Debated in Parliament on 5 Apr 2022.
Minister Josephine Teo.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That this House endorses Paper Cmd 15 of 2022 on 'White Paper on Singapore Women's Development' as our whole-of-nation plan of action to collectively advance Singapore women's development to build a fairer and more inclusive society, where women and men partnering each other as equals can pursue their aspirations freely and to the fullest."
Sir, this is the first time that the Government has presented a White Paper on Women’s Development for Parliament to debate. This fact alone is significant.
But more than that, before embarking on this Paper, the Government had initiated a year-long series of nationwide Conversations on Women's Development involving Singaporeans from all walks of life. It did so even as our nation battled a formidable virus which precipitated the worst recession since Independence. This fact is also significant.
The White Paper may have been prepared by the Government but it speaks with the voices of Singaporeans who care deeply about women.
At the start of our debate, I would like to thank the many partners who have journeyed with us in the past year and a half. They include the Singapore Council of Women's Organisations (SCWO), the NTUC Women and Family Unit, the PA Women's Integration Network, organisations like Daughters of Tomorrow and Dads for Life.
Some of our partners are here today. May I invite hon Members to join me in showing them our sincere appreciation. [Applause.]
We thank each and every one of the participants in the Conversations. You shared your views candidly in the spirit of advancing women's interests. You spoke from your hearts. The Government listened and we heard you. In response, we have put together the first-ever White Paper on Singapore Women's Development, which Parliament will now debate.
How shall we proceed? Where do we begin?
We must begin by recognising that Singapore women have already triumphed over great adversity and made significant progress in so many ways.
Up till a hundred years ago, women were mostly confined to domesticity. Sons had priority for education and parents decided on their children's marriages. Some women suffered the indignity of being traded like property. As a teenager living in 1930s Singapore, my paternal grandmother, my popo, bore witness to the early winds of change.
For example, about 700 brothels were closed after the Women and Girls Protection Ordinance was passed by the Legislative Council of the Straits Settlement. In 1932, the same Council banned the sale of young girls to rich families as "mui tsais". Women could no longer be deemed chattel, to be bought and sold.
During the war, many brave and enterprising women did their utmost to help their families and friends survive the cruel ravages of war – rape and murder, persecution and hunger, and untold personal tragedies. There were many heroes – and heroines, too, including Elizabeth Choy.
After the war, women contributed to the rehabilitation efforts, setting up associations and mutual help groups.
Soon after we attained self-government, the women of Singapore achieved a historic triumph. On assuming office, almost the first thing the new PAP Government did was to pass the Women's Charter in 1961.
The Charter institutionalised the rights and responsibilities of men and women in marriage and ensured the protection and welfare of women in Singapore. It also paved the way for greater protection from dangers like family violence and sexual offences. More importantly, it changed the perception of how women should be treated in society and at home. It gave women more autonomy in the roles they took up, fundamentally altering the social compact of its day.
Back then, only one in three women were literate. But schools for girls established by missionaries, activists, businessmen and intellectuals had already shown what women could do if only we educated them as well as we did men. The trailblazers included Aisha Akbar, who, in 1950, won a scholarship to enter the Trinity College of Music in England. She was only 20 then, and the first in Singapore to be awarded a music scholarship without having already qualified as a music teacher. Ruth Wong, the first woman principal of the Teachers' Training College who later became the founding director of the present-day National Institute of Education (NIE). She helped to transform the teaching profession and uplifted the education system, benefiting generations of girls and boys.
Free primary education starting in 1960 helped many more Singapore women triumph through education, achieving far more than basic literacy. Today, for every young man enrolled in University, there is a young woman.
In education alone, we, women, hold up half the sky. We also proved that, with education, we could triumph at the workplace and impact the lives of many others.
Take, for example, Sudha Nair. She happens to be here today. Sudha studied social work in NUS. Her education led her to start Singapore's first family violence specialist centre, the Centre for Promoting Alternatives to Violence (PAVE). Even today, PAVE offers valuable services in counselling, public education, research and advocacy.
Then, there is Juliana Chan, a Singaporean scientist who holds four US patents. Driven by her passion to enhance science communications, Juliana founded the Wildtype Media Group, which has become Asia's leading STEM-focused media company behind publications, such as the Asian Scientist Magazine and Supercomputing Asia.
We also have Huda Hamid, a businesswoman and social entrepreneur, who has helped single mothers and women from low-income households become financially independent. Huda was one of six winners of the 2020 Young Social Entrepreneurs Global Programme.
More women have now taken on jobs previously dominated by men and stepped up to leadership roles. Like Sudha, Juliana and Huda, they have proven themselves the equal of their male colleagues.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I hope you will agree that the women in this Chamber – on both sides of the aisle, the Government as well as the Opposition – have shown the same, too. Never before in our history have we had so many women in Parliament as we do now; and I sincerely believe Parliament is the better for it.
In the past decade, we have continued to make good progress for Singapore women. Women are now better protected against harms and sexual offences, through the Protection from Harassment Act and Penal Code.
Women are now better recognised for their contributions in the economy. Our adjusted gender pay gap has further narrowed, halving to around 4% over two decades. Among chief executive officers, women remain a minority, but we are encouraged that Singapore has more than double the global average.
Caregivers of the elderly and children, majority of whom are women, are now better supported. More facilities and higher subsidies have been made available. Schemes, like Silver Support and the matching of CPF top-ups, help them in retirement.
Women are living even longer than before. By 2020, Singapore women's life expectancy had reached 86, surpassed only by two countries – Switzerland and Japan.
And, of course, we now have a woman as our President. As many people noted in the recently released SPH Media book on Singapore’s battle against COVID-19, President Halimah has been a pillar of strength throughout this crisis. She stayed on top of things and struck a balance on difficult decisions, such as tapping into our national reserves.
By any measure, Singapore women's development has reached a very high base. As a result, we may have felt no urgency to further strengthen the position of women in our society. This Government, however, thought otherwise.
As I mentioned earlier, almost the first thing the PAP did when it first formed the Government was to pass the Women's Charter.
Last year was the 60th anniversary of the Women's Charter. We believed it was timely to renew the pledge our founding leaders made so many years ago, to further elevate the position of women in Singapore.
This is because, even as we were fighting hard to battle the pandemic, we remembered the daily battles women may still face: the battle with time to fulfil multiple roles and responsibilities; the battle for recognition of the challenges women and girls face, much more than men and boys; the battle with sexual predators who, having been tamed in analogue Singapore, now rear their ugly heads in our digital world; the battle with social expectations on what work we do, what chores we share, what words we say and even what clothes we wear; the battle within ourselves as to how much of "us" to give and how much to save for self-care.
To help women advance, we must not shy away from dealing with these battles.
On the contrary, we must always see the progress of women as a journey without end, where every achievement is a foundation to aim for new highs. In every generation, we have a duty to find new ways to uplift women. If half of humanity does not progress, how can the rest of humanity?
But where should the weight of our efforts now lie?
Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to advance a proposal for Members to focus the debate on two key elements of the Motion: first, how to further catalyse collective actions; and, second, how to further promote equal partnership between women and men.
In all likelihood, these two lines of effort are the most challenging. Yet, they are also where we have the best hope to really move the needle for our women. I believe this from the bottom of my heart. Let me explain why in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Like many young working mothers, I struggled with guilt. How could I forgive myself if my child became sicker while I was away on a work trip? How could I forgive myself if my children fell far behind in school or became delinquent because I was not around often enough to guide them?
At the same time, I also wondered if my boss would notice my divided attention. Would opportunities be redirected because it was assumed I was no longer interested or up to the challenge?
Last year, when my 82-year-old father suffered a fall and was hospitalised, my mother, herself nearly 80, became his sole caregiver. How could I forgive myself if she, too, became ill from exhaustion?
Questions like these trouble women all the time. I am in no way unique. Almost all the women would find it difficult to balance their family and career at some stage in life.
Part of the answer lies in additional legislative safeguards to uphold fairness at the workplace and also to uphold a more inclusive workplace. The White Paper promises that.
Part of the solution lies in providing better support to caregivers. The White Paper promises that, too.
But these efforts taken by the Government can only go so far. No law or tripartite guidelines can dictate the norms in a family, or the detailed practices of workplaces.
Had my husband not stepped up as an involved father, had my brothers not stepped in to provide relief to my mother, had my father and father-in-law not given their blessings, I could not have continued to work with relative peace of mind, let alone stepped into public life with a degree of confidence.
Throughout my working life, I was blessed to have bosses like Lim Swee Say and ex-Chairman of EDB Philip Yeo who made room to accommodate personal passions and circumstances.
Twenty years ago, in the months following the birth of my twins, my former boss Lee Yi Shyan gave permission for me to work from home, long before telecommuting became a formalised policy and telecommunications infrastructure was mature.
I will never forget the trust and the spiritual and practical support I have received from my bosses.
(In English): Sir, this is why I firmly believe men's support for equal partnership with women is so important.
It is also why I firmly believe collective action, beyond what the Government will do, is essential. We can put in place legislation on workplace fairness. But the lived experiences of working women depend on the understanding and support of employers and colleagues. While many Singapore women are empowered by caregiver support, some will continue to be constrained by cultural preferences held by society and even themselves.
Therefore, more than being a comprehensive plan of action by the Government, the White Paper is a clarion call for each and every one to take action – take action in our homes, our workplaces, our community, our relationships; take action to recognise women's achievements as society's achievements; take action to pursue women's progress as part of society's progress.
Mr Speaker, I have spoken about the many triumphs for women in Singapore. Standing in the Chamber today, these triumphs ring louder than ever.
In December 1965, when the Parliament of Independent Singapore first sat, there were only two active women out of 64 Members. Today, women occupy 30 out 103 seats, a nine-fold increase in percentage terms.
Just as our predecessors have laid the foundations for women to succeed, we, too, must build new scaffoldings for future generations of women to thrive. This White Paper reaffirms our shared vision of a fairer and more inclusive society.
This will only happen when men and women partner each other as equals in every domain. It depends on how we, as family members, share in caregiving and act as role models for our children. It depends on how we, as a community, signal our protection and respect for our women. It depends on how we, as employers, empower women colleagues to dream bigger and fly higher.
Women in Singapore can continue to triumph, not through our words, but our deeds. This is our collective mission. For this reason, I call on everyone to give it our fullest attention and support. Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [Applause.]
Minister Masagos Zulkifli.
Mr Speaker, it is with great honour that I speak in support of the Motion to advance the progress of Singapore women.
Since Independence, Singapore women have made tremendous progress. Minister Josephine Teo shared about the many remarkable Singaporean women who have laid the foundations of our society. Allow me to share about one woman who has made a great impact on social work development.
Across the island, MSF provides a key line of social support in our local communities, enabling families to bounce back – achieving stability, self-reliance and social mobility. This is through a network of 48 Family Service Centres (FSCs). This all started with Ms Thung Syn Neo. She was a pioneering social worker, a giant in the profession. Syn Neo spearheaded the formation of the very first FSC in 1978 in the then-Ministry of Social Affairs. We owe Syn Neo our gratitude for laying the foundations of our FSCs, which have uplifted and strengthened thousands of Singaporean families to this day.
Mr Speaker, the tremendous progress made by our women that we see today did not occur by chance. This was the outcome of the Government’s intentional efforts to steward the progress of Singapore women, decade after decade, because we believe in a fairer and more inclusive society, where men and women are equal, valued members of our society.
My Ministry and the many Ministers that came before me, have been at the forefront of this endeavour. We have led the charge, legislatively, and through our policies and programmes; nudging at times, and earth shaking at times.
I was proud to share how far we have come at the G20 Ministerial Conference on Women’s Empowerment in Italy last year. Developing countries had problems providing access to education for their girls, and developed countries complained how their girls were still stereotyped to be educated for roles like teaching and nursing, and few were in STEM. When I shared that, in Singapore, less than 1% of our children did not complete 10 years of education, and that our girls were free to choose their own education pathways, including STEM, the room fell silent – I think in disbelief – that we have achieved both of these.
But we should now move from quantitative achievements to one where the quality of development is our focus, which is why we launched the year-long nationwide Conversations on Singapore Women’s Development. We pressed ahead, even amid the pandemic, and organised 160 Conversations. Nearly 6,000 participants, representing wide segments of society, responded to the call and joined us, sharing with us their hopes and aspirations of our women. I was also glad to see many men participating in the Conversations – some of whom are in the Gallery today – because, in the next lap, we can only achieve this goal if we work together, men and women, in a whole-of-society approach.
One of whom said, and I quote, “Men and women both play a part in shaping the society. If we all start to do the right things, the future generation will not have to go through what we went through. We should start now while we still can.” This is one of the big conclusions of the Conversations: the collective responsibility that we, as a society, including we, men, must play, if we want to advance our women’s progress.
We must begin with challenging mindsets. This means forging new societal norms – one that is based on respect and partnership. Because only then can we progress further, to truly empower both men and women to pursue their aspirations freely and fully. This requires collective commitment – individuals and families, people, private and public sectors, all segments of society, to step up and walk the talk. In this respect, I believe that we, men, can make a difference for our women and, in the process, for ourselves. Thus, my appeal to all men. We can step up, we can do more and we should. Be role models, not only in words, but also in deeds.
Because we must believe in equal partnership between men and women, with respect as its cornerstone. I want to state very clearly that this is not a zero-sum game. From time to time, such beliefs or misperceptions come up, whenever we talk about advancing women’s progress. This is simply not our way. Our approach is not about asserting the rights of one over another.
As men, we have a big part to play to encourage equal partnership. In our homes, as fathers, it is our responsibility to teach our sons what it means to respect all women, starting from a young age; instil in them the right values and be role models ourselves through our actions, for them to grow to be gentlemen.
Our children are social learners of the world, watching our every attitude, word and action. They model after us and assimilate perceived social roles. More tangibly, we can play a much bigger role in sharing the weight of caregiving. We need to pitch in more. Some have, and many more can. Because, in a partnership, we can build on one another’s strengths and be better together, for our children and generations to come. I echo what Bryan Tan, who leads the Centre for Fathering, wrote in a recent commentary that says, and I quote, "Fathers are not 'substitute mothers'" and that "marriage is an equal partnership", unquote.
Allow me to share Saiful’s story. We have cited it in our White Paper, but I thought it is worth reiterating. Seven years ago, Saiful left his job in the creative industry to be a stay-home dad and the need arose because they had a young child in the family. While Saiful’s wife continues to work, she is always there supporting him. Her presence enables him to overcome the challenges that he faces. Saiful’s story is inspiring for two reasons. First of all, not only did he challenge the traditional gender expectations and norms; second, it shows us that when men and women partner together, we become better as one.
We honour and respect our women because it is the right and moral thing to do, and this is not something new or just a feature of modern society. Respecting our fellow women is a natural evolution from our values, because we have been nurtured to honour, love and respect the most important woman of our lives – our mothers. We can identify this in an Asian society like ours, culturally or religiously.
The Chinese know the devotion of Mencius’ Mother, how she single-handedly raised Mencius after her husband passed away, and Mencius’ deep honour and respect that he carried for his mother. One account described the great length and extent that he went to bury his mother and to mourn for her when she passed away. When asked, he said that "the devotion that one owes one’s mother should be expressed fittingly at all times, and certainly through her funeral and mourning rites".
From the Ramayana, the Indians cherish Rama who was banished for 14 years to live in the forest by his mother Kaikeyi to make way for his half-brother, Baratha, to become the King. And he dutifully left the city in obedience to his mother.
Malay/Muslims take lessons from Islam. When the Prophet was asked who a person should honour the most, or give the best treatment to, he replied, "his mother". And when asked again, "then who?", he said again, “his mother”, and again the third time, "his mother". Only at the fourth time did the Prophet say, "his father".
In honouring our mothers, it shows we are also taught to cherish and honour our wives, sisters and daughters. It is why we honour our Singapore women. As families, as a society and as a nation, we are stronger when our women, every woman, can flourish and realise their aspirations and their potential. Thus, we must be part of the solution.
And we will build upon this as a society – in workplaces, at home and in our community. At workplaces, our women contribute to a diversity of values, perspectives and capabilities. Having more women in leadership roles helps to catalyse robust governance and better stewardship of organisations. I am glad that women’s participation on Singapore boards is almost 20% in Top 100 listed companies and reaching 30% in Statutory Boards and Top 100 IPCs today.
MSF will continue taking a multi-stakeholder approach that empowers stakeholders to collectively address underlying root causes. For instance, the Council for Board Diversity raises public awareness of the importance of women on boards and works with corporates to develop a pipeline of board-ready women. This would be more effective than setting mandatory quotas, which does not address root causes of the issue that have to do with culture and tradition.
Over the years, we have also greatly increased support for our caregivers. In Singapore, strong families form the bedrock of our society. They are a key pillar of strength and our first line of support, providing unconditional love and support, through the ups and downs of life, such as that of our caregivers. Their role is irreplaceable but there will be those who need more support, beyond that from one another. We recognise their contributions to our families and society, and we will support them. Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam will elaborate, including the enhanced Home Caregiving Grant that would better help with caregiving costs.
Through the enhanced Silver Support Scheme and the Matched Retirement Savings Scheme, we have also boosted the retirement incomes of Singaporeans, including caregivers, who may not have a chance to earn higher incomes during their working years.
We have also made major moves to make quality preschools more accessible and affordable to families to enable working parents, especially mothers, to pursue their career aspirations with peace of mind. By around 2025, eight in 10 Singaporean children can have a place in a Government-supported preschool. These are just some of the many Government-led initiatives to support caregivers and their families.
But the Government cannot do this alone. The community has an important role to play, too. Caregivers can benefit from strong community support, especially fellow caregivers who share similar experiences and can offer practical and socio-emotional support. Allow me to share Richard's story, which is also featured in the White Paper.
Richard left his job 22 years ago to care for his father who had cancer. Things became challenging when his father then developed dementia. His father would sometimes get violent with him and people around him. Fortunately, Richard received support from his neighbour and benefited from caregiver support programmes by the Caregivers Alliance Limited. Now, Richard gives back and volunteers with them to help other caregivers find strength and solve the issues that they are facing. Richard's story is significant.
Firstly, I am encouraged that we are seeing more men like Richard playing a bigger role in caregiving. Like I said earlier, men must play their part in shaping societal norms towards a more equal partnership between men and women.
Secondly, Richard's story shows us the power of community support where caregivers benefit from one another's experiences and supporting one another through practical and socio-emotional support. Minister of State Low Yen Ling will speak more about this.
I would also like to add that even as our society progresses, there are still persons who experience violence. Let me state categorically that all forms of violence cannot and will not be condoned by our society.
Protecting women from violence and harm requires partnership across all spheres of society between men and women. Minister Shanmugam and Minister of State Sun Xueling will elaborate more on this.
Finally, it is timely and apt to consider a meaningful way to reflect the enduring importance of Singapore women's development in our society.
At the closing session of the Conversations, the Prime Minister had announced that the Government had taken on board a proposal from the Singapore Council of Women's Organisations (SCWO) and will dedicate a public garden to honour, celebrate and recognise the contributions of Singapore women.
I am pleased to announce that we have identified Dhoby Ghaut Green, which is located in the heart of the city, for the garden. The Government will work with community partners and the wider public to design and develop the garden. [Applause.]
The Prime Minister will also launch a travelling "Celebrating Singapore Women" exhibition on 22 April. The roving exhibition will celebrate our journey on women's development. It also aims to build awareness and ownership of the action plans amongst Singaporeans from various walks of life. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In Singapore, we believe in equal partnership between men and women, with respect as its cornerstone. We honour and respect our women because it is the right and moral thing to do. This is an integral part of our cultural values, because we have been nurtured from young to honour, love and respect the most important woman of our lives – our mothers. Muslims draw lessons from our religion. Just as we honour our mothers, we are also taught to cherish and honour our wives, sisters and daughters.
As men, we can and should step up to do more to support our Singapore women. For instance, we can play an active role in caregiving for our children and elderly. We should also support our women as they pursue their aspirations at the workplace and in society. As families, as a society and as a nation, we become stronger when our women are given the opportunity to flourish and realise their full potential.
(In English): To conclude, the White Paper is just the start of a decade of work. There will be many more conversations and action plans to come. It is a decade-long plan of action and commitment by MSF, the Government and key partners, which we will carry to fruition.
We will build a culture of respect and partnership between men and women and across all spheres of society. This is what will take us forward in the next bound. I would like to extend our sincere invitation to all Members, including those from the Opposition, to come join us in our endeavour to advance Singapore women's development towards a fairer and more inclusive society. [Applause.]
Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
Mr Speaker, Sir, as I celebrated International Women's Day (IWD) last month with my sisters, constituents and unionists, I was greatly inspired by the women from all walks of life sharing what it meant to break the gender bias, smash glass ceilings and reach for the stars.
If we take a look around, we will realise that we are surrounded by so many inspirational Singaporean women. In one IWD panel, I met with four such inspirational women with very, very diverse life stories.
Chef Judy is a successful chef and, after a very painful divorce, she used the baking skills she learned from her very supportive ex-mother-in-law to become a successful cafe and baking school business owner.
Gwendolyn has a degree in political science and is also thriving as a Rota commander and firefighter.
Cheryl struggled with mental health and is now a beauty queen and passionate advocate for mental wellness.
Sophia left her job to focus on raising her young family but, in the midst of it, upskilled herself and is now the proud owner of a very fulfilling business of supplying wedding flowers.
These stories and achievements of our ladies reflect the strength and determination we possess as we strive for excellence. This is, in part, made possible by the considerable improvements and opportunities, protection and safety nets that Singapore has developed over the years – evident in the increase in women graduates and women employment, along with the growth of women in leadership and board positions.
However, in our efforts to honour our women who #breakthebias, our actions need to continually reflect the inherent challenges that women continue to face in our society, communities and families. With this, I welcome the 25 very far-reaching recommendations made in the White Paper.
If our laws and policies are to reflect the standards we, as a society, desire, then this House must continue to look to pursue choices that seek to achieve a fairer and more inclusive society where both men and women, as equal partners, are free to chase their aspirations to the fullest.
The NTUC recognises its pivotal position in spearheading efforts to achieve greater gender equality in Singapore and has, through the decades, been a progressive and relevant voice for our women, from the women's programme under Mdm Yu-Foo Yee Shoon to the Women's Development Secretariat led by Mdm President Halimah Yacob to its current incarnation, the NTUC Women and Family Unit.
Indeed, the creation of a more inclusive society does not differentiate on gender and relies, first, on the ability to provide equal opportunities for women.
Today, our women are flourishing in careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), IT, entrepreneurship, services, manufacturing and our choices are often limited only by our interests and passions.
However, our work is far from being completed. Apart from developing favourable policies that elevate women in the workforce, the Labour Movement sees the pertinent need to widen the field for women by re-imagining and refreshing our career choices.
In addition to the promotion of STEM careers, the NTUC Women and Family Unit has identified even more opportunities and market gaps in critical but neglected professions that are traditionally dominated proudly by women, such as dressmakers and nannies. Together with the Labour Movement's ecosystem partners, we have started the process of refreshing and professionalising such occupations and have piloted place and train programmes in these sectors.
The Labour Movement recognises that our Singaporean women often play the role as the primary caregiver in our families and thus have been advocating since the 1990s on flexible work arrangements (FWAs) as a workplace norm. We welcome and support the White Paper's recommendations on FWAs. Beyond new tripartite guidelines on FWAs, we call on employers to take steps to ensure fairness in the appraisal and performance management of workers on FWAs. Workers must be clear about their duties, expectations and deadlines when they are on FWA.
Women go through many seasons and we recognise that women at different points of their lives would leave, enter or re-enter the workforce. Many face difficulty re-entering the workforce after an extended hiatus as there is a mismatch in expectations and support between employers and women returners.
The Labour Movement has sought to bridge this gap by providing training and mentoring that women can leverage to give themselves a leg up. The Labour Movement, through the NTUC Women and Family Unit's Women Supporting Women mentorship programme, grants women at all levels, including PMETs, access to women mentors who provide support and guidance, allowing our women to have a better landing when they are returning to the workplace or even to pursue better and shinier pathways at work.
I witnessed the journey of some 50 mentees who benefited from this programme and I would like to share the experience of one Ms K.
A single mom to three young children, Ms K quit her job five years ago as she was constantly taking childcare leave to take care of her young children. When she joined the programme, she was taken under the wing of unionist sister Daphne Ng from the Singapore FinTech Association. This six-month journey together culminated in sister Daphne recommending Ms K to a full-time role that provided flexible work arrangements (FWAs), which catered both to Ms K's caregiving and professional needs.
Such success stories have spurred the Labour Movement to bring the Women Supporting Women mentorship programme to more local communities. The Labour Movement welcomes the White Paper's recommendations on using mentorships to augment opportunities for women to re-enter the workplace.
Mr Speaker, Sir, while the NTUC has pioneered actions that look to create opportunities and provide support for women to enter and re-enter the workforce, we also recognise the need to enhance our measures to protect women from workforce harassment and discrimination.
Earlier this year, a survey conducted by the Women and Family Unit and the PAP Women's Wing revealed the worrying trends of gender discrimination that our women of today face at their workplaces. Not only did the report show that women perceive that they are disproportionately facing workplace discrimination, it also highlighted the prevalence of a lack of company know-how and policy against such workplace discrimination and harassment. This is, in particular, amongst companies that do not enjoy the abundance of resources and manpower.
The NTUC has, hence, started to look to channel efforts into enhancing the protection of SME workers by engaging our employers in dialogues, talks and webinars, whilst providing shared HR resources that work to prevent workplace discrimination and to protect whistle-blowers within reason. We are committed to equipping our SMEs and companies with better standard operating procedures (SOPs) that can help to create discrimination- and harassment-free workplaces.
NTUC has long championed actions to address discrimination in the workplace. We were party to drafting the tripartite guidelines on non-discriminatory job advertisements that were issued in 1999. We co-led the formation of the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) in 2006 to promote fair and equitable employment practices as well as to provide an avenue for workers to report such unfair practices on them. TAFEP, subsequently, formulated the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices in 2007, which has helped guide companies in adopting fair and merit-based employment practices.
NTUC has also been advocating for measures to level the playing field between Singaporeans and foreign workers for opportunities since 2011. These were implemented in the form of the Fair Consideration Framework and the National Jobs Bank in 2014.
More recently, in 2021, the PME Task Force driven by NTUC and Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF) called for strengthening enforcement against errant companies adopting unfair practices, such as by empowering TAFEP to impose penalties on recalcitrant companies and putting in place safe whistle-blowing policies and procedures to combat discrimination in the workplace. We are heartened that these calls made by NTUC will be reflected in the move to enshrine the TGFEP in law.
As we look forward to proposals by the Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness at the end of 2022, we will continue to safeguard the safety of women workers and help employers create a work environment that is free from discrimination and harassment.
From the time I have stepped into this House, I have seen the concerted effort of our nation and this House in supporting the development of women in Singapore. While we have made progress over the years, NTUC has identified multiple significant challenges that women continually face as they pursue their career aspirations. NTUC believes that one's gender should never be an obstacle or a hindrance in the workforce and we will make every effort to provide opportunities and resources that work towards championing our women and the workplace. Mr Speaker, I support the White Paper and the Motion. [Applause.]
Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the recommendations made in the White Paper on Women's Development. Many Members of the House are speaking today on this very important topic and I will focus my speech on jobs. Specifically, the need to provide women with equal opportunities at the workplace, so that we can support their aspirations to have both a fulfilling family life and a rewarding career.
Let me start by laying out the challenges faced by women at the workplace. Women face headwinds at every stage of their professional careers. Early on, while studying and choosing which career path to take, some hesitate to jump into male-dominated sectors, such as those in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) industries. Women also face challenges when they find out that they are expecting a child. Some tell me that they worry about being penalised in their appraisals when they go on maternity leave. Others shared with me that they had to suspend their job search because employers do not seem to want to hire someone who will need to take months off soon after being employed.
For mothers who chose to leave the corporate world temporarily to care for their children and are looking to return to work, it can be daunting to return to a workplace that has changed significantly in the time that they were away. Many women also struggle to find opportunities to earn additional income while being a full-time homemaker or primary caregiver to their children and their elderly parents.
For our young millennials, they have a vastly different outlook on what work-life harmony is, as they are more educated and have higher levels of career confidence. Many of them are rightfully ambitious and want to shine on the global stage, but do we have the right structures in place to support their aspirations?
To address these challenges, I will focus my suggestions on three areas: jobs at home, jobs closer to home and jobs away from home.
First, let us provide better support to women, especially those with caregiving responsibilities, who wish to continue working from home. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown us that it is possible for some categories of workers to telecommute full-time. I am, therefore, heartened that the Government has committed to entrenching FWAs as a workplace norm and to introduce new Tripartite Guidelines on FWAs by 2024 to ensure that employers consider FWA requests fairly and properly.
But we can, and should, accelerate the implementation timeline. While I understand that it takes time to engage the industry and ensure that there is consensus on the Tripartite Guidelines, we should strike when the iron is hot – in Chinese, we call this 打铁趁热 – and roll out the guidelines when many employers are still fresh from having the majority of their workforce telecommuting.
We should also support the aspirations of enterprising women who start home-based businesses to supplement their household income, while being a full-time caregiver or homemaker. During my house visits, I have met many enterprising "mumpreneurs" in Radin Mas who have started their festive cookie businesses, bakers who specialise in customised cake designs, and one woman who even started her own trading company right from the comfort of her own living room!
I hope that the Government, trade associations and self-help groups can provide better support to help aspiring home-based entrepreneurs kickstart and grow their businesses. One good example of a self-help group is Project Cookoh, a community effort that helps housewives in Jalan Kukoh start their own home-based business. Project Cookoh mentors mumpreneurs, subsidises the cost of cooking classes and provides an online platform to help the women market their products. We plan to start a similar programme in Radin Mas later this year.
To help more aspiring mumpreneurs, I hope the Government can introduce a Home-based Business Grant to help defray the start-up cost of equipment and tie up with schools, such as SHATEC, to provide subsidised training courses for baking, cooking and safe food preparation, for example.
Second, I believe we can do more to help women find jobs that are closer to home, so that they can better balance their work and role as a caregiver. In Radin Mas, we partnered the Singapore Manufacturing Federation to launch the Jobs Closer to Home programme in 2021, to help women with caregiving responsibilities find jobs that are within five kilometres of the constituency, or a few bus stops away from home. This has been particularly helpful for single mothers, as they often hesitate to take on jobs in locations that require long travel time. I hope that the Government, through our Community Development Councils and working with the NTUC, can scale the Jobs Closer to Home programme nationally and help employers tap into a ready pool of women who wish to work for companies that are based near their homes.
Third, let us better support the aspirations of our millennial women. According to a survey conducted by PWC, 71% of millennial women aspire to take on a global role. However, Mercer's 2020 Worldwide Survey on International Assignment Policies and Practices found that only 20% of the global expatriate workforce is made up of women. This disconnect between aspiration and reality is concerning. In many companies, going on international assignments and having extensive global experience is a precondition to reach senior management levels. A persistently low participation rate of women in international assignments will, ultimately, affect gender equality at the leadership level.
Good mentorship is, therefore, vital to provide women with the assurance to venture overseas for their postings. One good example can be found in the Financial Women's Association (FWA). FWA has a deep pool of successful women in the financial industry who contribute their time by mentoring younger women in the sector. Many of FWA's mentors have gone through overseas stints and their mentees are able to approach them for advice on how to overcome challenges and flourish from such opportunities. I hope that with EDB's support, more professional associations and industry partners will create such mentorship programmes to help our millennial women professionals go global.
Finally, regardless of whether they are working at home, close to home, or far away from home, we need to tackle the discrimination faced by pregnant women professionals. MOM is in the process of enshrining the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices (TGFEP) into legislation and I hope that the Act will state unequivocally that employers cannot penalise female employees or reject a perfectly qualified jobseeker simply based on pregnancy.
Mr Speaker, in conclusion, the White Paper on Women's Development marks an important milestone in Singapore's never-ending journey towards ensuring an equal and inclusive society. As a community, we can do more to support the aspirations of our Singaporean women to have both a fulfilling family life and a rewarding career. Sir, I support the Motion.
Ms Poh Li San.
Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore is a city where human resource is scarce and the supply of talent and skills is not commensurate with our required demand. With our ageing workforce and inability to recruit and retain competent resources, the risk of an unsustainable economy and a rise in inequality may increase. So, are we doing enough in this competitive and fast-evolving global economy? Are our institutional mindsets adjusted to attract more Singapore women to have a more significant role in our workforce?
We have made some progress in the development of women since the passing of the Women's Charter some 50 years ago. We can do much more. The role of today's women is no longer just about gender equality, preconceptions or biases but diversity, inclusion and the social development of communities and families. The White Paper on Women's Development is timely, with its recommendations in empowering women to play a bigger role in more economic sectors and to helm leadership positions across various industries.
Over the past decades, several organisations have successfully tapped talents from the female workforce. They have provided women with opportunities to excel in the workforce and such opportunities provided the path to senior roles. More opportunities must be provided to women in predominantly male organisations and companies.
I am passionate about the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) and one area that our women can contribute to would be our defence sector. Recent conflicts around the world have reminded us starkly that we cannot depend on anyone else to protect ourselves, our nation. In reference to a Straits Times article published in February 2016, in the next 50 years, the number of male Singaporeans between 15 and 24 years old is expected to halve. The numbers are pretty alarming. The percentage of the total women service personnel in the SAF is only about 7%. Should we be seriously considering more Singaporean women to be part of SAF?
When I joined SAF as a helicopter pilot in the Air Force some 25 years ago, there were only five women pilots in the entire Air Force and we were limited to flying transport planes and helicopters. Since then, the rules have changed. There are, currently, more women pilots and they are flying mean machines like the F15SG Eagles and F-16 Falcons. Some of these women pilots are even helming the fort as Squadron Commanders.
Similarly, there are breakthroughs made in various combat units in the Army and the Navy. SAF's efforts to continue to attract and retain women and placing them in frontline combat roles are very encouraging. However, we will have to do more in attracting women to be part of our defence team. It has been more than 35 years since the very first combat servicewoman was recruited and I am looking forward to the Minister for Defence's assessment of the progress in this regard, specifically on the measures to increase the proportion of servicewomen and progression pathways for our women.
Women have made some progress over the years in the Singapore Police Force. From just 10 Policewomen in 1949 to 19%, of which 16% are in senior leadership roles. This is a 50% increase from 2011. Women Police officers can play a key role in enhancing the security and safety of our society, especially when the nature of crimes has evolved and technology has enhanced our ability to conduct surveillance and crime prevention. Let us try to bring up the percentages of women Police officers.
If physically and mentally demanding roles in the SAF and SPF have made progress in the representation of women over the years, employers, such as the Civil Service, Statutory Boards and MNCs should also set an example by recruiting more women.
In fact, some Nordic countries had implemented gender quotas in their parliaments and in the board room. These practices can assist in expediting the progress of women.
Where there is a shortage of talent and keen competition to recruit and retain capable staff in the sunrise and fast-growing sectors, such as sustainability and IT, companies should look beyond their usual hunting grounds and tap half the manpower talent pool in the female population as a solution to their problems. You may like to know that in the early days of the United States' space programme, all the "human computers" were women. These are the staff at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) who performed highly complex mathematical calculations for aviation experiments and, subsequently, spaceflights. So, have no misconception that women do not have the IT aptitude.
I am in agreement with the White Paper's recommendation to encourage and support women to choose and excel in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM) industries, which have been predominantly male, until recent years.
I am currently employed in the aviation sector and women make up only 3% of chief executives, compared with more than 10% in many other industries. We can do better.
Women's low representation in STEM careers has been described as a "leaky pipeline". In our Primary and Secondary schools, girls often perform as well as the boys in science and mathematics. But as they progress to the tertiary level, fewer opt for STEM subjects, especially when it comes to engineering and computer science. Only 55% of the women who graduated with STEM degrees or diplomas pursued related careers, compared to 70% of men. We need to look into this. A women's contribution can only further assist in the field of engineering and science.
I also agree with the recommendations made in the White Paper to enhance equality in the workplace. It is important to make a concerted effort to encourage our young women to chase their dreams and develop their fullest potential in their careers without any hesitation and with the fullest support. As the Paper has pointed out, mindsets about what jobs are appropriate for which gender will need to shift.
It is crucial to showcase the wide and diverse range of possibilities and opportunities for women. Over the years, many trailblazing women have paved the way for our younger women and provided them the much-needed inspiration and confidence to achieve their goals that will, in turn, help Singapore to progress.
Mr Speaker, I would like to say a few words in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Earlier in my speech, I mentioned the progress made by the Singapore Police Force in women’s development over the past decades.
One pioneering female officer in the Police force is Mdm Zuraidah Abdullah. She joined the SPF in 1986, helmed several command positions in operations and training and was the first woman to achieve the rank of Senior Assistant Commissioner of Police.
Beyond the Police Force, Mdm Zuraidah was also the chairperson of the Malay Heritage Foundation and currently serves as the Chief Executive Officer of self-help group MENDAKI after her retirement from the SPF. Mdm Zuraidah was also inducted into the Singapore Women’s Hall of Fame in 2014 to honour her achievements.
I am heartened that outstanding women have been given accolades like Mdm Zuraidah. The stories of these outstanding women have inspired younger women to challenge themselves and excel beyond their predecessors.
(In English): Over the years, we have seen more women athletes excelling in sports. At the recent Tokyo Olympics, out of our 23 national athletes fielded, 17 were women. Similarly, of the 10 competitors for the Paralympics, there were six female representatives. I am hopeful that more women national athletes will make Singaporeans proud.
The media and entertainment industry has an impact and plays a vital role in the amplification of women in society. Often times, women are portrayed second to men and that stereotyping is blindly amplifying certain biases.
Not all women are Bond girls whose sole responsibility is to wait for their handsome male hero to come home to them or behave like the female protagonist in constant distress, as portrayed in Korean drama "Crash Landing on You".
I certainly hope the next Bond star will be a female lead and more female being portrayed as heroines in dramas. We need to reshape the archaic perceptions of how women are portrayed in our society. Our local media must work towards shifting the narrative by placing equal emphasis between men and women by sharing aspirational stories with a positive reflection of fairness and inclusivity for all genders and races and not just for the rich or powerful. We must curate positive stories that will inspire and amplify the right values.
Other than the media, public events and fora featuring female speakers, discussing issues that are of concern to the women community are important informal ways for women to share their experience and learn from one another. In Sembawang West, women corporate and community leaders attend our annual SG Women's Festival event to share their experience and discuss best practices in areas, such as career, financial planning, health and wellness, caregiving and sustainability. These platforms help to create informal interest groups and build a support ecosystem for women. To add, the SG Heroines Award, CNA Women Award and Her World Women of the Year Award are important recognitions that inspire and rally women communities to do more for the society.
I support the White Paper's proposal to develop career mentorship and networking opportunities for women. We need more professional and informal women bodies to recruit, retain and network with women in the various sectors. For instance, the Women Aviation International SG chapter was set up in March 2021 to encourage more young women to join the aviation sector. While it is an initiative started by women for the benefit of other women, there is sincere support from our male counterparts who understand the need to attract and retain the best talents into this industry. Being a participant in their programmes, I am heartened by the support from agencies and companies, such as the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore, Association of Aerospace Industries (Singapore) and Airbus Singapore, for example.
Mr Speaker, I would like to speak in Mandarin for the next segment.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Since both men and women contribute in the workforce, it is necessary for the Government to provide better facilities for homecare. I fully support the call in the White Paper for more equality in the family and society, because caregivers themselves also need to rest and be cared for.
I am glad to note that access to affordable and quality preschool facilities will be enhanced. I urge the Ministry to pay special attention to estates with many young families and provide adequate childcare facilities.
Likewise, in ageing estates, the Ministry must ensure senior day-care centres are easily accessible and affordable. With a rapidly-ageing population, we can expect more demand for migrant domestic workers to assist with caregiving for seniors. As of 2020, there are almost 250,000 migrant domestic workers in Singapore. This is not sustainable for the nation in the long run.
We will need to provide more and better institutional care and community support for seniors so that their children can go to work with peace of mind. People should also be better informed about geriatric care and the community support system available.
(In English): Working women tend to juggle one too many roles at home and at work. Prolonged periods of heavy loads can be draining on their own physical and mental health and may even cause burnouts. At a certain phase, they may have to prioritise familial responsibilities, like caregiving for young children or aged parents and take a break from their jobs. I trust that the Government will consider providing incentives to encourage MNCs, and especially SMEs, to introduce a sabbatical system not just for women but for both genders. Women, actually, do care about the men's welfare as well.
Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to Minister of State Sun Xueling, Minister of State Low Yen Ling, Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mazam, members of the PAP Women's Wing and Young PAP, as well as to many others who had contributed towards the White Paper on Singapore Women's Development. I am confident that the recommendations will drive significant improvements in the decades ahead and enable more women in Singapore to hold up half the sky, while the men hold up the other half.
On a personal note, as we chart our new way forward together, I hope to see more women representation in the Cabinet with more than just a mere 15% made up of only three women and 17 male Ministers. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to conclude my support for the Motion.
Ms He Ting Ru.
Mr Speaker, when moving the Motion on Empowering Women last year, I spoke about how we stand on the shoulders of those who forged the way before us and how we must continue to build on the progress that women have made to get us to where we are today. I spoke about society and the economy at large and how they benefit from greater equality for women.
Finally, I talked about the personal: how just two generations prior, my grandmother had to fight hard just to be allowed to go back to school for a meagre two more years before she was once again shut up at home and asked to wait to be married off. I also shared my hopes that my sons would grow up in a fairer society and do their part to ensure that women and girls are not only given equal opportunities to forge their chosen paths in life, but that they will also be respected as equals and see outcomes that are on par with those for boys and men.
All these remain relevant today with the release last week of the White Paper on Singapore Women's Development. The Conversations on Singapore Women's Development were launched in September 2020 with sessions taking place through the year that followed. The year 2021 was also designated the year of celebrating SG women with its attendant events and activities.
Yet, despite being over a year in the making, the White Paper was released barely a week ago, leaving Singaporeans with precious little time to go through the White Paper and consider its recommendations before the issues contained within are debated here in Parliament. There was just not enough time for my residents to provide feedback on the over 100 pages of its contents.
Contrast this with the no less consequential population White Paper which was released on 9 January 2013. That 41-page long paper was debated and passed in Parliament a month later on 9 February.
The seeming haste raises questions about whether the rushed timeline is necessary, or even beneficial to public debate and understanding. An invitation for full and rigorous public scrutiny is one of the key tools for managing and countering misinformation and disinformation, and goes a long way towards dispelling unwarranted and unwelcomed conspiracies.
That said, I am happy to see the paper acknowledging that a whole-of-nation approach has to be taken. The Workers' Party supports the spirit of the Motion and the White Paper's overarching goal of achieving a fairer and more inclusive society. However, we believe improvements can be made. My colleagues and I will address some of these during the course of today's debate.
To start, the White Paper specifically targets Singapore women. I feel we can do better: the principles and aspirations contained within the paper should form a blueprint of what we, as a society, stand for and what we value, no matter who you are. Additionally, the protections and aims should apply to all women in Singapore, regardless of nationality or status. My colleague Mr Leon Perera will elaborate further on these issues.
Moving on to the gender wage gap. The latest publicly available study conducted in 2018 and published in 2020 by MOM showed that there was still an adjusted wage gap of 6%. The White Paper mentions that the adjusted rate has dropped further to 4.3% in 2020, with the unadjusted median gender pay gap being 14.4%. While this pay gap is on the decline, it, nonetheless, still exists and I hope we will go beyond the points suggested in this White Paper to close the gap. Our efforts at reducing this pay gap must persist until women in Singapore achieve equal pay to their male counterparts for equal work.
We also need to ask about what the adverse effect the pandemic and our recovery from it has had on the gender wage gap and the effect of the chronic under-valuing and under-paying of jobs that are traditionally the preserve of women. These include nursing, caring, and teaching. Millions of us in lockdown around the globe found out first-hand how critical these workers are for the functioning and well-being of our economies, societies and families.
The real gender wage gap also should take into account the number of women who do not "lean in" to seek higher paying jobs, promotions or careers, due to reasons, such as a lack of confidence, familiarity or just plain discomfort with what is seen as "too male" environments. My colleague, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, will speak more on this.
Additionally, the 2020 MOM study asks but does not answer why such segregation exists. It mentions data from two years with a 16-year gap – 2002 and 2018. This does not give us a good picture of the problem. We, therefore, repeat the call from our manifesto that employers with 10 or more employees should be required to report to MOM the gender pay gap for the same job description. This information must be made publicly available, in aggregate form. Only with such publicly available basic data on a regular basis, could we have a better idea of the problem and move to close the gender wage gap. This will help employers increase access to a wider talent pool, enhance the diversity of their workforce and better attract and retain capable workers.
Unfortunately, the adverse impact on women's purchasing power does not stop at the gender pay gap. There has been more attention in recent years given to the study of the phenomenon of what is known as the "pink tax", loosely defined as producers and providers charging more for the same products and services once these are marketed at women. A study commissioned in 2015 by New York City found that women's products cost 7% more than similar products for men and that women paid more in every industry studied. Back home, a study by the Sunday Times of 10 retailers found women paying more for half of them. It appears that such gender-based pricing penalises women for, well, being women!
The scope of this phenomenon and whether it is actually justified warrants a study in Singapore. Women also bear a disproportionate share of unpaid labour, both tangible and "invisible" in the form of the mental load, because it is still usually the woman who is expected to oversee the smooth running of our households. The burden is also on her shoulders to ensure that the children are watered and fed, and that she not only has to coordinate the schedule, but is also expected to take time off work to attend to medical and other appointments of their dependants. The Member for Aljunied, Mr Gerald Giam, will speak more about what we can do to ensure that our unpaid caregivers – both women and men – are recognised and supported.
It is no wonder that there are also increasing recognition and data showing that women are disproportionately affected globally by rising costs of living – because they start from a weaker economic position that is exacerbated by all the factors mentioned above. We have, in this House, spoken at length about climate change and its effect on Singapore, yet I note that in an article earlier this year, UN Women wrote, "the climate crisis is not 'gender neutral'. Women and girls experience the greatest impacts of climate change, which amplifies existing gender inequalities and poses unique threats to their livelihoods, health and safety."
Such climate-driven inequalities do not affect only developing nations, but also high-income ones, such as Singapore. I also cannot help but notice that most of the jobs in the traditional energy sectors are almost entirely male-dominated. The green transition, therefore, represents a chance for us to ensure that women are well and justly represented in these new "green jobs" and we must work to ensure that the gender gap in STEM skills does not prove to be a barrier to greater gender equality in a low-carbon future.
The White Paper, too, would like us to challenge these stereotypes, to push women to take leadership roles and to support entrepreneurship. Indeed, removing barriers to female entrepreneurship will not only drive national economic growth, but also contribute to empowering women to be financially self-sufficient. The establishment of the Singapore Women Entrepreneurs Network by SBF last September is a welcome step to create a community of support for existing female entrepreneurs.
Would this initiative be expanded to support budding, prospective female entrepreneurs, with an emphasis on women in traditionally male-dominated industries, such as energy and STEM? Would there also be any special emphasis on Femtech? What about women who own micro businesses with different concerns?
And while I am on this topic, and since we are discussing mindset shifts today, perhaps it is also time to do away with gendered terms like "girl boss" and "mumtrepreneurs", which, to me, seem to suggest that there is something out of the ordinary about women or mothers taking a lead in business.
When it comes to representation at the top, having more women in decision-making leadership roles has many benefits and gives young women role models to look up to.
A resident also pointed out to me that the multi-Ministerial task force to fight COVID-19 was an all-male affair when it came to the co-chairs and other public-facing figures – which, surely, causes some dissonance, given that the paper itself acknowledges that women are disproportionately more affected by the pandemic. While it is undoubtedly true that we cannot make progress without "allies", I hope we do better at giving women a public leadership voice when we "build back better" coming out of COVID-19's long, long shadow. My colleague Sylvia Lim spoke about this extensively last year and I would like to repeat her call for change to make it conducive for women to step up to the political forefront.
Turning to anti-discrimination legislation, I am happy to hear that anti-discrimination legislation will be introduced in Singapore. This move has long been called for by Members in this House and, indeed, is one of the proposals contained in our 2020 manifesto, where we called for anti-discrimination legislation to be formally instituted to prohibit against employment discrimination on the basis of race, gender, age and against Singapore Citizens. After all, legislating against discrimination would make such practices illegal and, presumably, will come with attendant penalties for non-compliance. It would also give our businesses clarity to know what discriminatory practices are, and to introduce internal processes to protect their employees from discrimination.
It is also notable that discrimination and discriminatory practices persist despite the guidance and counselling offered through the Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment Practices (TAFEP). It is why we are still even talking about the issue today, and the White Paper includes tackling discrimination as one of its topics.
The guidance approach is just not good enough. We need legislation and policies that actually work. While mediation is an option, there needs to be proper mechanisms for monitoring, investigation, adjudication and deterrence in place. I hope that we will take reference from other jurisdictions to see how thoughtful legislation outlawing such discriminatory behaviour can benefit women and other vulnerable groups.
I would now like to turn to a major role that many women play: becoming a mother. When I was pregnant with my youngest, his eldest brother, who was only aged four at the time, came up to me at bedtime and told me, "Mama, I am glad I am not a woman." When I asked him why, he told me very seriously that it was because "it’s so hard to be pregnant". And, indeed, while parenthood brings much joy and growth, I do distinctly recall how lost and bewildered I felt the day we brought him home from the hospital. Having gone through 26 hours of labour and finally giving birth to an almost four-kilogramme baby, I was exhausted, in a huge amount of pain and just felt as if I had been run over by a bus, multiple times.
Baby’s constant wails and demands for food also left me frantically trying to find answers from my phone – with my husband being equally panicked. My mother, from a generation who were told that "formula was more nutritious", was also unable to help with the challenging task of breastfeeding. Despite this rocky start, I was extremely fortunate. For a village quickly grew up around me: aside from my parents assiduously ensuring that I had all the food and nutrients needed to recover in the immediate postpartum period, cousins and friends, who were themselves young parents, also offered all kinds of assistance. These ranged from offers for respite care in various shapes or forms, helpful recommendations and also late-night conversations on WhatsApp as we, together, stayed awake nursing or rocking fussy babies into the wee hours of the morning.
One such conversation which shall always remain with me is a comment made by a cousin that she found being a mother was actually harder than summiting Mount Everest! This difficulty is why the development of a child and maternal health and well-being strategy is so important if we are to support women in their motherhood journey. Our focus must move beyond just medical care. It is good to see that efforts announced during the Committee of Supply (COS) this year will provide care for maternal mental health and to encourage support for them at the workplace and in the community.
For new mums who do not have a village growing up around them, it is vital that they are given the right care and support in the vulnerable weeks and months that follow childbirth. They should also have easy access to non-judgemental advice and education about dealing with common issues ranging from lactation support, baby sleep advice and the change in relationship with their partners and families with a new baby.
I hope that a task force will look at instituting practices, such as having specially-trained health visitors to routinely call on new moms just before delivery and during confinement, to answer questions and provide reassurance at home in a more relaxed, non-clinical environment as part of the norm. We also should learn from traditional practices like doing confinement and jamu, and retain those practices which promote postpartum recovery and well-being, as these contain, after all, the wisdom of generations of mothers who came before us.
Beyond the early days and months, issues, such as mom guilt – where moms feel guilty for having to leave their children with a career while pursuing a career – and bearing a disproportionately larger share of the mental load, must also be addressed.
The task force must also consider how to support new fathers. It is not uncommon to hear that fathers often feel at a loss on how to support their wives and that they can feel alienated during the pregnancy and postpartum journey, all the while wondering how to bond with their newborns. This can have an adverse impact on them playing a greater role in bringing up their babies.
More attention must also be paid to closing any gender health gaps that may exist. International studies show that in many areas of healthcare, women experience poorer outcomes. The UK's House of Lords had a debate last year on improving women's health outcomes and whether there is a gender health gap. Some societies have seen situations where women have longer life expectancies, but spend a longer period of time in ill health. These studies show, too, that women and ethnic minorities tend to experience bias when being treated for pain, and note that, generally speaking, healthcare systems and research have been built around men, leaving women chronically misunderstood, mistreated and misdiagnosed. There is also concern that, historically, women are left out of medical research, which is concerning, as recent research is shining a spotlight on how there is a gender impact on health and illness and that males and females respond differently to treatment.
In Singapore, I note that a panel led by Senior Minister of State Amy Khor to advise HPB on women's health was set up in 2012 and that work has been done to promote women's health. It is heartening that there is targeted support for women's health outcomes and progress has, definitely, been made, but I believe we have not enough information publicly about how the concerns I raised above are being addressed in the Singapore context.
We must go beyond just promoting women's health but also need to play our part to address any biases and ensuring that the research gap, when it comes to medical and health issues that affect women, is addressed.
Mr Speaker, I have covered a wide variety of topics and my colleagues will continue to speak on the other areas that need strengthening and improvement. Before I close, I would like to make one final point about the deep mindset shifts required of us and the comprehensive societal education necessary to bring about much-needed change. We have to go beyond the planned Character Citizenship Education (CCE) changes to ensure that our curriculum and education, in general, make a conscious effort to challenge gender stereotypes. For example, we should not see house and care work being the preserve of women and must be mindful of ensuring equal male and female role models are well represented.
The rest of us must also do our part and be aware that our words and deeds matter. What we say and do are a reflection of our beliefs. It is, as my grandmother used to say: "sim hor; sia hor; da hor". In Hokkien, "have a good heart, think good things, say good things." I support the Motion. [Applause.]
Ms Jessica Tan.
Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the shared vision to take collective action and a whole-of-society approach towards making our society in Singapore a fairer and more inclusive one, where men and women partner as equals and can pursue our aspirations freely and to the fullest. We need to acknowledge the progress that Singapore women have made and the journey continues.
