Support Measures for Phase Two (Heightened Alert) and Phase Three (Heightened Alert), and Support Measures for Phase Two (Heightened Alert)

Mr Deputy Speaker, on 24 June, the Co-Chairs of the COVID-19 Multi-Ministry Task Force (MTF) wrote an op-ed in The Straits Times to explain how the Government was drawing up a roadmap to transit to a new normal. The Minister said that, in the near future, COVID-19 cases could be dealt with very differently from now. For example, an infected person who is vaccinated could be allowed to recover from home.

Subsequently, on 7 July, Minister Lawrence Wong revealed that gatherings in groups of eight might be allowed by the end of July when at least half the population would be fully vaccinated. Unfortunately, less than a week later, the KTV cluster emerged with eight locally transmitted cases, which swelled rapidly to 248 cases just five days later.

The KTV cluster and the Jurong Fishery Port (JFP) outbreaks were the first major setback in our roadmap for reopening since its announcement. When the KTV cluster first swelled to 120 cases on 16 July, Minister Gan Kim Yong said that instead of rolling back COVID-19 measures like before, MOH will continue to take a targeted approach to protect the unvaccinated. The vaccinated will be allowed to continue gathering in groups of five in mask-off settings while the unvaccinated could only gather in groups of two.

Yet, just a few days later, the MTF decided to step back into Phase Two (Heightened Alert) from 22 July to 18 August following spikes in locally transmitted cases, including among the elderly. The targeted approach was abandoned, and F&B and gym operators had to face the same restrictions they had just only exited.

Essentially, just a year after we completed our circuit breaker in 2020, Singapore has snapped back twice into states of quasi-lockdown on almost all social and non-essential activities.

Minister Ong explained in yesterday's Ministerial Statement that the KTV cluster alone would not have necessitated the roll-back to Phase Two (Heightened Alert). But when the JFP cluster started to grow, the MTF felt that it was necessary to take firmer measures to protect the elderly and the unvaccinated.

I understand the MTF's desire to err on the side of caution in this case. However, beyond this round of Phase Two (Heightened Alert), Singaporeans and businesses need more clarity on how the roadmap for reopening is going to be implemented. After 18 August, if more large clusters break out, will we need to brace ourselves for more rolling lockdowns?

Many businesses, especially in the F&B, arts and sports sectors, are suffering not only because of the safe management measures (SMMs) but also because of the frequent changes in policies, which can actually hurt them even more. The lack of certainty makes it difficult for business owners to decide if they should stay the course or pivot to a more pandemic-resilient line of business.

Individual workers, too, need to decide whether or not to continue hoping for more COVID-19 support grants or pivot their careers to a more stable line of work, if such options are available.

Not only are the policies sometimes changing overnight, but some of them are painfully complicated.

When the restrictions on the now-defunct Phase Three (Heightened Alert) from 19 July to 8 August were announced, some remarked that one needed a PhD to understand the dining-in rules. Not only was there differentiation between the vaccinated and unvaccinated, children and adults, same family or different household, but there was also differentiation between the types of vaccines received, whether Sinovac or mRNA, and the number of doses that counts as fully vaccinated.

Restaurant staff would find it challenging to enforce these rules with their patrons, some of whom may not have the TraceTogether app installed. Some fast food outlets initially decided to simply adopt the strictest interpretation of all the rules for all patrons. This benefits neither the industry nor its customers.

No one would disagree with a calibrated approach to SMMs. However, the practicality of such measures was not evident in the recent attempt. I hope the MTF will take on board lessons learned from the experience when formulating the rules as we look forward to some re-opening on 19 August and beyond.

Next, I would like to speak on how information on our battle with COVID-19 is presented.

The daily infection numbers have become a key focus for many people. MOH highlights these numbers in their daily updates and the media splashes it on the headlines. Singaporeans too mention these numbers in our conversations with one another.

Because of this, many wondered why our new infection count of 56 locally transmitted cases on 14 July did not require a lockdown when previously a much lower count of 24 infections on 14 May triggered a state of heightened alert for one month.

Experts will tell us that new case counts alone are not an accurate gauge of whether things are going well in our fight against COVID-19. There are many other factors that need to be taken into account when deciding the level of risk we are facing. Yet, most laymen are not capable of synthesising so much information at one go.

