteers, the HDB, Town Council, the National Environment Agency (NEA) and the police, disamenities still persist.

Hence, I appeal to MND once again, to reconsider my previous suggestions: install gantries for registration, install more CCTVs to monitor visitors and their activities, limit the number of visitors and require payment of a small fee to support the operations and cleaning of the sky gardens. Again, this is because every resident deserves to go home to a pleasant living environment.

I understand that requests, if taken onboard, do take time. For example, the Government has confirmed that the EASE programme will be offered to seniors living in private estates from this April. I myself first raised this in Parliament back in 2016, nearly 10 years ago, and my fellow PAP MPs had also continued to raise this request over the years. You can imagine our great relief and joy that it has been taken up by the Government and is finally coming to fruition.

Still on the topic of housing, I would like to talk a little about property taxes. In the lead-up to the Budget Statement, some of my residents have shared their concerns that property taxes may rise again, even though they are relieved by the one-off property tax rebate for 2026 for owner-occupied homes.

As Singapore has enjoyed a healthy Budget surplus with property taxes as one of the contributors, perhaps more can be done to calibrate this carefully or to consider longer-term support for owner-occupied properties. This is especially needed by private estate residents who are elderly and no longer working but are living in their own homes. The anxiety is real, especially as they are no longer earning an income and yet face increasingly higher property taxes that they are paying for out of their own savings. I hope that the Government can consider granting a longer-term rebate for such cases. This will also help our seniors age well and age in-place.

Other than homes, Singaporeans are very much concerned about jobs and the impact of AI on them. I am very heartened by the Prime Minister's commitment that no Singaporean would be left behind in our push for AI and in this spirit, I salute our NTUC stepping up to this call in rolling out the AI-Ready SG initiative. There are also sectoral AI playbooks for workers and businesses in the sectors that face the most disruption from AI.

My concern, however, is that the take-up rate for such initiatives will not be as high as desired, given what we have seen with the SkillsFuture credits where many people left it to the final months, and even then, it was not fully taken up. What the NTUC is offering is very much needed, but we need to ensure that it reaches the workers who need it. Are there ways we can ensure that access to these AI resources is as easy and seamless as possible? Our seniors also do not wish to be left behind. Can the Infocomm Media Development Authority's (IMDA’s) SG Digital Community Hubs be expanded to help seniors and more Singaporeans gain AI skills and pick up safety tips?

In addition, AI training and tools have already been made widely available, but the real fear of disruption from AI tells us that what our people need most, is the support and career guidance to journey together with them as they navigate these changes. I would like to call upon the Government to consider dedicating even more resources in order to expand the scope of the AI Missions to develop detailed sectoral playbooks for more sectors beyond the four chosen. We should also support the redesign of workflows and job scopes to enable greater productivity, while helping to alleviate the labour shortage in some of these industries. Sir, in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): Singaporeans worry about jobs and AI's impact. I am reassured by the Prime Minister's commitment that no one will be left behind in our push for AI. I commend NTUC's AI-Ready SG Initiative.

However, I am concerned about the potential low take-up as with SkillsFuture. I urge the Government to make AI resources more easily accessible, expand SG Digital Community Hubs to help seniors and providing stronger career guidance.

More resources to extend AI missions to additional sectors and to redesign workflows and job scopes will raise productivity and ease labour shortages.

(In English): Sir, for all our hard work to achieve success, as individuals, as a nation, we need the support and assurance of safe and comfortable homes and estates for our families and secure the future of our economy and jobs in the AI age. I urge the Government to deploy them to ensure a conducive living environment for all Singaporeans and to transform Singapore into the most AI-enabled nation in the world. I support the Budget.

Mr Xie Yao Quan.

Mr Giam, you have a clarification to ask?

Mr Giam.

Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.

Thank you, Speaker. I have two clarification questions.

I am wondering if the Member would accept that the constitutional requirement that governments run balanced budgets over their full term necessitates that a balanced budget would occur at the end of this five-year term even when there may be surpluses, simply by transferring any additional surpluses to reserves to ensure that the constraint is respected.

My second question: I ask if the Member will not accept that, even if a surplus need not be detrimental under all conditions, which is unobjectionable on its face, it nevertheless imposes a disproportionate cost on our households when they are already struggling with high prices and cost of living.

Mr Xie.

Sir, I thank the Member for both clarifications. My basic response to both clarifications is yes. I accept that surpluses can be transferred into Past Reserves at the end of a term of government. But surpluses within a term of government serves two purposes: first, it buffers Singapore and Singaporeans against shocks and crises within the term of government, and then at the end of the term of government, if we pass through that term without crisis and we have accumulated surpluses, then that could be transferred out, or that could be transferred into Past Reserves.

That is our system of government, and it is, I think, the envy of many countries around the world. It is something that is precious that we should really cherish. Something that we should really cherish.

Ms He Ting Ru.

Ms Poh Li San.

Mr Sanjeev Kumar Tiwari.

Mr Speaker, I speak on behalf of the various segments of the Singaporean workforce – the low-income, PMEs, mature workers and many others across the Labour Movement, including public officers.

In a Budget, workers look forward to two things most: assurance today and confidence for tomorrow, especially in an age shaped by rapid technological shifts, demographic change and workplace transformation. Their aspiration is simple and shared: stable jobs, sustainable wage growth and dignified progression over longer working lives. And they want to know that even as industries transform, they will not be left behind.

I am heartened by the many of the hon Members' speeches who shared similar concerns that our workers must be at the heart of this transformation. I thank them for the care.

Budget 2026 gives assurance to households while laying long-term foundations for a more resilient workforce and brighter economy.

Mr Speaker, the pressure to keep up and the risks of falling behind is real. On the ground, workers, especially PMEs, tell us candidly that they want to keep up. Workflows are being digitalised, re-designed and more AI-enabled. Tasks evolve faster; skills expire sooner. So, many workers do the responsible thing, they try to upgrade, learn new tools, adapt to new work.

However, challenges remain – fear of failure, insufficient time to upskill/reskill and not knowing what to upskill or reskill for sometimes, and at times, there is no change after all that upskilling and reskilling.

Here, I urge the Government to encourage companies, small and big, to partner the NTUC and the unions to leverage on the CTCs to prepare for the future of work and to grow both the organisation and its workers as part of the transformation journey. The earlier we prepare, the better the chances of workers being upskilled and to be more efficiently deployed.

Budget 2026 also takes a decisive structural step. SSG and WSG will merge into a single agency, jointly overseen by MOM and MOE. This will tighten the link between training and jobs, offering more seamless career guidance, upskilling, job matching and transitions for workers and integrated support for employers. This move recognises the faster cadence of technology and job transitions, and the need for a single "Jobs-Skills" backbone.

The merger builds on a decade of SkillsFuture. In 2025 alone, 606,000 individuals participated in SSG-supported training, and 123,000 enrolled in courses with direct employability outcomes. This signals a workforce investing in its relevance and wanting to stay relevant for the future.

We therefore should make the merger count for outcomes: track and publish conversion metrics, such as time to placement; wage growth post training; and employer adoption; co-design more CTC-like Jobs-Skills pathways, so training is planned with job redesign and hiring from the start; extend mid-career training support in ways that do not penalise caregivers or SMEs with lean staffing.

Mr Speaker, when disruption happens, the consequences for workers are painful. For some, the fear is not abstract. They have seen colleagues retrenched after restructuring, roles outsourced, functions automated. Retrenchments rose to 14,400 in 2025, on the back of a choppy global outlook. We are looking forward for AI transformation. The fear continues to be real.

In these moments, unions step in to ensure fair process, negotiate fair benefits and facilitate placement support through the e2i. Early notification to unions is not a procedural nicety; it is the difference between proactive help and reactive damage control. Many unionised companies recognise this. They give unions advanced notice of upcoming retrenchment exercises, sometimes even months ahead. We should institutionalise advance retrenchment notifications across all firms, including for PMEs, so that affected workers can be rendered meaningful assistance early and with dignity.

Another structural concern is the year-to-year contracts where is there ongoing work, but a whole lot of ongoing uncertainty and insecurity. The continued prevalence of fixed term contracts, especially annual renewals, put pressure on workers. While the share declined slightly in 2025, with over 90% of resident employees now in permanent jobs, around 7% remain on fixed-term contracts and older workers are disproportionately represented among one-year contracts.

For them, renewal uncertainty makes long-term planning and upskilling harder, which puts them at risk of falling behind. This issue is felt acutely by mature workers who already face longer job searches. Their reality should push us beyond administratively convenient renewals, towards clearer pathways to permanency where work is ongoing.

The Public Service is one of our largest employers. It can lead by example. Public sector data show nearly 24% of officers are 50 and above. We should be more transparent about contract tenure patterns, renewal outcomes and pathways to permanency where roles persist, so officers can contribute with confidence and plan for retirement with clarity.

I urge for regular employer reviews of fixed-term contracting, particularly for workers and for the Public Service to publish more granular indicators on a contract-to-permanent pathways, where functions continue beyond a cycle.

Mr Speaker, longer working lives need sustainable work intensity, not just more training. PMEs today operate at sustained high intensity, long hours for some, but more often, it is the constant connectivity, with limited mental space to recover. Officially, average weekly hours for employed residents have moderated to about 41 to 43 hours, and MOM has encouraged flexibility through the Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement Requests, but the intensity outside formal hours matter too. Surveys show over 90% of employees have worked beyond official hours, with 71% fearing negative repercussions if they do not respond after hours.

Rest is not about doing less, it is about sustaining efforts and well-being. Without sustainable norms, even the best upskilling will under deliver. Burn-out erodes adaptability and retention. Here, I would like to encourage employers to set organisational norms around after-hours responsiveness, escalation rules and protected focus time. I also call on the Government to monitor hours and intensity indicators and spotlight firms that redesign work to raise productivity and protect recovery.

Budget 2026 strengthens retirement adequacy and security. I thank the Government for a one-time CPF top-up of up to $1,500 in December 2026, targeted at seniors with lower retirement savings based on their CPF balances and property Annual Value.

The next step of planned CPF contribution increases for senior workers will proceed from January 2027, with a transition offset to help employers.

CPF will also pilot a new simplified, low cost, life-cycle investment scheme by 2028 to give members more diversified options above the base interest rates. This broadens pathways for workers who can take modest market risk across a long horizon.

These measures matter, because not all workers reach retirement with the same trajectory. Some face mid-career retrenchment, illnesses or years on rolling contracts that depress CPF accumulation. We should continue targeted CPF support for workers with disrupted careers, tracking cohorts with extended unemployment or caregiving breaks and calibrating top-ups to close adequacy gaps over time.

Mr Speaker, mature workers want to contribute – matching experience with opportunity is important. NTUC's own survey showed strong willingness among older workers to remain economically active beyond the current retirement and even reemployment ages. They are motivated by purpose, health and some as much as by income. But access to career guidance training remains uneven. Many who tap on these opportunities find them helpful, yet others have shared that they feel disadvantaged or overlooked in being considered for them. We must close this access gap.

We already see credible models in healthcare, age inclusive job redesign and assistive tech to help older staff to keep contributing productively, with unions partnering management and tapping on the CTC support to scale solutions. This is precisely the kind of redesign we need to mainstream.

We should embed career guidance as a default in mid-career pathways under the new jobs-skills agency and to scale union employer pilots that pair job redesign with structured upskilling for older teams, across sectors. SMEs often tell us their challenge is not only funding, but time and manpower to release staff for training. Where unions are present, we have negotiated training leave into collective agreements; this must be spread by example into non-union and SME settings, with redesigned shifts, modular stackable courses and just-in-time learning aligned to job redesign.

The Public Service can catalyse norms through transparent dashboards on contract renewal patterns and clearer pathways from fixed term contracts to permanent posts when work is ongoing. That signal will ripple to the wider labour market.

What Budget 2026 means for families today and for our future workforce is that there were expectations on the ground for more support, given the surplus and there are many uncertainties still looming.

Families will still feel Budget 2026's tangible support: cash Cost-of-Living Special Payments, enhanced U-Save rebates and CDC vouchers for all households in January 2027. These measures cushion near-term pressures while structural changes mature but, ultimately, confidence comes when a worker sees three things clearly: "If I learn, there is a job at the end"; "If my role changes, there is fair process and early help"; and "If I work longer, the work is sustainable and my retirement is secure".

Our task is to translate policy into predictable pathways at the firm and at the worker level through initiatives like the CTCs, the new jobs-skills agency and tripartite norms that protect both adaptability and well-being.

Mr Speaker, behind every statistic is a worker who wants to provide for family, stay self-reliant and contribute with dignity. Workers are not stopgaps; they are partners in transformation and productivity. When we invest in their skills, support them responsibly through change and give them time and space to adapt, workers repay that trust with commitment and employers benefit from a qualified workforce that will boost productivity and bring about growth.

The Budget sets direction. But direction must become delivery, and delivery depends on all of us. Let us Government, employers, unions and every worker, move decisively together, build new jobs and skills backbone so every Singaporean can see a pathway forward.

Let us redesign work so that transformation uplifts and not exhausts. Let us strengthen fairness and security, from early retrenchment notifications to clearer contract to permanency pathways. And let us ensure retirement adequacy, especially for those whose careers have been disrupted.

Mr Speaker, the future of work must not be something that workers endure, it must be something they can look forward to, having that assurance that their future will be better. Notwithstanding my thoughts, with that, I support the Budget 2026. [Applause.]

Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim.

Ms Yeo Wan Ling.

Mr Speaker, this Budget debate carries special significance for me. It is my first Budget debate in this new term of Government and my first Budget debate in my second term in Parliament. In writing this speech, I spent time reflecting on the work we had done in our previous term and the legislative moves we had made which will have long-term impact to our Singaporean workforce.

In the last term, we strengthened protections for platform workers, advanced progressive wages and made Flexible Work Arrangements a legitimate workplace conversation. These were not abstract policies. They changed daily lives, both at work and at home. With a healthy fiscal position, we now have the opportunity not only to cushion immediate pressures, but to build thoughtfully and boldly for the decade ahead.

Today, I will speak on three areas: inclusive workplaces for women in every season of their lives; a kinder workplace for persons with disabilities; responsible preparation for AI transformation.

Mr Speaker, if we want to talk about inclusive workplaces, we must talk honestly about women. Because women do not experience work in a linear fashion. We experience work in seasons: the season for early ambition, the season for caregiving, the season of returning, the season of mid-life change. And sometimes, these seasons overlap.

When we speak of inclusive workplaces for women, it cannot mean just guidelines. It cannot mean just legislation. It must mean cultural adjustment. Policies create permission. Culture creates safety. And policies must move so that new safe progressive cultures can take root.

We see this clearly in flexible work arrangements (FWAs). The Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement Requests have been in place for more than a year. Awareness is high. Yet in our NTUC Women and Families surveys, more than half of workers have never made a request. Not because they do not need flexibility. But because they fear being seen as less committed. They fear slower progression. They fear subtle discrimination. Indeed, we have created permission. But we have not fully created safety. And this gap is especially felt in the season of caregiving.