The White Paper covers five important areas affecting women's aspirations and development, with concrete recommendations for action. I would not be able to do justice to the work that has been done in all the areas covered in the White Paper. So, I would like to focus my speech today on the areas of providing equal opportunities for women at the workplace.
There are four points that I would like to touch on: one, why it is imperative for businesses to attract and retain women in the growth sectors; two, the approach to Flexible Work Arrangements (FWAs); three, the utilisation of parental and paternity leave; and four, mindset changes required.
I welcome the new workplace fairness legislation to provide a safe environment for women and those facing discrimination or harassment at the workplace to speak up without fear. Having role models to inspire women and greater participation of women in leadership and board positions are important. Beyond these actions, I would like to bring attention to the need to attract, develop and retain more women in the growth sectors. Why is this important? Growth sectors offer better job prospects, growth and remuneration. If not as many women are participating in growth sectors, then, eventually, it will lead to a gap in the progress and development between women and men in the workplace.
In Singapore, while the number of women in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) sector has increased to 32.4% in 2020, it is lower in comparison to other sectors. As companies push forward with their efforts to transform their businesses and with the growing importance of technology in business, STEM roles will be in demand. More can be done to understand why women in STEM roles are lower than in other sectors, so that the appropriate actions can be taken in partnership with businesses to attract and retain more women to STEM roles. I am not just saying that the companies need to hire more women, we need to make sure that women want to be in these roles; and we need to understand why they are not – it is increasing, but it is not there yet.
Giving equal opportunities to women also has direct benefits for employers. The labour market is tight and businesses are facing challenges in getting the talent they need. Data released last week by MOM reported an increase in the number of job vacancies in Singapore. Job vacancies left unfilled for more than six months increased by 8%, to 35%. A significant proportion of these vacancies are PMET jobs in growth sectors of information and communications, financial and insurance services, professional services, health and social services.
Women in Singapore are literate and educated. Since 1980, women make up 50% of the proportion of University graduates. In 2019, the number of women taking science, technology, engineering and mathematics in our local Universities was 41%. It just makes good business sense for companies to hire women in STEM roles. If they are not, they are missing out on tapping on half of the talent pool.
Let me touch on the approach to FWAs. Recognising that women still tend to have the greater responsibility for caregiving, the White Paper has called for companies to provide FWAs to support more women to enter the workforce and progress. Work practices must be supportive of employees' needs but we should recognise that business and operational considerations cannot be ignored. In order to provide good jobs, businesses must be able to operate effectively. I do agree with the balanced approach that the White Paper is taking in advocating for employers to consider FWA requests fairly and properly while recognising that FWAs are not an entitlement.
The White Paper outlines that MOM will work with the tripartite partners to put in place a new set of Tripartite Guidelines by 2024, requiring employers to fairly and properly consider FWA requests. My question is: why wait till 2024 to introduce the new set of Tripartite Guidelines? That would mean that it would be a year and a half before this happens. While I appreciate that time is needed to allow for consultation and to work on the new guidelines, if we believe that FWAs will enable fuller participation of women in the workforce, could we not start earlier and learn and refine from these experiences?
Apart from the pace of the introduction of the Tripartite Guidelines for FWAs, I do want to highlight a few points on the approach to FWAs. For clarity, let me just refer to what we mean by FWAs. Taking what has been outlined in the Tripartite Standards for FWAs, it is defined as variations from usual work arrangements to include: one, flexi-load, for example, part-time or job-sharing; two, flexi-time, which is staggered hours and compressed work weeks; or three, flexi-place, for example, telecommuting.
If any good had come out of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is that it showed that businesses and employees could pivot to variations of FWAs. While there were initial challenges, there were real benefits of adopting FWAs for both businesses and workers. With FWAs, despite the restrictions, operations were able to continue, work could be done and jobs were retained. Beyond COVID-19, employers can also benefit directly from implementing FWAs to achieve productivity; to gain access to a larger talent pool, and I am not talking about just women but men, too; and to have business agility.
While not all work can adopt FWAs, do not get me wrong, I am not saying that everything has to have arrangements made for FWAs – and some cannot. But as we look to strengthening the guidelines for FWAs, I think more can be done to encourage businesses to review and incorporate FWAs as part of business norms as there are real business benefits. The approach and mindset of how we implement FWAs will also set the tone and the culture in the workplace. I believe that for FWAs to be effective, it cannot be just about requiring employers to give fair evaluation and consideration to employees' requests for FWAs when they require it. This approach, while seen as supportive of employees' needs for balancing their work-life responsibilities, does indirectly send a signal that FWAs are not the work norm or culture, and, hence, hesitation of both employers and employees to adopt FWAs.
SMEs can also benefit from FWAs and, actually, they stand to benefit more. But, as we advocate for FWAs, we must recognise that, for SMEs, they will require more support than larger organisations in the implementation of FWAs, as they have very lean HR teams and they may not have the capacity and there will be a lot of transition and transformation.
Let me move onto the next point of utilisation of parental leave entitlements. I am supportive of the measures to encourage utilisation of parental leave as this will support employees, both men and women, in caregiving as parents. I fully support the drive for both men and women to be actively involved and share in the responsibilities as parents to care for their children, because I think that is a benefit to not just the sharing of load, but really benefit to families and also benefit to the children and society as a whole. But I want to make a point about maternity leave.
While the purpose of maternity leave is to allow women time to care and bond with their newborn child, let us not forget that maternity leave is also to allow time for women to rest and recover from the physical changes and strains that she went through in the nine months of pregnancy, as well as childbirth. I agree and encourage men to utilise their paternity leave, so that they can share with the care of the child to allow mothers to recover well during their maternity leave.
But let us not forget, when we talk about sharing of leave, sharing of time and all that, let us not forget, women need to take care of themselves. Their bodies have gone through a lot, both physically and mentally. I have three children, and I will tell you, I love all of them, my deliveries were very, very short, my third one was 15 minutes. But I will tell you, the nine months were challenging, your body just goes through a lot and the afterbirth is tough. So, I would say to everyone, do not forget that and, women especially, do not forget that you need to take care of yourself.
So, while actions are important, let me now touch on an equally important point, my final point, on mindsets. This is going to be fairly embarrassing for me, but I thought it would make the point, because it is a personal story. So, I am going to share a personal story about mindsets. Many times, we do not realise our own inherent and sometimes unrecognised stereotypes that we all hold. I personally think that I try my hardest to be quite open-minded, but the pin-drop for me one day – this was a few years ago when I had a very important client and we had arranged for technical briefings and very deep technological briefings for the client with very deep experts coming in and we came to a very important topic – and I was looking around the room when I said to my colleagues: "Where is the speaker?" It was very important and I was looking around and we were all looking for the speaker, at the expert. And then, finally, I was told, "the speaker is in the room" and we looked around. And then I realised: "Oh dear, are you sure that is the speaker, can you all please check?" That is what I said to our team.
Well, the speaker came on, spoke and, in my head, I thought it was going to be a disaster, or at least a mediocre session, but it turned out to be a very good session, because the speaker was a deep expert and, not only that, could actually relate it back to my clients' business and relate it back, a very deep technology area.
So, why is this embarrassing? Let me tell you this, in my head, I said that this person could not be the speaker. It was not a gender thing, but it was an age thing. I was looking for someone, because this topic was so complex and still is a very complex area, that I was looking in my head, a deep expert had to be one that "looked the part". And the pin dropped for me, because I was so embarrassed and this happened many years ago, and I still cannot forget that, because it is a check for me to say that: "We do not think we are, we do not think it is, but we do it"; we do it all the time. And that is why, beyond actions, I think mindsets are important.
And I did a check yesterday, and this individual that I am talking about, by the way, is world-renowned, and she is still doing very well, and she is one of the world-renowned experts in this area and she is doing very well in that area.
But let me now come back to this point. Mr Speaker, we all have mental models and biases. To realise the aspirations of enabling a fair and inclusive society for both women and men to achieve our fullest potential and progress together, we must recognise the need to make the mindset shifts, each and every one of us. One of the important points of this White Paper is that it is about all of us and not just about some of us.
So, I encourage all of us to move forward to achieve this aspiration that we have for all of us to realise our full potential.
With that, Mr Speaker, I support the White Paper.
Senior Minister of State Sim Ann.
Mr Speaker, Sir, since July last year, I have been co-chairing the SG Together Sunlight Alliance for Action (AfA) with my colleague Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam, which tackles online harms targeted mainly at women and girls.
I will elaborate how the Sunlight AfA, which seeks to support the Digital for Life (DfL) movement, tries to close the digital safety gap for women. Ms Rahayu Mahzam will share more about how MCI is responding to calls made by the Sunlight AfA.
Online harms, especially those experienced by women and girls, are not something that can be understood in the abstract.
Not everyone is aware of such online harms or what they look like. Based on a sensing poll conducted by the Sunlight AfA, 31% of respondents have either personally experienced or witnessed gender-based online harms or both.
However, you can feel the devastating impact of such harms on individuals and their families even if you have never been directly targeted. All you need is to listen with an open heart to the story of someone who has gone through such an experience. I have heard several of such tales from personal acquaintances, each of which has remained deeply etched in my mind.
The first that I recall occurred more than 10 years ago. A woman journalist related to me a harrowing experience, where her photos and contact number were posted by a person or persons unknown on websites that falsely profiled her as a prostitute. She was harassed and embarrassed by phone calls from strangers wanting to obtain sexual services from her. She had reason to think that this was part of a campaign by those who wanted to punish her for writing pieces that they disagreed strongly with.
In another episode, a father reached out to me because intimate photos that his daughter had taken of herself had been stolen from her phone and found their way onto blog sites that specialise in collecting and sharing such photos of young Singapore women. He went to great lengths to get the photos taken down. I will always remember his anguish when relating the severe trauma that this had caused his daughter and his fear that he might lose her forever should she do irreparable harm to herself. This is every parent's worst nightmare.
Thankfully, in both cases, the women and their loved ones were able to overcome the harm they experienced and put these terrible episodes behind them.
Our laws have been evolving. In 2019, the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) was amended to outlaw doxxing, which would address the kind of harassment that the woman journalist had endured. But online harms, too, evolve.
Another common form of such harms is hyper-sexualised communications on direct messaging platforms, typically involving the sending of lewd and sexually explicit photos. These are aimed at eliciting a response from the women and girls being targeted and linked to sexual grooming and eventual exploitation.
The impact caused by such online harms can have severe consequences on the victims who are made to feel humiliated and ashamed, violated and unsafe, isolated and withdrawn, depressed and even suicidal. Their families and loved ones are also not spared.
How many untold stories of scarred psyches or diminished lives are there? How many women and girls are out there who would never regain their self-confidence and peace of mind?
Hearing about these episodes makes me and many others who care about the well-being of women and girls want to do something about it. This goes beyond our sympathy and indignation on behalf of the victims and their families. There are wider and more insidious implications on society, too.
What do these online harms have in common? They stem from seeing and portraying women and girls, primarily, as playthings, for the sexual gratification of men. This is a deplorable and backward mindset, one that I believe most men do not subscribe to, but is, nonetheless, difficult to eradicate from society completely. It may be rooted in age-old inequalities between the sexes, but is unjustifiable by any modern standard of morality or law.
Generations of women – and men who support women – all over the world have pushed back against this mindset and fought for the dignity and safety of women and girls. Over time, like many other societies, we have developed clear laws and strong enforcement to protect women's safety in real life – against sexual assault, hurt crimes and trafficking. Singapore is now one of the safest cities in the world for women and girls, so much so that many of us take it for granted that we can go about our daily business alone and unaccompanied. Since 2017, we have been ranked first in Gallup's Global Law and Order report.
But the exploitative and backward mindset towards women has found new means of expression in the Internet age. Perpetrators believe they can hide behind the cloak of anonymity. The digital publication and dissemination of information, allows for viralling at speed and the impact on victims becomes more severe and wide-ranging. Such harms can also be weaponised in a malicious and cynical manner to threaten and inflict trauma on individual women. Unsurprisingly, more women than men feel unsafe from gender-based online harms. The sensing poll conducted by the Sunlight AfA found that while 72% of males felt safe from harms while online, only 60% of females did.
If left unchecked, online harms that promote exploitative and disrespectful attitudes towards women and girls may discourage women from being active online. We are not just talking about women deciding to make fewer posts or comments on social media. But avoiding important and meaningful undertakings, such as leadership roles or advocacy in real life, that might increase one's chances of encountering haters who wield online harms as a weapon. Reduced participation means reduced opportunities. Why should women accept this?
If this mindset is left unchecked, it may erode the real-life safety that women in Singapore have come to rely on, by undermining the value of respecting women and girls as full human beings that we have worked so hard to build up over the generations. Some who are intent on doing real-life harm to women and girls are also availing themselves of online means to identify and isolate their potential victims – hyper-sexualised direct messaging being one of such means.
No society that respects and values women can stand for this, much less one like Singapore where women have achieved so much freedom and confidence in real life.
The digital safety gap must be closed. Our women and girls must feel as safe and confident online as they do in real life. This is, certainly, relevant to many of the topics being discussed in the Conversations on Singapore Women's Development.
Therefore, while I was at MCI, with support from my former colleagues, I decided to make an appeal to those who care equally about women and girls' online safety, so that we can come together and do something about it collectively. I was moved by the number of people who came forward because this cause resonated strongly with them. This included not only women but also men. The number of men reaching out and supporting the AfA affirms and strengthens my belief that men are absolutely vital partners for improving digital safety for women and girls. As fathers, husbands, brothers, sons, friends and colleagues – they care for and want the best for women and girls. This is never about women versus men. This is only ever about women and men working hand-in-hand to push back against mindsets that exploit and victimise women.
IPS Senior Research Fellow and Sunlight AfA member Dr Chew Han Ei exemplifies this solidarity. He joined the AfA because he wants to help shift societal mindsets and norms to empower men, as supportive allies of women, to speak out against behaviours that reflect and perpetuate retrograde and exploitative mindsets about women. These are men and women who recognise that online harms, which men and boys may similarly encounter, cannot be dealt with solely via Government action in the form of greater regulation and enforcement. The Government's role is necessary but not sufficient.
Concerted efforts from the public, private and people sectors, to formulate approaches to victim support, undertake public education and engagement, and have Internet companies step up to do their part are also needed. Indeed, groups like the Singapore Council of Women's Organisations (SCWO), United Women Singapore, TOUCH Community Services and AWARE are among the organisations that AfA members hail from. I also wish to express my gratitude to the many officers from MCI who believe in the cause and contributed so much of their time and effort to provide the AfA with secretariat support.
Since its launch in July 2021, the AfA has administered a survey to understand the incidence and impact of online harms in Singapore, engaged over 240 parents and youths to raise awareness about online harms and impart tips on how they can help their loved ones navigate the digital space safely, launched a website containing informational resources about online risks and safety tools on technology platforms.
What has been particularly encouraging to the AfA members is that the Government is responding to the calls we have been making, by introducing Codes of Practice for Internet platforms. Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam will share more on this later.
The AfA will roll out more initiatives in the coming months to empower individuals to recognise online harms and build a more holistic system of support for victims. These include a workshop to equip youths to support peers who may be experiencing online harms and a pilot to provide counselling intervention to victims of online harms.
We will work with community partners to develop public education initiatives to drive awareness about online harms and promote digital safety.
Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam and I are grateful for the support of all alliance members, including those who expressed interest in sustaining initiatives in the longer term. The AfA has been a platform for many of our members to forge new friendships and explore common areas of interest, including wider advocacy for the protection and advancement of women and girls, beyond tackling online harms. I am encouraged and look forward to new engines of activism in our society in support of women and girls.
Beyond the AfA, we have seen the cause attract wide resonance. The People's Action Party Women’s Wing adopted the theme of tackling online harms for its International Women's Day activation for 2022. It partnered lawyers and counsellors to roll out a resource toolkit to equip branch volunteers to be good listeners and helpful responders when members of the public bring up issues relating to online harms during Meet-the-People Sessions.
More broadly, we welcome interested community partners to join the Digital for Life movement. There is room for many of us to amplify efforts to build a safer digital future for all.
Very recently, Straits Times journalist Malavika Menon wrote courageously about her personal encounter with online harms, including that of a sexist nature. Her piece reminded me of that first conversation I had, all those years ago, with a different woman journalist. Back then, I felt upset for her, but did not yet have a clear idea of what can be done to tackle such online harms and defend the dignity and confidence of women online.
I believe we have a roadmap now, which is constantly being expanded and refined, thanks to the partnership and collective wisdom of the women and men who stepped forth to join our AfA, and all those who are committed to uplift digital safety for Singapore women and girls. The digital safety gap can be closed for our women and girls. Let us make it happen.
Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Speaker, Sir, like Member of Parliament for Sengkang Ms He Ting Ru and my Workers' Party colleagues in the House, I support the Motion. We all share the goal of a gender-equal society. For us in the Workers' Party, this is a very important goal, which is why Ms He Ting Ru and I moved the Motion in this House on gender equality last year.
Personally, what keeps me invested in this ideal is when I think about my family members – my wife, my mother, my daughter and also my son – and how I want them to live in a society where every individual is judged not by their gender but solely by the content of their character – to paraphrase something that Dr Martin Luther King Junior said in the context of race.
While we broadly agree on the end goal, we have some differences in our approaches to define and, ultimately, achieve that goal, which is why, in our speeches in this debate, we are focusing on where we see gaps in the White Paper and where we have different views and policies.
Sir, in my speech today, I shall focus on four topics related to the goal of moving towards a truly gender-equal society. Firstly, changing mindsets to strive against sexism and towards gender equality in everyday behaviours and shared cultures. Secondly, policy responses to the problem of sexual harassment. Thirdly, transparent time-based structural rules to enable foreign spouses with Singaporean children, who are mostly women, to move towards Permanent Residency (PR) status and citizenship – and extending that point, a more predictable and transparent points-based immigration regime. And fourthly, in the spirit of gender equality, changes to our laws on spousal maintenance to be fairer to house-husbands and men who have less income and assets than their wives in the event of a divorce.
Firstly, Sir, on changing mindsets and culture. In my Motion speech last year, I spoke about the challenges facing us on this front. Online, we do still see views from some quarters stating that moves towards gender equality and fairness for women reflect "misandry" or the hatred of men.
Mr Speaker, Sir, just last month, the South Korean presidential election was won by a candidate who had, among other things, campaigned on a platform that some described as "anti-feminist". He had reportedly called for the abolition of Korea's Ministry of Gender Equality and Family and had blamed the country's low birth rate on "feminism". This is a sobering turn of events, though it should be noted that the victory was by the narrowest of margins, with some Korean gender equality activists suggesting that the result showed that the momentum was on their side.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to be absolutely clear. I cite this example not to argue that we should not go too far or too fast so as not to provoke a backlash from those with different views. On the contrary, my Workers' Party colleagues and I argue that we should be bold and ambitious in our gender equality strides. A great deal is at stake, including the empowerment to lead full lives and contribute back to society of half the population.
I bring up the Korean example to emphasise the importance of having conversations with Singaporean men and, perhaps, some women who may not fully buy into the vision of gender equality as well, to convince them that society moving in this direction is fair, right and not a threat to them. We have to carry all Singaporeans on this journey. We must not allow anti-gender equality sentiments to fester and brew into something more bitter and more sinister.
Sir, in the last speech I made on this, I put forward some suggestions on how to change mindsets. I would like to put forward another suggestion here.
The Government can support non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and think tanks in conducting rigorous regular research and publishing the results about the areas in life where women still face inequality – from the unequal burden of housework and domestic violence to sexist discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace and on campus.
All of us in this House can and should help publicise such data, as should other stakeholders like NGOs, trade associations and chambers and student groups. Such data being widely accepted can help individual Singaporeans have informed conversations with other Singaporeans to move the needle on mindsets.
In truth, the battle for mindsets was never mainly about policies. It is about us as a people keeping an open mind to new facts, research and trends, being willing to relook at established conventions and winning people over, one person at a time. We all have a role to play in this journey. If every person who believes in gender equality can change the mind of just one person who harbours sexist thinking, whether man or woman, a revolution in our culture and thinking will be achievable within this generation.
Next, Sir, my second topic. I would like to talk about the issue of sexual harassment.
Here, I am not referring to violent or physical abuse, such as rape or molest, which is addressable under the laws that exist, but to verbal abuse and inappropriate behaviour, lewd and derogatory comments or instructions given in the workplace or on campuses, for example.
To cite an AWARE report on gender equality released on 28 July last year, "According to the results of a 2020 Ipsos-AWARE national survey, two in five workers in Singapore have experienced workplace sexual harassment in the past five years, including being on the receiving end of crude sexual and sexist remarks and being touched physically in ways that made them feel distress or alarm." So, this is not an insignificant problem.
Victims of sexual harassment can go to Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) but the role of TAFEP, currently, would appear to be limited to interceding with the victim's employer to put in place better anti-sexual harassment policies and to deploy its own disciplinary and internal dispute handling procedures as a company.
Victims can also pursue recourse through the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) Court, filing a Magistrate's Complaint or through litigation, which is costly and time-consuming, which would deter many victims, especially since victims may often be disadvantaged in terms of power or socioeconomic status vis-a-vis male perpetrators.
Moreover, in the absence of any legislation defining sexual harassment of the employer's liability for the same, the outcome of such legal action is uncertain.
Other countries have used legislative tools to tackle this issue. This can be found in the UK Equality Act and in the US. Malaysia amended its Employment Act to specifically define and criminalise acts of sexual harassment in 2014. Malaysian law defines sexual harassment as "any unwanted conduct of a sexual nature, whether verbal, nonverbal, visual, gestural or physical, directed at a person, which is offensive, humiliating or a threat to their wellbeing". Under this law, both men and women can commit acts of sexual harassment.
Sir, sexual harassment is a complex issue and it can cause a great deal of discomfort to men who are confused as to how social mores have changed and where to draw the line, a point that my colleague for Sengkang, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, will allude to.
I do not suggest a rush to legislate right now but would make three suggestions here as steps to consider taking before considering the issue of legislation.
Firstly, the Government should consider how best to nudge employers to adopt in their respective corporate handbooks guidelines on workplace sexual harassment based on existing TAFEP guidelines or international best practices. For example, can this not be a requirement or a plus point when awarding certain large Government contracts and economic incentives?
Secondly, can the Government conduct and publish more research on the subject of workplace and campus sexual harassment so as to quantify the impact of better guidelines and other factors on the problem?
Thirdly, can the MOE be more prescriptive in requiring Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) to adhere to certain baseline minimal standards of compliance with respect to sexual harassment? These will include implementing a national code of conduct for IHLs as well as ensuring comprehensive sexuality education that includes the concepts of respecting consent.
In Taiwan, for example, as cited in the AWARE report I mentioned, the government has enacted the Gender Equity Education Act, which, specifically, addresses the problem of gender-based bullying, which is referred to as sexual bullying, under the Act.
Sir, I would like now to move on to the third topic in my speech, which is the immigration status of foreign spouses.
Sir, I will not need to remind Members of the House about the problem of foreign spouses who are mothers of Singaporean children and who sometimes grapple with the insecurity caused by their uncertain immigration status in Singapore, having to renew Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) or social visit passes at regular intervals with no assurance of success and with uncertain prospects of achieving PR or citizenship status in the longer term in spite of their role as parents and families with Singaporean kids.
All of us, I am quite sure I can say this, have dealt with such cases among our constituents. I dealt with one such case recently in the Serangoon ward of Aljunied GRC and I would like to share it.
Olivia – not her real name, of course – is a foreign national on LTVP. She was married to a Singaporean husband. They are parents to a Singaporean girl, Anna – also not her real name. Anna is in Primary 4 at one of our schools. She struck me as being just like my own daughter at that age.
Unfortunately, the father passed away. At his wake, I met both Olivia and Anna. I took down their details so as to write appeals in aspect of Olivia's continued LTVP status since she does not have a living husband as a sponsor any longer; and in respect of their continued stay in an HDB public rental flat since the family is of very low income – and, in fact, now has no income at all – since Olivia does not work, though she would now want to and need to.
Sir, I feel very emotional thinking about both of them. Olivia will have to start working even though she faces uncertainty as to her immigration status and ability to work in future as renewals of permits are never assured even though she is the mother of the Singaporean child; and Anna, who is part of a family unit with the mother and whose mother faces all of this uncertainty while having to raise her single-handedly.
Sir, one in four marriages involving at least one Singapore Citizen is between a Singapore Citizen and non-resident foreigner, meaning that the spouse is not a PR or Singapore Citizen. Seventy percent of such spouses are women. So, this issue has a gender dimension.
To quote from the July 2021 AWARE report once again, "the latest publicly available data shows that from 2012 to 2016, 13,900 migrant spouses of Singapore Citizens were granted LTVP out of 16,600 applications. A national study on cross-national families found that 55% of the 655 foreign-born mothers interviewed had attained permanent residency and 26% had become Singapore Citizens after an average of eight years of marriage, but 17% of them still held LTVP or LTVP+. This suggests that many such couples have to deal with the stresses and difficulties arising from uncertain residency status for almost a decade before the migrant spouse acquires PR or citizenship. For female migrant spouses, in particular, this means years of insecurity, compounding their vulnerability to family violence."
According to an earlier Parliamentary Question reply in this House, 98% of LTVP renewals sponsored by non-spouses are approved but this still leaves uncertainty on the part of the spouse who loses a Singapore Citizen spouse or whose Singaporean spouse no longer wants to sponsor her LTVP application. Moreover, LTVP is not a stable status and does not amount to residency, subject, as it is, to regular renewal after short-time intervals.
The time taken for foreign spouses to become citizens and the uncertainty surrounding this have implications for, firstly, stress and mental well-being, as uncertainty clouds their ability to plan their lives. This may also affect the well-being of their Singaporean children.
Second, access to housing options open to citizens and PRs. Though rental housing can be granted to non-citizens, the perception – and usually, the reality – is that it is harder for such cases.
Third, access to legal employment, which may lead them to take up cash-based forms of employment that do not have a legal basis, which will leave them vulnerable to exploitation with no legal recourse. Not all foreign spouses have LTVP+ or MOM's approval to work. Would it not be beneficial to tap on this pool of manpower for our economy since these individuals are living in Singapore anyway?
Fourth, access to certain forms of social welfare assistance reserved for citizens and PRs, as with housing.
Fifth, access to subsidies for primary healthcare, which may inhibit behaviours, such as seeking medical treatment and going for health screening, and which may have an impact on the health of the wider community if LTVP holders succumb to communicable diseases, for example.
Sixth, enhanced vulnerability to domestic violence since the perception remains that it is harder to get a renewal of LTVP without spousal sponsorship. AWARE has cited evidence of cases where the husband threatens to cancel the LTVP if the wife reports domestic violence.
This is why, in its General Election 2020 manifesto, the Workers' Party called for a clear, transparent and time-based fast-track path to citizenship for foreign spouses who are parents of Singaporean children. I repeat this call here.
I would like to extend this into a more general point and call for a more transparent regime in evaluating applications for citizenship.