Earlier this month, I asked if MOH could publish a risk index in its daily virus update that can give the public a more holistic view of the risk we face. This index could weigh various factors including the vaccination rate, hospitalisation rate, positivity rate of testing, contact tracing efficiency, new infections per 100,000 people and the infection risk of other countries, among others. This will require some calculations and intelligent assumptions by experts to produce a single daily number that the public can more easily digest. It should be a leading indicator, not a lagging one.

I am not suggesting that the MTF should be bound by this risk index when deciding on policies. However, the index can serve as a guide to both policymakers and the public to understand the current risk levels and adapt accordingly. An objective, science-based COVID-19 Risk Index will help assure the public that SMMs imposed by the Government are appropriate for the given risk levels. This would secure more buy-in from the public and result in greater voluntary compliance with SMMs. Voluntary compliance is key in our battle against the virus, as demonstrated by the KTV cluster outbreak, which was most likely caused by a wilful disregard for social distancing regulations. No amount of rules and fines will stop people from engaging in risky activities behind closed doors if they are not convinced of the risks.

There are not many countries around the world that have come up with a COVID-19 Risk Index which is both accurate and widely understood by the public. Singapore has an opportunity to lead the way in this respect. I hope the Government can give consideration to this proposal.

I shall now move on to a related factor in our roadmap for reopening, which is vaccinations. During my estate visits and house visits, I make it a point to ask residents, especially the elderly, if they have gotten their vaccinations and encourage those who have not to do so soon for their own protection. Thankfully, most residents assure me that they have gotten their jabs. However, I find vaccine hesitancy among a small minority of the population rather worrying. Based on the reasons they articulate, it appears that a lot of their misunderstanding about vaccinations is fuelled by confusing information they receive from friends through private messaging platforms. I myself receive a daily stream of such messages from friends and residents.

The situation is more complicated than just scientific arguments for or against vaccinations. I have heard accusations of vaccine manufacturers colluding with governments to promote their vaccines; that the vaccines have not been fully approved and, therefore, are merely experimental; or that Singapore is biased against or towards vaccines from some countries. These have been circulating since the end of last year and have steadily increased in virulence and virality in the last few months.

Instead of politicians fronting the public education campaign for vaccinations, more can be done to amplify the voice of independent medical experts to explain the facts and allay the public's fears. Other experts in business, international relations and culture also have a role to play in addressing misinformation about vaccines. This must be done soon, before the window of opportunity to change minds closes. Once news about large COVID-19 clusters fades from the headlines, the impetus to get vaccinated will decrease.

I have some questions about the latest COVID-19 support measures which I hope the Finance Minister can address. First, I am glad the Minister has introduced a new Market and Hawker Centre Relief Fund, which provides a one-off cash assistance of $500 per stallholder. However, I note this is provided only to stallholders in Government hawker centres and markets. Can similar relief be extended to stallholders in neighbourhood food centres which are run by private food service management companies like Koufu and Kopitiam?

Second, I also note that the Minister has extended the COVID-19 Recovery Grant (Temporary) scheme's income-loss coverage period to end-August. However, I would like to point out some implementation anomalies from the previous rounds of the grant. Is the Minister aware of instances where companies place their Singaporean workers on no-pay leave during Heightened Alert periods while continuing to employ foreign workers at full pay?

I have a resident who works as a dishwasher and was asked to go on no-pay leave while his foreign worker colleagues were not. Apparently, his employer assumed that Singaporeans could benefit from the COVID-19 Recovery Grant, while the foreigners could not. Unfortunately, this Singaporean applied for but was denied the COVID-19 Recovery Grant and, so, he ended up worse off than his foreign colleagues. I will be making an appeal on his behalf directly to MSF but I hope MOF can consider ways to prevent companies from employing this form of arbitrage to reap the best of both worlds and, in the process, disadvantage Singaporean workers.

In summary, Mr Deputy Speaker, I hope to see greater detail in the Government's roadmap for reopening. The public needs a more easily understood COVID-19 Risk Index and we should make a strong push to overcome vaccine hesitancy in order to reduce the risks of serious COVID-19 infections.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join the debate. Sir, recovering nations the world over are now beginning to embrace "Living with COVID-19" as a strategic reality. Each nation has formulated its own strategy to lift restrictions and find ways to return to a more normal way of living, with UK leading the charge by declaring "Freedom Day". Developing COVID-19 resilience is crucial to securing and adapting Singapore's economic competitiveness.