Women returning to work tell us that flexibility is top-most in their consideration to stay or return to the workplace. But what worries them more is whether in asking for FWAs, they would be “marked” by their organisations, and even if they managed to get their FWAs approved, whether their bosses and teammates will genuinely support them. Because the lived reality is that even with FWAs, caregiving does not go away. Children fall sick. Parents require ongoing care. Caregiving is not a short interruption. It is part of life.

Ms N, a resident I met, knew about the guidelines. She wanted to ask for flexibility because her childcare does not operate on weekends and closes at 7.00 pm sharp daily. But she did not dare to ask. In her small company, she feared being labelled as the one who inconvenienced everyone and she feared being replaced in her job, by a boss who does not understand her needs.

This not a policy gap. It is a workplace culture gap.

We must recognise that workplace flexibility alone cannot solve caregiving strain. Childcare operating hours, especially in estates with shift workers, must better reflect workforce realities. I therefore call for support to expand flexible and extended childcare options, including weekend and after-hours pilots in selected communities.

We must also speak about women in mid-life. As Singapore ages, women experience ageing differently. Perimenopause brings fatigue and physical changes that are rarely discussed at work. Some might even consider these topics taboo. Yet progressive employers are showing that this conversation can be normalised. I was encouraged to learn from our Education Services Union Leader, Sister Brenda, that her organisation openly engages employees on how to better support women through menopause. Managers have respectful conversations. Adjustments are made without embarrassment. These may seem like small changes, but they signal respect. Indeed, small tweaks like more comfortable uniforms can make all the difference as women go through the different seasons in their lives. That is what cultural maturity looks like in the workplace.

Similarly, breastfeeding mothers tell us that workplace lactation rooms may exist, but culture matters more. If lactation rooms become storerooms or moms feel rushed, the message is clear: support is conditional. The NTUC Women and Family unit will continue to promote lactational spaces in workplaces and we will continue to expand our NTUC Better Workplaces programme this year to support more companies with their lactation room set-ups.

Mr Speaker, if inclusion is to be real for women in every season, policy must be matched by practical action. I call on the Government to: scale job redesign funding and build expertise, especially in non-office based, frontline and shift-based sectors; recognise and benchmark progressive workplaces so inclusivity becomes part of Singapore’s competitive edge; publish sectoral benchmarks on FWA utilisation and career progression outcomes; expand flexible and extended childcare options; provide clearer tripartite guidance on supporting women through perimenopause and menopause as legitimate workplace health matters.

Mr Speaker, we must continue to move policy intentionally to shape culture – so that inclusive workplace norms do not remain aspirational but become standard practice.

Inclusion must extend beyond gender. A kinder workplace for persons with disabilities and their caregivers means removing barriers, not lowering standards. Like all Singaporeans, our persons with disabilities and their caregivers have career aspirations and dreams. But limited caregiving resources and rigid employment structures – fixed hours, inflexible expectations, lack of assistive tools – unintentionally exclude them.

My Punggol resident, B, who has hearing impairment, struggled to secure a host company for his ITE Work-Study Diploma and he and his family suspect that it was due to his impairment. As with many of our youths, B is a bright-eyed, curious and hardworking young man. His family is supportive, and understandably worried about his future. With a secured place in the ITE Work-Study Diploma, they will be more assured of his future independence. I have since reached out to several employer contacts as well as SG Enable for assistance but stories like this remind us that talents do exist, but access is uneven. We must strengthen upstream support in placement and upskilling even in our schools.

I support initiatives such as the SG Enable Enabling Mark, which recognises disability-inclusive employers. But the Enabling Mark must go beyond just being an award. It must not remain something that companies aspire to do just once a year. It must be normalised as a workplace standard with adequate funding and resourcing, embedded into hiring practices, job design, leadership key performance indicators (KPIs) and organisational culture. Inclusion cannot be ceremonial. It must be operational.

We must also strengthen the Singapore Opportunity Index as a national signal that inclusive hiring is part of business growth strategy and not charity. Employers who invest in inclusive employment should see it reflected in how we assess opportunities and competitiveness. And importantly, we should build a national database of inclusive employers, a live resource base for job seekers with disabilities and their families. This will not only improve job matching but also make inclusion visible and measurable.

NTUC will continue to do our part. Apart from FWAs, NTUC has secured stronger protections against workplace discrimination and I am glad that this helps to level the playing field for our working persons with disabilities. We are also working with tripartite partners on a Tripartite Advisory on Reasonable Accommodations to provide guidance on good practices that employers can adopt to make their workplaces more inclusive for persons with disabilities. I call for clear guidance and appropriate funding under the upcoming tripartite advisory, so that our employers can implement inclusive practices confidently. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): AI will affect our nation's future development, but this transformation must be responsible. New technology should make people's lives and livelihoods better and brighter, not bring anxiety.

The impact of autonomous driving technology on the bus industry is a concrete example. To this end, the National Transport Workers Union (NTWU) has already begun training on electric buses and autonomous driving with public bus operators. The Tripartite partners have also started discussions to understand the impact of autonomous driving on bus captains and maintenance personnel as well as future career development and renumeration arrangements.

But when engaging with bus captains, I saw one thing more clearly. One captain told me that driving only accounts for 20% of her work. The remaining 80% involves serving passengers, assisting elderly and mobility-impaired individuals and handling emergency situations. This reminds us that when discussing this transformation, we cannot only look at the surface aspect of driving; you must truly understand what that job entails in real life.

There are now also proposals for new positions, such as remote drivers. Upon further study, we discovered that these positions require skills like data analysis, which current captains may not immediately be able to handle.

If we do not understand the true content of job roles, we may make the wrong judgment. Therefore, I call upon the Government to invest more resources in analysing job structures of various industries, clearly identify which functions can be assisted by AI and which must be completed by humans. Then, based on real circumstances, design training and transformation pathways. Technology can advance but transformation must be planned and have safeguards.

(In English): Mr Speaker, today I have spoken about three priorities: inclusive workplaces for women in every season, a kinder workplace and responsible transformation. Inclusive workplaces for women mean moving policies for workplace culture shifts to take root. A kinder workplace means barriers must be redesigned away. Responsible transformation means understanding before replacing.

These are not incremental tweaks. These are big hairy audacious goals. They require courage to change policies, faith to shift cultures, commitment to redesign systems, and discipline to transform responsibly.

If we are serious about building a Singapore that is not only competitive, but fair, kind and humane, then these must be the collective Singaporean ambitions that we have. Sir, I support the Budget.

Minister of State Desmond Choo.

Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the chair at 2.50 pm. Order, order.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 2.29 pm until 2.50 pm.

Sitting resumed at 2.50 PM

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Xie Yao Quan) in the Chair]

Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik.

Mr Azhar Othman.

Mr Deputy Speaker, first and foremost, I would like to wish Members of the House, "新年快乐", Happy Lunar New Year; and our fellow Muslim colleagues, "Selamat menyambut ibadah puasa", Welcome to the holy month of Ramadan. Mr Deputy Speaker, my speech will be touching on three aspects that I hope will set the tone forward.

The Singapore company, which covers business, local and international, employment and employability, Singapore family and the Singapore dream. Singapore has achieved significant success through strong and clean leadership. Pragmatic long-term economic policies, a pro-business environment and substantial investment in human capital. However, we now face unprecedented challenges.

Internally, we are dealing with an ageing society, low birth rates and high cost of living. Externally, geopolitical tensions, a multipolar world and a shift from rule-based to a power-based order that are influencing our landscape.

The Singapore company reflects the good work of the Government of Singapore, managing Singapore like a well-run engine. The recent Budget announced by our Prime Minister is a positive step in supporting businesses and fellow Singaporeans. Yet in this transformed environment, we must act differently and decisively.

Trade remains the life blood of Singapore's economy, making it essential for the Government to support companies in maintaining strength and pursuing global growth. It is crucial for the Government to provide support to businesses at all levels, whether they are startups, SMEs or MNCs based in Singapore. We ought to build resilience, be adaptable and constantly innovate to stay competitive and be relevant.

The Budget 2026 shows that the Government does listen to the ground. The Budget includes a tax rebate of 40% and the benefit of $1,500 for active companies with at least one local employee. This initiative serves as an immediate short-term support to alleviate operational costs. In addition to these, there are various forms of support by the Government, such as increased funding for grants, loans and international growth, which are highly crucial.

Nevertheless, I would like to propose that the Government extends support to micro and home-based businesses. During the pandemic, the Singapore Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry engaged with 1,800 home-based businesses which embody the spirit of entrepreneurship and have shown resilience in managing their operations. Some of these businesses have successfully transitioned to formal companies.

Dr Malik Hassan, whose parents started their business selling Nasi Lemak, I think some of you may know, from a stall at Adam Food Centre. Dr Malik, who is also the president of the Singapore Malay Chamber of Commerce, has expanded to now having 40 branches across Singapore and has evolved to provide a variety of food and beverages.

On a personal experience, Deputy Speaker, my mother ran a home-based business selling rojak initially at our kampong house and then moved to our three-room HDB flat. Sometimes I helped make the rojak to be sold to our neighbours. Today, our engineering company has offices in seven countries – Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Uzbekistan, with our headquarters in Singapore. My mother's entrepreneurship spirit has rubbed onto her son that has allowed his company to grow regionally.

Mr Deputy Speaker, it is essential to embed the DNA of entrepreneurship in as many Singaporeans as possible. This can also be achieved by having entrepreneurship as non-examination subjects introduced at the primary, secondary and high institutions. Such subjects will enhance their creative and innovative minds. We should be a country of creators and innovators that develop new businesses, thereby increasing the economic status of Singapore and Singaporeans.

Mr Deputy Speaker, SME Centres@SMCCI's business advisors have provided business advisory to 3,000 businesses annually. Other forms of programmes, like Partner for Business Growth, were performed. When guided effectively, economic growth driven by these companies benefits not only the business owners, but also the employees they hire.

Mr Deputy Speaker, strengthening support for Enterprise Singapore, SME centres and trade associations and chambers (TACs) will enhance the ecosystem and network of assistance available to local companies. As a small nation, our greatest asset lies in our ability to forge a powerful coalition of companies, Government bodies and TACs working collaboratively to support one another.

Next, I would like to touch on support for international growth. The enhanced Grant and Market Readiness Assistance are welcome initiatives that can significantly benefit our companies. It is crucial for our business to expand beyond our shores and establish presence in various regions, including the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN), Africa, Middle East, Latin America and many others. Financial support plays a vital role in this expansion.

I propose that enhanced grant be provided to TACs and SMEs to facilitate regular business missions. This initiative enables companies to explore the best opportunities in their target countries. Ministry for Foreign Affairs to look at having our passport be visa free in as many countries as possible. We are already in good position, but there are still countries we need to apply visa and these are countries we need to ensure visa free to ease travelling and business operation.

Establishing more free trade agreements (FTAs) and strengthening our partnership with ASEAN partners, such as the Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone (SEZ), and various other countries will ensure our local companies are welcome in the region and do extremely well via partnership or even merger and acquisition. In addition to the grant, it is essential that TACs and the Enterprise Singapore, which has an international network, aid our local companies.

I am pleased to note that the Singapore Business Federation (SBF) has established an office in Dubai, and I had the privilege of speaking with Miss Anita, the lead manager of SBF in Dubai, and discuss ways to grow business effectively and understand the landscape and culture of the local country. I have also participated and at times led numerous business missions organised by SMCCI, SBF, Enterprise Singapore and the UAE Singapore Business Council.

These missions are crucial for companies to receive support, minimise errors in establishing their business in foreign markets and gain access to the robust network developed by Enterprise Singapore and TACs. The ecosystem will empower Singapore companies to set up their operation overseas in the most effective manner possible and be very successful.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I will next touch on employment and employability, which is crucial in today's evolving landscape. The support provided by the Government through initiatives like SkillsFuture has been very encouraging. New industries such as space technology, advanced manufacturing, utilisation, data centres and renewable energy are emerging, offering a wide range of employment opportunities. As with every sector, AI will play a significant role in enhancing productivity within these fields.

Singaporeans are navigating the transition from sunset industries to these new sectors and the ability to learn quickly is essential, especially as AI becomes integrated into these industries. Therefore, the support from both the Government and employers is invaluable.

Training and transition to these new industries to be made easily accessible. A strong foundation for any worker lies in the attitude and many Singaporeans exemplify qualities such as intelligence, hard work and honesty. By enhancing their skills with AI competency, they can become valuable assets to companies.

Sir, turning to the Singapore family. I often think of the Government as the greatest family of all. Just as a parent ensures each child gets the specific support they need, our Budget must reflect that same targeted compassion.

The CDC vouchers are a welcoming support. If I can propose that, as other Members have done so, that this support be paired with the performance of the Singapore economy. Singaporeans can enjoy when the country does well – similar to companies who issue bonuses to their staff when their companies do well too. We can even call these the "Singapore Bonus".

On providing support for Singapore families, we must also move towards a more sophisticated, data-driven model of support. We know that a family in a 3-room flat caring for a special needs child or an ailing octogenarian faces vastly different pressures than a young couple in the same block. I am confident with the data that we have, the support should be calibrated based on household dependency ratios to ensure that those who need the most help receive it regularly until they can truly fend for themselves.

Finally, Mr Deputy Speaker, we must protect the Singapore Dream. This dream is a promise that every citizen, whether their passion lies in the arts, sports, business owner or the boardroom, can become the best version of themselves.

But the dream is about more than just economics. It is about the spirit. We must ask ourselves: are Singaporeans proud of the country they were born in? Are they happy? Will they sacrifice for their children's children's future so that they may live with dignity? The answer will be yes, if we continue to provide that this Government is a caring, responsible partner in their success.

By strengthening our economy, companies, global outreach, respected career for our workforce and refining our family support, we ensure that the Singapore Dream remains a living reality for all. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Budget.

Mr Melvin Yong.

Assoc Prof Kenneth Goh.

Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you for this opportunity. We are operating in a world that is more fragmented, less predictable, in a world where small missteps now carry larger consequences. If we misallocate capital, recovery is slower. If we delay reform, the competitive gap widens. If we neglect skills, the deficit compounds and if fractures emerge within society, they may take years, even generations, to repair.

For small states, there is less room for error. Survival depends on foresight, adaptability and unity of purpose. Allow me to frame my remarks to Budget 2026 around two themes: capability and cohesion.

First, on capability. Budget 2026 rightly accelerates Singapore's push in AI and other strategic capabilities. The support for business transformation through enhanced enterprise schemes and AI adoption incentives is timely and necessary. But transformation is not merely about investing in new technology. It is also about redesigning processes: how work is done, who does it, with what tools and to what effect.

Redesigning processes ultimately involves people. It is people who interpret signals, exercise judgement and bear responsibility. While technology may drive new processes, it is people in the organisation determine the pace of change. If work flows evolve but mindsets do not, progress stalls and competitors move ahead.

Adaptation is ultimately a human challenge. So, just as we supercharge our AI strategy to enable firms to adapt, we must ensure that we are preparing people to adapt at the same pace. If we want transformation to be fast, we must also prepare people to be adaptable.

And that is why support for SkillsFuture and adult learning is critical. The merger of SkillsFuture Singapore and Workforce Singapore is significant because it brings training and job placement under one roof so that upgrading skills connects more directly to employment. Otherwise, firms will still adapt but they will do so by sourcing talent elsewhere and Singaporeans will risk being left behind.