In a previous reply to a Parliamentary Question, the Government outlined its rationale for not instituting a more transparent system for evaluating citizenship applications. Two reasons were given: not wanting people to "game the system" and not wanting foreign nationals to accuse the Government publicly of unfairness.
It is true that most countries do not grant immigration rights automatically to foreign spouses of citizens. However, many other countries publish transparent material for such decisions.
The criteria for a UK spouse visa, for instance, states that the applicant and spouse must have a combined income of at least £18,600 a year, among other requirements. The subsequent application for permanent residency includes a "Life in the UK" test to demonstrate good knowledge of the country's language and lifestyle.
In Germany, the criteria include specific language proficiency levels in the passing of the citizenship test.
New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the UK are examples of countries with transparent criteria and a points-based immigration system. The criteria, typically, cover age, level of education, appropriate skills and work experience, a job offer and proficiency in the local language.
In New Zealand, having close family members is also one of the criteria that is taken into account.
Sir, on the argument that we do not want people to game the system, if we have a points-based system that prioritises those with a clearly better claim to be citizens, will that not attract and encourage the right applicants exhibiting the right qualifications and behaviours that we want? For example, we can institute more points for skillsets in short supply in our economy.
To revisit a subject I have previously spoken about at some length in this House, to get more Singaporeans into good redesigned trade jobs like carpentry and plumbing, for example, one approach – not the only approach by any means – is to convert experienced foreign craftsmen and trades experts into citizens.
As for the argument that foreigners should not be able to stir up anti-Singapore sentiments if there is no systemic national bias in granting citizenship, as one assumes there is not, this should not be an issue with a transparent points-based system. Opacity, on the other hand, can just as easily fuel such sentiments.
Some may say that more transparency may encourage foreigners to marry Singaporeans in an exploitative and cynical fashion solely to gain an assured pathway to citizenship.
But not having transparency does not appear to have deterred Singaporeans from marrying foreigners and having children in very significant numbers. All the current regime does is create uncertainty for the foreign spouse and the mother of Singaporean children and, hence, for the family and the children themselves.
Sir, I would argue that non-transparency does not curb the phenomenon of Singaporeans marrying foreign spouses. It only makes things worse for everyone after the fact.
The advantages of a points-based immigration system include the following.
First, creating predictability and a perception of fairness and transparency, better enabling participants in our national life to make decisions.
Second, attracting and encouraging the right applicants, for example, those with skills in short supply.
Third, creating a dynamic system that can be adjusted, for example, based on labour market needs, with those adjustments being publicly signalled and, hence, influencing citizenship application behaviour in a positive way.
Fourth, within such a system, foreign spouses of Singaporean children can be given clear, transparent, time-based pathways to PR status and citizenship via a points system, without having to depend on a "black box" evaluation process which breeds uncertainty and an inability to plan ahead.
Sir, the arguments used against a transparent points-based system for immigration could also be used against instituting such a system for Employment Passes. But with the advent of COMPASS, we have taken a major step in that direction for the Employment Pass regime. There is no reason why we should not do the same for our immigration regime.
Lastly, Sir, the fourth and last topic I would like to touch on, and in the spirit of gender equality, I would like to call for changes to our spousal maintenance laws to foster more fairness to certain types of men who may be at a disadvantage under section 69 of the Women’s Charter in the event of a divorce.
In the Women’s Charter debate earlier this year, the Government said it has considered the possibility of allowing maintenance applications to be made for husbands without the condition of incapacity. Its position on section 69 was that there was no need for such gender-neutral legislation because there is a higher chance of women giving up their careers to get involved in care work while the partner continues working.
I would like to revisit this point because it ties back to our argument that while progress is being made to empower the majority of women in Singapore, there are whole groups of people being left behind and these include non-citizen women living in Singapore, certain types of them, but also men who are doing exactly the same type of unpaid care work which many Members of Parliament spoke about today.
The example was cited in this House of a 2014 media report on a man who was ordered to pay $70,000 in maintenance despite the fact that he was a retiree, the ex-wife earned more than him and he paid the mortgage for their home.
In developed countries, approaches to spousal maintenance vary, with some countries like England giving generous maintenance to the financially weaker party and others focusing on time-limited maintenance, so that the spouse can get back into the workforce. I recognise that the specifics will continue to be debated more fully at some point in time, but one common idea I support is that, regardless of sex, a spouse must be able to file for maintenance without the requirement for incapacitation.
Why do I say this?
One, it should not be the case that we decide this law on what tends to happen, but rather, what can happen, especially as the current cohort of young adults has reached a point where a higher proportion of women than men have post-Secondary educational qualifications. It will not be a rare situation, going forward, that couples decide that the husband should be giving up his job to take on care work because he earns less or for some other reason.
Second, at the very least, we should not bind the Courts in granting maintenance.
And my third point here also concludes my speech. If we agree today that, in principle, we want to expand recognition, legal support and improve autonomy in care work, then, in the name of fairness, we must ensure that this is also so when things go poorly, that we provide a route for compensation for all care work, be it the contributions of men and non-citizen women.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully support the proposals to introduce new workplace fairness legislation to ensure that women are not discriminated against. However, we must also acknowledge that we continue to receive feedback that there are employers, large and small, who discriminate against women who are pregnant.
How will the Government facilitate and encourage employers to adopt fair practices to hire pregnant staff? Will we be able to include such fair practices as part of the MOM framework in the consideration of the application of EP and other work passes? It would be good to have a platform to highlight companies with fair practices with regular testimonies by their staff and, perhaps, as part of the consideration of the Best Employer Award.
Would the Government look into having legislation to enshrine FWAs, such as early release of staff with children, so that they could pick up their children from childcare or spend more quality family time?
I appreciate the action plan to entrench FWAs as a workplace norm. Our experience during the pandemic has proven that it can work very well, with benefits for both employees and employers, as well as the environment, as we cut down on commutes to the office. To nudge hesitant employers and companies, I would like to suggest that the Government consider enticing companies that implement FWAs with privileges like a higher foreign worker quota or a co-payment element like Workfare. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, each of us has at least one important person in our life. She is our mother. Mother is great. They hold us in their wombs for nine months and take good care of us as we grow up. As the saying goes, women hold up half the sky. We cannot ignore their contribution and importance.
We must also put ourselves in their shoes and understand the challenges and pressures they face. Sometimes, you cannot have the best of both worlds and you have to give up certain things and make sacrifices.
But we cannot dismiss their sacrifices and take it for granted. We cannot have the cake and eat it. Therefore, we all have the responsibility to do our best to support and encourage them. Unity is important.
I am grateful to the Government for the great support it has given to low-income families over the years, including giving them a substantial subsidy for childcare. MOE also provides free breakfasts to those disadvantaged children. I hope the Government can also increase the childcare subsidy for children in the sandwiched middle- and low-income families to further assist them and ease their burden. This will help mothers who have to juggle work to supplement their household income. I also hope that the Government will consider giving subsidies to mothers who are unable to join the workforce due to difficult circumstances.
(In English): Sir, next, the focus of this White Paper regarding caregiving has been on recognition and support for caregivers. The enhanced respite care options and Home Caregiving Grant and the broadened scope of the Household Services Scheme are all excellent proposals. But these may not apply directly to certain families, who need to depend on migrant domestic workers for caregiving and yet cannot afford to do so. Would the Ministry consider some form of subsidy to lessen their financial burden or even waive the maid levy entirely?
Would the Ministry consider additional necessary support, including financial help, for young children with challenging illnesses who come from dysfunctional families or are being cared for by divorced single moms, such as by ring-fencing partial funds from their fathers’ CPF accounts, for their healthcare expenses?
Although the current CPF Act does stipulate the existence of a special trust account, the Courts have no power under the legislation to direct and/or to set aside amounts from their fathers’ accounts to help pay for the healthcare expenses of these children during the divorce proceedings or when the families are abandoned by the fathers. With that, I support the White Paper.
Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this debate. I had, during the Workers' Party Motion on this matter last year in this House, spoken about a number of concerns about gender equality in the workplace.
To quickly recap, I had explained why womenomics in Singapore still had a way to go. Married men are employed 1.3 times more than women. Yet, women earn 14% less. I had also suggested a number of practical steps to promote greater gender equality. These include reservations for female representation on board memberships in GLCs, increasing the coverage of childcare and primary schooling facilities in demographically young estates, paid re-entry programmes for mothers and informal caregivers, and publishing aggregated and average pay gap information by industry sector.
Today, I wish to share a number of reactions in response to the White Paper on Women's Development. Consistent with my earlier speech, I will focus on Area 1 of the White Paper on "Equal Opportunities in the Workplace".
The Report highlights three action plans to improve female labour force participation: FWAs, career mentorship and flexible leave entitlements. I will share about each of these separately.
Currently, MOM parental paid leave provisions amount up to 18 weeks paid, of which six weeks may be taken up by fathers. The White Paper suggests that this could amount to up to 22 weeks with the father's eligible share bumped up to eight weeks. While I think I can reverse engineer this figure essentially by adding up unpaid as well as paid infant care leave for each parent, perhaps the Government would be willing to clarify exactly how this discrepancy arises.
Regardless of the calculations, while a move towards greater shared leave provisions, undoubtedly, represents an improvement, the policy still remains voluntary. Employers are only asked to consider FWAs "fairly and properly". The only concession is that the consumption period for additional unpaid infant care leave will be extended for those in the Public Service from "within the first" to "the first two years".
As my friend Sengkang Member of Parliament Louis Chua will note in his speech, the Workers' Party has, in our manifesto, explicitly called for a different shared parental leave scheme of 24 weeks with a minimum of half of this to be granted to the mother, and a sixth to the father. On its face, these may seem to be distinctions without differences – 22 versus 24 weeks, a maximum of eight weeks versus a minimum of four weeks to be granted to the father.
But if you will indulge me, there is, in fact, a material difference. By imposing a maximum that the father can take, the law, as currently construed, embeds, if you will, an implicit assumption that the father is, in fact, the primary breadwinner. What if there is a couple where the woman out-earns the man? In this case, it would be financially rational for the woman to be the one returning to work while the man remains at home providing childcare. Fixing a maximum of eight weeks for the father will preclude this possibility.
Of course, this is not to deny the physiological changes a woman's body undergoes following delivery. And it is undeniably important that the body be allowed to rest and recover from the rigours of childbirth, lest the doctors in this House correct me on this. Research has shown, however, that the postpartum period can be divided into three distinct phases, with the second sub-acute phase where the body undergoes major changes in hemodynamics, genital urinary recovery, metabolism and emotional status lasting between two and six weeks. Postpartum depression would also, typically, present itself within this timeframe. This is why a 12-week minimum for the father makes sense, without ruling out the father as the primary caregiver thereafter.
We should also recognise that just taking additional leave, even when fully justified and accounted for, is not entirely costless. Being away from the office for a longer period will inadvertently delay or, perhaps, inhibit career progression and this is especially the case for mothers who end up utilising more of the leave entitlement. This is another reason why minimum paternal leave requirements can also indirectly help limit the gender wage gap from rising even further.
More generally, the report calls for FWAs to be boosted to cover 40% of all employees by the end of 2022 but does not offer any similar commitment for the expansion of coverage of FWAs in the public sector, only stating that the public sector will "take the lead". May I clarify that the Government will, in fact, be committing to attaining the 40% target for those in the Public Service?
While I applaud the effort to expand mentorship, I have mixed feelings about how far mentorship can take us. Do not get me wrong. I am a mentor, both voluntarily and professionally, to students, and I see the enormous value that close mentorship can offer. This can be a wonderful idea if there are already sufficient women in positions of influence across a broad range of organisations.
But this is a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem. If potential female mentors available remain small in number, we run the risk of either over-taxing this limited pool of mentors or a failure to break into spaces where women are currently under-represented. What is worse, we pile additional stress on this group, which may even, inadvertently, inhibit their continued career progression, because they have become preoccupied with non-professional commitments.
The solution, it would seem, would be to encourage male mentors to step up. This is certainly possible, but we would also do well to recognise the more challenging climate men face when asked to mentor the opposite gender. In a post-#Me-Too world, men have often become very cautious in both their language and advice, for fear of being accused of sexual harassment. They may choose to withhold their most strident criticism, even if such critique may be constructive, or refrain from banter, for fear of being perceived as sexist.
This point was made by Anne Clarke Wolff, the founder and CEO of Independence Point Advisors, a women-owned investment bank and advisory, sometimes known in the business as “Salomon Sisters.” In an interview, Ms Wolff explained that the forces that led women to exit high-stress, high-remuneration jobs, such as those in finance, were not because they favoured shorter hours or lower commitment; au contraire, they left because they felt excluded. This absence of camaraderie may be ameliorated by genuine mentorship. This is built over social settings, like drinks and dinner. But many men today would be very uncomfortable engaging in such activities, even when above board, with someone of the opposite gender.
One is also left to wonder just how such opportunities would apply to women in more blue-collar or non-professional occupations. After all, the origin of apprenticeships was to transfer artisanal skills in trades work. Will the mentorship and networking plan apply with equal force to lower-wage domains and occupations?
The report takes the position that, while it wishes to encourage and support women in achieving their leadership potential, it shuns tokenism and, in particular, the "unintended consequences… [of] imposing hard quotas." On its face, this principle is surely indisputable; even champions of greater empowerment are likely to be uncomfortable with being granted a seat at the table, only by dint of their gender.
Mr Speaker, my concern is that this principled approach downplays the recent research on mandated representation and the role that it can play in shifting longstanding behavioural biases.
In one study, when gender quotas are randomly assigned – this is the gold standard for causal inference – in village councils in India, the prior exposure to a female leader gives rise to subsequent lasting electoral gains. In particular, perceptions of effectiveness of a female leader improves and gender stereotypes about the roles of women in public versus domestic spheres weaken.
In another study, mandated board representation in Norway led to an improved likelihood that women would, subsequently, secure leadership. After the advent of such quotas, gender gaps between males and females in terms of qualifications would also diminish and a female CEO would also be more likely to be appointed.
Thus, when mandated representation is actually pursued, both theory and evidence emphatically reject the notion that quotas would most likely be ineffectual. Because quotas could improve talent allocation by overturning historical instances where such groups may have been deliberately excluded. After all, nobody truly believes that being a man predisposes one to computer engineering, data science or finance.
Overall, the body of evidence suggests that reforms of this nature have been successful in reducing historical inequalities, and power and norms do shift permanently, even in response to temporary interventions. All this points to something that is just as intuitive as a rejection of tokenism; that rebalancing the position of disadvantaged groups requires concrete corrective action, even if only for a season, to permanently shift attitudes and perceptions.
Indeed, in countries that have moved to embrace gender quotas on corporate boards, there has been greater enthusiasm for such quotas, as well as more professional and formal approaches to board selection. Even in countries where there are no quotas, there is a growing recognition that market forces will not fix the problem on its own.
Undoubtedly, we should not go overboard with trying to squeeze round pegs into square holes. The evidence also suggests that firm valuations may suffer excessively when the existing gap between mandated and actual representation is larger, or when the costs of compliance are too great, due to the firm being too small to cope.
That is why a limited quota could be a viable way forward. This would be akin to, say, a voluntary target of a third of board seats being held by women and holding this target for a temporary period of 10 years. It would only apply to the largest firms, thereby minimising the compliance costs for small corporations. And a third seems eminently attainable, given how female representation is currently about 18%; this would amount to a doubling from the present share.
Here, again, the public sector can be the one to take the lead. Even if we do not wish to excessively tie the hands of employers, will the Government at least ensure that all Government-linked firms aspire to this voluntary target? And will the Government consider requiring board-level training on unconscious gender biases, similar to the current requirement that board members undergo one-time training on sustainability, for all listed corporations?
Sir, about a decade ago, Sheryl Sandberg, the chief operating officer of Facebook, now Meta, co-authored a book entitled "Lean In". The book, which went on to spark a brief movement, explained how she believed that women had to be bold and embrace self-promotion, in order to succeed in the workplace. This thesis has come under some criticism since, but the central metaphor – the need to be proactive in pushing for a seat at the table – applies, in my view, to how we should be advancing pro-women policy in our nation.
It is in this spirit that I have found the action points outlined in the White Paper to betray a somewhat lack of ambition. To be clear, the report represents a positive step in advancing the cause of true gender equality in the workplace.
Hence, while I support the Motion, I have found the report to be sanguine in the role that the Government, through the Public Service, can play in ushering in such positive changes in the workplace. Charity, surely, begins at home, and the deafening silence on how the demonstration effect of Government leadership by rolling out the proposed actions decisively within the Civil Service strikes me as inexplicable and, honestly, somewhat peculiar.
Ms Sylvia Lim.
Mr Speaker, my focus today will be on Area 3, "Taking a strong stance against violence and harm". I will, thereafter, make two observations about workplace culture and public policymaking.
First, violence, family violence. I welcome the Government's recognition that there is a need to enhance protection for victim-survivors of family violence. The extent of family violence tends to be significantly under-reported worldwide. We can understand why this is so for reasons ranging from emotional attachment to the perpetrator, to not wishing to incarcerate a breadwinner. To that end, I was glad to see the footnote on page 49 of the White Paper, which recognises the need to look at self-reported data to supplement official data if we are to have a clearer picture of the prevalence of domestic violence.
The White Paper affirms, among other things, that there is a need to strengthen societal attitudes against family violence and enhance preventive efforts for persons at risk. It was also stated that, for victims, reporting of family violence should be made easier and that immediate help should be available to reduce the risk of repeat violence. As for perpetrators, the White Paper affirmed the need to increase perpetrators' accountability and rehabilitation.
I would like to add my perspective on some areas that I believe will be critical in making a difference on the ground. This is in particular reference to Action 13 on enhancing protection for victim-survivors of family violence.
Sir, the response and attitude of law enforcement to reports of family violence are critical. It was stated at page 54 that, moving forward, the team responding to cases of family violence will include social service professionals.
I do agree that tackling family violence benefits from a comprehensive approach. At the same time, I am concerned that the proposed multidisciplinary first response may, inadvertently, result in a Police mindset that the social services will take the lead from the start. If the first response is, for want of a better word, "a softer one", there may be a perception among perpetrators that they can try to explain their actions away. As for victims, it is vital that they do not encounter responses that appear to decriminalise their experiences or, worse, attribute blame to them for precipitating the violence by the own behaviour. If they do encounter such dismissive attitudes, they are unlikely to report again.
On this note, I should mention the special vulnerability of persons with disabilities. There is evidence from other countries that women with disabilities disproportionately experienced domestic violence and sexual violence. Given that disabled persons may be less able to defend themselves, we must be mindful of our special duty of care towards them. It was mentioned in the White Paper that frontline officers currently already undergo sensitivity training. I wonder if there is any component or other training to equip officers to respond to victims of violence who are disabled.
I next move on to discuss cases of repeat violence. Repeat violence is not uncommon in family cases. Besides investigating cases after they have occurred, are the agencies looking into strategies to prevent the incidents in the first place? In particularly high-risk cases, how much resources are agencies willing to put in?
At first blush, it might sound impossible for external persons to prevent incidents that happen within the house. However, it has been done to some extent, and successfully, elsewhere.
To illustrate my point, I will take an example from the UK. In the 1990s, police in Merseyside innovated with a rapid response initiative to address cases of repeated violence identified as particularly high-risk.
As research had shown that a repeat incident was most likely to occur within days of the first incident, victims were issued with neck pendant alarms for a short period of time. When they sensed that a violent attack was imminent, they could activate the alarm so as to open a voice channel to law enforcement officers. The officers would then be able to hear what was going on in the home, talk to the victim if needed, and decide if a rapid response to the premises should be dispatched. This initiative was, indeed, resource-intensive, but it reaped significantly positive results for victims not only in reducing repeat incidents but in reducing fear of crime, immensely improving the quality of life for themselves and, often, their children, too.
I cite this example to illustrate what a strong commitment to bringing down family violence might entail. Will our agencies be innovating their own preventive strategies in particularly serious cases?
Sir, I know that family violence is not an easy matter as it is often multifaceted and related to social factors, such as alcohol consumption, anger management issues and the like. Victims are usually in a difficult position as sending their spouses to jail often impacts the family economically and, in that sense, can be "unaffordable". This, in turn, may lead agencies to face ambivalence from victims who report for protection and then withdraw when it comes to prosecution.
Sir, before I leave this topic on family violence, I would like to comment on possible mindset issues to be overcomed within law enforcement itself. The need to strengthen societal attitudes against family violence applies to frontline officers, too. This is not a new issue; neither is it confined to Singapore alone.
Being a Police officer carries a certain, almost romanticised, notion of going after bad guys and girls. While there may be other motivations, there are many officers I know personally who enjoy the adrenaline rush of handling murder cases and going after organised crimes syndicates. Some officers may not find handling family violence cases quite their cup of tea. If they bring reluctance or disinterest to such cases, the public will feel it. It is thus important for the official HR policy for career progression not to relegate such duties as unimportant and thereby affect that officer's career prospects. Beyond official HR policy, there is also the issue of the unofficial culture, that is, what officers talk about in the canteens, which may be much harder to overcome.
Sir, next, I move on to workplace culture. We deserve gender-neutral workplaces. What does this mean in practice? Hiring and promotion of employees on equal footing, male or female, are fundamental.
To this end, like Ms He Ting Ru, I welcome the pending anti-discrimination legislation and stronger fair employment guidelines as steps in the right direction.
There is a further aspect that is more insidious and, that is, again, culture. There was an example of this that made international headlines last year. Then-New York Governor, Andrew Cuomo, faced allegations that he had sexually harassed female employees. In his defence, he said that he was unaware that his behaviour of touching female employees was offensive and attributed it to his Italian heritage.
Do we have similar challenges here, too? How many women bear with unwarranted contact from male superiors because they want to keep their jobs? A fleeting touch may seem harmless to some. However, it bears remembering that physical touching without consent could well amount to the offence of outrage of modesty.
What about something less than touching, such as making loaded comments? To cite a personal experience: decades ago, when I was a law enforcement officer, it was suggested to me by a male superior that I should put on make-up when I came to work. I did not take offence at that time, as I simply dismissed the comment as crazy since we were not running a modelling agency. But thinking back about it today, the comment was probably made innocently, but was it appropriate? Would such comments impact other women much more deeply?
Sir, we do not want to go to the extreme of resorting to litigation for such matters. But to avoid undue pressure on females in the workplace, employers and society as a whole would need to step up and educate themselves, too.
Finally, public policymaking. Sir, the White Paper recognises that female participation is necessary for standard setting. This is seen under the section on mindset shifts at Action 24: "Develop gender-responsive standards under the Singapore Standardisation Programme". There is express recognition that there is a need to improve gender diversity in the standards community so as to develop gender-responsive standards. Examples cited were minimising workplace accidents with health and safety standards and ensuring food in Singapore was safe for consumption.
It was stated that Enterprise Singapore and the Singapore Standards Council will develop a new gender strategy in 2022. In order to track whether such initiatives are effective, I will make the general point on the need to continually collate and publish data on a gender-aggregated basis. This is essential for meaningful analysis in gender-sensitive policymaking.
Related to standard setting, there is mention in the White Paper of the importance of having more women in leadership roles as CEOs and directors of companies. That said, it is also vital to have more women in political leadership, which I consider to be standard setting at the national level. I was glad to hear Minister Josephine Teo earlier highlight the increased presence of women in this House and that society was better off for it. I had spoken on this topic in August last year on the Workers' Party's Motion on gender equality. I do not intend to repeat myself here, save to say that this is a critical peg that we all need to work on.
Sir, in summary, I have spoken on family violence and shared my observations on some areas that we should consider or at least be mindful of, especially regarding the response of law enforcement. I have also touched on workplace culture and the impact on the experiences of female employees. Finally, I had reiterated that standard setting in public policy also requires gender-aggregated data and significant women participation in political leadership.
Mr Sharael Taha.
Mr Speaker, Sir, over the last 60 years, much progress has been made in women's development in Singapore in many areas, such as education, healthcare, the enactment of the Women's Charter, protection from violence and more equal working opportunities. The White Paper on Singapore Women's Development is an important step to continue the progress and collectively drive the whole-of-nation commitment to advance Singapore women's development. And I believe that there is more that we can do to increase its effectiveness.
Firstly, collectively as a society, we can do more to create a safer, fairer, more inclusive and progressive workplace through the introduction of workplace fairness and expediting the legislation for FWAs while providing assistance to caregivers and back-to-work mothers with re-employment opportunities
Secondly, while we work towards changing the entrenched stereotype that women are primary caregivers and, hence, often shoulder a heavier caregiving load in the family, we must provide better and easier support for our caregivers.
Thirdly, to further ease the caregiving load, how can we continue to provide more affordable childcare?
The pandemic was a catalyst for organisations to adopt FWAs. FWAs have helped both men and women better manage their workplace and personal responsibilities.
Due to restricted access to the workplace during the pandemic, it became a "burning platform" for workplace norms on FWAs to evolve. Now that the "burning platform" has less urgency, I worry that organisations will not devote enough time and attention to FWAs and revert to the old ways of working, something which my colleague, Mr Melvin Yong, mentioned in his speech earlier, too.
Hence, while I understand that the introduction of the Tripartite Guidelines on FWAs will take place only in 2024, we should consider scheduling important milestones that would, eventually, lead up to it. This would go towards ensuring that we keep up the momentum towards making FWAs a norm.
Since many primary caregivers tend to be women due to our entrenched societal expectation, to increase the effectiveness of FWA in furthering Singapore women's development, we must also do more to promote job restructuring through flexi-load or job-sharing. This can enable those with caregiving responsibilities to continue playing a part in the workforce.
Take, for example, Mdm Farhana from Pasir Ris. She takes care of her elderly mother who undergoes dialysis three times a week. If more organisations adopt job-sharing, flexible work hours and remote working, caregivers like her may have more opportunities to contribute to the workforce.
Women play many important roles in our society. They contribute to the economy and shoulder a heavier burden of caregiving. Hence, while we enable FWAs to help both men and women better manage their workplace and personal responsibilities, the FWAs must also address the dos and don'ts of how to protect their privacy and family time at home.
As we practise more flexible work hours, workers will be working at different hours to manage their workplace and personal responsibilities. We have heard of anecdotal stories of workers feeling pressured whenever they receive or have to answer emails late at night. While we do not want to go to the extreme end, like in France, where it is illegal to email an employee after office hours, we must recognise that FWAs mean that different groups of people will be working at different times. However, as FWAs blur the line between work and home, how can we get employers and workers to come to a new understanding about work-life balance and respect for personal space and time?
We should also encourage employers and organisations to facilitate the re-entry of women into the workforce. Whether through developing mentorship or internship programmes, or by providing networking or retraining opportunities, the effort to enable more women to re-enter the workforce should be recognised and highlighted as an important consideration for fair and inclusive employment practices.
In a study conducted by PPIS on the aspirations of Muslim women in Singapore, one of the top aspirations of Muslim women is to be financially independent. However, many respondents shared that they felt less employable as they perceived that social inequality in employment opportunities still exist. They also felt there was less exposure to different job opportunities and, interestingly, they felt that there were insufficient avenues to upskill for better paying jobs.