Yesterday, in Parliament, the MTF shared Singapore's roadmap towards treating the virus as endemic. However, some quarters remain sceptical how well this will be executed and carried through. Just as we thought we had seen light at the end of the tunnel, the sudden roll-back to Phase Two (Heightened Alert) arising from the Jurong Fishery Port and KTV clusters dealt a fresh blow to businesses and the community at large. Whilst most understand the need to tighten restrictions until we achieve a higher vaccination rate, many Singaporeans wonder if the approach could have been better calibrated, such as allowing two fully-vaccinated diners to a table, instead of banning dining-in outright.

This consideration seems reasonable in light of the Government's earlier signal that Singapore should learn to live with an "endemic" COVID-19 in our midst; so that, with robust public health defences in place, we shift our focus from "Zero COVID-19" to "Living with COVID-19". We have developed enhanced testing and tracing capabilities, good control over infection rates, kept hospitalisation rates low and appeared to be able to ringfence the spread of infection. Compared to mid-May, when only 24% of our population was fully vaccinated and Phase Two (Heightened Alert) had to be first imposed, our vaccination rate has since more than doubled to about half of our population this round.

We should expect "Living with COVID-19" to include intermittent outbreaks and even the emergence of new variants, every now and then. Having worked so hard to build our defences, should we not be adopting a more confident posture?

As part of "Living with COVID-19", we should establish a suite of leading indicators that better predict the imposition of restrictions, so that businesses and the public are not constantly caught by surprise. These indicators could be based on a combination of key health metrics, including infection rates, vaccination rates, hospitalisation rates, ICU admissions and fatalities – a so-called COVID-19 Index which businesses and individuals can monitor, for a shared sense of vigilance and ownership. I guess, something similar to what Member Gerald Giam mentioned earlier. We could guide Singaporeans to read and interpret this COVID-19 Index away from the focus on infection rates alone, which may shape their behaviour.

Affected businesses may also rely on a set of new norms to sustain their operations, from qualification for rental relief and contract variations to wage support and credit support, so that the burden is shared more fairly, every time restrictions are imposed. They should not have to rely on the goodwill of landlords nor individual negotiation with financial institutions to keep the line of credit flowing each time restrictions are enforced. There should also be a basic package of state-sponsored COVID-19 support that individuals and businesses can expect to kick in every time restrictions are announced, rather than uncertain drip-feed of measures that many believe are subject to negotiation and lobbying.

Sir, as vaccination is the key to achieving COVID-19 resilience, I agree our focus should be to achieve an 80% vaccination rate in the near term, especially amongst vulnerable seniors. The Minister for Trade and Industry yesterday urged businesses to get medically eligible staff to get vaccinated and to deploy unvaccinated employees to lower risk settings. I would like to ask if Singapore would consider the French government's approach to impose vaccination as a requirement for certain professions at higher risks.

Sir, as the Finance Minister has pointed out, a critical part of our recovery process is the reopening of our borders. This is not just about GDP growth. It is in fact an existential issue for Singapore as an international business hub. We survive and thrive on our ability to connect our businesses and people to the region and the world.

As other countries move more aggressively to reopen their borders, I am glad to hear that the prospect of travelling with few restrictions is in sight, if it comes through in early September. I have heard senior regional executives beginning to question the value of being based in Singapore, as they are no longer able to travel freely in and out of the country for business. Some are considering leaving for good, as it is no longer tenable for them to be separated from family and loved ones for such extended periods of time. This is bolstered by increasing adoption of "Work Anywhere" policies as well as new growth opportunities in their home countries.

Sir, the Government should be lauded for its well-executed labour policy during the pandemic. Singapore has managed to cushion itself from the unemployment hardship suffered by other countries because of COVID-19. The Government spared no expense in supporting businesses to hire locals, with significant levels of Government funding directed towards the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS) and the Job Growth Incentive (JGI) scheme, including this round.

Under JGI scheme, 270,000 Singaporeans and Permanent Residents were hired by 42,000 businesses as of February 2021 as reported, with generous wage support of up to 50% of the first $6,000 of their gross monthly income for up to 18 months and that is generous. One-third of those hired had been out of work for more than six months and about 60% previously employed in a different sector.

While I applaud the success of the scheme, it is still unclear how businesses can make the transition without continued Government support. As the JGI scheme has primarily supported SMEs in their manpower needs and the scheme has helped previously unemployed as well as mid-career switches with job opportunities, I urge the Government to extend the scheme and to carefully calibrate how it is phased out, so that the benefits remain deeply rooted.