So, just as we reskill adult workers in the short term, we must also invest in the longer-term development of our youths. And that brings me to education.

AI will not simply change jobs. It will change how we value skills. When information is instantly accessible and machines can generate high-quality work at scale, speed and recall no longer set individuals apart. Prepari ng our young for this future requires more than updating content. It requires rethinking how we teach, how we assess and even how we structure time and space for learning. We must be prepared for fundamental reforms in education.

If technology can elevate baseline cognitive performance, then assessing students solely on the outputs they produce becomes less meaningful. The emphasis must shift. And in a world where information is abundant, the current focus on high-pressure exams built around memorisation risk misallocating our efforts.

The competencies that will be valuable lies elsewhere – in discernment, collaboration, ethical judgement and the ability to navigate complexity.

What, then, are the implications? Twenty-first century competencies must sit at the heart of our educational goals. We should bring the same intensity and focus to nurturing these capabilities as we have historically devoted to excelling in examinations. But I am not advocating that we all run out to purchase 10-year series for creativity or adaptability; please do not do that. But in doing so and placing the 21st century competencies at the heart of our national educational priorities, this will require significant change and teachers must be at the centre of this transformation.

That is why I am encouraged that this Budget recognises the central role of education in securing our future, with MOE's total expenditure projected to increase by 8.8% year-on-year and operating expenditure rising by 6%, largely to recruit more educators. For a country whose only natural resource is human capital, this is not academic. It is consequential.

Let me turn briefly to higher education. Universities exist to serve a societal purpose. And in an age of AI, serving that purpose requires more than incremental adjustments. It requires structural redesign. Not only in what universities teach, but how they teach. Not only in how they conduct research, but how that research connects to evolving societal and industry needs.

It raises deeper questions. Who do universities serve? Primarily the young at the start of their careers or also adults returning mid-career to reskill and adapt? Must programmes remain anchored to a traditional four-year model following junior college or polytechnic pathways, or can the duration, pacing and credentialing become more modular and flexible? How should funding models evolve when knowledge cycles shorten and industries transform more rapidly?

If universities are to remain relevant in an AI-led world, they must be prepared to rethink purpose, restructure and rethink how they deliver content not just in terms of their pedagogy. But transformation does not occur in a vacuum. Incentives shape behaviour. For universities, those incentives are heavily influenced by global rankings, many of which are operated by privately owned, commercial organisations. These metrics shape how institutions allocate resources and define success.

As the Singapore Management University (SMU) President Professor Lily Kong observed in her recent IPS lecture, rankings can become powerful drivers of institutional behaviour. Universities must guard against allowing external metrics to redefine their mission. If reforms that strengthen teaching quality or societal alignment risk affecting ranking position, institutions may hesitate.

To be fair, existing rankings attempt to incorporate elements of impact and engagement. But they remain heavily weighted toward research output, citation counts and reputation surveys. If we are serious about transforming higher education for an AI-led world, then we must also align the metrics that institutions pay attention to.

Singapore is well placed to catalyse the development of a complementary international framework for universities governed multilaterally by academics, policy-makers, industry and civil society. Such a framework would not replace existing rankings, but rebalance incentives toward learning outcomes, meaningful societal impact and long-term capability building.

If metrics shape incentives, then shaping metrics is part of our national strategy. And doing so would empower our universities to pursue necessary reforms without being constrained by narrow indicators.

My second point, Deputy Speaker, is on cohesion. If capability enables adaptation, cohesion enables resilience. As work and learning become more personalised and technologically augmented, shared spaces of belonging become more important. But cohesion cannot be left to chance. We must be intentional about cultivating it. And the sport and the arts play a central role here. They are where resilience is demonstrated, imagination expressed and identity projected. They generate both social capital and economic spillovers through events and the broader creative economy.

So, it is encouraging that the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth's (MCCY's) budget has increased by 13.8% in Budget 2026, with much of this increase directed toward infrastructure development.

Infrastructure matters. But it is only half of the equation. If we invest in facilities without strengthening the practitioners who animate them, we dilute the return on national investment. Ensuring that support for practitioners grows in step with capital investment is not imprudent. It is disciplined stewardship.

Beyond public spending, we should also consider how to mobilise more private capital into this ecosystem. Budget 2026 grants up to 400% tax deductions on qualified AI spend for businesses to catalyse innovation.

Sir, I think it is reasonable to ask whether our tax framework can offer similarly attractive incentives to more strongly encourage sustained giving to the arts and the sports.

In 2024, arts organisations raised about $45 million in cash and in-kind donations, roughly 3.3% of total giving; while sports organisations raised about $16.7 million, or 1.2% of total giving.

Sir, judging by the inspired speeches from Members of the House commending our athletes in our first Sitting for 2026, I think these are modest sums relative to the role these sectors play in shaping national identity and cohesion.

Strengthening incentives for sustained giving to qualified Institutions of a Public Character in the arts and sports would deepen participation and reinforce the practitioner base without significantly increasing public expenditure. In uncertain times, cohesion becomes even more critical. Encouraging sustained giving is not charity. It is an investment in the vibrance and resilience of Singapore.

Sir, in closing, Budget 2026 stands out for its emphasis on capability and cohesion. In my remarks, I have outlined how we can build capability – by reforming education for an AI-led world and aligning university incentives with societal needs. I have spoken about strengthening cohesion by investing in the people who front our sporting and cultural life.

If we act decisively in both, we can ride the next wave rather than be overwhelmed by it. Yes, some may claim that AI is overhyped and we are in an AI-bubble. They may be right. I cannot predict the future. But the cost of being caught off-guard far exceeds the cost of being over-prepared.

This Budget gives us that foundation. It now requires equal resolve, in both capability and cohesion. If we do so, this period of uncertainty can become one of renewal – not because the world has become easier to navigate, but because we have become stronger as one united people. Sir, I support this Budget.

Dr Wan Rizal.

Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.

Mr Deputy Speaker, our system of public education is undeniably among the best in the world. Even if we quibble about details, the statistics speak for themselves. Our most recent ranking in the OECD PISA has us ranked first worldwide and the World Bank's Human Capital Index likewise has put us up top. Yet, this success while not undeserved, belay an important reality. We have done exceedingly well until now. But it is highly uncertain if we will continue to do so, especially in an AI age where traditional educational advantages are being rapidly upended by the advance of this technology.

As Prime Minister Wong stated in his Budget address, our response to AI cannot be one of fear. This year's Budget exhibits an explicit tilt toward helping our nation confront the challenges of AI. And having spoken on the importance of AI in my Budget response two years back, I agree wholeheartedly with this stance. Hence, I support this year's Budget.

But it would be foolish to be blind to the immense transformative potential of AI to not just disrupt, but also completely overturn the competitive advantages of the Singapore model.

We cannot proceed with business as usual. We need change, not because our educational system is failing to deliver today, but because it is not adapted to deliver tomorrow. This is the hardest type of change, requiring foresight, wisdom and courage. After all, "if it ain't broke, why fix it?"

Let us first acknowledge how far our system has come. Public mass education began in earnest a decade before Independence, following the establishment of our MOE. MOE's goal at the time was to reconcile the diverse approaches to education, given our multiracial population and to orient schooling toward the goals of nation building and workforce preparedness.

This effort was immensely successful. The overall number of years of schooling in the population went from less than four years in 1960 to more than 12 by 2015, with an emphasis on science and technical education, coupled with a rigorous system of sorting and tracking, public education became the backbone of our nation's remarkable economic progress. Indeed, if you ask economists what they think was the most important factor underlying our nation's move from third world to first, many will likely point to our educational system.

We must not take this success for granted, however, because the global educational landscape is rapidly changing. The advent of AI will mean an erosion of the edge in knowledge and ability that our schooling system had previously been able to confer. Emerging research already points to how AI compresses the skills gap by raising the productivity of inexperienced and lesser trained workers. This is the case even for college-educated professionals engaged in cognitive tasks. While this may fail to translate at the aggregate level, AI is nevertheless rapidly fulfilling its promise to vastly improve the efficiency of individuals.

This was the thrust of my speech to the Budget Statement two years ago. In the interim, AI has advanced at a breathtaking pace. Tasks that may have eluded AI, save for some determined and curated prompting, are now routinely answered with speed and accuracy. In the courses I teach at university, I struggle with how to best obtain separation between students based on submitted assignments alone.

The undeniable conclusion is that our traditional model of climbing the ladder of human capital development to become competent, reliable and trustworthy executers and operators is no longer likely to be the distinguishing factor for our workforce. The AI revolution will upend the way we approach education at all levels.

In primary schools, we still have classrooms that have as many as 40 students. This was never tenable in so far as large classrooms affect not just the ability of our kids to receive sufficient teacher attention and absorb lessons, but also the ability of our teachers to adequately manage their pupils without excess stress. It has become even less acceptable today in an AI age. While some champions of technology have lauded the promise of AI to produce education customised to each learner, research in the cognitive sciences is unambiguous in concluding that children simply respond best to instruction delivered by another human rather than a device.

Furthermore, while educational technology may confer some benefits, notably in language acquisition and problem solving, these are frequently offset by drawbacks, such as reduced attention spans, diminished memory and weakened critical thinking. The saving grace for such applications is that if they are applied in a thoughtful and deliberate manner, which occurs when edtech is treated as a compliment rather than a substitute for the teacher. This, in turn, calls for a better ratio of teachers to students in the classroom.

I am also keenly aware that at the early ages, it is absolutely crucial that kids build a solid foundation for all that is to follow. This will set them up, not just to succeed in their subsequent academic endeavours but also in all sorts of life outcomes. It is, therefore, crucial that we do not allow our youngest learners to be left behind in their formal educational journey, reliant on supplementary tuition and parents turn teachers to make up for shortfalls in understanding that they would ideally have received directly from teachers in the classroom.

Much of what primary school students learn may seem like a boring reprise of known concepts. But these ideas are new, at least to the kids that are being exposed to them for the first time. And if these kids do not grasp the basic premises that they are being taught, do not get excited about acquiring new knowledge and resort to memorising and in lieu of true understanding, we set them up to be incurious individuals, ill-prepared in an AI-centric world, where the ability to absorb and regurgitate information will no longer be sufficient to set a student apart.

Rather, children need to be excited about their educational journey and approach school in a holistic way, as a place not just to be fed dry academic mater material, but a safe space to ask all sorts of questions, to challenge prevailing wisdom and assumptions and to have fun, picking up pursuits that are as varied as art and music and sport and of course, if they are so inclined, languages, along with Math and Science.

Major high stakes examinations long, a mainstay of gauging student understanding and evaluating student performance, will be less relevant in an AI age. This requires us pardon, pardon the pun, to re-evaluate how we evaluate our kids, especially in secondary school. We need a mindset shift away from testing as a signal of competence and a means of streaming students to a way to check progress and identify if any particular student may have inadvertently fallen behind. This need to change mindset is not lost on our educators or learners themselves. MOE officials at the highest levels have acknowledged that examinations are the be all and end all, and students that embrace freedom from an examination-oriented curriculum often come to see that studying can be even a joyful and meaningful affair.

Continual assessment has been a long-standing component of our educational system. It certainly was since I was in school, which was a long time ago. But our weightings reveal lip service paid to the notion of continual. Until recently, mid-year and final examinations could comprise as much as four-fifths of the total grade, which places an inordinate emphasis on these markers. So, even though the Ministry formally abolished mid-year examinations three years ago without an accompanying rebalancing of the weight placed on examinations and tests versus other forms of assessment, the effort will always remain half-hearted.

Indeed, the continued presence of a relatively high stakes year-end examinations can leave students and parents feeling unprepared that they do not have a mid-term gauge. Anecdotal evidence even suggests that students and parents are making up for this change by simply having tuition centres administer mock mid-terms in lieu.

Furthermore, the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) and "O" level examination remain major consequential tools for tracking students. I, along with others on both sides of the aisle of this House, have repeatedly called for a reconsideration of these examination milestones, to grant more students the chance to pursue through-train education if they so choose. In an AI age, opportunities for late bloomers to catch up will be more abundant, which also means that such flexibility becomes even more important.

The fact is, until the incentives for performing well in exams are truly changed, it is hard to expect anyone to relinquish the single-minded focus on exams.

Yet, here is the nub. There is substantial evidence that genuine continual assessment is even far better in bringing about learning and understanding. Frequent but low-stake quizzes, as much as once a day, can improve conceptual retention and understanding. Nor should we fear that this approach, which admittedly is commonplace across East Asia, need undermine ultimate student performance. Systems like those in Estonia and Finland, as well as the US states of New Hampshire and Vermont have relied on formative assessment and continuous feedback for years and have produced a steady stream of excellent students.

Similarly, the evidence on tracking too early, by early, the literature suggests between the ages of 10 and 12, which incidentally, is precisely when we start subject-based banding and institute the PSLE, actually increases educational inequality without any clear achievement gains. While Ministry officials had assured that subject-based banding, retain mixed form classes and which is consistent with research that supports how within school tracking can help students with heterogeneous ability actually cope better and promote positive peer influence, there nevertheless remains significant sorting between schools, which can undermine the benefits of tracking in the first place, while continuing to place undue importance of exams as a sorting tool.

To be clear, this call to shift attention away from exams and toward continual assessment decidedly does not mean a relaxation of standards. Rather, it calls for the sort of steady engagement that can keep standards consistently high. This change emphasis is also better aligned with fixing one of the principal challenges that educators face in the modern AI-enabled classroom – students who simply cannot sustain enough attention and interest to complete basic tasks expected of educated individuals, like reading an entire book cover to cover, to grasp what they have read accurately, to write with accuracy and originality, and to internalise mathematical skills.

Sir, AI will probably have the greatest impact on the way we go about tertiary education. And I will pause here to declare that I am, indeed, a college professor.

Until now, university education has had a two-fold aim: to impart the workforce with modern, value-added skills via high quality teaching; and to infuse our economy with the latest cutting edge innovation and technology through research. Both will now be upended by AI. What does it mean to transmit knowledge to undergraduates when such knowledge can be easily accessed and repurposed at the touch of a button, is rapidly devalued within years of graduation and can usually obtained at a fudge of the cost. What does it mean when answers to assignments usually arrive after extensive reflection, discussion and struggle, may be obtained within minutes with a simple prompt?

There are already inklings of the tsunami of change that is about to come. GenAI can easily synthesise and deliver information that all but the very best undergraduates struggle to absorb, relieving the need for entry level positions. Agent AI can already accurately execute a wide range of tasks that new graduates used to fill, which means that firms will have a far weaker incentive for hiring them.

Indeed, I believe that it will not be foundational models, which has captured so much of the public imagination and excitement with their clever answers to questions and seemingly human interactions, but rather agent-based ones that will be at the forefront of this disruption. Cognitive jobs are all the more vulnerable to replacement by such tools, which produce faster, are often more accurate and increasingly are higher quality output than humans. The best models are even able to do so with minimal guidance and instruction.