[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]
How can we, as a society, come together to support and create platforms for our back-to-work mothers seeking upskilling and re-employment opportunities? PPIS President, Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim, also suggested that such programmes should be attended by spouses to provide the closest support for our back-to-work mothers, something which I do agree, that us, males, we must do more of.
While we continue towards changing the mindset that women should be the primary caregivers, we must continue to improve the support for our caregivers. I acknowledge the Government's efforts to increase the supply of respite care with 3,100 homecare places and 4,600 daycare places for seniors added since 2015, one of which is in Pasir Ris. However, given that one in four Singaporeans will be above the age of 65 by 2030, will this be enough? What are our projected requirements and how can we have a whole-of-nation commitment to address the manpower needs of the respite care industry?
Yet, another way we could extend help to reduce caregivers' financial strain is through the enhancement of the Home Caregiving Grant. I support the doubling of the Home Caregiving Grant from $200 to $400 for lower-income households. This is a significant enhancement to the grant which has already benefited 31,000 individuals. However, we must explore how to better create awareness for the grant or any other grants for caregivers.
One of our Pasir Ris residents, Mdm Neo, who is in her 60s and currently unemployed, takes care of her bedridden husband. When I visited her a month ago, she happily shared that HDB has just installed the ramps and grab bars for her under the EASE programme. However, through our conversation, it became apparent that she has not heard about the Home Caregiving Grant.
How do we ensure caregivers are aware of the support that is available and not just ask for it when they truly are at their wits end?
Do we have effective outreach programmes to help support our caregivers? Should we also segregate caregivers based on who they are caring for, for example, someone providing care for a person with disability, vis-a-vis a caregiver providing care to a chronically ill elderly? Both these caregivers need and deserve our support. Should we have a one-stop portal that can serve all caregivers or at least provide the relevant information for any one of our caregivers? How can we proactively engage our caregivers so that they do not feel that they are left to their own devices?
Since our visit to Mdm Neo, I am happy that she is now applying for the Home Caregiving Grant and is our monthly beneficiary at our Pasir Ris Care Store.
Another way to ease the caregiving load is to continue providing affordable and quality preschools. Besides subsidies for anchor or partner childcare operators, can the Ministry consider providing subsidies for private schools and private childcare options, such as those in religious organisations that are already available?
I also urge the Government to review the differentiated childcare subsidy of $300 per month for working and $150 per month for non-working mothers. We must recognise that some women choose to remain at home instead of work, in order to provide adequate care for the young, or to persons with disabilities or developmental needs. There are also some women who had to quit their job because of health issues.
For example, one of our mothers in Pasir Ris had to quit her job while she recovers from depression. However, the family was worried that with the differentiated childcare subsidy, by her not working, they will have to spend $300 more per month, in addition to her losing her income. We can do more to ease such pressures on our already stressed young mothers. Mdm Deputy Speaker, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Over the last 60 years, much progress has been made in women's development in Singapore in many areas, such as education, healthcare, the enactment of the Women's Charter, protection from violence and more equal working opportunities. The White Paper on Singapore Women's Development is an important step to collectively drive the whole-of-nation commitment to advance Singapore Women's Development and I believe that there is still more that we can do to increase its effectiveness.
Firstly, we can, collectively, do more to create workplaces that are safer, fairer, more inclusive and progressive by introducing fairness at the workplace and expediting the legislation for FWAs and providing assistance to caregivers and back-to-work women.
In a study conducted by PPIS on the Aspirations of a Muslim Women in Singapore, one of the top aspirations of Muslim Women is to be financially independent. However, many respondents shared that they felt less employable as they perceived that social inequality in employment opportunities still exists.
They also felt that there was less exposure to job opportunities and there were insufficient avenues for them to upskill for better-paying jobs. What roles can bodies, such as MENDAKI and NTUC, play to create platforms for back-to-work mothers who wish to seek upskilling and re-employment opportunities?
PPIS President Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim also suggested that married couples attend such programmes so that back-to-work women can receive support from the person closest to them – something that I really agree with.
Second, while we work towards changing the stereotype that women are primary caregivers and, hence, often shoulder a heavier caregiving load in the family, we must provide better and easier support to our caregivers.
Third, to further ease the caregiving load, how can we continue to provide more affordable and quality childcare?
Finally, we should encourage more women to take on leadership roles as well as venture into the STEM fields. We should provide support for our young women to find jobs in the growing industries.
(In English): In conclusion, Mdm Deputy Speaker, ultimately, we all have a part to play to inculcate the values of fairness, equality and respect. We all can address gender roles from young, at home and in schools and, in this way, help to build a fairer and more inclusive society where all Singaporeans have full and equal opportunities to achieve their aspirations.
Women represent our mothers, sisters, wives and daughters. Every one of us has a vested interest in ensuring a supportive and inclusive workplace, free from harassments and discrimination. Women deserve to feel safe and protected as they remain important contributors to society. We must role model equal and mutually supportive gender relationships built on sincere care and concern for others. This will help determine how women in the next generation will be treated as we commit to build a fairer and more inclusive society.
Mr Louis Chua.
In August of last year, I spoke in support of the Motion on Gender Equality tabled by my colleague Ms He Ting Ru. I highlighted the unequal distribution of care responsibilities between parents and how this is linked to discriminatory social institutions and stereotypes about gender roles. I suggested that the impetus for change lies with both the views held by the individual and society at large, as well as with us policymakers and how we shape those views.
My colleague, Mr Gerald Giam, will be touching on FWAs and how both employers and employees gain from having FWAs as the norm, rather than the exception at the workplace. As I have reiterated across various speeches over the last two years, I hope that the Government, businesses and society do not view FWAs as one which has unintended consequences of reduced employability or, ironically, creating rigidity in the workplace. And it is imperative for the Government to demonstrate leadership on this matter.
The first issue I would like to touch on is that of parental leave and its impact on the roles of fathers in society and in accelerating gender equality. The upheaval caused by COVID-19 and its impact on how we work have shone a spotlight on gender inequality that exists at home, with working mothers often the ones who have to pick up the slack. I previously highlighted a study by market research firm IPSOS Group S.A. and United Women Singapore, which showed that a mere 47% of mothers are happy with the division of household and care responsibilities, as opposed to 78% of fathers – a clear difference in perception that we need to shift.
These shifts in societal perception that we seek do not happen in isolation. Policies play a large part in shaping these views and, on this front, I was a bit disappointed to see that the White Paper has fallen short on concrete policy changes to encourage fathers to take on a more active role in household and caregiving responsibilities, especially around a more equitable distribution of statutory parental leave.
There is a growing body of evidence that suggests that the immediate aftermath of a child's birth represent a golden opportunity of sorts to shape lasting good habits among young fathers that persist throughout a child's lifetime. Fathers who spend more time with their infant children develop greater confidence in their own childcare abilities, perpetuating a virtuous cycle that leads to lasting egalitarian split of responsibilities between mothers and fathers. There is also a suggestion that women in more equitable households can focus more energies on career development, leading to better gender equality both at home and at work.
The impact is not limited to the parents involved, but also has far-reaching impacts on society at large. A study by the IZA Institute of Labor Economics in Germany from 2017 showed that in the decade after Germany introduced reforms in 2006, to encourage fathers to take at least two months of parental leave, there was a marked shift in the attitudes of not just the current generation of parents towards gender equality, but also the grandparents' generation. Both grandmothers and grandfathers, whose grandchildren were born after the reforms, were less likely to agree with the sentiment that "[w]omen should be more concerned about their family than about their career".
Since my last speech on this topic, some of you would know that I have welcomed a new addition to the family and our little baby boy is now just over four months old. I am extremely grateful that my employer is understanding and a strong believer in FWAs, but many other young fathers do not share the same experience. A mere two weeks of paid statutory paternity leave, compared to the OECD average of 10 weeks, means that even the most well-meaning of fathers who wish to take on a more egalitarian share of the child-rearing responsibility must make direct financial trade-offs, such as via unpaid leave. By increasing the statutory entitlement to fully-paid parental leave for fathers, we can, at the very least, eliminate some of the direct financial considerations from the mental calculus.
We are heartened by the Government's move to lead by example in encouraging public officers to utilise their full entitlement of parental leave. This will go some way towards breaking down stereotypes and misconceptions in the workplace that lead to lower take-up rates. But we can, definitely, go a step further with actual policy changes. The existing elective four weeks of shared parental leave, whereby mothers have to make the election to share their maternity leave, means that, in practice, it is rarely transferred, with 94% to 97% of fathers not taking at least one day of shared parental leave for the 2014 to 2018 cohorts.
And I can imagine the challenges mothers face in reducing their paid maternity leave, especially when we consider that our parental leave policies are not exactly world leading, with the 16 weeks of maternity leave below the OECD average of 20 weeks. The experience of other countries, such as Sweden or Germany, has shown that the introduction of mandatory use-it-or-lose-it "daddy days" significantly increased the take-up rate of paternity leave. A further expansion can come in the form of "sharing bonuses" awarded if fathers take up their full minimum entitlement of shared parental leave.
Portugal has experimented with this model, which increased the take-up rate of shared paternity leave from 596 fathers in 2009 before the reforms, to about 16,400 fathers the year after.
This is why the Workers' Party has, in our manifesto, called for a shared parental leave scheme that entitles parents to 24 weeks of Government-paid leave, to be shared between mothers and fathers as they choose, but, crucially, with a minimum of four weeks to be granted to the father and 12 weeks to the mother. This would replace the existing 16-week maternity and two-week paternity leave entitlements: an increase from 18 weeks to 24 weeks in total of gender-neutral parental leave.
Further, as an added incentive, consideration could be given for an additional bonus number of weeks to be awarded to the pool if fathers utilise the full four weeks of minimum parental leave they are entitled to. The hope is that, over time, these increased entitlements become entrenched as social norms – as has happened in countries like Germany – as more parents utilise their full entitlement, initially to benefit from the bonuses, and, over time, because it is simply the thing to do. These new social norms will encourage fathers to spend more time with their children and take on a greater role in the child's development, take on their fair share of household chores and lead to an overall uplift in our society's perception of gender roles.
The second issue I would like to touch on is that of providing support to parents and, especially, mothers beyond childbirth. We all recognise the importance of parental care leave in allowing mothers to properly recover from giving birth to her baby and for parents to care for and bond with their newborn child. However, while we have a high standard of medical care provided at childbirth across all our hospitals here in Singapore, I believe more can be done to provide greater postpartum support to mothers, especially to first-time mothers, and families who may not have the economic resources to obtain post-birth support services.
To many parents, including my wife and I, having a trusted confinement nanny to support our transition from a clueless couple to proud parents is a godsend. Such services do not come cheap, however, as they range in the thousands of dollars, and made worse in the last two years due to the border closures. Yet, even for those of us who are lucky enough to have the dedicated care and support of a live-in confinement nanny, the immediate aftermath of a confinement nanny's departure is still one characterised by high levels of stress and anxiety.
They say it takes a village to raise a child and I find it to be especially true after the birth of my second son. One might think that, as experienced parents, things will get easier and we might enjoy some efficiency gains. But my personal experience suggests that caring for two young children is more than double the amount of effort. We are extremely thankful for the village that was our families and extended families. However, not everyone has easy access to their very own village and, for many others, the parenthood journey can also be a lonely and alienating one.
Beyond providing informational support, could we bring the proverbial village to all mothers out there, to ensure that community support and services are available, especially to those without a strong informal support system, to fill the care gap? My colleague, Ms He Ting Ru, spoke about this point earlier as well, with her suggestion being instituting practices, such as having specially-trained health visitors, to routinely call on our new mothers. To reduce inequity and inequality during the foundational years of our children's lives, we need to strengthen access to continuous care for the health and well-being of our parents.
I have spoken about support for parents in the plural and I would now like to switch gears slightly and focus on the topic of support for single-parent households. I am heartened to see that one of the action plans, Action 18, introduced in the White Paper seeks to "enhance support for single parents" and I look forward to the concrete initiatives and recommendations to come.
There is merit to the ground-up consultative approach adopted by AfA, but, in parallel, more can already be done to correct systematic discrimination faced by single parents under the law. One of these areas is the differential treatment currently accorded to unmarried single parents – often single mothers – in contrast to their peers who are single parents by virtue of divorce or who are widowed. This contrast shows up most starkly on the issue of housing access – with far-reaching consequences for both parent and child. After all, a stable home environment is one of the leading indicators of positive developmental outcomes.
At present, HDB recognises single-parent households of divorced or widowed parents as a family nucleus, for the purposes of public housing eligibility, as well as for access to public housing grants. Some concessions have been made, depending on individual case circumstances, such as permitting unmarried single parents aged 21 and above to buy up to a 3-room flat in a non-mature estate from HDB, or a resale flat; but they still do not receive equal treatment to their divorced or widowed counterparts, let alone other families.
Outside of these concessions, unmarried single-parent households have to avail of the schemes targeted at singles. The eligibility schemes and grants targeted at singles are often more restrictive and have lower monetary amounts. Yet, the challenges that single parents face do not discriminate based on marital status and are, in fact, more pronounced, especially when we consider that single parents have to singlehandedly shoulder the burden of both being the primary caregiver and primary breadwinner.
This struggle was experienced first-hand by one of my constituents who is an unmarried single mother with her daughter. She shared the challenges she has faced over the years and how she has fought to overcome them to do right by her child. In addition to battling social stigmas and stereotypes, she was discouraged by the various Government policies, such as that for housing. As a young father, I understand the trials and joys of parenthood, but I cannot begin to imagine the sheer weight of responsibility faced by single parents, such as herself.
The challenges faced by unmarried single parents are large enough without the additional burden of being viewed differently in the eyes of the Government for access to public housing. The consequences of the distinction are self-evident. Financial worries are not uncommon for single-parent households and every cent counts. The median monthly employment income for unmarried single mothers below the age of 35 was $600 in 2017, a number which has hardly changed since 2013.
The $10,000 to $15,000 difference between the Proximity Housing Grant for Families and Singles could amount to a year of mortgage payments or a significant contribution to a child's college fund. Families also qualify for the family grant, which can rise to $50,000, double the $25,000 maximum awarded to singles.
While HDB is free to assess cases individually and make exceptions if appropriate, it does not appear that the exception is commonly made. In response to my Parliamentary Question in a previous Sitting on the number of unmarried single parents who have successfully obtained the Proximity Housing Grant for families in the last five years, MND Minister Desmond Lee shared that only five unmarried single-parent families had obtained the grant, in contrast to 2,029 divorced or widowed single-parent families.
This is but one example of differential treatment under the law for unmarried single-parent households. Elsewhere, single parents are not eligible for the Baby Bonus Cash Gift and Cash Gift Baby Bonus Plus, which amount to $8,000 in total. The Parenthood Tax Rebate and Working Mother Child Relief (WMCR) are also not extended to single parents. If the WMCR is to encourage married mothers to continue working after childbirth, the reality for many single mothers out there is that they simply cannot afford to not continue working after childbirth.
No matter the express objectives of our Marriage and Parenthood policies to promote and strengthen the institution of family, and to encourage parenthood within marriage, children are not insulated from the impact of our policymaking. It is also these policies which could inevitably contribute to inequality at birth and beyond.
Lastly, I would like to raise my concerns on women's retirement adequacy and financial literacy. Having adequate financial literacy to support sound financial decision-making throughout one's lifetime and having sufficient savings to support one's retirement are issues not unique to women. However, based on CPF data, as of 31 December 2020, we see that CPF members' balances for men are 10% higher than those for women, even though the number of men and women CPF members are roughly equivalent.
While women had higher average CPF balances as compared to men up to the age of 35, this could perhaps be explained by the roughly two years of National Service commitments or that women in these age groups are, generally, paid more favourably compared to men. Men across all other age groups had between 6% and 35% higher average CPF balances, compared to women within the same age groups.
The gender gap in retirement adequacy, especially when we have a defined contribution type pension system linked to employment, is one which needs to be squarely addressed. It is thus imperative that we redouble our efforts to strengthen social safety nets with an emphasis on adequate retirement adequacy for women.
On financial literacy, the OCBC Financial Wellness Index 2020 report found that only 60% of women surveyed had investments, compared to 75% of men, noting that more Singapore women than men see investing as gambling. But for women with the confidence and knowledge to conduct their own investments, their investments do better than men.
This perceived lack of knowledge or confidence is also reflected in an earlier survey conducted in 2019 by UBS Wealth Management in Singapore. While 64% of women believe they would outlive their spouses, with most women heavily involved in household daily expenses, a dominant 72% let their spouses take the lead on long-term investment and financial planning decisions.
While the White Paper compared literacy rates for women between 1965 and 2021, given our social security system which emphasises on individual responsibility and self-reliance, I hope the Government will commission an in-depth study to examine the levels of financial literacy amongst Singaporeans, with a particular emphasis on empowering women to take charge of their own financial well-being. Allowing all Singaporeans access to a simple and fuss-free investment solution to earn higher expected returns for their CPF as envisioned by the CPF Lifetime Retirement Investment Scheme will also go a long way to enhance retirement adequacy for all, which, I believe, will also significantly benefit women who are less inclined to invest on their own volition today.
To conclude, Mdm Deputy Speaker, the four issues I have raised – parental leave, providing support to parents beyond childbirth, supporting single-parent households and raising women's retirement adequacy and financial literacy – are not entirely new. But critically, what we need is a new approach which recognises that policies shape behaviour. And as lawmakers, we need to set in place concrete policy changes which reflect our collective will to advance women's development in Singapore.
Mr Vikram Nair.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, the journey for equal rights for women has been a long one. Around 200 years ago, the first organised women’s movement started in the UK. They were called the suffragettes, fighting for suffrage or the right to vote. It was only in the last century that women obtained the right to vote in most countries.
Singapore moved quickly – we passed the Women’s Charter in 1964 and the aim of this legislation was to give women equal rights in marriage and at work. This ended longstanding practices like polygamy. Women were also required to attend school and encouraged to join the workforce and did well in both areas. Women have enjoyed equal rights at law for a long time.
However, equality at law was the start of the journey. Equal rights, in substance, are a longer journey and this White Paper facilitates that journey with concrete actions. The 25 action plans are comprehensive and touch on many of the issues women face today.
While there are many initiatives I find interesting, I will focus on two broad areas in this speech, namely: (a) equal opportunities in the workplace; and (b) the recognition and support for caregivers. In simple terms, these initiatives strive towards substantive equality at work and at home.
Under Area 1, Actions 1 and 2 provide an important development in Singapore’s employment law. I had spoken in favour of anti-discrimination legislation in earlier debates. This is relevant to many contexts, including protecting against discrimination based on gender, race, religion and, back then, it was nationality. In the absence of legislation, MOM had given effect to the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices by linking companies’ rights to tap foreign workers to compliance with these guidelines. So, Singaporeans had to be given fair consideration before you could employ foreign workers.
If these guidelines are now legislated, then it will apply more broadly to all employers, even those who do not employ foreign workers.
Grievance handling procedures and protection of complainants will also be required. I expect this will require a cultural shift amongst employers in Singapore.
For a long time, we had a strict contractual interpretation of employment rights and it was easy for employers to both hire and fire. Now, employers will need to make hiring and promotion decisions more carefully and, in practical terms, will likely need to properly document decisions to prevent allegations of unfairness.
There is also legislation envisioned in relation to FWAs and new tripartite guidelines that envision requiring employers to fairly consider requests for FWAs. Many employers had to radically rethink their work arrangements over the last two years with the work-from-home requirements. Hopefully, the lessons learnt from this experience will not be lost but will, instead, be utilised when we return to business as normal.
Of course, flexible work is a lot more than just working from home. It includes the option to work shorter hours or fewer days in a week, which will require employers to put in more thought in the work scope of individual employees.
Again, though, these FWAs should be equally available to men and women to be effective. This is so that, for example, in certain households, if men wish to play a bigger role in caregiving, they may also need to avail themselves of FWAs to play this role. Otherwise, if FWAs apply only to women, it may have the perverse effect of forcing women to continue to bear the caregiving load using these arrangements.
Finally, on this front, I also welcome the initiative to promote greater board diversity. This is being done through changes in the listing rules and the Code of Corporate Governance. Again, I note that diversity is not intended to cover gender alone, but also other forms of diversity, which I assume would also include race and professional backgrounds of members of the Board. As Boards provide leadership to companies, having diverse boards would provide companies with a greater breadth of perspective as well as having a positive knock-on effect within the ranks of companies, as diverse boards are more likely to pick from a wider pool of talent for leadership and executive positions in the company as well.
These legislative changes detract somewhat from the "freedom to contract" model we have adopted in relation to employment law, but I believe that these are necessary derogations as these initiatives protect employees in vulnerable positions. The combination of more FWAs as well as fair consideration principles being legislated could go a long way to allow men and women the ability to remain in the workforce and not be embarrassed or discriminated against if they decide to take different work arrangements to attend to caregiving needs.
When we move from the workplace to the home, we also find that women often bear the bulk of caregiving responsibilities. The second set of actions, 7 to 11, provide a wide-ranging suite of measures to lighten the caregivers' load. Action 7 provides direct respite for caregivers by adding basic child- and elder-minding services to the Household Services Scheme. The financial strain will be eased with grants, such as the Home Caregiving Grant and the expanded Seniors’ Mobility and Enabling Fund, with further future support envisioned. Access to affordable preschools is going to be enhanced and there is also a focus on the mental and physical health of caregivers, with support networks being set up.
These options are important because they, significantly, ease the load many women carry at home. Again, as with FWAs, I would suggest that all these grants and support be provided on a gender-neutral basis, so that if the caregiver at home is the man, these grants and support should be equally accessible to them.
In addition, I would suggest that it may help to have support networks that are specific to male caregivers as they may face a different stigma from female caregivers. A newspaper feature on stay-at-home fathers who did the caregiving while their wives were the primary breadwinners highlighted the stigma that many of them face. Yet, these are the best examples of men supporting their wives with their aspirations and should be celebrated. If this gets more normalised, this may have a much stronger impact on the overall journey to gender equality. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to say some words in Tamil.
(In Tamil): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Last year, I discussed in this House the experiences shared with me in one of the dialogues on Women's Development that I attended with Ms Indranee Rajah with women from the Indian community. Many of the issues raised now see benefits through direct action plans.
One big development is enshrining the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices into law. This will mean that opportunities will need to be given to people on merit, and irrelevant considerations, such as gender, should not be taken into account. Measures are also in place to protect those who speak out.
Women are often caregivers in many households, for both the young and the elderly. This paper proposes broadening the Household Services Scheme to include basic child- and elder-minding services, to give families more options.
Financial support will be given to caregivers for the elderly with different grants, and access to affordable preschools will be enhanced. Additional support is also being rolled out for those caring for persons with disabilities and children with developmental needs.
The above are just a few examples of changes in this wide-ranging paper that aims to create a more equal society for women, both at home and at work and support the important role they play in both areas.
(In English): Deputy Speaker, I support this Motion.
Minister of State Gan Siow Huang.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, women hold many important roles in our society. We are colleagues at the workplace, also mothers, wives, sisters and daughters to our families, Therefore, as we debate in this House about how we can better support women, we are, indeed, debating about how we can create a better future, not for Singapore women alone, but for Singaporeans.
We have made good progress in empowering women in Singapore and we should be proud of that. Today, women make up almost half of the labour force, literally holding up half the sky.
The employment rate for women aged 25 to 64 has continually grown over the past two decades and, remarkably, continued to increase even during the pandemic from 73.2% in 2020 to 75.1% in 2021 – beating the odds.
Many more women are entering and excelling in what are traditionally regarded as male-dominated sectors, such as STEM, construction, professional services and becoming leaders in their chosen fields, many of whom are in the Chamber today. We will continue to encourage and support women in pursuing their career ambitions while respecting women's choices on the sectors that they wish to contribute to.
Given our manpower constraints, it is crucial that we enable both women and men to be part of our workforce as much as possible.
I share the story of a dear colleague of mine. She lives with her retired husband and mother-in-law who has dementia and is bedridden. Although they have a helper, her husband started to face burnout a few years ago. In her previous job, she felt extremely helpless as she was working long hours and was unable to work from home. She contemplated early retirement to better care for her family.
Thankfully, after changing jobs, things improved for her as she is now able to work from home regularly and is given time off to run errands when needed. She appreciates the workplace flexibility that allows her to continue working and be financially independent. With a more balanced share of caregiving load in her family, everyone enjoys better physical and mental well-being.
Experiences like this show how important FWAs can be. With workplace flexibilities, women who are caregivers will be better empowered with the choice to continue working and progressing in their careers, thereby reducing career lags for women and helps to close the gender pay gap.
FWAs apply not just to women, but also to men. With greater workplace flexibility, coupled with a supportive workplace culture that recognises both men and women have a role to play in caregiving, more of us will be able to manage work and family demands. This is why we must press on with efforts to sustain workplace flexibilities.
In 2020, close to nine in 10 employees worked in companies that provided at least one FWA on a sustained basis, up from more than six in 10 in 2015.
As safe management measures gradually eased, we may be tempted to revert to pre-pandemic ways of working. However, if we do so, we will lose the many benefits that FWAs bring to employers and employees.
The White Paper has laid out our plans to strengthen and sustain FWAs at the workplace. We will introduce a new set of tripartite guidelines on FWAs by 2024.
The tripartite guidelines will prescribe fair and proper practices that employers should adopt, such as having a proper process to assess employees' requests for FWAs and communicate the outcome of such requests. This will establish the norm that it is acceptable to request for FWAs while maintaining employers' prerogative to approve or reject the requests based on their business and operational needs.
To Ms Jessica Tan, Mr Sharael Taha and Mr Melvin Yong's suggestion to implement the tripartite guidelines on FWAs earlier, it is important that we take a calibrated and enabling approach to enhance access to FWAs. We need to equip employers with capabilities to manage a more flexible workplace – not just remote work but also flexi-time and a flexi-work load – and also ensure that employees also understand the roles that they play in making FWAs sustainable for business operations.
We should build confidence and capacity instead of seeking to use legislation for every workplace issue that arises. Otherwise, workplace disputes will arise and the mutual trust and understanding between employers and employees which we have carefully maintained over the years will be eroded.
Over 10,000 companies have already adopted the tripartite standard on FWAs, covering more than one in four employees in Singapore today. We welcome more companies that are ready to come on board even before the tripartite guidelines are introduced by 2024.
As an intermediate milestone, MOM and our tripartite partners aim to increase the adoption of this voluntary tripartite standard on FWAs by companies covering 27% of employees today to 40% at the end of this year. The Public Service has adopted the tripartite standard on FWAs.
The Government also encourages and recognises companies with progressive HR policies, including FWAs, enhanced leave schemes for caregiving and sabbaticals, employee leave schemes, many of which were raised by Ms Poh Li San, Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim and Mr Louis Chua. I think these are all positive steps and we encourage companies to do so if it suits their employees' needs and their business operations.
The Alliance for Action for Work-Life Harmony has been championing these forms of work-life support since last year. Ultimately, companies with progressive policies will be able to better attract and retain talent, which is good for business.
From the Conversations series on Singapore Women's Development, we also heard stories of how some women who chose to leave the workforce for a few years due to family reasons faced difficulties returning to work.