Sir, there is room for the Government to act with equal resolve to uplift the plight of low-wage workers, provide more safety nets for those who have lost their jobs and re-double our efforts to build a strong Singaporean Core along with global talent. The pandemic has evoked heightened awareness of such vulnerabilities and gaps. Rather than keeping status quo, we should seize the moment to build consensus on how we may address these issues collectively.

Mr Deputy Speaker, we have seen COVID-19 unleash a wave of innovation. The speed at which COVID-19 vaccines were developed served to remind us that, with the right conditions, major scientific breakthroughs, such as success of the “messenger RNA” technique behind the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, are possible. We are also reminded that moving fast and removing barriers are the best things the Government can do. Despite the increasingly tight fiscal position, I support the Government’s continued commitment to the Research, Innovation and Enterprise (RIE) 2025 Plan, setting aside $25 billion to support innovation and new discoveries. Good that this was not reprioritised. So, it is good that we kept this.

However, this effort must be accompanied by the Government's intervention to ensure innovations are translated into real world solutions beyond the labs and scientific publications and are diffused through the economy. Businesses must be able to harness such technologies to raise productivity and, ultimately, contribute to higher living standards. Research funding should be prioritised accordingly and be scrutinised to deliver economic value to the wider society.

Nurturing ground-up innovation can be equally important. The number of registered Home Offices saw an increase of 25% in 2020, with the pandemic revealing new entrepreneurial opportunities. These enterprises are the very examples of micro resilience that we need to cultivate as they are the seedlings of future enterprises, if properly nurtured. To understand how we can support the acceleration process, we need to review if existing policies are conducive to current trends and to build support measures that lower barriers to entry, broaden the scope of economic activities and implement oversight frameworks for the industry to flourish.

For instance, in the home-based food business, which runs the gamut of home bakeries to private kitchens, the regulations under HDB, URA and SFA should be reviewed to support artisanal home-based activities and a relevant set of regulations to meet with the appropriate levels of commercial standards for safety and hygiene. But they should not be so onerous as to stifle these budding enterprises.

Sir, Singapore is no stranger to overcoming adversity and building resilience, with and for our people. Let us transform our recovery to build back better, broader and stronger. We did it before and we will do it again. With that, I support the Supplementary Supply Bill.

Mr Deputy Speaker, we now find ourselves back in Phase Two (Heightened Alert) again. Community spread has increased and the large number of unlinked cases is cause for much concern, particularly when we have not yet reached our vaccination target of 70%. While challenging, these restrictions are important to bring down our community infection levels and to ensure that our healthcare system and workers are not overwhelmed.

I also note that we continue to make progress with our vaccination rollout and all the staff and personnel involved in this national effort to safeguard us against the virus have my utmost respect and gratitude.

I would like to focus today on our roadmap for managing COVID-19 and what more can be done to further support our businesses and workers who are already on the ropes as we lurched from phase to phase in this seemingly never-ending battle against the Coronavirus. The last two months, in particular, have been difficult ones for Singapore. Both residents and businesses alike have had to navigate and respond to restrictions that have changed on an almost biweekly basis.

After months of progressively opening up in the original Phase Three, Singapore's recovery received a huge setback when community cases jumped after the virus breached our defences at Changi Airport. This resulted in an announcement on 14 May that a new phase, christened Phase Two (Heightened Alert), would come into effect two days later, meaning that all food and beverage businesses would once more be required to shut down to dine-in customers, along with restrictions being tightened for a host of other industries and that these would take effect for four weeks. Other restrictions were also brought in to restrict social gatherings and, amongst others, the retail and fitness industries took a large hit. Primary and Secondary schools also shifted to home-based learning.

On 10 June, it was decided by the MTF that we would move to Phase Three (Heightened Alert) in two steps from 14 June, with food outlets opening up with two diners allowed to dine in; social gathering and visitor sizes moving to five; and, on 7 July, the number of diners were allowed to increase to five per table, all these to take effect from 12 July.

Even as diners, F&B businesses and other industries were celebrating a cautious return on 12 July, the now infamous KTV cluster was announced on that very day. By the middle of the week, the cluster had grown to 88 infections and, on 16 July, just four days after dining sizes were increased to five, a slew of dining rules and regulations that one would need an advanced degree to navigate were mandated to be implemented by restaurants on 19 July.

And, finally, on 20 July, after barely a day of having to comply with the most complicated dining rules ever to have been devised, restaurants were suddenly told they had to throw all of that and much of their inventory out of the window and that dine-ins would no longer be allowed for the next four weeks. One can only imagine the amount of losses that this has resulted in.