The superior capabilities of AI are not limited to intellectually intensive activities either, like research or analysis. AI can perform better in just about any profession where intellect, brains and ingenuity is deployed – from vacation planning to financial planning, from video game design to building design, from data analysis to legal analysis, and from diagnosing bugs in software to diagnosing cancers in humans. The aspirational careers of Asian societies – doctors, lawyers, engineers, bankers – are now all potentially replaceable by AI.

Moreover, we must not be lulled into a false sense of security by our nation's current unemployment rate, which has yet to capture the potential displacements of jobs that could result when AI and robotics become more entrenched in the economy. The future is much better inferred from the unemployment rate of new workers. Notably, while our youth unemployment rate remains considerably below those of other advanced economies, this has steadily trended up since the middle of 2024. Reports of fresh graduates struggling to secure employment are also piling up.

What this means is then that the skills we teach in lecture halls and labs need to evolve away from rote learning and solving known problems to leveraging what makes humans unique. Soft skills like empathy, networking, judgement, creativity and vision.

I already see this in my courses. The way to separate weaker students from stronger ones is frequently no longer what they submit in written assignments – something Singaporean undergraduates often excel at – but by their inquisitiveness, their willingness to question prevailing wisdom, their ability to think outside the proverbial box and their strength at bringing others together on a common task. Students must want to understand what they are being taught, not just cram yet more information without care for the fundamentals.

It also means that our outdated approach to university entry, which is conditional on relative performance in an academically oriented high stakes exam has to be revisited. In last year's COS, I suggested that we move forward with granting entry based on satisfying absolute entry criteria. This is now even more urgent given how relative academic performance will be ever less relevant to university success.

Reform must also percolate up to more advanced levels of tertiary education. It is natural to ask, what is left of research when even at the PhD level, only a tiny, talented minority may still credibly lay claim to intellectual superiority and methodological sophistication? Prime Minister Wong's $37 billion funding for the Research, Innovation and Enterprise plan is undeniably a welcome step, and if resource constraints were the only limitation to research success, we would be well positioned, even though, as I previously mentioned, our national R&D spending still lacks those of comparable technologically forward economies.

But the reality is that scholarship is not borne out of funding alone, as important as it is, and especially in an AI age where differences in the capacity to produce research are likely to collapse. Instead, what is relevant is the sophistication of the questions that we ask and the way that we approach problem solving. For this, we must still appeal to what is inescapably human. Our most groundbreaking innovations have always relied on humans affording their imaginations the absolute freedom to follow wherever the ideas lead. This occurs best in open, liberal, democratic societies, which offer the best conditions for the accumulation of productive human capital and the generation of world class scientific output. These conditions then contribute to productivity and in the long run, economic performance.

Our autonomous universities must stop chasing global rankings for their own sake, but instead focus on the genuine nature of academic enterprise, a point that Member Kenneth Goh, a fellow academic, has just made. In doing so, I am certain, nevertheless, that recognition and reward will find their way to them.

Sir, no matter how much we revamp our educational system, even if we were to adopt the seemingly radical steps proposed here, the reality of real world distributions of human ability is that there will always be a group that falls in the left tail and risk being left behind.

Yet, this AI moment also offers tantalising opportunities. Teachers can tap on AI generated resources to offer education that is more interesting and more customised, a luxury that would have taken previously hours of work. Weaker students now have a more realistic chance than ever before to shine in the classroom. Not only will AI compress the talent gap, it will devalue the traditional degree, which opens the door for those who, endowed with hitherto undervalued skills, to finally stake their place in the modern economy. This includes those who may not be as book smart, but who are gifted in myriad other ways. Those who are blessed with superior hand-eye coordination, or are more innately social, or exude practical intelligence, or possess a tinker's mentality.

Singapore has, since his birth, been an ethnically, culturally and religiously diverse nation. Let us also embrace neurological and intellectual diversity, starting from the ground up with our educational system. And let us —

Prof Lim, you have a minute left.

I shall end with my final sentence. Let us allow diversity to be the core strength of our educational system in this AI age.

Senior Minister of State Desmond Tan.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this year's Budget. I think it is one that provides critical stability in the midst of uncertainty and chaos. And with this stability, it helps us to propel forward to pursue progress for Singapore and Singaporeans.

Last September, I spoke about the two forces shaping Singapore's future. I named it the two AIs. AI No 1 is "artificial intelligence", which generates information at lightning speed, changing the way we work and we live. AI No 2 is ageing individuals, experienced workers who bring their wisdom, their judgement and their perspective to the workplace.

Today, I would like to build on these two AIs and on this idea. My argument is a simple one – that AI helps us find answers much faster, but it is experience in AI No 2 that helps Singapore ask better questions. Singapore's success will depend not only on how quickly we find answers, but whether we ask the right questions about our future economy, our workforce and our jobs. As Singapore becomes a super aged society, our goal is to support our seniors to age with dignity, with security and with a peace of mind.

Mr Deputy Speaker, the Labour Movement and our tripartite partners have been working on this and preparing for this transition for many years. We supported raising the retirement and re-employment ages, which are on track to reach 65 and 70 by the year 2030. We support strengthening CPF contributions for senior workers and to progressively raise the ceiling to protect retirement adequacy. We backed the Workplace Fairness Act to reinforce protection against workplace discrimination, and we have consistently pushed for job redesign, lifelong learning and stronger mid-career transition support.

These efforts have indeed made a difference. More seniors today are financially prepared for retirement and more are choosing to remain economically active.

But as our workforce transforms, challenges remain. First, as our population ages, overall resident labour force participation, unfortunately, is gradually declining from 70.5% to 67.9% in the last five years. This is a structural challenge that will affect our economic resilience in the long term.

Second, many seniors still face barriers in staying meaningfully employed, such as hiring filters or reduced benefits at re-employment. NTUC survey show that they take longer to find jobs, average of 6.2 months versus 4.9 months on average, for other workers, and 37.5% report narrowing job prospects due to age. I am sure Members here would have also heard of anecdotal experiences among our residents who face challenges in the job search.

Third, many seniors worry about keeping up with technological advances and its impact on job security specifically. While many are willing to learn, they face constraints of lower familiarity with new technologies and also heavier caregiving responsibilities. Employers have also cited difficulties such as mismatched salary expectations, skills gaps and concerns about higher wages. While these are not straightforward, and also difficult issues to deal with, but I remain optimistic that Singapore can navigate these challenges through our deep tripartite cooperation, and also, especially in this time of AI.

Mr Deputy Speaker, let me articulate three priorities as we navigate this change, especially for our senior workers. The first priority is to enable seniors to remain employable with choice, flexibility and inclusion.

Many seniors want to continue working beyond their retirement age. NTUC’s Senior Employment Survey shows that more than 70% of senior workers are open to employment beyond the retirement age. But this is not about expecting seniors to simply stay in the workforce longer. It is about giving seniors the choice and flexibility to continue contributing meaningfully, building on their strengths, their experience and their skills. Employers should continue developing flexible career options. The Tripartite Workgroup (TWG) for senior employment, which I also co-chair, is exploring ways to expand and broaden these options.

Through the Alliance for Action on Empowering Multi-Stage Careers for Mature Workers (AfA-EMW), companies have piloted promising models. One example is Mandai Rainforest Resort’s hobby- or interest-based job roles, and also recruitment prototypes, where seniors are hired based on their hobbies and interests, with roles redesigned to build on these strengths and these passions. Through this approach, Mandai gave Mr Richard, a 60-year-old nature enthusiast, the opportunity to serve as a Welcome Ambassador in a role aligned with his love for nature. With support from his colleagues and employer, Richard now takes pride in bringing his guests around the resort to experience the natural surroundings he cares deeply about.

Some employers have also created structured pathways that allow seniors to transition gradually into retirement while continuing to contribute meaningfully. At Schneider Electric, for example, the Senior Talent Programme offers different “personas”, one of which is the “Pivot” persona, which enables senior workers to take on roles such as coaches and mentors while remaining engaged in the organisation.

These initiatives show that when employers redesign jobs thoughtfully and provide structured pathways, they can unlock the full potential of our senior workers. Senior workers must also be able to contribute with dignity and without fear of discrimination.

The Tripartite Workgroup is studying whether additional support can be extended to long-term unemployed seniors seeking to re-enter the workforce. This need was actually reflected in the experience of Mr Sunil, a senior jobseeker who shared in a forum letter last week about how NTUC’s Career Festival gave him more than job advice – it restored confidence and reassurance at a critical stage of his job search when he walked into the Career Festival. His experience reminds us that beyond advice, senior jobseekers benefit from personalised guidance and support as they navigate career transitions.

We should therefore continue to encourage our employers to support and to invest more in training and job redesign for mature workers and also to facilitate multi-generational workplaces.

Mr Deputy Speaker, the second priority is to ensure that AI strengthens rather than replaces our workers. As mentioned earlier, NTUC has launched the AI-Ready SG initiative, which is a one-stop platform to train and upskill workers, support firms in transformation and improve matching for workers to access better jobs.

Apart from the support given to workers in areas such as training and matching, NTUC has actually launched for quite some time an AI Readiness Index (AIRI), which I think Member Denise Phua will be happy to know, an AI Transformation Blueprint and more recently, sectoral AI Playbooks that provide companies with practical guidance on business transformation and resources to support their workers' upskilling. I am pleased to share that the first three playbooks have been launched and I encourage employers to work closely with us to tap on these resources in their transformation journey.

Our CTCs, including our growing network of queen bees also play a critical role in business and workforce transformation. They bring employers and workers together to co-create upskilling and job redesign plans that directly benefit their business and also upskill our workers.

Let me share one example. At Tan Tock Seng Hospital, the introduction of an AI-enabled predictive patient monitoring system has helped our nurses manage fall-risk patients more effectively.

I met senior enrolled nurse, Lilian Teng, who is 69 years young. She shared how the system eliminated frequent manual labour, reduced physical strain and allowed her to focus on higher-value clinical work. Importantly, her younger colleagues helped her adapt and gain confidence to handle the new technology, while Lilian contributed and shared her clinical experience with the younger colleagues.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

What encouraged me was not just how AI supported a senior worker in this instance, but how different generations supported each other in the work place. This example shows that the future of work is not just about choosing between technology and experience, or between younger and older workers. It is about maximising their relative strengths and making them stronger by working together.

Mr Speaker, the third priority is to build a multi-stage, cross generational workforce. The future workforce will not follow a linear, simple path of education, work and retirement. Instead, I believe it will be a journey of continuous learning, continuous upskilling and reskilling, and contributions. Senior workers will increasingly play roles as mentors and coaches while the younger ones will bring digital capabilities and new technological knowhows. AI can help bridge these generations by amplifying the strengths of both.

I believe that Singapore's competitive advantage in the future can lie in combining technological answers with experience-driven questions. Mr Speaker, I will now speak in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, last year, during the Parliamentary debate in September, I talked about two AIs: "artificial intelligence" and the "ageing individual" whom we are concerned about. What I want to further emphasise is that these two AIs can complement each other – artificial intelligence can help improve the speed of work, whilst the wisdom of senior workers can help improve the accuracy of work. Intelligence and wisdom, speed and accuracy. Both are indispensable.

AI can quickly provide answers but the wisdom, judgement, values and sense of responsibility of senior workers, as well as their years of accumulated experience, cannot be replaced by technology.

Our philosophy is very clear – AI cannot replace human wisdom, but we certainly have the wisdom to master AI.

As technology evolves at an accelerating pace and AI becomes more widespread, some senior workers worry that they cannot keep up with the changes and will find it difficult to master new skills. We understand and take everyone's concerns very seriously.

Therefore, NTUC has launched the AI-Ready SG initiative to encourage workers to learn and use AI tools and also support enterprises in using technology to redesign work, helping to make the transformation process smoother.

Entering the Year of the Horse, the global situation remains uncertain, and enterprises still face numerous challenges. Workers must also do their part, prepare for rainy days and actively plan for the future.

If each of our workers can make good use of AI and the wisdom accumulated over many years – AI plus wisdom, technology plus experience, having both speed and accuracy – then Singapore will certainly be able to achieve stability and progress amid chaos.

(In English): Mr Speaker, looking ahead, our workforce must be defined not by age, but by capability. We must move from lifetime employment to lifelong employability. From qualifications alone to demonstrated skills and adaptability. From protecting jobs to strengthening job security.

Ageing, like AI, is upon us. Standing still is not an option. I therefore call on our tripartite partners to step up support for all our senior workers to prevent premature exit from the workforce, to help them bounce back when needed and to sustain meaningful employment for as long as practicable.

This Budget lays strong foundations for the transformation towards an AI-enabled economy. As a small nation whose strength lies in our people, we must press ahead with AI in ways that strengthen and not replaces our workers.

We welcome the Government’s assurance that technological progress will not come at the expense of our workers. Together, we must act decisively to put in place the support needed for workers to adapt, progress and continue contributing with confidence. The Labour Movement stands ready to work closely with our tripartite partners to ensure that every worker, including our senior workers, will not just adapt to change, but will thrive in an AI-enabled economy. [Applause.]

Minister of State Dinesh Vasu Dash.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of Budget 2026. This Budget strikes a balanced approach to meet the pressing needs of today, while preparing us for the challenges of tomorrow.

This is also timely as we enter a new phase of Singapore’s economic journey where the global economy is increasingly fractured and uncertain. Where technologies, are advancing at unprecedented speeds, reshaping how companies operate, and how we live and work. And where we would have to do more with a slower growth in our workforce, given our ageing population and falling TFR.

This is why the Government launched the Economic Strategy Review in August 2025, and I have had the privilege to lead the Committee on Entrepreneurship together with my co-chair, Minister of State Alvin Tan.

Sir, entrepreneurship is in our DNA. Many of our forefathers built successful businesses and contributed to nation building, including pioneers such as Lim Nee Soon, Seah Eu Chin, P Govindasamy Pillai, Syed Omar Aljunied and Edwin Tessensohn.

Perhaps one of the most iconic pioneer entrepreneurs was Tan Tock Seng. His story started when he arrived in Singapore in 1819 as a vegetable seller to a successful shop owner in Boat Quay in 1827 and to a thriving businessman. Through his many businesses that spanned real estate, agriculture and of course healthcare, he provided thousands of jobs to Singaporeans, then and even now.

Like our Pioneers, our generation has also our avant-garde entrepreneurs who have succeeded and have been able to entrench themselves here and beyond Singapore’s shores.

Take Carousell for example. This company was founded by three National University of Singapore (NUS) graduates, who were inspired by their exposure to Silicon Valley through the NUS Overseas Colleges programme. Carousell began with a simple idea: to make the selling of pre-owned items as easy as taking a photograph. What started as a mobile-first classified ads app had since grown into a leading online marketplace and omnichannel re-commerce business operating across Southeast Asia, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and serving tens of millions of users across the region.

I am very glad that Mr Marcus Tan, one of the founders of Carousell, and others like him are part of the Entrepreneurship Committee. They, together with venture capitalists and business leaders have added tremendous value to the committee.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore's entrepreneurship ecosystem is in a good place. Just like our early days, today's entrepreneurs have spurred innovation, created jobs and established themselves internationally. In fact, the Global Startup Ecosystem Index 2025 by StartupBlink ranks Singapore’s ecosystem as number four in the world.