All employers ought to practise fair and merit-based hiring. If employers screen out applicants because of so-called resume gaps or last-drawn salary, they risk losing out on good candidates. A better, smarter approach is to make a robust and fair assessment of each candidate.
MOM will continue to partner the Institute for HR Professionals (IHRP) to uplift HR standards. We will help HR professionals develop capabilities that allow them to better tap on back-to-work women as a talent pool.
For back-to-work women who are ready to return to the workforce, they can tap on Workforce Singapore's (WSG) and NTUC's Employment and Employability Institute's (e2i) career coaching and job matching services. They can also benefit from Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs) to reskill for new jobs.
WSG will broaden its partnerships with various organisations, such as Mums@Work Singapore, Daughters Of Tomorrow and MENDAKI, to reach out to back-to-work women and support their journey to re-enter the workforce.
I am heartened that there are organisations out there, such as NTUC Women and Family Unit, SHE BRILLIANCE and Financial Women's Association, that have been active in providing mentorship and career guidance to moms who are trying to come back to work. I think we need more of such community support to help uplift women.
Ms He Ting Ru spoke about the gender wage gap. I agree with her. We need to do more to reduce the gender wage gap. We need to take a multi-pronged practical approach towards this. We have heard of some countries that have legislated equal pay for equal work, such as in some parts of the US and Canada, but the adjusted pay gap remains higher than that in Singapore.
In Singapore, we take a much more practical approach towards matters like this. Here, we are talking about strengthening workplace fairness, introducing and entrenching FWAs, working with industry partners and community partners and using education to encourage and empower women to take on jobs in growth as well as in STEM sectors. After all, the main reason for the gender wage gap in Singapore is occupational segregation.
Financial literacy is important for financial well-being. I agree with Mr Louis Chua and I thank him for raising this point. Some women, because they are caregivers, may have had disrupted careers and, as a result, were not able to earn as much as their partners. Aside from providing a supportive environment for caregivers to continue working, MOM has also taken steps to help caregivers build their retirement nest egg.
First, we encourage cash top-ups to CPF accounts of caregivers through tax incentives and Government matching grants for eligible seniors, many of whom have been women who benefited from these schemes.
Second, they can consider monetising their homes under the HDB Lease Buyback Scheme and the Silver Housing Bonus to unlock their housing value and enhance their retirement income.
Third, we supplement the retirement income of seniors who had low incomes during their working years and now have less in retirement through the Silver Support Scheme. Lower-wage caregivers who are working may also be eligible for the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme, which provides up to $4,000 in cash and CPF top-ups annually today. From 2023 onwards, they can receive up to $4,200 in cash and CPF top-ups annually.
For more women to succeed in their careers, we must also tackle discrimination and harassment at the workplace.
Some participants in the conversations shared that women still face prejudice due to perceptions that they would be less committed at work due to caregiving and pregnancy reasons. When instances of discrimination or harassment were reported to their employers, some felt that their concerns were swept under the rug. Others hesitated to come forward because they were afraid to lose their jobs or of "getting marked" by their colleagues.
We can do better. All of us have a role to play. We want to send a strong message of assurance that help is available and that those who seek help and recourse can do so safely and will be protected against retaliation. We do not tolerate workplace discrimination in any form, certainly not against women, be it for their caregiving responsibilities or their pregnancy status.
This is why MOM and our tripartite partners are taking a significant step to enshrine the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices in law, strengthening equal opportunities in the workplace.
I must say this is really a long journey. Looking as far as back as 2016 in Parliament, Mr Patrick Tay had already been pushing for anti-workplace discrimination legislation. Over the years, numerous times, various Members of Parliament in this House have raised this. I am really glad that, finally, we are taking that big step towards legislation.
The work of the Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness is ongoing and the committee has agreed to look at protecting the confidentiality of the identity of those who report on discrimination or harassment at the workplace and protecting them against retaliation. The committee is looking also at the legislation to include requiring employers to have a proper process to handle grievances reported by their employees.
Like many of the shifts in the White Paper, the eventual workplace fairness legislation will not just benefit women. In giving greater assurance to women at work, we are also giving greater assurance to all workers.
However, we all know that legislation is not a panacea. We need mindset shifts and collective action for real and sustained impact.
I thank Ms Sylvia Lim for agreeing with us that the education of employers is key. As Ms Yeo Wan Ling highlighted, employers must educate and equip themselves, their supervisors and HR professionals to create fair, respectful and safe working environments.
The Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) and the tripartite partners can help employers with this, with further support available for SMEs if they lack knowledge or the capacity in implementing proper policies and grievance handling processes. I urge companies to take ownership and tap on such help.
To individuals who encounter workplace harassment, TAFEP's Workplace Harassment Resource and Recourse Centre is here to provide advice and assistance. We assure you that you are not alone and it is safe for you to reach out. Let us help and support you.
Our community partners, such as grassroots leaders, union leaders, Daughters Of Tomorrow, Mums@Work Singapore, SCWO, AWARE and more, are among those working with us to augment outreach and support to those affected by workplace harassment. Together, we are enlarging the safety net to protect and support women.
As colleagues or friends, each one of us can make a difference, too. Do not be bystanders. Instead, call out and stand up against unfair and unsafe work practices and support those who are affected. We should work towards a vision of zero workplace discrimination and harassment. Before I conclude, let me highlight our key actions in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] We have listened to our people and charted out within the White Paper the direction and steps we will take to better support our Singapore women at the workplace.
We will enshrine TGFEP in law to strengthen and uphold principles of fairness at work so that our women will have equal opportunities alongside their male counterparts to pursue and progress in the careers of their choice.
We will enhance our systems so that our work environments are safe and free from harassment. Employers will be required to put in place proper grievance handling procedures, protect the confidentiality of those who come forward to report workplace discrimination or harassment and protect them from retaliation.
We will introduce Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangements around 2024 to require employers to fairly and properly consider FWA requests and continue to boost the adoption of the Tripartite Standard to cover 40% of employees. We want to provide women and men with the necessary flexibilities at work so that they can pursue their personal or family aspirations while having a good career.
(In English): The benefits of our efforts will well extend beyond the workplace, where our children can grow up in more supportive family environments with greater parental involvement, where there will be stronger relationships between parents who share responsibilities at home, and where women and men partner each other as equals, progress together and pursue their aspirations freely and to the fullest.
I am heartened to hear this joint call and commitment to action being strongly echoed by Members of Parliament who have spoken thus far. So, today, let us join hands as a society, regardless of our political affiliation, to commit to making our workplaces fairer and more inclusive, for an even stronger Singapore tomorrow. [Applause.]
Dr Shahira Abdullah.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to express my support for the action plans proposed in the White Paper on Singapore Women's Development. In my opinion, the policy and legislative changes that will be implemented have the ability to catalyse a mindset change in the whole community on how gender roles are perceived in today's context.
I would like to focus my speech on the support for women in the workforce. To do so, we can, firstly, look at the gender pay gap. Both the adjusted and unadjusted measures of gender pay gap are used for policy-making.
Based on a study conducted by MOM and NUS in 2020, it was found that there was an adjusted gender pay gap of 4.3%, which has shown a marked improvement, though it can still be improved. The gender pay gap was attributed to various factors. Women frequently play the primary role of a caregiver, be it to their children, the elderly as well as those with special needs. This may have impacted their time and experience at work, leading to delays in career progression and earnings.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
However, there was barely any change in the unadjusted gender pay gap between 2002 and 2018, with a differential of 16% between the two genders. This is significant and can be explained by occupational segregation. Examples include the effect of occupational choices which may be dictated by a woman's multiple responsibilities.
The Labour Force Participation Rate (LFPR) in 2020 also shows further evidence of the motherhood penalty in which the gap widens, particularly when women reach their peak childbearing or childcaring ages.
So, what can be done to narrow this gap? I am very heartened that the White Paper has taken a multi-pronged approach to tackle this.
Firstly, gender discrimination and implicit biases still persist in the workplace, intended or unintended. For example, minority women may have to deal with biases due to gender as well as race. In June 2021, a woman applying for a preschool teacher job was allegedly asked to remove her hijab at work. Additionally, whether a woman decides to get married or start a family should not be asked in interviews or play a part in whether job opportunities are offered. It is disheartening that we are now in the 21st century and yet women are still having to contend with questions on their childbearing motivations at the workplace and upon being hired. Therefore, it is very welcomed that we will be enshrining the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices in law. Doing so will afford better protection to women who are victims of discrimination and prevent retaliation against those who whistle-blow.
In particular, I would also like to ask if specific legislation and policies will be introduced for women going on maternity leave. If there are cases in which a pregnant mother has to go on maternity leave, she should not be automatically given a lower band by default during her subsequent appraisal simply by virtue of taking what is a statutorily mandated leave. Guidelines should be available for the employer to objectively evaluate her performance and for the employee herself to be able to fulfil them reasonably. This can help to address the unequal pay or promotion which can slow down further career progression down the road.
Additionally, what provisions or measures can be introduced that would ensure women are not discouraged from taking their statutorily mandated maternity leave at risk of penalty to their career progression? While the White Paper champions autonomy of choice for women, I am concerned that women may be presented with a false choice and come under increased pressure to view their recovery during the duration of the maternity leave as optional, especially for women who aspire to hold leadership positions in future.
Thus, they may either opt not to take the full duration of their maternity leave or choose to continue working throughout the duration of their maternity leave.
Anecdotally as well, it seems a handful of employers may encourage women to work throughout their maternity or seek to postpone or do away with their time away with the promise that doing so would lead to greater career progressions. I think a stronger message needs to be sent that maternity is not an optional leave but one that is statutorily protected because Parliament recognises there is a need for women to recover from the procedures and many bodily changes introduced by pregnancy and labour. There is a greater social good being encouraged by preserving the maternity leave for women and ensuring that it is observed.
Secondly, I am also glad to see the introduction of the new Tripartite Guidelines on FWAs by 2024 which requires employers to consider employees' flexi-work requests fairly and properly. There are many ways FWAs can be implemented, whether flexi-place, flexi-time or flexi-load. Being able to do so would allow employers to adopt the best practices to manage their workforce while, at the same time, allowing them to tap on talents that they may not have been able to traditionally.
This is also a major step forward to weaken gender norms. Instead of work structures that reward employees for pulling more hours at work, a transition to one which is supportive of a family-friendly work culture would encourage both parents to balance work and family commitments.
However, such benefits should not be solely used by women as the perceived costs of hiring them will increase. According to MSF, only 55% of fathers used up their paternity leave. This was mainly due to workplace support. Fathers are worried that it might affect their career prospects. Employers also have to ensure that colleagues are willing to cover the fathers' duties in their absence. I understand that the White Paper will be tackling this aspect in Action 4. Therefore, may I ask whether there are similar upcoming plans to ensure increased utilisation of FWAs, not by women, but by men as well?
In a similar vein, an NUS study in 2021 showed that men with lower incomes were less likely to utilise their paternity leave. This was especially prominent in those involved in manual labour. Hence, could I suggest for provisions to be made to allow for some amount of paternity leave to be made compulsory? This will be a strong signal to the community regarding the importance of shared gender responsibilities as equal partners as well as towards enhancing the support of women in low-income families as well.
Thirdly, employers or institutions which are able to adopt such family-friendly practices should be rewarded for their commitment to gender equality in the workplace. These efforts are not easy to adopt, especially since it also relies on the mindset change and support of society to make it work. This is also in line with the Government's moves to encourage marriage and parenthood to boost the total fertility rate.
Lastly, it is evident that everyone plays a part in the progress of women's development which is why I believe mindset change is the most critical step in this whole endeavour of policy, legislative and structural changes. It is reflected in the choices that we make every day. As fathers, when we make an effort to share the mental load and burden of household responsibilities; as parents and educators when we decide what kind of examples we set with our behaviour; as employers and colleagues when we show understanding to fellow parents at work or as consumers where we take a stand to not consume sexist content.
Only with everyone taking a conscious step and working hand-in-hand will our efforts bear fruit much faster with far-reaching effects. With that, I support this Motion.
Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. The White Paper encapsulates the collective aspirations of women in Singapore. Importantly, it tackles the deep and long-running concerns and stigma and discrimination our women face at home, at school, workplaces and the community. Regardless of where women are in their lives, we, as a society, must support them. Let it be their choice and not a decision or judgement that we impose on them.
Hence, I welcome the 25 concrete action plans that have been tabled in the White Paper.
Sir, I would like to touch on two areas: supporting career aspirations and supporting their children's well-being.
Sir, the pandemic has taught us that physical meetings can be replaced by virtual ones and matters can be easily resolved over emails. Importantly, we saw how FWAs allowed organisations to remain productive while allowing workers to juggle other commitments at home. This alleviates the mental burden faced by women who are caregivers but, at the same time, it allows the husbands the opportunity to share the load. Importantly, it can also encourage women who have not been working for some time to return to the working world with ease.
I commend efforts, such as Mums@Work, Career Navigators and MENDAKI Sense's back-to-work women programme, which mentor women who wish to get back to the working world, retain them, retrain them and partner companies to ensure a smooth transition. In that regard, I welcome the recent news by MOM that employers must consider staff requests for FWAs by 2024.
However, I hope that the Government can push the deadline earlier and explore accreditation models for companies that support FWAs and have concrete back-to-work women HR policies within their organisations. Staff welfare clubs for women or the set-up of childcare arrangements within the building can also be implemented to allow women to have a strong support group within workplaces and allow their children to be near them while they work. Hence, I hope more companies can consider rolling them out to allow more women to return to the workforce.
Mr Speaker, the second area I would like to highlight is the need for us to support women in their children's well-being.
Sir, apart from my mother and my wife, my late grandmother continues to be my inspiration.
When my mother was born, her father passed on soon after. My grandmother raised seven children on her own. She held multiple jobs. She was a religious teacher teaching Quranic recitation; she was a seamstress, sometimes doing clothes for free so that the children in the kampung can have nice clothes; she was somewhat an entrepreneur, she cooked and sold epok epok in the kampung, too. She was a resilient woman. She held a tight ship, ensuring ends meet and that the children were well cared for. My mother, being the youngest, had sisters who were doubling up as mothers. In situations like this, the elder ones usually make way for the younger ones to support their education. Although things turned out okay for my family, I have seen families of similar profiles within my constituency who are facing challenges.
During a recent house visit, it pained me to find that the elder siblings who have yet to complete Secondary education, forgo their studies so that they can help with the family income. There were also times I found children who were without preschool education due to multiple constraints faced by single parents.
Mr Speaker, we need to strengthen support for women in vulnerable groups, those from low-income families as well as single parents. Their biggest worry is their children's well-being. We can help alleviate their worry and better support them mentally and emotionally by focusing our resources on supporting their children's well-being. We need to get the children in school, focus on their studies and set them on the multiple pathways of success.
Sir, we have now seen an increase in childcare and preschool places around Singapore. Perhaps, we can have more child-minding or student care services in schools and within clusters of low-income families, so that children from vulnerable families can get access to care conveniently while their mothers go out to work and focus on their careers. If we can focus our resources on the well-being of children, I am optimistic that we can help our women from vulnerable families get back up and provide better for their families.
In that regard, I welcome the expansion of KidSTART and hope that, as the programme continues to expand, the content and delivery are not diluted. Sir, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, I welcome the tabling of this White Paper on Singapore Women’s Development and support all the actions being proposed. In my English speech earlier, I have touched on two areas, namely, career aspirations and support for children.
More Malay women are now serving as members of the Mosque Management Boards, as well as Malay/Muslim bodies in Singapore. However, compared to the number of men, the number of women has yet to reach 50% in terms of those becoming members of board of directors. For example, even though MENDAKI has a female Chief Executive Officer, only seven out of 21 members on its Board of Directors are women. In MUIS, five out of its 19 Council members are women. What about the number of women appointed as members of the mosque management boards?
I am thankful that during my service as a mosque Chairman in the past, I have worked with many capable women. We already have a woman President of the Syariah Court. In fact, our President Mdm Halimah Yacob is ranked 37th on the list of 500 most influential Muslims in the world. Perhaps, it is time for us to have a woman mosque Chairman?
I hope that more opportunities and spaces are open for our women to assume leadership responsibilities in our institutions, not just in MENDAKI, MUIS and mosques, but also in Malay/Muslim bodies and private companies, so that a diversity of opinions can be obtained through discussions and policy presentations.
Second, we still see many single mothers and mothers from low-income families facing many challenges. These include those who have to quit their jobs to look after their children.
I hope that the tabling of this White Paper can further enhance support and assistance for women and children from needy families, especially in terms of providing more preschool and after-school childcare services. With this, mothers can feel reassured enough to return to work and the children will also receive support in terms of their education and mental well-being.
(In English): Mr Speaker, the White Paper on Women's Development is a strong signal of the Government's direction towards a fairer and more inclusive society where men and women are seen as equals and complementary in building a better Singapore. While the Government leads the way in legislating these proposals, society, as a whole, must play its part. It is all hands on deck, regardless of gender or age, whether you are a student or a worker, employer or employee, private or public sector.
To my fellow men out there – husbands, fathers, sons – let us ask ourselves what kind of future do we want to create and leave behind for our women, our daughters? If we want our daughters to be respected, what are we doing within our homes or within the online space? If we want our daughters to succeed in their careers, what kind of work culture are we practising in workplaces? Mr Speaker, I support the White Paper.
Ms Hazel Poa.
Mr Speaker, Sir, PSP welcomes the move to introduce workplace fairness legislation to offer protection against discrimination and harassment. In general, we support the plans outlined in the White Paper. There are a few areas we wish to add on.
The participation rate of women in the labour force has been rising over the years. Women have taken on more economic responsibilities, but their share of caregiving and family responsibilities has not been decreasing correspondingly. It should not surprise anyone if this situation makes marriage and having children more daunting.
As the White Paper correctly pointed out, mindsets on gender roles need to change.
Our current parental leave structure reflects the old mindset that needs to change. Currently, maternity leave is 16 weeks, paternity leave, two weeks, and fathers can share up to four weeks of their wives’ maternity leave. With the mothers getting a much longer leave than fathers, it reinforces the idea that childcare is primarily the responsibility of mothers. This is inconsistent with our move to change mindsets on gender roles.
I urge the Government to change it to equal shares by default, with flexibility to reallocate parental leave between the couple based on mutual agreement, subject to a minimum period for each parent. The default equal share of parental leave between the couple underlines the belief that parenthood is a responsibility that should be shared equally by both parents. Equal parental leave would also give less reason for employers to discriminate against female employees.
Various studies have shown the beneficial effect of fathers taking paternity leave and taking on a bigger role in parenting. An NUS study found that children are less likely to have behavioural issues and fathers experienced reduced conflict, stronger family relationships and increased satisfaction in their marriage. Another study found mothers get improved maternal postpartum-depression outcomes.
However, not all fathers take paternity leave. In 2019, the take-up rate was only 55%. A key reason cited was work culture that does not support the taking of paternity leave. We should, therefore, look at incentives for employers to provide better work-life balance.
Next, I will move on to financial support for caregivers. The Home Caregiving Grant is given to defray cost of caring for persons with disabilities who require assistance in performing three or more Activities of Daily Living. This grant is given regardless of whether the caregiver is a paid professional, foreign domestic helper or an unpaid family member. Therefore, it is more a financial support for the disabled person, rather than for the caregiver who may have had to give up a full-time job.
The same applies to the Senior Mobility and Enabling Fund which subsidises the cost of mobility devices.
Another measure that the Government is changing to improve the retirement adequacy of caregivers is to raise the CPF top-up tax relief cap from $7,000 to $8,000. Can MOM provide the number and percentage of caregivers who received CPF top-ups each year and what was the average amount of the top-up?
Is this a measure we can rely on to ensure the retirement adequacy of caregivers? If not, would the Government consider a scheme where a portion of the monthly CPF contribution of the working spouse is transferred to the caregiving spouse? It is fair for a married couple who share the responsibilities of family and work to also share the rewards.
A third area that I wish to bring up is that of foreign spouses. We would like to see greater transparency in the criteria for residency for foreign spouses. With the implementation of COMPASS, we have moved towards a more transparent model for approval of work passes. A similar move towards transparency on residency criteria for foreign spouses would benefit our citizens worrying over how to ensure long-term residency for their foreign spouses and the recurrent cost of visit passes.
There are many good plans in the White Paper. At the end of the day, we need to measure reality. What are the indicators that will be tracked to monitor if we are achieving the objectives stated in the White Paper and what are the targets set? Setting a target shows our commitment. For example, we can set a target for female representation on the Boards of Directors. Since Statutory Boards and IPCs can achieve about 30% female representation, it shows that 30% is a realistic target. Listed companies have a female board representation of under 20%. Will the Government commit to setting a target of 30% within three years?
Another area that is very important to most women would be the sharing of parenting and caregiving responsibilities. Will the Government be tracking and setting a target for this as well as the utilisation rate of maternity and paternity leave?
Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Speaker, whenever I visit the funeral wakes of my constituents, I try to speak with their caregiver to offer them comfort and find out how I can provide assistance to them and their families. As I listen to them relate how they looked after their loved ones in their final years, I am filled with admiration for their immense dedication and sacrifice. I have spoken to an elderly wife who changed the stoma bags of her husband, who was a cancer patient, for a period of time until he passed on. I have conversed with a son in his 50s, who changed his elderly mother’s soiled diapers several times a day, in a reversal of parent-child roles. I have a 72-year-old resident who continues to juggle her roles working as a cleaner and the sole caregiver to her disabled adult son and mentally incapacitated husband.
These unsung heroes press on out of filial devotion to parents, duty to spouses, responsibility to their adult children and, most importantly, love for their family members.
Unlike caregivers of young children, caregivers of elderly or disabled persons face a heavier load over time as the health of their loved ones deteriorates. They do not experience the same delight of young parents watching their children grow up. Their care recipients may not be able to express their appreciation well or may even inadvertently make hurtful remarks due to conditions like dementia.
For caregivers, every day brings new challenges and new heartaches, until that inevitable day when they see their loved ones pass on. Caregivers of children with disabilities face an additional stressor of worrying about who will care for their children if they outlive them.
It is a very heavy burden to carry. We, as a nation, society and community, can and should do much more to share some of the weight on caregivers’ shoulders.
In 2010, approximately 8% of residents aged between 18 and 69 years provided regular care to a friend or family member, with 37% of caregivers reporting that they had been providing care for almost a decade. These percentages have surely gone up since then and will likely increase further, given our ageing population.
In my speech today, I will focus on Area 2 of the White Paper – the caregiving aspect. While caregivers in Singapore are more often women than men, I will not take a gender-specific approach to the problems or solutions. The role of caregiving does not solely apply to any gender and, most certainly, should not be borne only by women.
Unpaid caregiving of family members incurs substantial direct expenses and opportunity costs. According to a 2019 answer by the Minister for Health to a Parliamentary Question by then-NMP Anthea Ong, about 6% of Singapore residents – male and female – cited caregiving to family members as the main reason for leaving their jobs or not looking for one. The majority were women aged 40 and above.
In a reply by Minister of State Gan Siow Huang to Parliamentary Questions by Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Ms Joan Pereira earlier this year, 15% of women aged 25 to 64 cited family-related responsibilities as their main reason for being outside the labour force in 2020, while 6% worked part-time due to family or personal commitments.
In his paper published in Insights in Public Health Journal, Dr Wayne Chong pointed out that unpaid informal caregivers of older adults not only pay the lion’s share of mental, emotional, social and financial costs of care, they also fork out non-trivial opportunity costs associated with caregiving, including lost wages, personal freedom and aspirations.
These are enormous sacrifices. It is time for Singapore to provide a more comprehensive package of financial support and compensation to caregivers for their economic and social contributions to the nation. I would like to discuss seven ways our nation can share our caregivers’ burdens, many of which have been touched on in the White Paper.
First, employers play a big part in creating a society that values the contributions of caregivers and shares some of their burdens. All employers should provide FWAs for their staff to better balance work and caregiving responsibilities. Managers should be given training to have a greater understanding of the unpredictable nature of caregiving so that they can be more empathetic towards their staff.
The White Paper states that the Government will introduce a new set of Tripartite Guidelines on FWAs by 2024, which will require employers to "consider FWA requests from employees fairly and properly". The Government aims to create a workplace norm where employees "feel it is acceptable to request for FWAs, while maintaining employers' prerogative to accept or reject requests taking into account their business needs."
Can the Minister for Manpower clarify if this means that employers can reject FWA requests without providing valid reasons? If so, it will give employers an escape clause from their FWA obligations.
I repeat the call in the Workers’ Party’s 2020 Manifesto that all informal caregivers of elderly or disabled family members should be entitled to ask for FWAs that are feasible for their line of work and fair to both the employer and the employee. Employers should be required to provide reasons if the request cannot be met.
It is in the interest of all organisations, large and small, to have meaningful FWAs in place. Employers who fail to do so may lose capable employees to competitors. In fact, having good FWAs can be a company’s competitive advantage in attracting talent. The underlying premise is the basic principle that "a happy worker is a productive worker".
Second, we need to legislate Family Care Leave. Most caregivers remain in paid employment, which places extremely heavy demands on their time. The demands of both work and caregiving responsibilities are often concurrent, making it difficult to set aside one to handle the other.
Civil servants are currently eligible for two days of parent-care leave per year. However, according to an MOM survey, only 20% of private companies offered such leave benefits in 2018.
There have been many calls for the legislation of Family Care Leave by Members of Parliament from the Workers' Party, PAP, Nominated Members of Parliament, as well as AWARE and the Singapore Alliance for Women in Ageing, among others.
The Government should legislate Family Care Leave soon. This will help in recognising that caregivers’ contributions are on par with that of parents with young children.
Family care leave can supersede the current Childcare Leave. As a start, all Singaporean employees should be granted up to six days of leave to look after their young children or immediate family members with long-term illnesses or disabilities. The first three days should be paid by the employer, with the remaining days paid by the Government.
An additional two days should be granted if the employee has more than one care recipient. This means that if an employee has one child and one parent to care for, he or she will be entitled to eight days of paid Family Care Leave, of which three days are paid for by their employer and five days by the Government.
The Government rejected previous calls to legislate eldercare leave, citing business cost concerns by employers, manpower constraints and the employability of caregivers. Having the Government bear more costs of Family Care Leave will limit the financial strain on employers and minimise any employment discrimination against caregivers.
Third, we should recognise the skills and work experience of caregivers. During the caregiving years, a caregiver gains important skills, such as people management, negotiation, conflict resolution and budgeting, as well as domain knowledge, such as healthcare, food and nutrition knowledge.
Employers should consider caregiving experience as work experience, just like the Civil Service does for National Service, with corresponding salary increments. Recognising caregivers’ skills and experience could also open up employment opportunities for them in the care sector, which, in turn, can contribute much-needed manpower to our health and social care system as our society ages.
The Public Service should take the lead to steer this mindset shift, and the Government should encourage the private sector to do likewise. Such a paradigm shift will signal that caregiving is, indeed, valued by society.
Fourth, we need to adjust our approach to financial support and compensation for caregivers. Caregivers should be provided more financial support to offset the costs of home-based caregiving. This support should aim to match the subsidy given to patients in long-term care facilities.