While I appreciate that our responses are, in some ways, shaped by the fast-changing nature of the pandemic, we should pause and reassess whether this approach of drip-feeding restrictions and business support measures is doing more harm than good. Many business owners, in particular SME owners, have written to me to express their anguish over cashflow difficulties. Retail, fitness, F&B and related businesses along the entire supply chain are on their knees from having endured more than 18 months of hardship arising from a reduction in footfall and various permutations of closures or restrictions. Many of them have said that they are clinging on and depend on a timely disbursement of a patchwork of business support schemes to stay afloat, even while they scramble each time to make sense of the ever-changing restrictions. Some SME owners have told us that while they can deal with tight restrictions and difficult regulations, what has been particularly difficult is the ever-changing landscape in which they are constantly spending a lot of time and energy adapting their businesses to comply with.

While we should encourage businesses to be nimble and adapt quickly to a rapidly changing environment, I fear that the last 18 months would be a step too far for all but a lucky few. We cannot take the position that uncompetitive and inflexible businesses that are unable to pivot to deal with such times should be allowed to go under. There is also too much at stake, as many livelihoods depend on the survival of these businesses. I believe the MTF is painfully aware of this.

However, events over the last two weeks, in particular, have proven to be very confusing and disruptive. The sudden changes just days apart have resulted in much stress and confusion and these also do not engender confidence, as many of us often wonder how many days or weeks will pass before a sudden change in position is on the cards again.

And even as we, as individuals, alongside our businesses, struggle to make sense of the shifting landscape, the vast majority of us here in Singapore do want to follow the rules and play our part in the fight against the disease. This is something to be applauded and should not be taken for granted. It is also up to the Government and us, as lawmakers, to ensure that there is a level of assurance, stability and, where possible, certainty in the measures we take and the support we give Singaporeans and our businesses.

While it may appear that calibrating business support schemes in accordance with the situation of the day allows for targeted support to be given, over prescribing or managing the situation may end up being self-defeating. It could result in a situation where our policies become too reactive and the confusion and uncertainty that result may end up in help not reaching those who need it the most. Attention also has to be paid to keep rules simple as much as possible, an approach in policy-making that we used to pride ourselves in.

For example, business owners struggle to make sense of the various schemes available to them. To top it off, they are also facing problems due to the delayed or uncertain nature relating to timing and amount of disbursements that they are eligible for. If the intention is to support these businesses, we must make sure that our support is effective and is as efficient as possible. These schemes must be designed to deal with the immediate threat faced by businesses which are already on the ropes.

COVID-19 will remain with us for a while yet and emerging variants may mean that our drive to handle this as endemic would suffer from setbacks. The question is, therefore, how can we continue to provide our businesses with support in a sustainable manner? We can keep on extending schemes at the very last minute and going through a budgeting process each time new restrictions are announced. But what we need now, more than ever, is a roadmap with support measures pegged to respective restriction levels moving forward.

It would be extremely helpful to individuals and businesses to know what this roadmap is, with stages and criteria that are determined in advance and clearly communicated to all of us to enable us to plan forward as much as possible.

Next, I also note that, apart from businesses, individuals, too, are having to adapt to our changing times. Our economy has been kept afloat by new working arrangements becoming the norm, with working from home now being the default arrangement for many. This has brought some unexpected conveniences for some, like allowing us more family time without the need to commute to the workplace. However, there are also some of us for whom working from home has not yielded good results.

A recent survey by Microsoft found that workers in Singapore were more burnt out and exhausted, compared with their peers globally, with one in two workers saying they felt exhausted and 58% saying that they felt overworked. This has been attributed to digital workloads rising due to the pandemic. We need to bear their welfare in mind when we adjust our workplaces and jobs to reflect the new normal. I also hope that the trends we see, with an increase in those pursuing non-traditional career paths, will continue and receive more attention.

Another group of workers which you must also consider is our essential workers, particularly those involved in the provision of the different types of care responsibilities and who work to keep our care infrastructure and essential infrastructure going. The inability to work from home, shortage of manpower, coupled with the lack of travel opportunities for a break even if it is just a quick day trip across the border, means that our essential workers have been particularly hard hit.

Women, too, across all societies have borne the brunt of the pandemic and we are no exception in Singapore. Attention has to be paid to these groups to ensure that they are not pushed to the point of breaking, driven by the various workloads and household responsibilities with no chance for respite.