Our start-up ecosystem benefits from a pro-business environment which includes our established companies, our talent pool, dedicated startup spaces such as the LaunchPad at one-north and supportive Government policies. These make Singapore a unique, competitive and trusted hub for innovation.

We are also a key hub in Asia for innovative companies and investors, with over 4,500 tech startups, 220 incubators and accelerators and over 500 venture capital firms that have anchored themselves in Singapore. Many founders of startups have proudly shared with me on how the Singapore brand had helped them forge partnerships and to break into new markets.

However, we cannot stand still and rest on our laurels. We need to continue to strengthen our startup ecosystem, to maintain our attractiveness to startups, talent and capital. This is because of intensifying competition from startup hubs in Asia, the Middle East, and even further afield. Venture capital remains tight, particularly outside of the US.

Over the last few months, Minister of State Alvin and I have spoken to more than 300 stakeholders including startup founders, business leaders, venture capitalists and our youths. This was to understand their concerns and to propose strategies to help them and future generations of entrepreneurs. We would like to thank each and every one of you for your feedback and for your support. This was only possible with the strong support of our committee members and ecosystem partners such as the Action Community for Entrepreneurship (ACE), the Singapore Business Federation, Singapore Fintech Association and the National Youth Council.

To support our startups, we will adopt a three-pronged strategy to strengthen our entrepreneurial ecosystem. First, we will strengthen our entrepreneurial culture. Second, we will help promising growth-stage startups scale and expand beyond Singapore’s shores. And third, we will facilitate investors to exit and recycle their capital and expertise into new ventures.

Let me start with our entrepreneurial culture.

Several years back when my son was then five years old, he told me of a "paper clip" challenge, which apparently, he chanced upon on YouTube. Starting from a paperclip, he was required to barter trade upwards until he reached a valuable item. After a couple of weeks, he presented a beautiful pen to me and tried to sell it to me for $20. What started off as a humble paper clip, after multiple trades, had been traded upwards towards a pen.

I am sure my story is not unique and there are many budding young entrepreneurs with very interesting ideas. However, when I ask successful founders whether they would support their children in pursuing entrepreneurship, some of them were reluctant. They know well the risks of failure and how difficult the journey was. It is therefore important to double our efforts to sustain and grow our entrepreneurship spirit in Singapore. And we should start from a younger age.

Initiatives such as the Applied Learning Programmes in schools and the Direct School Admission for Entrepreneurship are a good start. These programmes allow students to gain practical skills such as critical thinking and the resilience needed to succeed in today’s fast-paced business world. And on that note, I fully agree with Mr Azhar Othman who had indicated earlier the need to start entrepreneurship in schools at an earlier age.

We should also encourage Industry-led programmes, like the "My First $1,000" programme spearheaded by one of our committee members Mr Willson Cuaca from East Ventures.

In this programme, students who are between the ages of 14 and 18, will be given $250 for their business idea. After eight weeks, they would have to return the initial capital with cost and will receive a dollar for dollar matching for their profits, capped at $1,000. This allows our youths to road-test their ideas and experience the ups and downs of entrepreneurship. Some may fail, but the lessons learnt would surely stay with them for life. I am happy to report that those who are keen can continue to sign up. Registrations are still open, but they will be closing quite soon.

Ultimately, we must view setbacks as a stepping stone towards eventual success. Every successful entrepreneur will tell you that their path was filled with obstacles. They will also mention that they would not have succeeded, if it was not for the lessons learnt from overcoming these challenges. The key is to learn quickly from setbacks and bounce back stronger.

We can also support our entrepreneurs in more tangible ways and encourage entrepreneurship across all ages. Entrepreneurship communities and startup spaces, like LaunchPad, allow people to collaborate, learn from each other and develop their ideas in a supportive environment. This can be open to interested persons of all ages, including our mid-careerists and our seniors. These communities, alongside mentorship from experienced entrepreneurs, create a strong ecosystem of support that gives budding entrepreneurs the confidence to take that first step.

While new technology, products and services are disrupting traditional industries, it is also not uncommon to see startups with the right product or idea to achieve phenomenal success. It is therefore exciting to work in a startup and perhaps, even more exciting to start one. And so, I would like to call on our aspiring entrepreneurs to believe in yourselves and to boldly take that first step.

Second, let me touch on those who have taken the leap of faith, achieved some success and are ready to scale globally. To do so, they may need specialised talent, a range of financing options and access to new markets. They may need to raise funds for research and development, infrastructure, hiring and sales. But many start-ups speak of difficulties to access fundraising options at the growth and pre-Initial Public Offering stages.

Particularly for deep tech startups, they need experienced and credible financing partners with the right expertise and capital structures that are suitable for long-cycle, capital-intensive innovation. Hence, the $1 billion top-up to the Startup SG Equity schme, as announced by our Prime Minister, is a welcome reprieve. Further, the expansion in scope to cover early growth-stage companies, will help our startups raise the funding they would need to then scale.

In addition, the new Growth Capital Workgroup, led by Minister Chee Hong Tat, will look into measures to support the financing needs of companies across various growth stages. We will share the feedback obtained through our engagements with the Workgroup and to support in their efforts as well. The increase in the maximum loan quantum under the Enterprise Financing Scheme will also be useful. This is because the overall loan quanta had been increased from $30 to $50 million and would be beneficial for our SMEs who may be considering scaling up their businesses.

As Singapore is a small market, our startups must think global from day one to succeed. But we know this could be challenging for some, especially if they do not have a strong track record or if they are unfamiliar with the new markets. The Budget measures to support Singapore companies as they venture abroad, such as the enhanced Global Innovation Alliance and the Market Readiness Assistance grants, will therefore be very useful. By strengthening the ecosystem's access to financing options and support for entering new markets, we hope to create an environment where good ideas can flourish and companies, including our SMEs, can grow and compete.

Thirdly, let me speak about facilitating exits to support capital recycling. Many successful founders want the opportunity to exit and to reinvest their time, talent and capital into new ventures. Thus, if we want a sustainable and dynamic ecosystem, we must ensure that capital is available for promising companies to exit at fair valuations and for the early investors to recycle their capital.

A well-functioning and vibrant capital market in Singapore is crucial for this. I am therefore heartened that our committee's recommendation for a second $1.5 billion tranche of the Anchor Fund, which will help ensure continued support for high-quality listings in Singapore, was supported. This will be especially important as more startups mature and want to seek capital for their growth plans through public markets.

The committee also welcomes the $1.5 billion top-up to the Financial Sector Development Fund, to expand the Monetary Authority of Singapore's Equity Market Development Programme, which aims to develop our fund management industry and increase investor participation in Singapore equities. I look forward to seeing the positive impact of these efforts in boosting listings on the Singapore Exchange.

Let me conclude, by going back to my son. Unsurprisingly, he was able to convince me to buy the $20 pen and he cashed out the venture, therefore, with tremendous bragging rights. He then recycled this princely sum into his next venture, of buying several other nicknacks and started the process all over again. If I recall correctly, most of it went to chocolates, which were quite quickly gobbled up by him.

Sir, Singapore's next phase of entrepreneurs will face far more complexities than the paper clip challenge. There would be setbacks and they would have to navigate along uncharted waters. Those who are able to adapt early, move decisively and invest ahead of the curve, will succeed.

The work of the Economic Strategies Review Committee on Entrepreneurship will continue and we will support our startups in this venture. We will strengthen our entrepreneurial culture, help promising growth-stage startups scale and we will facilitate investors to exit and recycle their capital into new ventures. We hope that these efforts will allow Singapore to nurture the next generation of budding entrepreneurs, such as Mr Marcus Tan and Tan Tock Seng.

I am confident that Budget 2026 will provide a shot in the arm for current and future employers, as well as entrepreneurs. Thank you and I support the Budget.

Miss Rachel Ong.

Mr Speaker, I thank Prime Minister Lawrence Wong for his Budget Statement and for the continued emphasis on honouring our people and results.

Today, I speak in defence of our seniors. Many carry with them daily realities and pressures very quietly. I will highlight four areas that require our attention: nutrition vulnerability; rising cost pressures; digital anxiety; and the fast evolving threat of scams.

First, nutrition vulnerability. In a food-secure city like ours, it is worrying that we are seeing signs of rising malnutrition among seniors. A National Healthcare Group Health Study found that the proportion of hospital patients aged 65 and above, are at risk of malnutrition rose from three in 10 in 2022 to four in 10 by 2025, with two-thirds still at risk, at discharge. This shows the issue is not marginal but persistent. Doctors at the National University Hospital also highlight that malnutrition is closely linked to falls and poorer recovery.

Many do not see food as part of healthcare. When eating becomes painful, tiring and lonely, nutrition suffers, not from ignorance, but from circumstance. Some stop walking to hawker centres and rely instead on biscuits and instant noodles. Others shift to softer but less nutritious foods because of untreated oral health issues or chewing difficulties. Over time, protein intake drops, strength declines and frailty rises. If we are serious about healthy ageing, nutrition policy must address access and the daily realities of how our seniors eat.

My first proposal is a national movement, which I will refer to, for now, as Strong Seniors SG, with a simple goal: helping seniors stay strong through better nutrition, especially adequate protein intake. Protein should not feel like a luxury. Affordable foods, such as eggs, tofu, beans and simple fish dishes are already part of everyday meals. Yet nutrition gaps among seniors often arise not from the lack of food, but from practical barriers; difficulty chewing, fatigue from cooking, eating alone, or uncertainty about what foods truly support strength.

Strong Seniors SG would therefore focus on making protein intake easier, more familiar and part of the daily routines. This can be advanced through three practical pathways: where seniors eat; how seniors eat; and what seniors eat.

First, where seniors eat. We can partner hawkers, food courts and Active Ageing Centres (AACs) to make protein-rich meals more visible and accessible. Stalls to highlight affordable protein options or label balanced set meals, including softer choices for those with chewing difficulties. When the healthier option is easier to spot, it becomes easier to choose.

Second, how seniors eat. Eating is social. Seniors eat more and eat better when they eat together. Some AACs already run communal meals and we can build on this. In the UK, general practitioners (GPs) go beyond medication by recommending communal dining and social activities as preventive care. We can adopt the same approach in Singapore, with GPs and polyclinics referring seniors to community meal initiatives that provide both nutrition and social connection.

Third, what seniors eat. Countries like Japan and South Korea are investing in senior-friendly food innovation, including texture-adapted, high-protein meals. South Korea goes further by setting a national senior-friendly food standard, with clear nutrition and texture benchmarks. Certified foods are labelled by texture levels allowing seniors to buy ready-to-eat meals from supermarkets.

In Singapore, Health Promotion Board's Nutri-Grade has shown how clear labels can guide healthier choices. Could we build on this success with a similar approach for senior-friendly foods, signalling both nutritional value and eating comfort? Our food innovation ecosystem can support this through grants, pilots and partnerships with industry and community providers. Because when seniors maintain their health, they maintain their independence, confidence and dignity.

The second area that requires attention is rising cost pressures. Cost pressures for seniors are often less visible. One overlooked area is oral health, which directly affects nutrition and overall health. Many seniors assume tooth loss is simply part of ageing. Some quietly share, "I don't go to the dentist because I cannot afford it". With subsidies, full dentures can cost between $500 and $800 and require multiple visits. For seniors with limited finances and mobility challenges, this is a deterrent.

I therefore ask the Government to review dental subsidies, particularly denture-related costs and to consider introducing one fully subsidised annual dental check-up for seniors aged 65 and above, on Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) Blue or Orange. Such a measure would strengthen preventive care, while giving us a clearer national picture of our seniors' oral health needs.

Transport is another burden. While Agency for Integrated Care's Medical Escort and Transport (MET) subsidies help some, many mildly frail seniors fall outside eligibility. They may be able to walk, but could be unsafe in crowded transport. Taxi fares of $20 to $40 per trip quickly adds up. About one-third of seniors live alone or with another senior; which means managing healthcare, from appointments to follow-ups, can be stressful, costly and physically demanding. To ease this burden, I propose two practical steps. Expand the role of neighbourhood GPs under Healthier SG to handle hospital-directed routine tests and follow-ups closer to home.

Second, provide broader transport subsidies for seniors with frequent medical visits.

Next, digital anxiety. Singapore's Smart Nation push has brought many benefits. But for some seniors, it has also brought digital anxiety. Among seniors-only households, smartphone ownership is near 90%, but access does not equate confidence. A simple SMS that says: "Reply 1", "Click this link" can be confusing. A hospital appointment message can trigger days of worry, especially when it is to reschedule. Seniors often leave the hospital with a printed appointment slip they rely on. When an SMS later arrives with a new date, certainty disappears. For those who depend on escorts or family to arrange transport, this anxiety is compounded.

Then, there is what I call the "two-minute OTP race". For a senior, it means searching for their glasses, unlocking their phone, switching screens and trying to read an English message within a time limit. For the institution, it is one notification. For our seniors, it can feel like emotional roller-coaster. Digitalisation must therefore include human fallbacks and senior-friendly design.

I suggest to: include a direct phone line to a real person in automated messages; keep government apps simple, with clear mother-tongue options; offer guided "safe update" sessions so seniors can navigate their devices confidently. And for seniors with mobility challenges, I urge MOH and our healthcare institutions to proactively assess transport needs when appointments are rescheduled.

When seniors feel unsure on the digital front, some withdraw, others avoid transactions and many feel embarrassed to ask for help. As one resident shared, "英语不会, 电脑不懂"; or "I do not know English, nor am I IT-savvy."

When seniors feel unsafe in the digital space, these consequences are not only stressful; they can be dangerous.

And this brings me to my fourth point: scams. From financial loss to trauma, scams affect people of all ages. But for our seniors, the consequences can be life-altering. Singapore recorded 51,501 scam cases in 2024 with $1.1 billion lost. Seniors may be fewer in number, but they often suffer the highest losses and the deepest emotional turmoil.

For someone in their 70s and 80s, money represents years of effort and strength they can no longer earn back. The loss therefore cuts far deeper than the dollar value. Many do not tell their children. There is shame and fear of being scolded. Some suffer sleeplessness, anxiety and a loss of confidence in their own judgement.

One senior in his 80s shared with me that after recognising the scam tactics and refusing a second request for money, he feared retaliation and stopped going out alone. Repeat victimisation is also not uncommon.

In a Home Team survey shared in 2021, 45% of scam victims were targeted again. And I know this to be true. Some scam tactics are advancing quickly, with AI-enabled deepfakes far harder to detect. I suggest three areas where our response to victim support can be strengthened.

First, faster and more coordinated support. Automatic referral pathways to ensure victims are quickly linked to counselling, guidance and family support. Second, more humane system responses. Banks and agencies can adopt protocols, including private consultations, multilingual guidance and staff trained to respond with empathy. Third, a mandatory scam resilience workshop for victims, to equip seniors and families with practical tools, confidence and safeguards before they are approached again. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I would like to say a few heartfelt words to our senior residents.

Many Singaporeans have encountered scams before. If you have been deceived, please do not blame yourself too much. This is really not your fault. Scam tactics are becoming increasingly sophisticated nowadays and anyone could have a momentary lapse. What is important is not to put yourself down because of one experience. Be more self-forgiving and carry on living courageously.