The White Paper stated that the Home Caregiving Grant (HCG) quantum will be increased next year from $200 to up to $400 per month for low-income households living in HDB flats. To qualify, care recipients must require assistance to perform three or more Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), such as eating, bathing, dressing or toileting.
I would like to ask the Minister for Health what was the basis for arriving at $400 a month for low-income families and $250 for low- to middle-income ones.
I am also concerned that some patients with dementia may not qualify for HCG. This is because the behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia, such as forgetting, impulsivity, wandering and getting lost, are different from the ambulatory and dexterity competencies of ADLs. Can the Minister clarify if dementia sufferers can claim for HCG?
HCG is meant to defray the cost of caregiving expenses rather than financially compensate caregivers. Currently, any financial compensation schemes in place are mainly through family members, such as the Retirement Sum Topping Up Scheme.
Over and above financial support, family caregivers should receive some form of financial compensation for their caregiving work. This would mean allowing them to claim a modest allowance on top of HCG so that they will have more savings for their retirement. If the caregiver and their family members are low-income earners, the Government should step in to top up their CPF Special Accounts or Retirement Accounts, without the need for matching contribution by family members.
Fifth, home-based caregiving services must be made more accessible to all households, especially lower-income ones. The White Paper proposes broadening the Household Services Scheme (HSS) to include basic child- and elder-minding services.
However, the HSS is not currently subsidised by the Government, even though households likely to benefit most are those without the means to employ a live-in domestic worker. At $20 an hour or more, the cost of home-based caregiving services is a stretch for many such households.
MSF should extend means-tested subsidies to Singaporean families which procure home-based caregiving services for their elderly or disabled family members, if those members are not able to attend centre-based programmes. By caring for their loved ones at home, caregivers save the Government subsidies it would otherwise disburse to care centres. Some of these savings can be passed on to families by increasing subsidies for home-based care.
Sixth, short-term and ad hoc respite care services will allow caregivers to run errands, respond to unexpected developments or just get a short break from caregiving.
All full-time caregivers deserve an option to take a day off a week, where they can draw on a shared pool of suitably-qualified respite home care workers or place their loved ones in care centres during their day-off. Full Government subsidies should be made available to those from lower-income households.
Currently, respite care services are provided at some senior care centres and nursing homes. As at end December 2021, there were over 450 respite care places, according to the Minister for Health in response to a Parliamentary Question by Ms Nadia Samdin. This is a very small number, considering there are some 210,000 caregivers in Singapore.
How many requests for respite care did the Agency for Integrated Care receive in 2021? Is there sufficient public awareness of the availability of respite care services? What plans does the Government have to expand the availability and accessibility of respite care?
Finally, long-term residential care facilities may be the only option for many families. Some elderly caregivers lack the strength to even lift their disabled spouses or adult children to bathe or transfer them. Some elderly care recipients are single, with no children to care for them.
I am not suggesting that everyone rush to put their parents in nursing homes. However, the reality is that with longer lifespans, fewer children and more Singaporeans working overseas, we can expect an increasing demand for long-term residential care for elders and the disabled.
There continues to be high demand for nursing homes and adult disability home places in Singapore. As of end-2020, 90% of the 16,300 nursing home beds were utilised, up from 85% in June 2019.
Can MOF, MOH and MSF elaborate on their plans to expand nursing homes and adult disability homes up to 2030? How much of our population's future demand will this expansion meet? What are the Ministries doing to ensure that care homes are able to attract enough qualified professionals, including Singaporeans?
Mr Speaker, caregiving is a huge weight for any individual to bear and caregivers have made a lot of economic and social sacrifices. Yet, they continue to press on, out of love and duty to their family.
As a nation, we will need a paradigm shift in our thinking towards caregivers and share some of their burdens. With the support of the Government, businesses, community and Singaporeans, we can strive to be a more inclusive society and better recognise the sacrifices of our caregivers. I support the Motion.
Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 5.20 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 4.58 pm until 5.20 pm.
Sitting resumed at 5.20 pm.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
SINGAPORE WOMEN'S DEVELOPMENT
Debate resumed.
Minister Shanmugam.
Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to take part in this discussion for this Motion. We started this process in September 2020. The White Paper is an important marker on this road to equality for women. We have not arrived, but we know the road to travel and the final destination.
I do not need to speak about the history of women's rights in Singapore or the issues women face, the details are in the White Paper. They are important, but the topics have been well-covered. I will just make two points. First, the psychological significance of the White Paper and, secondly, I will update the House on our approach to violence which is targeted at women in the family context.
First, on the psychological significance of the White Paper. When you try and deal with large issues, like equality of men and women, one, you have to make a list of specific things that need to be done to achieve the end goal. That is important. Otherwise, it just becomes a rhetorical exercise. And the White Paper lists the many areas where more action needs to be taken. The House has discussed them and I am sure will continue discussing them.
But beyond that, in a more fundamental way, when we talk about respect for women, equality of women, it requires an internalisation by the majority that these are basic values; that these are values which we cherish, which we hold dear. And I have said, when we started the Conversations in September 2020, that our aim is to work towards a deep mindset change, to build a society where every boy and girl grows up imbibing the value of gender equality. To get a change in thinking at the individual level and to have it deeply set in is never easy.
I will put it this way. Are we able to say that equality for women is part of our culture that is deeply set in? I think the answer is, it is still work in progress. But the process we started in September 2020 has moved the needle, quite some.
The year 1961 was epochal. It was path-breaking. The progress women have made in many fields since then has made the idea of equality more real. From September 2020, the Conversations, this White Paper, I believe, have had a significant psychological impact and moved us further along the path. The scale, the depth of the Conversations and follow-up have registered in our collective consciousness. It has helped in the process of our collective psyche in accepting equality.
In law, there is a concept. When you want to know whether something is fundamental and accepted by most, you test it by checking. If I were to ask this question to a group of right-minded people, will they say, "Yes, of course, it is so", or will they express different views? If they will say, "Yes, of course, this is so", then that is your answer.
If you apply that to the idea of equality for women in Singapore, after the Conversations and the White Paper, if someone were to stand up in a group in Singapore and ask about equality for women, will people say, "Obviously, yes"? I think so. Or put it another way – in a mixed group of right-thinking people, how many will dare to say, "Men and women should not be equal"? Think of that.
It is an achievement that, regardless of whatever one may personally think, if people realise that expressing a contrary view would be against social norms, that means people understand what the norms are. That is important.
So, we must not underestimate the power of such collective norm building. The Conversations and the White Paper have helped a fair bit in this process. Over time, if properly acted upon, that can change behaviour on how men and women perceive women and their roles.
The current situation in Singapore may look like, well, this is normal, this is the natural order of things. But it is not. Let me illustrate by giving you some examples. In the US, a headline in the last few days caught my eye, that women now have to travel outside the state they stay in, in some places, to get abortions because of tighter and tighter rules on abortions in some of these states.
The issue of a woman's right to have a medical procedure autonomy of her body versus a life, is subject to laws in many countries, including Singapore. But it gets difficult when the issue becomes politicised and if you tilt too far away from giving autonomy to a woman over her own body. In Singapore, a woman's autonomy is given considerable weight.
If you move to Australia, another matter that has received some attention is the experience of women in the Australian parliament. I am referring to these examples not to criticise other systems and approaches. I am looking at them as illustrations which can remind us of choices we have made, we make on the journey we have travelled and can travel. Coming back to Australia, there were several allegations about how women were mistreated in the Australian parliament.
In November 2021, a report, known as the "Jenkins Report", was published on what has happened in the Australian Federal Parliament. It sets out in graphic detail some of what happened, quite shocking really. I have prepared an annex that lists some examples. Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, may I distribute an annex to the Members of the House?
Yes, please. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
If you look at the list, an MP leaning over, grabbing the victim and stuck his tongue down her throat. I am quoting from the report. It is a member of parliament doing this. At an after-work drinks session, a senior party member put his hand up the victim's skirt. A male colleague asked the victim intrusive questions about her personal life and so on. Leaders made jokes about employees' sex life, asked them out for dates, propositioned them. Parliamentarian was completely naked when a worker walked into his office and addressed the worker as if nothing untoward, and so on.
For us here in Singapore Parliament, you can understand this is quite unthinkable. I do not mean that in a self-congratulatory way, nor do I seek to draw any conclusions on morality. Just looking at it, factually, our laws and framework and what we expect of behaviour in Parliament, all are different. And the consequences, if you breach our laws, are quite severe. You can expect to be caned if you are a man; and I will come back to the examples here.
So, the conduct in the Federal Parliament of Australia, one is tempted to ask: is this the result of a different culture on how women are perceived and can be treated? I do not know enough to draw any conclusions. But Members can see, where we are in Singapore and the road we are on, was and is not pre-ordained. It is because of the choices we made and the work we have put in to treat women properly, with respect.
If Members look at the examples, on the right-hand column, in Singapore, just a couple of examples – a man, previously with NUS, holding a PHD. He touched a woman over her skirt during an MRT ride. He was sentenced to 18 days in jail. In another case earlier this year, a masseur molested a customer during a massage session. Nothing as graphic as what you see happened in the Australian parliament. He was sentenced to nine months' jail and three strokes of the cane.
If you do these things outside Parliament, you are likely to get jailed and caned. I think it is quite unthinkable that something like this can or will happen in a parliamentary context in Singapore but, if it did, a male Member of Parliament is likely to go to jail and be caned for some of the more egregious conduct.
We look at it in the context of how we treat women and what the laws are. All of these fit in together to make sure that there is a certain status, respect and expectation of behaviour. That is important.
I will refer to Australia in another context. Last year, in one of the conversations that I took part in, there was an Australian lady. I was taken aback by what she said. She said – and these are in the notes that our civil servants take – and I quote verbatim, "to Minister's question on her experience in Australia in terms of career opportunities for women as well as support for mothers, the lady said that Singapore offered much better opportunities and support for women. Companies in Australia often took a male-centric perspective and women tended to be politically disadvantaged, especially in rising to leadership positions."
Again, a small vignette. If we move forward to the UK, I can recount to the House what a relatively senior female diplomat from the UK told me. Again, quoting from the notes, "on caregiving, Minister said that we were exploring how we could provide better support. One way was to recognise the caregiving role in monetary terms" – I will skip her name – "said that UK had not seriously discussed the question of monetary compensation for caregiving."
On my list of examples, let me also share some things that have happened recently in Malaysia. When I say Malaysia, Singaporeans and, probably, Members of Parliament, too, sometimes tend to say on social issues, Malaysia is not a real comparison because we have taken different paths on social issues. But I make a different point.
We were part of the same country until 1965. Our cultures are largely similar. The roads we took diverged after 1965. These were deliberate choices and they have led to very different results, and that is worth reflecting on to consider carefully what path we should continue on and what we can do to strengthen the respect and the idea of equality for women.
I will refer to two events: one early in the pandemic and one just a few weeks ago for Malaysia. In March 2020, Malaysia, like Singapore, was dealing with the pandemic. The Movement Control Order, I think, had been in place. The Malaysian Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development posted infographics on social media on how to ensure harmonious households.
It was a document that was obviously intended to be serious and it gave advice to wives. The advice included the following: that the wives should mimic the voice of a Japanese cartoon character, Doraemon, when speaking to their husbands; wives should giggle coyly; wives should avoid wearing home clothes and put on make-up; wives should use humorous words and avoid nagging.
The ministry's post, as you can imagine, drew a lot of response. As I understand it, Doraemon is a male robot cat, so, not quite sure why women should speak like a male robot cat. There were many takes on the ministry's post. This is one. With Speaker's permission, can I have this video shown?
Yes, please. [A video was shown to hon Members.]
Besides this, the same ministry, on 18 March 2020 also stated that only the head of the household should leave the house to purchase necessities. And I think almost in every household, the man assumed that that was them and only them.
Fast forward to this year, 22 February, the Malaysian Deputy Minister, again from the same ministry, the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development, she gave this advice to husbands and wives, that husbands should try the "physical touch" approach by striking their wives "gently" and to discipline them if they do not stop "unruly" behaviour. And wives should seek husbands' permission before speaking. And wives should speak to their husbands only when the husbands are calm and relaxed, and after the husbands have eaten and prayed.
In Singapore, let me tell you, if you beat your wives or vice versa, the Police will come looking for you. And Members will not even consider it possible for either MCCY or MSF to issue such statements.
People may think this is a joke, but the differences in approach underlie and make a serious point. The path taken in 1961 and continued has led us to a very different place in terms of how we in Singapore view women and what we consider acceptable to say to women about how women should behave. The White Paper pushes us further along that road.
Our cultural norms are now different from Malaysia. We have, as opinion leaders, the power to strengthen and solidify those norms with more action. We can look at positive examples from other countries for us to emulate. Many of them are in Scandinavia, not in all aspects, but in some important aspects. There is still much we can learn from others.
To summarise my first point, Sir, the impact on norms and values, the internalisation of the idea of equality – I see that as among the most important outcomes from this process.
Let me move to my second point on how we deal with violence targeted at women in the family context. On the whole, if you look at women and how they perceive their safety and security, we have done well.
I have told the House before, SPF does regular surveys. The 2018 public perception survey showed that 93% of our women feel safe in Singapore. In 2020, Gallup's Law and Order survey, 97% of Singapore residents – obviously men and women – feel safe walking alone on the streets at night. It is the highest in the world.
We have made several legislative changes to give better protection to women. Just touching on the changes in the last three years.
In 2019, we amended the Penal Code to deal with sexual crimes which use technology; we repealed the marital immunity for rape; we introduced enhanced penalties for offences against victims in an intimate or close relationship with the offender. Usually, women were the victims, even though the legislation is neutral about which sex.
In the same year, we amended the Protection from Harassment Act to enhance protection for victims of harassment. The victims are, again, usually women or, quite often, young women.
Last year, we increased the penalties for sexual offences, including outrage of modesty. That came into force just last month. We intend to take further steps. But for today's purposes, I will deal specifically with violence in the family context.
For violence at home, women, again, are more likely to be the victims. The proportion or ratio is three to one, roughly. Members would have read about some cases which were in the news. A woman was abused by her husband on several occasions – punched her, held scissors to her face, cut her hair while holding onto her head. An elderly mother was abused by her adult son for years, starved, not allowed to shower, physically assaulted. She did not report him to the Police, despite volunteers asking her to, because she said she did not want to affect her son, despite suffering all this abuse.
MHA and MSF set up a task force on family violence in February 2020. The task force came up with 16 recommendations.
One common situation, for example, is the threat of violence at home or in a flat. The husband is angry, he is threatening violence; the woman fears for her safety. If the Police turn up at that point, nothing much can be done because if there is no actual violence and no imminent threat of violence, then it is very difficult to do anything. Her husband denies it anyway that he is going to hit. The woman and the children stay in the same flat in fear, and then something bad can happen.
Once these measures are able to be implemented – the task force's recommendations – MHA and MSF will respond. They will make an assessment. If the situation is serious, if there has been violence, it may proceed as a criminal case. We try not to criminalise all of these situations because that then does, quite often, irreparable harm in the family context. But where it is necessary, it is processed.
If there is no actual violence but there is a significant threat of violence, the wife may be offered the option of being moved to a safe space, depending on the facts. It will be her choice even if there is no criminal offence. She has the option that she can take the children and leave immediately, go into the safe space, then consider her next steps, instead of facing the threat of violence.
It could also include moving to a temporary shelter arrangement while working out longer-term interventions. That gives the parties the opportunity to cool down, provides an opportunity for reconciliation. You really do not want every such situation to end up in the matrimonial Courts.
We will also empower specific persons, such as the Director-General of Social Welfare, to apply for Personal Protection Orders on behalf of those at risk in certain situations – like that mother who was clearly being abused but did not want to report her son. This will be very resource-intensive and, therefore, will take time to implement. Members can see, however, what we hope to achieve.
In conclusion, Sir, if I may say this, the recommendations in the White Paper serve as a guidepost, not the endpoint of our aspirations for Singapore women. In that context, I have shown you some examples – or I call them vignettes and illustrations – of how things happen in some other countries, some things that had happened, and what it reflects and how the road we have taken has made pretty much some of these things quite unthinkable in Singapore. And that is by choice. It is not something that is preordained.
We will need to look again at this White Paper and the recommendations, continually review, see how far we have come. And I hope that we can all work to make Singapore a place where every girl and woman can achieve her fullest potential. [Applause.]
Ms Rahayu Mahzam.
For a woman in Singapore to be truly unencumbered to pursue her aspirations and make real choices in her life, we need to address challenges that many women still face today and facilitate the path for her to seek opportunities.
I join this debate to speak on two salient challenges: coping with caregiving duties and seeking a safe digital space.
Caregivers are the cornerstones of our families. Their contribution is part of what makes Singapore a thriving and caring society. I am encouraged to see many men share caregiving responsibilities at home as husbands, sons and fathers. However, some stereotypes remain and women continue to take on a higher load.
During the Conversations on Women's Development, many women shared that they struggled with balancing what they were traditionally expected to do as caregivers against achieving their aspirations, and often had to choose one over the other. They hoped men and women could take on a more equal share of caregiving duties.
Caregiving is a shared responsibility. I am glad to hear the calls made by my colleagues in this House for men and women to partner each other as equals. Each family should find their own balance, with family members pitching in to care for loved ones and giving each other real choices to pursue their aspirations, regardless of gender. This is a vision we must continue to work towards.
The Government understands that caregiving can be a heavy load to shoulder alone. We need to provide more support to caregivers, both men and women alike, so that they can find the balance between caregiving and pursuing their aspirations. Some may choose to dedicate more time to caregiving. Greater support will help them to manage the load better.
Minister Masagos Zulkifli earlier shared about efforts to support families with young children. Allow me to share more about our plans to strengthen support for caregivers of seniors.
We are proud to be a society where children feel an innate sense of responsibility to care for their elderly parents, but this duty can be challenging.
In 2019, MOH launched the Caregiver Support Action Plan to support caregiving for seniors. We will build on these efforts to recognise and empower caregivers.
Firstly, we will enhance the options for respite care to ease the caregiving load. Caregiving can be a long journey – a marathon, rather than a sprint. Crystal Lee is one example of a caregiver who has had a long caregiving journey. She started at the young age of 13, caring for her father, who suffered from various cancers. Later on, she also took care of her mother who suffered from a stroke. More than 20 years later, Crystal continues to care for her mother. Her father has since passed on. Crystal shared that her mother goes to the nearby day care centre, giving Crystal time to rest and recharge. She also taps on the Home Caregiving Grant (HCG) to help her reduce her care costs. These alternative care arrangements have given Crystal space to pursue her hobbies and continue working as a part-time nurse.
Today, we have a range of eldercare and respite care services that help to ease the caregiving load of caregivers like Crystal, allowing them to rest and pursue other goals, with peace of mind that their loved ones are well cared for. MOM recently announced plans to broaden the Household Services Scheme to provide basic elder-minding and child-minding services. This provides another option for caregivers to tap on to take a break.
Nonetheless, some caregivers shared during the Conversations that they were unaware of the respite options available. Others hoped to access respite care more readily. I would like to assure Mr Gerald Giam that MOH is reviewing the respite care landscape to better meet the needs of caregivers and make respite care more accessible, affordable and available. We will share more details in due course.
Secondly, MOH will continue to explore ways to enhance our care ecosystem. Over the years, we have expanded the capacity and range of eldercare services to meet the care needs of our seniors. Many seniors and their caregivers have benefited from these services.
Mr Sharael Taha and Mr Gerald Giam have asked whether our care infrastructure will continue to be sufficient. Indeed, as our population ages, the caregiving load on families will grow. Household sizes are also shrinking, with fewer members to share caregiving responsibilities. Some may turn to nursing homes to provide care. However, nursing homes should be reserved for those with the highest care needs and no family support. Many of our seniors also prefer to age-in-place at home. We want to continue to fulfil their aspirations.
To do so, we need to build on the range of services and support structure in place today, to better care for seniors at home. Some seniors may be less mobile and need more help with activities of daily living throughout the day. Others may need support beyond the typical service hours of their nearby day care centres. MOH is, therefore, exploring further future support to enhance the care ecosystem. Together with the various initiatives announced in the White Paper, we aspire to provide wraparound care for seniors residing within the community, even for those with higher care needs. This way, our caregivers can continue caring for their elderly loved ones in the community, instead of in nursing homes.
Another area of concern is financial support for caregivers. I thank Members for the various suggestions raised during this Debate. Our caregivers care for their children and elderly parents out of love and not for hope of reward. This value of family support and filial piety is something we should continue to treasure and uphold. Nonetheless, caregivers shared that they feel the financial strain of caring for their loved ones at home, in spending on care options and daily necessities. More financial support can go a long way to help caregivers obtain the help they need to ease their caregiving journey.
In 2019, the Government rolled out the HCG to defray caregiving costs. The grant has since supported more than 39,000 beneficiaries. In February 2022, we also rolled out an expanded Seniors' Mobility and Enabling Fund, which is expected to benefit more than 38,000 seniors in 2022. Since then, we have reviewed the HCG and enhanced it to recognise caregivers' contributions and further reduce caregiving costs. The grant will be increased from $200 per month to up to $400 per month, with more help provided to lower-income families.
Members of the House have expressed their support for this enhancement, and rightly so. The enhanced HCG builds on multiple layers of financial support provided today to defray the costs of care for those living at home. As a start, the Government already provides generous means-tested subsidies of up to 80% for centre- and home-based eldercare services. A care recipient using these community care services may benefit from subsidies of more than $8,000 per year. Other support includes grants and insurance schemes like CareShield Life and ElderShield.
Together, these go a long way in helping to lighten the financial load on caregivers.
Some Members have made suggestions calling for even more financial support. These are not new propositions requiring paradigm shifts. We have and will continue to study these carefully. However, we must recognise that any additional support comes at a cost and will raise our long-term healthcare expenditure and impose pressure on our fiscal resources.
Beyond helping caregivers afford the help they need today in their caregiving journey, we also need to ensure they are cared for, especially in their old age. Those who have cared for their loved ones for most of their life may have lower savings for their own retirement. The Government has put in place various initiatives to help build up the retirement adequacy of Singaporeans, including older caregivers. The Silver Support Scheme provides quarterly payouts to seniors who had low incomes during their working years and now have less in retirement. Families can also play a part by topping up the CPF accounts of their loved ones. We will support you with tax incentives and matching grants for eligible seniors.
I would like to assure Mr Sharael Taha that we will also continue our efforts to make it easier for caregivers to access the support they need throughout their caregiving journey, including preparing for the end-of-life. Caregivers of seniors and those with mental health conditions can look to the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) as a one-stop resource, be it for referrals to care services, applying to financial schemes, or tapping on respite care options. MOH and AIC will also build on existing caregiver support networks and outreach teams to provide more sustained support. To improve visibility of these efforts, AIC and MOH will launch a publicity campaign starting this year, to raise awareness of available resources and where to seek help.
This is a journey we need to embark on together to support our caregivers. Family members can share caregiving responsibilities. Employers can be more understanding towards caregivers who need flexible work arrangements (FWA) because of their caregiving commitments. Peers can also make a difference. When like-minded caregivers are brought together, they can provide a listening ear, share experiences and even lend a helping hand. Minister of State Low Yen Ling will share more about the Government's plans to form community-based peer support networks for caregivers.
Together, as a community, we can lighten the load for all caregivers. Mr Speaker, allow me to say a few words in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I thank my colleagues for sharing their views on the need to support Malay/Muslim women. We have, indeed, sought perspectives from all levels of society in Singapore and across various groups, including the Malay/Muslim community. Hence, we had also involved groups, such as PPIS and the Muslim Youth Forum, in the discussion.
Besides Government initiatives to support the development of Singapore women, community efforts through our M3 agencies and Malay/Muslim organisations have further strengthened support for women in the areas of marriage and parenthood, employment and others. For example, in employment, we have strengthened support for women to return to work through the Back-To-Work Women programme by MENDAKI, which provides opportunities for women to gain new skills and suitable jobs.
Many women are strong and resilient and can uplift themselves if given the opportunity. Therefore, we see more women being appointed as leaders, including in religious institutions and Malay/Muslim community organisations.
To answer Dr Wan Rizal's question, there are, currently, 122 women who have become members of the various Mosque Management Boards. The Syariah Court is led by the first woman Senior President, and she is supported by other women legal professionals, such as the President, Registrar as well as Assistant Registrar, with women making up 66% of the Syariah Court leadership. In 2019, for the first time, a woman, Ustazah Dr Rohana Ithnin, was appointed as one of the four full members in the Fatwa Committee of the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore.
The achievement of women is something that we can be proud of. We will continue to enhance and build on efforts to empower Malay/Muslim women to achieve their aspirations.
(In English): Mr Speaker, I would now like to address the issue of enabling all women to navigate the digital world confidently and safely. Singapore's digitalisation journey has benefited many women by unlocking new employment opportunities, such as in the cybersecurity and technology sectors. Digitalisation has also enabled many women to better manage their responsibilities at home and work.
However, as more of us go "digital", some have, unfortunately, fallen victim to online harms. Senior Minister of State Sim Ann explained how women have been particularly impacted by this phenomenon.
The Government seeks to build a digital society where everyone can have a positive digital experience. However, we cannot do this alone. Whole-of-society efforts like the Digital for Life movement, which brings together partners from the people, private and public sectors, are needed to nurture a safe digital space for all.
The Sunlight Alliance for Action (AfA), which I co-chair with Senior Minister of State Sim Ann, was launched in support of the Digital for Life movement. To date, AfA’s work covers Public Education, Victim Support, Youth Engagement, Research and Volunteerism. Senior Minister of State Sim Ann has elaborated earlier on the importance of creating a supportive environment for all women online, as we do in the real world, and how the community has worked together through AfA to ensure women and girls benefit from our increasingly digitalised society. Apart from Sunlight AfA, we have also seen various community partners contribute to the ecosystem to tackle online harms. These include the Defence Guild SG, which was launched in June 2021 by a group of lawyers following an offensive online poll sexualising women asatizah. Member of Parliament Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim is part of this effort.
In addition to initiatives by the community, legislation is also needed to enhance online safety. Many countries, such as Germany, Australia and the UK, have introduced or are looking into new regulations to tackle harmful online content. Closer to home, the desire for enhanced measures to protect users from online harms is strong. A baseline study commissioned by Sunlight AfA in January 2022 found that 43% of respondents considered stricter enforcement of relevant laws to be the most effective solution to reduce gender-based online harms. In addition, respondents felt that companies and platforms have the most room for improvement in tackling the issue.
In line with global trends and citizens' desire for stronger safeguards in the digital space, MCI recently announced the introduction of Codes of Practice to raise the baseline standard for online safety so as to minimise exposure to harmful content; empower users to report and prevent the further spread of harmful content; and ensure online platforms remain accountable on their measures and processes to keep users safe.
Moving forward, Sunlight AfA will also be developing a research roadmap to inform future research priorities and measures to address online harms. Given the fast-evolving digital landscape, continued research will be critical in generating insights to help us protect our people in online spaces. As MCI develops these Codes of Practice, we will consult community stakeholders, including AfA members, to ensure efforts to nurture a safe online environment are tailored to meet the needs of Singaporeans.