According to the Singapore Police Force’s (SPF’s) data, scam cases in 2024 reached a new high. Among these, senior citizens suffered the most losses. What is even more heartbreaking is that many seniors dare not speak up after being scammed because they feel ashamed and are afraid of being blamed.

As a result, they experience long-term anxiety, difficulty sleeping and even begin to doubt their own judgement. Facing such situations, I would like to offer some advice to all our seniors.

First, do not be afraid but remain vigilant. You can agree on a simple "code word" with your family beforehand. This way, when you receive calls or video calls, you can confirm whether the other party is indeed your family member. Current scam tactics are very sophisticated. They can even imitate the look and voice.

One lady received a video call from her "husband". The caller said his phone was lost and needed her to transfer money immediately. The person on screen looked like her husband, and the voice was identical too. But in fact, her real husband was at home at the time.

Hence, all seniors must remember – for any call asking for money, you must pause and confirm the caller’s identity first. Use the code word to verify. Only then can you truly protect yourself. If the caller claims to be a Singapore Government official or Police officer, you can dial 1799 ScamShield anti-scam hotline to verify.

Second, if you suspect or have already encountered a scam, please immediately notify your family or bank. The earlier you seek help, the greater the chance of reducing losses.

Third, actively participate in anti-scam courses. According to a 2021 Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) survey, 45% of victims have been scammed again. Therefore, learning is the most important line of defense.

Currently, many communities organise anti-scam talks. For example, Telok Blangah Community Centre will hold another anti-scam education activity on 7 March. Because scam tactics constantly evolve, only by learning together and reminding each other can we better protect ourselves.

Finally, I would also like to say a few words to the children of our seniors. Even smart, well-educated people can be deceived. Scammers do not choose their targets. When parents encounter scams, they often blame themselves and are more frightened than we imagine. Please give them more understanding, comfort and support and help them emerge from the shadow.

(In English): Mr Speaker, across many cultures, how a society treats its seniors reflects its moral strength. Singapore has made meaningful progress, building firm foundations through Healthier SG, Age Well SG and the tireless work of everyone on the ground. I thank our Government and public officers, and recognise that every policy decision must be balanced against fiscal realities. May our Smart Nation be strong and kind for every generation. With this, I support Budget 2026. [Applause.]

Dr Haresh Singaraju.

Mr Speaker, Mdm Tan is 78. She has six chronic conditions, the kind of complexity that team-based care was built for. Every quarter, despite a worsening gait, she makes her way to my polyclinic with a plastic bag of medications. Down the corridor, a nurse with years of clinical experience and an advanced practice qualification waits for Mdm Tan as scheduled. The clinic briefed her on what this nurse could do, but a couple of conversations in one clinic cannot undo a lifetime of expectation.

Mdm Tan has seen a doctor every quarter for years. That is not a habit. It is a relationship. We do not yet have a national framework that helps patients understand what team-based care looks like and their benefits, especially for complex chronic care. So, Mdm Tan expresses politely that she would like to only see the doctor instead. The doctor's queue grows and the nurse waits for her next patient.

I am not questioning patient choice. I am questioning whether the system gave patients enough reason to choose differently. And no key performance indicator (KPI) captured it. Across our public healthcare, we do not yet systematically track utilisation of advanced practice nurses or care managers and even pharmacist-led clinics.

The result is predictable. Trained professionals underutilised while doctors run behind, and patients like Mdm Tan wait longer as their healthcare and social needs compound. What I saw in that corridor is not a clinical gap. It is a measurement gap. And it is not unique to healthcare. It runs quietly through the domains this Budget touches.

Mr Speaker, this is a substantial Budget, substantial enough to change that. This Budget rightly bets on AI as an engine of growth. But the longer serving engine is our people. The test is whether they are better off. We measure what the system produces – wait times, enrolment rates, disbursements with extraordinary precision – but we do not yet assess whether the system changed the outcome for the person it was built to serve.

The Singapore Public Sector Outcomes Review spans four themes and dozens of indicators across domains, across every domain of national life. It tracks outputs and throughput. It does not capture whether a person's health, housing, employment and social connection are collectively improving.

That is the gap, not an effort in integration. Each ministry sees its slice. No one sees the whole person, the very thing a family physician is trained to do. Every week, I see it. If there is a place where the whole person view should begin, it is Healthier SG. As of August 2025, it enrolled over 1.3 million residents into a care relationship. The most significant shift from episodic treatment to sustained health management in primary care this country has undertaken. That relationship is the foundation.

My question is, what else it can carry? Beyond active ageing centres and sports programmes, social prescribing pathways remain narrow. The culinary class at my community club, five minutes from my clinic, is not linked; neither is the e-sports interest group for seniors near my home. Not because it does not work. Because no one has built the bridge and that bridge is key for heartfelt social connection.

In May 2025, the World Health Assembly adopted its first resolution recognising social connection as a public health priority. Singapore is a member. If we already have the infrastructure and we do, the question is not whether social prescribing works, is why the connections remain incomplete.

The gap between what we measure and what matters does not stop at the clinic door. It follows families home. A couple sits at their dining table after their toddler has gone to bed. The laptop is open, the childcare fees, mortgage, career plans, caregiving help. They are doing the sums on a second child. I have met such couples a few times along their healthcare journey at their six weeks postnatal checks through their children's milestones and their own health reasons and concerns.

The mothers tell me they are coping. Their affect says otherwise. On separate occasions, the fathers come in for something routine and ask, almost as an afterthought, whether it is normal to feel this overwhelmed. I empathise. These are the conversations that never reach a policy paper, and they are the conversations that shape whether a family grows.

Thirty weeks of parental leave, once fully in effect this April, is among the most generous in the region. LifeSG credits, Large Families Scheme – the financial incentives are healthy, but the United Nations Population Fund's 2025 report spanning 14 countries and over a third of the global population found that financial incentives alone are largely ineffective when structural barriers remain.

This couple's question is not just about money. It is whether their workplaces will make room for the life they want to build, whether a supervisor will raise an eyebrow, whether a promotion will be quietly deferred, whether flexibility is a policy on paper or a practice in the room. They close the laptop. They do not decide against the second child. They decide not yet. And that decision acquired, private and unmeasured one, is exactly what across domain well-being framework would catch.

The gap between a parental leave policy that looks generous on paper and a workplace culture that quietly penalises those who use it. This is not a gap any single policy can close. No single Ministry sees both sides of that equation, which is precisely why no single Ministry has closed it. Each of them – Mdm Tan, the nurse, the couple – was counted. None was heard.

A well-being framework would have seen Mdm Tan not as six diagnoses, but as a person whose trust the system had not yet earned. It would have given the nurse something the current system does not, proof that her care made a difference. And it would have seen the couple not as two incomes, but as a family doing calculations on hope. Not because it adds new programmes, because it asks a question the current architecture does not: across domains, is this person's life improving?

The Prime Minister puts it well. What matters is not just the policies we announce, but the outcomes they deliver in people's lives. That standard is the right one, and I am asking this House how we intend to measure ourselves against it. I believe we can, because no country has yet done what Singapore is positioned to do – link individual level administrative data across domains, organise it through a well-being framework and run it as routine Government infrastructure.

The Nordics built rich individual level datasets but channelled them primarily through academic research. The OECD adopted well-being frameworks at the supra-national level but could not bridge sovereign data silos. Wales passed the Well-being of Future Generations Act but lacked the digital infrastructure to wire it to individual lives.

Each solved the piece. None solved the system. Singapore can.

We have the data infrastructure, the governance density and, with the Public Sector Governance Act strengthened last month, the legal authority for cross agency data sharing with appropriate safeguards. To be clear, I am not proposing open access to individual records. I am proposing linked analysis governed by the same rigour of the Public Sector Governance Act and the protections of the Personal Data Protection Act, so that outcomes across domains can be assessed without compromising the privacy this House rightly guards.

Build this framework and everything else follows. Social prescribing gets data to prove what works. Team-based care gets validated by outcomes, not throughput, whether the workplaces truly support the families they depend on becomes a question we can finally answer.

Let me put this in Budget terms, because this is a fiscal argument as much as a social one. If linked data show that a housing intervention reduced downstream healthcare costs for the same cohort, that is not a well-being insight. That is a budget insight. It is the difference between allocating by tradition and allocating by proof. This House asks every Ministry to justify its spending. The question is whether we have yet given them the tools to do so across the domains, and that tool must carry weight. If the data show that a cohort's well-being is declining across domains, this House should expect that finding to inform the next budget cycle, not the next study. Measurement earns its place only when it is tied to decisions.

Genuine cross-domain work is already underway. ComLink+ mentioned in this Budget, too, deserves particular recognition. It now pairs lower-income families with dedicated family coaches, tracks progress across preschool, employment, debt clearance and housing, and has begun integrating health action plans in partnerships with our healthcare clusters. That is real progress and it is the closest model we have to what I am describing.

But ComLink+ is programme-specific and population limited – lower-income families with children living primarily in public rental housing. It currently serves over 10,000 families. The elderly enrolled in Healthier SG with complex chronic care demands is not covered. The middle-income couple weighing a second child is not covered. The question is not whether we can do this for some families in need. We can and we are.

The question is whether we are ready to build this as routine Government infrastructure across populations, across the life course.

Cross-domain measurement cannot live within a single Ministry, not because any Ministry has fallen short, but because the architecture was never designed for it. That is precisely why this must sit in the Prime Minister's office, in the strategy group, the only body with convening authority across domains.

I ask the Government: direct the strategy group in the Prime Minister's office in coordination with MOH, MOM and MSF to publish, within 18 months, a single integrated well-being report for two defined cohorts as a start. First, Healthier SG enrollees aged 65 and above; second, middle-income families with children under six.

Begin with the baseline – who these people are – across every domain that touches their lives as of this Budget, organise that through a well-being framework. Then 18 months from now, measure again and tell this House whether anything changed. Not a new dashboard, not another satisfaction survey. A single report that tells us whether our elderly are living better and whether our young families are getting the support they need. One cohort at each end of the life course, one proof of concept.

If the linked analysis through the well-being framework works for these two, there is no reason it cannot extend to the sandwiched generation caught between them and, in time, across life's course. If the infrastructure to do this already exists and I believe it does, then what remains is a decision on timeline. I would welcome the Minister's indication on when this might begin.

The timeline itself signals how seriously we take the integration this Budget promises. If there are barriers I have not accounted for, I would welcome that candour too, because understanding what stands in the way is in itself progress. I am aware that what I am proposing is not as modest as it may sound. Cross-domain measurement means the Ministry's outcomes become partly shaped by another Ministry's performance. That is a significant shift in how we govern.

I am not asking it for it to be easy. I am asking for it to begin.

Mr Speaker, this is not a call to spend more. It is not a call to change direction. It is a call to see clearly whether our economic progress is reaching our people. The Prime Minister asked us to strengthen our social bonds and build a Singapore that belongs to all of us. I am asking how we will know if we have. Mdm Tan is still in the queue. The nurse still has an empty slot. The couple is still pondering at the dining table.

But if this well-being framework exists a year from now, Mdm Tan walks into that clinic and an important arm of a complex chronic care is addressed by the nurse who already knows her by name and social background. The couple reopens the laptop and, this time, the data tells us what their silence never could – not just whether the money was enough, but whether the workplace made room. This is what it means to see people clearly.

The question is whether a year from now we will know if anything changed for them.

Ms Elysa Chen.

Mr Speaker, I have recently been wondering, how do I raise my child in the kind of world we are living in today? The Prime Minister began his Budget speech by describing the profoundly volatile, fragmented and contested world we live in.

The moment I wake up, my phone pings with negative news. In various parts of our world, we have armed conflict and wars. On top of that, we have trade wars and, increasingly, we are fighting tech wars, over AI, chips, data and digital dominance. AI and digital activities have also displaced healthy social connection and mental well-being. Our young people are experiencing what The Straits Times is calling a "contagion of despair". Many are also anxious about AI displacing their jobs. And as technology and the rest of the world advance at breakneck speed, some are left behind.

We used to feel much more secure in our economic connections with other nations and our social connections with other people, but that has changed now. Therefore, apart from the threat of global instability, isolation is an equally pressing threat for Singapore. Despite the challenges that we face, I am glad to hear in the Prime Minister's speech a glimmer of hope. The various strategies and support systems highlighted will take Singapore forward as one people.

Not an isolated Singapore from the rest of the world. Not isolated people within a land. But a connected Singapore, a shared Singapore, a Singapore that is for all of us.

To do that, we need to turn from isolation to connection. There is great temptation to give in to the dog-eat-dog mentality, in a world where it seems like we are playing a zero-sum game. If you have more, it means I have less; and we start to compete against one another. This is the economic isolation I fear.

But imagine if we and our neighbours could work together and uplift one another, sharing our resources, each of us contributing our strengths to create shared prosperity and more economic opportunities within the ASEAN region. What a world that would be!

To achieve this, we need to first empower Singapore workers by helping them to be economically connected to the region. Global trade is fragmenting, with tariffs and the "weaponisation" of trade impacting ASEAN supply chains and raising uncertainty. Yet in this climate, around 82% of Singapore SMEs plan to expand overseas this year, primarily targeting ASEAN markets to drive growth, diversify revenue and build stronger regional brand presence. Tangible Government support is critical for Singapore companies seeking to venture abroad and helps Singapore stay economically relevant to the region.

There are encouraging success stories, such as that of Happy Fish, an indoor swimming school which now has 10 branches in Singapore and 11 in Malaysia, with its first Jakarta branch opening this quarter. They plan to open more branches in Malaysia and Jakarta and expand into Vietnam, Thailand and Japan, with support from Enterprise SG.

Such stories inspire confidence in the Singapore brand. We are competent and dependable. But such a brand alone is insufficient.

Singapore enterprises or global companies which have headquarters in Singapore often require Singaporean workers who are prepared to venture abroad to take up regional or global leadership roles. Yet many Singaporean workers are reluctant to venture overseas. An MOM report in November showed that only 3.1% of Singaporean and Permanent Resident workers have had overseas work stints of at least six months. But companies are looking for workers with global or regional experience to take on leadership roles or who are prepared to venture into the region to support growth initiatives. With the stiff competition from the global pool of talent, how can we provide this international exposure for Singaporean workers so our workers are ready and willing to take up opportunities? I will propose specific measures during the COS, including grants for companies deploying Singaporeans to regional roles and work exposure programmes for young graduates in ASEAN markets.

Second, I wish to speak on the economic isolation of a group of people who have sacrificially taken time out for a noble cause. They are among the most capable people I have met. During their time out, these people have honed a range of valuable skills. They have experience in strategic planning, financial oversight, conflict resolution, multiple stakeholder management, event planning and execution and healthcare coordination. They have to manage competing priorities, optimise limited resources and lead with resilience under pressure.

These super power workers I am referring to are stay-at-home parents. They have given up some of the very best years of their careers. I call on the Government to implement a scheme to support their return to the workforce. This is a crucial piece in the overall national effort to support Singaporeans to feel confident in starting families. It supports the long-term objective of arresting Singapore's local population decline and creates a pathway back for parents to be productive members of our economy.

Third, as we strategise for Singapore to surge ahead and ride the AI wave to advance our economy, let us not forget that there are groups of people who may be left behind.

Mr Daniel Yeow, who runs The Social Space, a social enterprise in the food and beverage (F&B) sector, shared with me that it is becoming much harder to sustain their mission of providing dignified employment to vulnerable groups, such as single parents with caregiving burdens, at-risk youths and people with mental health conditions. These individuals are often unable to maintain long-term employment and not many employers are willing to give them even a chance. While this social enterprise is determined to help such workers, they are struggling to do more because of rising cost pressures and increasing local qualifying salary (LQS) thresholds. Yet it is challenging for such enterprises to fully benefit from the various AI and productivity related schemes in order to provide employment to such groups of people.

I would like the Government to consider a "Take A Chance" grant for employers who hire such vulnerable persons. There are already the Senior Employment Credit for hiring seniors, Enabling Employment Credit for hiring persons with disabilities and the Uplifting Employment Credit for hiring ex-offenders. We can introduce another similar credit scheme for employers who take a chance on persons from other vulnerable and marginalised groups and offer them meaningful long-term employment. In the push towards productivity, it is important that the most vulnerable are not inadvertently made worse off or further excluded from employment opportunities.

Beyond economic isolation, we must also address social isolation. Last year, I had the privilege of addressing a group of young people in the Rotaract Club of Raffles City at their 25th installation ceremony. I shared about how we were seeing quiet quitters. There are young people in China lying flat, or "躺平"; in Japan, we see hikikomori, directly translated, it means "pulling inward and being confined". In Singapore, about one-third of youths aged 15 to 35 reported severe or extremely severe symptoms of depression, anxiety or stress. Students dealing with these conditions miss about 190 hours – or 24 days – of school annually and mental health struggles cut down school performance by 63%. Research by IPS has found a direct statistical link between high screen time and greater loneliness.

Yet, the young people of the Rotaract Club defied these trends. They painted rental flats, ran community projects with homes for the disabled, homes for the children, and even launched cross-border collaborations across the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), including launching the inaugural Rotaract ASEAN Young Leaders' Exchange to foster cultural understanding and youth dialogue across Southeast Asia. They are amazing! I saw how confident and how purposeful they are.

I left that event shivering with excitement. But I also asked myself: how might we empower more young people to be changemakers? How might we connect with young people who feel so disconnected from real life that they have retreated into their digital worlds? With an increasing reliance on AI, how might we help people build strong social skills, strong communication skills and competencies to navigate cross-cultural environments with sensitivity, respect and moral courage, qualities that AI will never be able to replicate? In an AI-saturated world, with everyone upping the game on AI to improve productivity, for Singaporeans to remain competitive, we need to have more than just AI and that must mean more social-emotional and cultural intelligence.

For youths who want to do more and who are not content to be mere spectators, but want to build our nation together, I see immense potential in the Budget announcement of a $50 million SG Partnerships Fund, so we can support more ground-up community initiatives.

But turning to those who are struggling, I wonder if we can recruit and train befrienders and mentors trained in psychological first aid so we can form a first line of defence for our young people. I would like to propose tapping on the schools' peer support leaders for this role, with the long-term hope that building such capacity also builds capacity for such individuals to eventually serve as community volunteers.

In my community, I have seen mothers and volunteers form support networks on their own, from playground groups to a group of young widows who call themselves Hope Herd and who ensure no one journeys alone. They are resilient. But what about our youths who may be struggling on their own?

While we have CHAT, which provides mental health assessments at *SCAPE and CREST-Youth to do outreach, we lack intermediate spaces in the heartlands. Traditional spaces like our void decks have "No Football" signs put up and malls require spending. Without free, unstructured spaces to congregate, our youths have nowhere to go. Is it any wonder they are retreating into their digital worlds?

Overseas, youth-friendly spaces that combine drop-in socialising with mental health support have shown real results. I would like to propose third spaces co-located with ActiveSG gyms or libraries, where young people can socialise and access early mental health support before conditions escalate.

There is also compelling evidence for the arts as a driver of health and wellbeing. I would therefore like to explore the power of the arts in promoting mental well-being and social connection among our young. I would like to call on the Government to commission a nation-wide study on how the arts strengthen the mental and social well-being of our students. There is an opportunity to scale up the work that arts practitioners are already doing. Some are using theatre to address bullying and build empathy in schools. I propose that MOE increase partnerships with them to build socio-emotional competencies, complementing what teachers and counsellors already do.

Further, participating in arts programmes also reaps significant socio-emotional benefits. A study by the Singapore Symphony Orchestra shows that just bringing students to attend a concert together resulted in significant improvement in their well-being and sense of social connection.

Therefore, I propose that we expand the Culture Pass to cover every child, rather than only applying it to citizens aged 18 and above. This provides access to the arts to every child, strengthens family ties and involves parents in the artistic development of their children. Most of all, doing so also benefits their overall health and well-being.

We also have to combat the isolation of those with special needs. One particularly heartbreaking instance of social isolation that I came across was during the Walk of a Lifetime, organised by Saint Andrew's Autism Centre. During the briefing, I learnt about how some parents keep their autistic children at home for fear of the social rejection they would encounter should their children go through a meltdown in public. I am working on an initiative in Bishan Community Club to make it a comfortable and conducive space for those with special needs, so they know they are welcome at our events. We are doing this by setting aside calm corners, training volunteers to know how to engage such families and designing wayfinding features.

I also started an initiative to promote bonding between parents, grandparents and children. It is called Play Date. It is an indoor space with loose parts free play, which is going to expand to serve children with special needs.

Our efforts are modest. Punggol Regional Library and the National Gallery have far more beautiful and well-equipped rooms for those with special needs. But wherever we can, let us provide more of such spaces across our country. I would like to issue a call to every operator of a public space, to be like the National Gallery and the National Library Board and to consider making accommodations to make their spaces more welcoming to persons with autism and special needs. Let us break down the barriers that have kept those with special needs apart from us.

Mr Speaker, I started this speech with a question: how do I raise my child in this complex world we are living in?

I found an answer in a volunteer in my community. Her name is Ain. She is a young mother of an eight-year-old boy with hearing disabilities, and she lives with her family in a rental flat. After work, Ain finds time to serve her neighbours. She attends wakes, visits those who have been hospitalised and organises activities with fellow volunteers and even accompanies single mothers to my Meet-the-People Sessions to advocate for them.

This is a Singaporean who refuses to let others fall into isolation. She demonstrates empathy, shows kindness and pulls her community together. Ain is an ordinary woman doing something truly extraordinary. And I think the way Ain lives, the way she is a role model for her child as she presses on with hope and love, is a wonderful, powerful way to take Singapore forward. Mr Speaker, I support the Budget.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa.

Mr Foo Cexaing.

Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Budget. However, I would like to speak on how we can do better to support Singaporeans and families with children.

Sir, our TFR has remained below one for a couple of years now. This is well below the replacement rate of 2.1. What does this mean for Singapore? On the one hand, it means we must do much more to support parenthood. But to me, a low TFR means that each child born to or adopted by a Singaporean, is precious. Not just to their parents but to all of us as a society. And our policies and structures must reflect the full weight of society's support, regardless of the circumstances of their parents.

While the Government has done much to support each child, I would like to highlight four groups of children that we can do much more for today.

First, children of unmarried parents. Our policies across the Government systematically disadvantage this group of children today right from birth, as it penalises their unmarried parents who look after them.

One, their unmarried parent does not receive the Baby Bonus Cash Gift of $11,000.

Two, they are not recognised as part of a "family nucleus" for HDB schemes, they receive lower subsidies than the family grants. They are not eligible for schemes like the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme.

Three, their unmarried parent is excluded from the most substantive tax benefits we provide for families. They cannot claim the Parenthood Tax Rebate of up to $20,000. They are not eligible for Working Mother’s Child Relief, even if the unmarried mother has to work doubly hard to bring up her child. Neither are they eligible for the Qualifying Child Relief.

Sir, I believe strongly in the family nucleus, where the parents are able to bring up children in a loving and nurturing home. But I do not believe that any Singaporean that will wake up one day and decide to have a child without getting married, just because we change our policy stance and allow them to be benefit from all the above benefits as provided to married parents. Even married parents are not incentivised to do so, as evidenced by the low TFR.

Mr Speaker, nobody makes the decision to have a child without getting married on a whim. If given a choice, I believe that not a single one of us in this House or in this country will want to be an unmarried parent. Behind every child born to an unmarried parent is a story of tears, agony, confusion, uncertainty, but overcome by only a burning desire to bring up the child.

I have met a couple of residents who are single and unmarried. They have burnt the candle at both ends because they tell me they want their child to grow up feeling like they are the same, like any other child in school. Many succeed but many others do not. Have our policies inadvertently tipped the balance against them? This is not how a society where each child is precious should be or can be. We must do better.

It is time to stop the policy differentiation between married and unmarried parents who take care of their children. This is not an abandonment or de-prioritisation of the family nucleus. This is not an encouragement of people to have children out of wedlock. And this is not going to lead to a sudden spike in the number of children born out of wedlock. All it is is a reflection of a society that cares for each child and that does its best to alleviate the challenging circumstances they face at birth and give them a better chance in life.

Mr Speaker, the second group are children of non-working mothers. Currently, non-working mothers do not qualify for the additional subsidies for childcare as well as after-school care. So, they will have to pay several hundred dollars more each month if they would like to place their children on these programmes.

Here again, there is clear policy logic. We want to incentivise dual-income households. Moreover, there will be some of us that think, since the mother is not working, well, she can care for the child, no need to place in childcare or student care.

Sir, in 2018, about eight years ago, there was a young Deputy Director in MOE. He came across many students from complex, disadvantaged family backgrounds who would have benefitted from the structured environment after school, but who were deprived from doing so because their families decided they could not afford it.

In some cases, the parents had many children. In other cases, they had a child with special needs amid siblings. So, the mother had to stay at home to take care of the children, but as you can understand, she could not take care of each of them adequately well. There were also other mothers he encountered who were absent. They are not working but nor are they taking care of the child.

The Deputy Director and his team were determined not to let the working mother criterion hold back these children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds from accessing structured after school care. From the ground up, they worked hard with school educators and the Ministry of Social and Family Development, and devised a protocol where the school educators would identify the children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds, facilitate their registration in the school-based Student Care Centre, highly subsidised. This meant much more work for the school educators, but they all supported the initiative, and dedicated their time and energy to identifying and engaging these students because they knew that having a structured after school environment could be so helpful for these children.

Today, the Deputy Director has grown a little older, has some white hair, stands here in Parliament. But he still has the same dream and the same fire burning in him. We should support all our children to have affordable childcare and after school care, regardless of whether their mother is employed. There are many more children beyond those currently identified in the schools that will benefit from this. And our school educators and teachers will also save time from having to make the case for each of these children.

So, Mr Speaker, my plea to the Government is – come on, let us get this done. Let us grant the additional subsidies for childcare and afterschool care to all students and drop the working mother criteria. Again, I do not believe that this will overnight make all of our working mothers wake up and decide to stop work, or this encourage those who are looking for work to not continue to do so.

Mr Speaker, the third group are our children with special needs. I would like to call for the removal of means-testing for subsidies associated with children with special needs. And this will include additional subsidy for EIPIC, subsidies for Special Student Care Centres, subsidies for children who need assistive technology and devices, like hearing aids. We should also extend free frequency modulation systems for all children in preschools, just as we do today for those in primary schools.

Sir, the emotional, health and financial impact of raising a child with special needs, after school and through life, is much more than the cost associated with bringing them up in their early developmental years. It is not something that every parent or any parent or child would wish upon themselves. And, therefore, as a society, we should give them our fullest support in their developmental years, because each child is special and precious.

Mr Speaker, my fourth and final group are our adopted children. Sir, for most couples, adopting a child is not the first resort. Many have invested significant amounts of time and energy, including going for IVF to have children of their own. Adopting a child is not a decision that any couple takes lightly. They know it is for life. They are fully committed. There is no backing out, just like the rest of us who have children of our own. I spoke to a resident recently, who also happens to be a childhood friend of mine. She and her husband came to my Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS) and shared with me their adoption journey.

First, they had to attend a pre-adoption briefing and a disclosure briefing and then obtain a favourable adoption suitability assessment (ASA). The ASA took several months, whereby they had to undergo, and they had to complete copious documentation, identify several referees and go through multiple intrusive interviews. But they, however, understood the need for this, because we do want to ensure that parents who adopt are ready and equipped to do so.

After they cleared the ASA, they signed up to be on the waiting list of an accredited agency, so that they could identify a child for adoption and this was a very long waiting list, so there are many among us who would like to adopt a child as well. After matching with the identified child, they had to apply for a Dependent's Pass for the child to be able to come to Singapore, because they need the child to be in Singapore for them to apply to the Court for the adoption order.

But the Court process takes several more months as well, because as part of the review, the Judge requires a report from the Guardian-in-Adoption (GIA), which is an officer appointed by the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), and she interviewed them again, made home visits, similar questions as the ASA, and it was only after she had completed her report, then could the couple request for a final hearing for the Judge to issue the adoption order.

After receiving the adoption order, they then need to apply to the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA), finally, to get citizenship for their son. At the point where they came to me, they had spent more than one and a half years since they started the ASA process. Their son had been in Singapore for close to a year and, at that point, were they able to apply for citizenship.

During the entire period, when their child, their son, was in Singapore, they had to pay foreigner fees for all the medicals associated with him, because he was not a Singapore Citizen, at least not yet. They shared with me that they felt like second-class parents. But to top it all off, they wanted to adopt a second child so that their first child has a sibling. Well, just like all of us.

However, MSF has informed them that they are strongly encouraged to start the process at least nine months from the date of their first child's adoption order, so that they can bond adequately with the first child. And, thereafter, they need to go through the entire process again – registering for a new ASA, going for all the interviews and putting up all the documentation.

So, Sir, I can understand the Government's desire to ensure that each adoption goes well. We all do. But this is surely too much. Their first child has already been with them for close to a year. Why the need to wait another nine more months to start the process, and why then the need to reassess them for adoption suitability, when things are going well with the first child?

And to compound the situation, compared to maternity leave of 16 weeks, adoption leave for parents is only 12 weeks. So, on the one hand, we want them to bond longer with the child, but on the other hand, the leave period is shorter.

Sir, if our fellow Singaporeans are made to feel like second-class parents during the process, something is not right. These are Singaporeans who have put in great resolve to care for the child just as their own. They are no second-class parents. They are special-class parents. So, I urge all the relevant Government agencies and there are many involved in the process as I have described, to come together, work towards streamlining the process for parents significantly. And may I suggest that during the period where the child is in Singapore on a Dependent's Pass, let us extend the Singapore citizenship subsidies for infant care, for childcare, for medicals to the child, because it is a matter of time that they will become a citizen, and these are critical developmental years. Let us not lose time and also let us align the adoption leave with maternity leave at 16 weeks.

Sir, the changes I have suggested above may be seen as an attempt to slay several sacred cows, but to me, it really is not. To me, a strong family nucleus means testing, these remain critical, but equally important is that we take care of each and every child, regardless of their parents' circumstances. Let us not let the heartbreak or the regrets of one generation affect the chances of success of the next.