Mr Speaker, Singapore has made significant progress over the years in shifting societal norms between men and women, from one based on patriarchal values to one based on respect and partnership. However, some stereotypes and challenges remain that impede our progress in creating a fairer and more equal society.
As we mature as a society, our mindsets need to change collectively. Everyone has a part to play, be it in caregiving or in ensuring a safe digital space for all. Let us walk together on this journey and empower all Singaporeans – men and women alike – to pursue their aspirations freely and to the fullest. [Applause.]
Minister Ong Ye Kung.
Mr Speaker, Sir, today, we debate an issue close to my heart. I will not just speak as a Member of the House or a Member of the front bench, but also as a son, a father and a husband.
At the core of this debate are the relationships that all of us have with women in our lives, at our workplaces, in our country. And our duty to women should be equal to our duties to all fellow citizens and the choices open to women must be equal to those open to men.
First, let me ask, what is the place of women in our lives? I will share a bit of my own circumstances. My grandfather and grandmother, they had nine sons, I have no aunties. Of whom, my father was the second eldest. They lived in a kampung in Lorong Chuan, now part of Aljunied GRC. I grew up watching the men in my family breed fishes, plant vegetables, rear livestock, repair cars, there was a workshop in our kampung. And the women cook, clean, look after the children. There was "men's work" and there was "women's work".
Then, when my grandfather fell gravely ill, I saw it was my aunties, that means my uncles' wives, particularly my 阿姆, in Teochew, who took care of him. Then, when he died and during the last rites, I could see the men and the women had distinct roles and there were protocols during the last rites observed at the funeral.
So, from young, I felt some dissonance because I was in Primary school then and, at that time in class, there was hardly any differentiation between boys and girls. If anything, the girls were often the better students while the boys were more playful and many of us were struggling to keep up. School lessons at that time already included stories like 花木兰, Marie Curie. And so, from a young age, we had both men and women as our role models.
Then, my parents moved into their own flat in Toa Payoh, next to a temple. That was the 1970s. The household composition did not change. I had an elder brother. So, my mother was the outlier, the only woman in the family. But what changed was her role in the family. She was a teacher, which meant she had to go to school very early in the morning, came home, marked the examination papers, marked the homework and then cooked, cleaned, looked after my brother and me; and also coached us in our homework. So, in her, I saw a very strong woman who, in her world, carved out a role for herself that was equal but different from my father. To me and my brother, she was our disciplinarian and also our anchor. Growing up, therefore, my family was mainly men, and women were the outliers.
Then, I got married. My wife and I had our own children and the situation changed completely. Both our children are girls. I became the outlier. So, today, after my parents' passing, the people I love most in this world are all women. The dissonance I felt as a kid, slowly developed into a deeper understanding of the struggles and aspirations of women. I am not sure I totally get it, but I am trying to get it.
You see, as a young father, I had thought that whatever discrimination and biases there were against women, it will be alright, my children will be alright, our daughters will be alright because these would, eventually, be scrubbed out by the norms of a modern society.
After all, in Singapore, our daughters have a good education. They are growing up in a world where women can be CEOs, professionals, leaders of nations. And as parents, we will support them to fulfil their ambitions and their aspirations.
But soon, I realised it was not so simple. And I saw it through the eyes of our daughters. One example was when our daughters were just toddlers. During Chinese New Year visits, relatives would glance at them and then turn to my wife and ask, "When are you having sons?" My wife will always reply, "I am happy with two daughters!" And I know our daughters heard those conversations. I wonder how they felt.
Then, as a young girl, my elder one, when she first learnt of the concept of dowries, she had a shock. That was over dinner table. I do not know how it came up. And she started asking, "Why must the groom's family give the dowry?" We are talking in terms of Chinese tradition, "Why the four pieces of gold for the Teochews, why the roast pig for the Cantonese and Hakkas?" She had all these burning questions. My wife calmly answered, "Because in Chinese tradition, the girl marries out." That got her even more upset. She said, "So, this is like a transaction? I will be sold?"
I tried to make things better by explaining, "The money can flow both ways. And in some cultures, it is the bride's side that provides the dowry in recognition that the husband will incur costs in taking care of the bride." [Laughter.] It was not a helpful intervention. I would say, if this was a supplementary question, it was a very badly answered supplementary question. We left it like that.
All children, sons and daughters, are born into this world with no bias against men or women, like my own daughters. But through my daughters' eyes, during their formative years, I better understood the lived experience of social expectations and prejudices. And these are beyond Government policies and legislation.
In fact, policies and legislation, especially those in Singapore, are meant to remove discrimination and promote equality. Instead, we have biases deeply embedded in our social practices and our constructs.
I think they probably had their roots in nomadic bands, where the men mainly hunted; the women mainly gathered. And then, these roots probably grew deeper in agrarian tribes, where the men mainly ploughed the fields and the women took care of domestic matters. The tribes decided to come together to form complex societies. And then, the key problem statement was: how do we, as different tribes, live peacefully together and not kill one another? The answer is to make everyone stakeholders of a stable and peaceful society. And that stake is the betterment of the family, of whom members are bonded by blood and DNA. It follows, therefore, that blood lines must be drawn to define the family.
The basis to do so in most societies was the patriarchal structure. The expectations of sons carrying the family line, daughters marrying out, dowries flowing whichever way, sons having the greater share of inheritance – often, protected and reinforced the system.
We cannot undo all these longstanding anthropological practices and history in one generation. But no matter how entrenched, that past is challenged by the present. I think there are at least three driving forces: one, education; and two, technology. And they combine in a powerful way to force a rethink of the status quo.
Take education, for example. Young girls in Singapore grow up in an environment that their grandmothers would not have imagined when they were children. Education has become the great equaliser of most societies.
With equal opportunities for education and development, women are now able to enter vocations and professions that were, historically, male-dominated. And education, as a driving force, is now turbo-charged by the advancement of technology. What used to require physical strength can now be automated or done by machines. So, neither men nor women are better at numerical calculation, more empathetic or more meticulous. It is individuals that have varied strengths and weaknesses.
I was Transport Minister before. During that time, I met many women engineers working in LTA, SMRT and SBST. When I was Education Minister, I met many male students training to be nurses. And, now, as Health Minister, I see many of them serving in hospitals.
In my GRC, we have two successful women: one, Mariam Jaafar, who was trained as an engineer; two, Poh Li San, she was a Super Puma helicopter pilot. The lines that were once perceived between male and female-dominated occupations are blurring and, the overlap, I believe, will enlarge over time.
Let me talk about the third driving force that is challenging the past and, that is, our own effort to change the status quo. The patriarchal structure will evolve faster if people now conclude that, as a society, if we treat men and women more equally, it is better for the welfare of our families and our loved ones.
This will take time. The Government will have a key role. By enacting policies, such as universal access to education, the Women’s Charter and all the various recommendations in the White Paper before the House today, we can catalyse and help accelerate into that new future.
Society must also play a part, that means, you and I – everybody, every family. I look after a constituency. There are many BTO units and many young couples have moved into them. And I can see many husbands are now significantly involved in household and child-minding responsibilities. Some families even have a breadwinner mother and a stay-at-home father because this is the best play of the family's strength – unheard of in my growing up years.
Employers can decide, without the compulsion of law, that it makes better business sense to get rid of gender bias in hiring, promotion, appointment to boards and succession planning.
Having said that, the push for greater equality between men and women is a nuanced and long-term exercise.
I have highlighted the existence of societal biasness that we need to correct. But at the other end of the spectrum, there are inherent differences between women and men that cannot be ignored and should, in fact, continue to exist. That is what I believe.
Let me quote Mother Teresa in a message for the World Conference on Women in 1995: "I do not understand why some people are saying that women and men are exactly the same and are denying the beautiful differences between men and women... As I often say to people who tell me that they would like to serve the poor as I do," and Mother Teresa would tell them: "What I can do, you cannot. What you can do, I cannot. But together we can do something beautiful for God. And it is just the way the differences between women and men."
Many women I know, including my wife, are against gender biasness in society, but they will also fiercely guard the difference between women and men. Because they know daughters have a special bond with their parents that is different from the relationship that sons have. A woman, in a room full of men, is often able to articulate a different perspective.
And for mothers, maternal instincts are non-substitutable. It comes from carrying the child for nine months, manifested in a mother wanting to nurse the child after birth.
Let me offer another quote. This is by a Hollywood star, Denzel Washington. He was paying a tribute to his late mother in one of the talk shows, I think. And he said this, I quote, "A mother is a son's first true love" when he is born; "a son is a mother's last true love" when she dies. The last three words I added.
Single or married, mothers or women without children – women have special roles to play in their families and society because of these differences between women and men. However, where does recognising inherent differences stop, and biasness and stereotypes begin? It is a very difficult and sensitive question, which I have no answer to.
During this debate, we hear many examples, many suggestions: how about enhancing this scheme, that scheme? But let us have that broader philosophical question in mind. We want to get rid of biasness but there are also inherent differences between women and men, beautiful differences.
Look at leave. We only catered for maternity leave in our Employment Act decades ago. And that was a world where women needed to recuperate after childbirth, and where child-minding and taking care of the infant were mostly performed by women. So, maternity leave went to the women. In 2004, we introduced childcare leave, and then, infant care leave in 2008 as we saw men performing more of such roles. Then, in 2013, I believe, we introduced one week of paternity leave. And as we saw more men participating, we introduced a second week in 2017.
In 2022, should we, therefore, declare all these as family leave, to be equally shared between men and women? Is it equality or are we no longer recognising that there is still a difference between men and women? So, let us be wise when we make such suggestions and choices.
The recommendations in the White Paper are careful in recognising and striking this balance – championing equality, especially of opportunities and progression, but yet recognising the beautiful differences between women and men. It is a wiser approach.
There are many practical initiatives – anti-discriminatory measures in the workplace, FWAs, stronger support for caregivers, allowing elective egg freezing, and upholding stiffer penalties for sexual offences.
Of particular importance are the moves to strengthen the family support infrastructure, which are empowering for women at various stages of their lives.
On this, let us also have some perspective. It is not difficult to ask for more subsidy. Taking the Home Care Grant (HCG), for example, $400 is not enough, increasing from $200 to $400 is not enough, so, let us increase some more, give to more people. From a technical perspective, the HCG is not universal but broad-based. No doubt, if you transfer someone from a nursing home to a homecare environment, the Government saves on subsidies and we can think about how to help such individuals and such families more. But when you implement HCG, it does not cater to just this group. It is, actually, quite broad-based – whoever meets the means-tested criteria is eligible. So, it is not cheap. It is quite a big scheme.
And if you want to expand it, double it, expand the number of recipients, you are looking at more budget. So, where does the budget come from? It has to come from some taxes and if you cannot raise taxes, if you object to raising taxes, then where will the money come from? So, we will continue to find ways to support families: from housing to education to, generally, having a safe, peaceful environment to bring up children as well as for homecare.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I have been speaking as a son, father and husband. Now, let me speak as a man, to fellow men. I say let us all be stakeholders in a fair and equal society. At the most basic level, let us respect women through our words and actions. Offences against women are clearly wrong and the vast majority of us agree with that. Perhaps what is less obvious is the occasional insensitive remark that reflects an unconscious bias or stereotype.
Understand and see things from a woman’s point of view. Stop mansplaining, using diminutives, or doing things in the presence of women that they feel embarrassed by.
Let us be more proactive in supporting the women in our lives, just as they support us. This could mean undertaking the roles that society often expects women to do, like household chores, parenting, arranging for food during a gathering or conference or Parliament Sitting. Many men already do these things and we can, certainly, do more as equal partners in society, and in solidarity with women.
Finally, while we accord women respect, let us take a step further to be chivalrous. I may be old-fashioned, but I personally think there is much virtue in men extending a special courtesy to women.
To be honest, I often feel uneasy, just because I am a Minister, that people, including my female staff, will attempt to carry my bag or open the door for me. And I will always try to stop them and offer to open the door for them instead, often reminding them etiquette comes before protocol.
Such courtesy is timeless. It does not lessen the person at the receiving end or imply that they cannot do it themselves! They are perfectly capable of doing it themselves. Instead, it adds a certain appreciation and complementarity to the relationship between women and men.
I want to make a special shout-out to our youths, having met many of them during my time as Minister for Education. I say to them: be kind to all your friends, accord respect and courtesy to one another, listen to the views of everyone, girls and boys, keep the games and the jokes appropriate and tasteful – not from your point of view, but from theirs.
Sexual offences are a rising problem amongst your generation. The boys might be uncomfortable with hearing this, but I think it is important you hear this. Never be part of the problem, but be part of the solution. When in doubt, always do the right thing. Watch out for the girls and, if it is late at night, offer to walk them to the bus stop, to the MRT station or to their destinations.
Most of you take wefies now. But on those rare occasions where you take a photo with your class, your CCA group or with the Minister, do not let the girls kneel in front and you stand at the back comfortably. So, boys, volunteer to squat in front. Or at least position yourselves freely as equals. Safe management measures (SMM) restrictions are now lifted, you can now take group photos again without one-metre spacing. So, make this the new post-COVID-19 norm!
Mr Speaker, Sir, to end the speech, let me talk about a familiar character in Chinese history – which is 花木兰 (Hua Mulan). Members are familiar with the story. A poem was written about her called "The Ballad of Mulan" or 木兰辞.
I thought the last few lines are particularly meaningful. In Chinese, it goes like this:
雄兔脚扑朔, 雌兔眼迷离；
双兔傍地走，安能辨我是雄雌!
Roughly translated, it says: when you catch hold of a rabbit, the male will kick its legs; if you catch hold of a female rabbit, it will close its eyes. But when they run side by side, you cannot tell which is male and which is female.
This was written in 400 AD, during the era of Northern Wei (北魏). Even in highly patriarchal ancient China, there was recognition that there are inherent differences between men and women. But there are many roles that can be equally performed by both women and men.
As our daughters grow up and start their own families, they will likely face the same dilemma as many women today, juggling multiple responsibilities and feeling guilty if they fall short of being the "superwoman" who can handle it all.
But if my daughters decide as a life priority to start a family and spend more time as mothers to bring up their children, even at the expense of their career progression, I will be immensely proud of them. And if they decide they prefer to be single and use their talents to contribute to community and society, I will also be immensely proud of them.
But whichever priority they put greater weight on, whatever life course they choose, they should not be pressured to do so. This shall be their choice.
As a son, father and husband, and a Member of this House, I see our collective duty to support women in whatever they set out to do and accelerate away from our antiquated past of women and men stereotypes, at home, at work, in society.
The future that we envision must be a society that dispels unconscious bias, promotes the right value of mutual respect between all individuals, upholds meritocracy and provides as much support as we can to enable caregivers to find better balance in their roles.
In my mind, this equality to freedom of choice is the heart of this White Paper and the reason why I strongly support it. [Applause.]
Mr Darryl David.
Mr Speaker, Sir, in 2017, I spoke about a greater need to support women, especially mid-career women, at work. In that speech, I touched on how women tend to "leak out" of the promotion pipeline at the mid-career stage because the mid-career period tends to coincide with the stage of their lives where women experience heavy maternity and family commitments.
Due to these commitments, many of them either exit the workforce, take on an involuntary career slow-down or are assigned to what some may call the "mommy track" by their companies. Because of these reactions, the career gaps between women and men widen as the organisational hierarchy progresses.
Mr Speaker, there is one thing that COVID-19 has taught us about work and working from home. It would be that FWAs in the form of working from home and such hybrid work arrangements where time is spent between working from home are working out just as well as being physically present in the office, which is the more traditional working arrangement.
Many Members of this Chamber have already talked about FWAs and, indeed, FWAs are covered and highlighted in the White Paper. FWAs might just be the right solution that enables women in their mid-career to have the best of both worlds. However, as we are also lauding the merits of FWAs because they enable women to manage both their work and their family commitments, we need to be mindful also that there could be potential downsides for women when FWAs are applied in too broad strokes.
A 2017 article written by Singaporean researchers from the Human Capital Leader Institute (HCLI) published in the Global Talent Competitiveness Index by INSEAD, highlighted the need to have a more nuanced approach when implementing pro-family policies to support women. Among the issues highlighted in the article, it was identified that a prolonged period of working from home may, in fact, have a dampening effect on the career development of women.
One of the effects was the result in female executives being cut off from informal channels within the company and then, subsequently, encountering difficulties in obtaining resources necessary for work through informal company and industry networks.
So, for women in their mid-career to truly benefit from FWAs, companies need to be cognisant of the potential impingement of the formation of informal professional networks that may result from the prolonged reliance on such arrangements. Companies, therefore, need to proactively assist women to manage the risk of such professional isolation.
One of the ways that companies can mitigate this is to implement a system of corporate mentorship and sponsorship for female executives. As mentors and sponsors, senior executives are responsible for providing career guidance to female executives, helping them open doors to high-visibility projects, connecting them with professional networks within the company and across the industry, and also ensuring that they receive the resources they need for project implementation.
Through this process, female executives can continue to have a channel into the senior corporate network, thereby ensuring that they continue to have the corporate visibility and exposure they need to advance their career even though they choose to opt for a more FWA.
The second area I would like to speak on is specialised support for mothers who are returning to work. Even though both men and women are equally susceptible to experiencing work-family conflicts, women are more likely to experience these conflicts more frequently and at greater intensity than men do. This is largely due to societal expectations that place a greater degree of family responsibilities on women even when they are full-time professionals and a greater degree of social sanctions that women will experience than men when they fail to juggle between work and family responsibilities.
As a result, many working women have chosen to take a break from work to concentrate on meeting their family responsibilities before returning to work when their children are old enough to be independent.
Juggling between work and family can be daunting, especially so for women who are returning to work after prolonged periods of non-work arising from the need to meet family responsibilities. Many of these return-to-work moms will, inevitably, experience a skills-gap issue where their knowledge about their trade could have become obsolete over time, they could have also lost business networks that they used to have, and they might not be fully up-to-date on the type of professional openings that are available on the market.
To better assist return-to-work moms, it would be good if NTUC’s e2i division or their Women and Family initiative can conduct unique career coaching sessions to ensure that women returning to work are fully aware of the type of opportunities available in the market and they also have access to skills upgrading courses that enable these return-to-work moms to pick up new and relevant skills that will make them a better fit for the market.
An idea that is also worth exploring is to create more networks of entrepreneurs or business professionals to guide, mentor and advise mothers who are perhaps thinking of starting their own business.
The COVID-19 pandemic has, definitely, resulted in the rise of more home businesses and, rather than return to conventional employment, perhaps some of these "mumpreneurs" might want to scale up their businesses, so as to allow themselves the opportunity to generate an income while also having the flexibility to attend to their other personal and familial duties.
Indeed, having more of these networks, like "Mumpreneurs-Go-Places", for example, could help to coalesce and bond this group of mumpreneurs, who would then be able to provide mutual advice, help, support and guidance for one another. It would be good if the Government could also perhaps consider providing some start-up grants and support for such mumpreneurs or perhaps explore avenues of micro-financing that would be useful to them.
Mr Speaker, Sir, a wicked problem is defined as a social or cultural problem that is difficult or impossible to solve – normally, because of its complex and interconnected nature. Indeed, as we work towards parity, equality for women in Singapore, we are taking on what perhaps is becoming less and less of a "wicked problem", but still one that has no simple and easy solution. Because, while the Government can take the lead in outlining concrete steps to support women, it takes a whole-of-society effort to actually move this needle significantly.
Solving issues, such as unconscious biases and glass ceilings at work, require companies to take proactive steps, such as sponsoring the careers of high potential female executives. Resolving the challenges faced by working moms and return-to-work moms requires not only strong support from their family members, but also a system to integrate and reintegrate these women into the professional working network. My comments notwithstanding, I am supportive of the White Paper and hope that this will provide the foundations for Singapore women to grow, develop and thrive in our community and society.
Ms Tin Pei Ling.
Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak in this meaningful debate on the White Paper on Singapore Women's Development. This marks yet another key milestone in Singapore's long journey towards removing barriers and empowering Singapore women.
This House has seen many exchanges and recommendations on how we can empower and advance Singapore women over the past six to seven decades. Personally, since entering this House in 2011, I have also heard many suggestions made by fellow Members of Parliament (MPs) and seen real policy changes implemented to resolve pain points and provide stronger support to Singapore women.
Humbly, I, together with fellow PAP women MPs, have contributed modestly to the cause by moving a private Members' Motion titled "Aspirations of Women" in 2017. Therefore, now that a White Paper is completed and introduced, this is certainly a significant leap forward as tangible actions will be taken to further Singapore Women's Development.
And, of course, in this House, I have also covered a range of topics talking about women and place of women in tech, as well as digital competency. But in this speech today, I would like to just share and address two pieces of feedback I have heard so far and some suggestions in the area of empowering women in their careers and protecting girls from harm.
One category of comments I have heard is whether we are overly promoting women's rights. Comments include, some jokingly and some not so jokingly, whether we should also have a Men's Charter or White Paper on Singapore Men's Development and whether we should promote women to higher positions for the sake of it, thereby compromising meritocracy potentially.
Clearly, efforts to champion Singapore Women's Development cannot be to demand women's rights just because it sounds politically appealing. Rather, it is about ensuring fair play and choice. It is to ensure that, for instance, between a male and female candidate of comparable competency or potential, the female one does not get filtered out or be considered as a lesser candidate because of biases, such as "Oh, she is of childbearing age and may have to take time off to give birth" or "Oh, she has young kids and will have to take childcare leave or be distracted now and then". This was something that I experienced in 2015, when I first gave birth. I remember this as a comment during the General Election; this was levelled against me. Or that "women are more emotional, less decisive and harder to follow."
Well, we need to address such attitudes and comments. First, there is a need to make the entire environment – employers and society – to be more empathetic and supportive towards women. Second, just as women in Singapore today have control over our own bodies as law enforcement authorities do not turn a blind eye to crimes against women, there is also a need to punish and deter the worst abuses against women at the workplace as well. This is to ensure that women are not disadvantaged for recruitment and promotion. Third, beyond breaking the biases, it is also putting in place support to free up women's capacity, so that they can pursue other worthy aspirations to be an equal partner.
We have seen women going places, we have seen how women are able to hold our own and make it out fair, and yet, we have to ask ourselves: is it enough? Is it already levelled? Are there other barriers that are in place, that are prohibiting women from going out there to fulfil their fullest potential? Therefore, with this Paper, and by supporting Singapore Women's Development, I believe it is also about fulfilling the potential that has been untapped.
So, this leads to the topic of caregiving. Another feedback that I have heard is whether having a whole segment on caregiving in a paper titled "Singapore Women’s Development" will reinforce the gender stereotype that caregiving is exclusive to women. I fully understand the concern towards this. Anyone can be a caregiver and it is a noble responsibility to care for another life, especially if the care recipient is a loved one.
Caregiving should ideally be a shared responsibility, regardless of gender. However, the current reality is that women disproportionately form the majority of caregivers. A recent Government survey, for example, found that women in dual income households were five times more likely than men to be managing housework and giving care.
Hence, even as we continue to educate and change mindsets, we must address this caregiving issue now, so that women weighed down by caregiving duties can have the capacity to also pursue their other life aspirations.
I am glad that the White Paper recognises this current reality. Furthermore, caregiver support policies are not exclusive to women but benefit male caregivers as well. Notably, the increase in Home Caregiving Grant (HCG) is welcomed. It is a significant increase in support for low-income households. The grant will not fully compensate for caregiving and it is not meant to do so, but it recognises the sacrifices that caregivers make and reduces the trade-offs that caregivers face. The increase in grant may cross the threshold for the household to finally get help, so that the caregiver can take up a part-time job and keep her career on track. It may also mean having funds to get the much-needed respite care, when the stress on the caregiver becomes overpowering and she needs a break.
I wish to highlight the importance of enhancing respite care. Caregiving is a 24/7 responsibility. It is mentally and physically draining. Hence, readily available and accessible respite care, especially for full-time caregivers, are important to reduce burnout. However, full-time caregivers would usually have been out of the workforce for some time and suffer relatively weaker finances.
As MOH reviews the respite care landscape, I hope that MOH will also consider: (a) increasing institutional capacity for respite care across Singapore, even as MOH explores home-based respite care, because not all homes are suitable and caregivers, usually, prefer to keep their loved ones near as they may have separation anxiety; (b) exploring more flexible financing options, including greater use of extended family members' MediSave, to pay for respite care services, beyond enhancing HCG, which works like a subsidy.
On a note related to caregiving, though out of the scope of this White Paper, I wish to again highlight the topic of migrant domestic workers (MDWs). The role of MDWs remains integral to how Singaporean families choose to provide care or supplement caregiving for their loved ones. Firstly, an MDW can offer care one-to-one and, hence, more human touch, more personalised and personable. Secondly, this offers greater flexibility to families with members having to work.
MDWs, therefore, help to free women to focus on work and other pursuits. However, in many instances, the MDWs may have caused more grief than relief to their employers. I had shared the challenges faced by Singaporean families and, indeed, Singapore women, in my Adjournment Motion last November. So, I shall not repeat them here.
I should also note that the dire situation has improved as the supply of MDWs have eased.
Nonetheless, there are still instances where employers feel that the system is tilted in favour of MDWs when disputes arise and employers are left to prove their own innocence to the authorities while scrambling to pick up the pieces at home.
While I understand that MDWs, by virtue of them being in a foreign country, are assumed to be of lesser resource and that over-reliance on MDWs is more a bane than a boon, the reality is that families and, therefore, women of such households need MDWs to support caregiving at home. Hence, I urge the Government to pay greater attention to this matter and be more sensitive to the circumstances and needs of such households, especially those of middle- and lower-income, because time taken to settle these disputes means time away from productive and fulfilling work.
Another point I wish to highlight is better protection of young girls from harm. Several of my youth volunteers at MacPherson are passionate about this and recently organised a few webinars under the "Action for Her" movement centred on protection of girls against online harms. Issues explored ranged from body shaming to cyberbullying to sexual harassments. Hence, I believe the actions set out in Area 3 of the White Paper are pertinent and I support them.
But I also wish to highlight the importance of protecting girls from violent or sexual misdemeanours at home. This can be especially salient in complex family settings that are dysfunctional or where the parents are undergoing acrimonious divorce. Children look up to their parents as role models and they pick up ideas from their surroundings. They must not be led to think that the misdemeanours they are exposed to at home are normal. And more importantly, to ensure that girls in such households and settings are not led to grow up thinking that they are weak and do not deserve happiness like any other. Hence, we must better protect our girls, intervene sooner when necessary, bring them into safer environments sooner, so that they can grow up with the right values and in an environment that brings out the best in them.
Notwithstanding my questions raised, Sir, I believe the White Paper holds great significance in our continued journey to support Singapore women to fulfil their fullest potential and aspirations. So much has been said in this House, the White Paper's greatest value is that it sets out specific actions to be taken. Hence, I support the Motion.
Leader, would you like to proceed with the Exempted Business Motion?
PAPERCUTS