Mr Speaker, I will now change gears and turn to the final segment of my speech, our national exams. I was very heartened when Minister Desmond Lee announced that the Government MOE is reviewing high stakes exams, especially the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE). Let me share my views on why I think this is timely and much needed.

At the last Parliament Sitting, I asked MOE for a detailed breakdown by grade across several national exams – so what proportions scored what grade – for the PSLE and the "O" level. MOE replied that for PSLE, at least nine in 10 students achieved AL6 or better in English, mother tongue, math and science; and for the "O" levels, about nine in 10 obtain a C6 or better in English, Mother Tongue and mathematics.

Now, that is obviously not what I asked for, because I asked for a detailed breakdown of each grade. But let me explain why I asked for this. In the latest PISA 2022 assessment of 15-year-olds, 41% of our students were classified as top performers for mathematics, 24% for science, and 23% for reading. In comparison, for the OECD, it was 9% classified top performers for math, 7% each for science and reading.

But if we ask any general 15-year-old in Singapore, I believe a very small percentage will tell us that they are top performers in any of these subjects. Why? Because their lived experience going through the exam system in Singapore has told them that they are not top performers.

Again, MOE did not release the data, but I believe that way less than 40% of each cohort, PSLE or "O" levels, will have received the top or top two grades for mathematics, for example. And this is because, while our grades for both the exams are no longer assigned on a bell curve base, they are now based on the objective scores of the students – the philosophy behind how the exams are set has not changed. It is set to be able to segregate the children by ability very finely.

So, you have X percent of very challenging questions, Y percent of challenging questions, so in and of itself the exam will be able to differentiate the students and, by that, affect their grades, thereby school selection, which is the key cause of the education arms race. But I do not think that this needs to be or should be the case. If 40% of our cohort are considered top performers in mathematics globally, then the performance on the national exams should reflect as such – 40% of the cohort should get the top or top two grades in mathematics.

Sir, I should be clear. I am not against challenging our students or against facilitating the best or most inclined of them to achieve greater skill and accomplishment. It is just that I disagree that our national exams should serve this purpose. We should not confuse excellence and competency. It is the role of national competitions – Math Olympiads, Science Olympiads, English Olympiads – to reward and recognise excellence. The role of national exams should be to assess for competency. And once students clear the threshold of competency, they should get the top grade without any further finer segregation.

Mr Foo, I am enjoying your speech, but you have a minute left.

Thank you, Sir. I believe this will be especially critical for generations to come with the advent of AI, because my concern is that the acquisition of foundational knowledge and fundamental cognitive skills will be impacted by growing up with AI. Now I need to be like a robot. Already, there have been studies that suggest that Gen Z may be the first generation that shows lower average intelligence quotient (IQ) and cognitive scores than previous generations for attention, memory and literacy.

This is linked to screen time, digital devices and social media, and I have no doubt that AI will compound these challenges. We are only seeing the tip of the iceberg. In this context, it becomes even more critical that our students achieve fundamental competencies, and the most important factor for this is motivation. If our students are able to put in effort and they can achieve top grades with decent effort, I believe it will build up their confidence. It will build up their interest and motivation of the subject, and they will acquire good competency, which forms the solid foundation and springboard for them to leverage the potential of AI. Without this foundation, AI may only serve to retard the cognitive development instead.

Mr Speaker, the vision and priorities outlined by the Prime Minister in the Budget speech are long sighted and far reaching. I believe that the suggestions I have made in my speech will further strengthen us as a society and give all of our children a better chance to succeed in life. I support the Budget. [Applause.]

Mr Sharael Taha.

Mr Speaker, many Singaporeans and businesses I meet share a common concern. The ground feels less certain. The global order is fragmenting. Supply chains are shifting. Technology is advancing at a pace few governments and even fewer companies can confidently predict.

Recent developments reinforce this. The US has announced potential tariff increases. As Deputy Prime Minister Gan noted earlier this week, if exemptions are not secured, Singapore's exports, such as pharmaceuticals to semiconductors to advanced manufacturing, could face higher duties. For companies, this means tighter margins. For workers, wage pressures. For investors, greater caution.

We cannot control geopolitics. But we can strengthen our resilience. Budget 2026 is delivered in a changed world. Prime Minister Wong has described it as the first step towards securing Singapore's future in this new environment. A changed world it is.

Our MDDI GPC, across this term and the last, has consistently championed six themes. Firstly, strengthening Singapore's AI value proposition; second, building deep and broad digital capabilities; third, ensuring ethical governance; fourth, uplifting vulnerable groups through technology; fifth, investing in infrastructure and cybersecurity; and sixth, building a high-trust digital society.

Together with fellow PAP MPs, including Ms Tin Pei Ling, Ms Jessica Tan, Mr Alex Yam and Ms Hany Soh, we filed a Motion with 13 Calls to Action in the last term. I am encouraged that many of these themes that we have championed for are reflected in this Budget. But alignment must translate into decisive execution and measurable outcomes. Our response must rest on three pillars: competitiveness, inclusive growth and digital for good.

If we get this right, we will not only remain competitive and relevant in a global market, we will also remain united as a society.

On competitiveness. When I speak to workers, business owners, young graduates and mid-career professionals, I hear both excitement and anxiety. Excitement because AI holds immense promises. Anxiety because many are unsure where they stand in this race. That anxiety is real.

In just the past six months, we see how the global AI race has accelerated at pace. At the Global AI Summit, it was evident that we are entering the era of frontier and foundation models powered by massive compute scaling and multimodal capabilities. Generative AI is no longer experimental. It is embedded in enterprises, in public services and national infrastructure. The shift towards Agentic AI and AI-native enterprises signals structural transformation.

This is happening at three levels. First, population scale. In China, AI is embedded across platforms serving hundreds of millions. In the US, AI copilots are integrated into productivity tools used globally. In India, AI is woven into telecom and digital services at the national scale. AI is now part of daily workflows.

Second, compute scale. The race is about compute dominance. Next-generation chips are being ordered in unprecedented volumes. Hyperscalers are investing billions in AI data centres. India has announced ambitions to attract up to US$200 billion in AI and data centre investments. Sovereign funds in the Middle East are investing heavily. The European Union is securing its own compute capacity. Chips, data centres and energy are now strategic infrastructure.

Third, on scale. AI is embedded in manufacturing lines, in logistics networks, in defence systems and in energy grids. This is no longer about chatbots. It is about industrial competitiveness and national capability. As capability accelerates, responsibility must keep pace. AI safety, alignment, model evaluation and red teaming are central to credible deployment. Trust will determine who can scale. Advantage will not come from models alone, but from diffusion. The winners will be able to align compute, capability, governance, talent and industry integration into one coherent strategy.

Singapore cannot compete on population scale. We cannot outspend superpowers on compute scale. But we can compete on precision, on trust, on regulatory credibility and deep sectoral integration.

And this is not just about technology. It is about jobs. If we anchor AI in sectors where we are strong, such as mentioned, as advanced manufacturing, aerospace, logistics, financial services and healthcare, and scale to more sectors with measurable outcomes, we create higher value roles, more resilient careers and stronger wage growth. But if we move too slowly, routine work will be automated elsewhere, and higher value functions may migrate, and our workers will be left behind. The world is moving at scale and our responses must be fast, deliberate, workforce-centred and outcome-driven.

To achieve this, we must address key questions.

How do we build both deep AI specialists and broad AI literacy? How do we redesign jobs so AI augments rather than replaces? How do we drive real end-to-end business value with AI? What is our strategy on compute capacity, compute sovereignty and resilience? How do we power AI growth with sustainable energy? How will the National AI Council evolve NAIS 2.0 and orchestrate our ecosystem across Ministries, AI missions, Centres of Excellence, talent development, investment, deployment, removing friction across Ministries and deployment across Government and industry?

My fellow PAP MPs and I in the MDDI GPC will elaborate further at the COS. National ambition must translate into scalable enterprise capability and better jobs on the ground.

Let me now turn to SMEs. Something which fellow GPC MP Ms Jessica Tan and others have also touched on.

We already have digital grants, pre-approved AI tools and Chief Technology Officer (CTO)-as-a-Service. These are important foundations. But SME owners tell me candidly, "I know AI is important, but I am managing cashflow. I cannot afford a data scientist. I am not sure my data is ready. I cannot experiment without clear returns."

Behind each SME owner is a workforce wondering how AI will affect their roles. Most SMEs face three constraints: the cost of talent, the lack of validated use cases and integration challenges. If AI adoption is concentrated among large enterprises, the productivity and wage gap will widen. We must move from advisory support to shared capability infrastructure. I welcome Minister of State Jasmin Lau's emphasis on lower-risk, structured experimentation and shifting funding towards implementation and workflow redesign.

I would like to propose three further refinements. First, evolve CTO-as-a-service towards AI-Capability-as-a-Service with pooled AI engineers deployed across SME clusters for hands-on implementation.

Second, organise pooled resources by industry to co-develop plug-and-play AI modules with industry leaders for generic processes, such as quality control, logistics optimisation and predictive maintenance. These validated solutions reduce blind experimentation and lower development costs. By crowd-sharing capabilities and lowering adoption costs, we can create a faster "IKEA moment", a term Minister Josephine Teo used to describe the point when enterprises move beyond experimentation to fully integrating technology into their operations.

Third, introduce outcome-linked co-funding tied to measurable productivity, cost savings, export growth or energy efficiency, something that was shared by many Members of Parliament yesterday. If we treat AI infrastructure like physical infrastructure, shared and accessible, SMEs can compete by agility, not size. Our workers can compete by working smarter. AI must be a multiplier for the many, not a privilege for the few. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, I would like to touch on our community specifically and the need for us to view the issue of skills upgrading and reskilling in this era of artificial intelligence (AI) more seriously.

Industries are changing rapidly. AI is not a specialised skill that is only relevant to engineers or programmers. AI cuts across all sectors; from manufacturing, logistics, finance and education to small and medium enterprises. The question is not whether we work in the technology sector or not. The question is how AI will change the way we work. If we are not prepared, we will be left behind. But if we are prepared, AI can become a tool that empowers us.

We need to encourage more of our workers, whether young or mid-career, to upgrade their digital skills and understand the basics of AI usage. Not everyone needs to become an AI expert. But everyone needs to know how to use AI to increase their productivity and job value. This is the key to building strong and sustainable wage growth.

The same applies to businesses within our community. We should not just become passive consumers of technology. We must see how AI can help businesses grow. For example, using chatbots for customer service, data analytics to understand sales patterns, automation for inventory management and more targeted digital marketing.

Last week in Pasir Ris, for the first time we held a large Ramadan Bazaar. I noticed several stalls were already using signboards generated by AI. This shows that our small businesses have already begun taking the first steps. We should encourage the use of AI like this, not just for design but also for stock management, online promotion and business expansion, and many other areas.

We must view AI not as a threat, but as an opportunity. If we are bold enough to change and are prepared to upskill, our community will not only remain relevant but can play a leading role in the new economy.

(In English): Mr Speaker, in English and to my second point on inclusive growth. A recent MOF report on income growth, inequality and social mobility shows meaningful progress. Our post-tax-and-transfer Gini coefficient has fallen from about 0.47 in the mid-2000s to around 0.37 today. Real incomes at the 20th percentile have grown faster than the median, supported by Workfare and the Progressive Wage Model and OECD studies indicate relatively strong intergenerational mobility.

These are significant achievements. But as disruption accelerates, the risk is not just income inequality. It is opportunity inequality. Let me highlight two groups of workers who are facing greater risk.

For senior workers, the re-employment age will rise to 70 by 2030. The Senior Employment Credit and CPF Transition Offset support retention. The Job Redesign Grant helps firms redesign roles.

But for our seniors looking for jobs, the lived realities remain challenging for them to seek employment aligned to their experience. We must accelerate structured job redesign using AI and automation to reduce physical strain and enhance productivity. But more importantly, we must expand structured pathways for seniors into roles, such as trainers, mentors, safety supervisors and quality leads, where experience is a strategic advantage. This will widen meaningful employment opportunities for senior PMETs who, today, still struggle to find roles aligned with their expertise.

In an ageing society, enabling seniors to remain productive, respected and fairly paid is not just manpower policy. It is central to inclusive growth. I look forward to hearing more on how we can further strengthen senior employment at the COS debates.

Second, on fresh graduates. While headline statistics remain stable, many graduates share a different lived experience. Entry-level tasks, such as market research, coding and reporting, are increasingly automated. Fellow PAP Members of Parliament Mr Henry Kwek and Denise Chua shared this as the "broken ladder" scenario. At a recent Chinese New Year conversation in Pasir Ris, some of the residents were managers, told me that they can now complete such tasks with AI tools themselves, reducing the need to hire and train fresh graduates.

The GRIT programme supports about 800 participants. What are the outcomes and how can we scale it up faster? We must also strengthen our internships to be more structured and industry-embedded so that students graduate business-ready, not just AI-literate. This is something that I have spoken on in my earlier speeches. I look forward to hearing more on encouraging seniors and fresh graduate employment in the COS debates. If we get this right, we strengthen mobility across generations.

Now, on my last point, digital for good. As we advance technologically, we must invest in technology for social good with equal urgency. Technology must not only increase productivity. It must improve lives.

First, we must ensure children from lower-income families are not left behind. Access to devices alone is not enough. We must expand AI literacy, exposure to automation and robotics, and industry mentorship. In Pasir Ris-Changi, our M3 organisation runs RoboWars and hackathons to expose students, including those from lower-income families, to digital skills. We should scale such efforts nationally so that every child has a fair start in this digital economy.

Second, on seniors and caregivers. AI-enabled fall detection, smart home sensors, remote health monitoring and telemedicine can allow seniors to age safely at home. Predictive analytics can identify health risks earlier. When designed well, these tools ease the burden on sandwiched-generation families juggling work and caregiving.

Third, on people with disabilities and caregivers. Remote work tools, assistive AIs and job sharing can expand meaningful employment.

Fourth, on people with special needs. Recently, I trialed a project with visually impaired residents to test a wayfinding solution using indoor positioning and AI image recognition to navigate complex indoor spaces. The innovation exists. But how do we connect such projects to agencies, funding and testbeds and scale them with less friction? We may need a clearer pathway linking community innovators, GovTech, IMDA, healthcare institutions and social service agencies.

Finally, trust. As digital adoption deepens, cybersecurity and scam prevention must keep pace. A high-trust digital society requires strong safeguards and responsible governance.

Mr Speaker, the challenges before us are complex. We face geopolitical uncertainty, technological disruption and social change all at once. Singapore has never thrived by standing still. Budget 2026 sets direction. Our task is disciplined execution.

We must sharpen competitiveness, ensure growth remains inclusive and harness technology for good. AI must strengthen industries, uplift SMEs, empower seniors, open doors for graduates and protect the vulnerable, among many others.

Above all, our strategy must translate into better lives and good jobs that are higher value, skills-based, fairly paid and future resilient.

If we align ambition with action and innovation with trust, we will not merely respond to disruption. We will shape it and secure a resilient, united and forward-looking Singapore for generations to come. Mr Speaker, I support the Budget.

Second Minister for Finance.