The pandemic has also highlighted the unsustainable nature of some of our industries and our economic model, which rely on cheap, abundant foreign labour. In particular, construction firms and the cleaning industry are facing high costs of having to quarantine migrant workers and are also struggling with a shortage of workers. Many construction projects have been delayed as a result. Perhaps, this is the push we need to fully transform this sector and raise productivity levels to solve the labour crunch. As I mentioned here in this House earlier in May, it is timely that our businesses take the first steps in transforming to move away from our addiction to cheap, abundant labour.

Finally, my earlier question about publishing information relating to how the MTF weighs up the various factors for understanding how restrictions and support schemes are determined and to signpost how we will move from tier to tier seems particularly pertinent, given the events of the last months. In his response earlier this month, the Health Minister said that it would not be realistic to provide a definitive roadmap. Yet, I note that the Finance Minister indicated that the Government was, in fact, preparing a roadmap for Singapore's transition to life with COVID-19.

And in a Facebook post on 20 July 2021, the Prime Minister said that Singapore has to "feel our way forward". Yesterday, the Health Minister updated this House that a roadmap was currently being implemented. I would, therefore, like to seek clarification from the MTF about what is the definitive plan for how we move forward. If so, will the Government, in the spirit of accountability and providing much needed stability and confidence, make these metrics and roadmaps public? If there are obstacles to doing so, what are they and what can this House do legislatively to ease the process?

I would like to conclude, too, with a more general observation about the importance of clear, consistent messages to the public in the midst of a public health crisis. This would lead to less confusion and it behoves us to ensure that we have coherent policies that are communicated early and clearly, especially as we are a country that prides itself on doing well in rankings for the ease of doing business due to the clarity and transparency in our processes.

Most of us accept that there are, indeed, times when restrictions need to be tightened at short notice as the situation develops rapidly. However, we need as much warning as possible to allow businesses and households a fighting chance to rework plans and try our best to stave off any impending cashflow crises. It is, therefore, important that we have clarity, such as the risk index proposed by my colleague Mr Gerald Giam, that is announced to the public. Telling our people what the matrices which inform our decision-making are can only add to public confidence that the crisis is in good hands and let us know that our policymakers are dealing with it in a competent and coherent manner.

This approach is also important in addressing ground feedback relating to matters as wide-ranging as vaccine hesitancy to understanding the different restrictions.

We owe much to our civil servants and various agencies who have been hard at work coming up with and implementing the various policies and schemes, but I also note that the details about communication matter, too, and they can make or break an individual’s reaction to our containment measures and fight against COVID-19.

For example, the changes and updates in vaccine safety and advice stemmed from an approach with an abundance of caution. This is not a bad thing. Yet, I have heard many accounts of individuals being told that they were ineligible for the vaccine due to medical reasons, such as drug allergies, in one week, only to be encouraged to sign up to get themselves vaccinated the week after, with no official statements being made that they could find about the reversal in policy at the time.

More personally, I registered to take the vaccine after the rules relating to breastfeeding mothers and anaphylaxis were updated, but found out when I got home after my first shot that the safety booklet given to me contained the outdated advice that breastfeeding mothers should stop breastfeeding for five days and those with a history of anaphylaxis were ineligible for the vaccine!

Likewise, each time a major announcement is made about tightening up or loosening of restrictions, my inbox gets a series of emails from various business or even school mailing lists urging patience while they wait for guidelines from the relevant authorities about how the rules will affect their operations and also to allow them time to digest the rules and adapt their processes yet again to ensure compliance.

There is also often a lag of a few days before business and individual support measures are announced, leaving much anxiety in the meantime. This often leads to the sense that the MTF is having to scramble to play catch-up each time major changes are announced.

While all these seem like small things, they do not help in engendering confidence, whether to encourage more people to get themselves vaccinated or to convince people that these are the right steps to keep Singapore safe and our economy going.

I end by saying that having clear, coherent communications throughout the various stages of the pandemic and honest, open conversations about the reasons and matrices for the different restrictions and support measures is just as important as the substantive steps being taken.

Mr Deputy Speaker, while we at the Workers’ Party stand united with Singaporeans in the fight against COVID-19, we believe that there is room for improvement as outlined above and hope that these will be taken into account.

Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you for allowing me to join the debate.

There are three areas that I wish to touch on in my speech today: one, helping businesses cope with the disruptions of COVID-19; two, the COVID-19 Recovery Grant – Temporary scheme, to help lower- and middle-income individuals whose income has been impacted; and, three, mental wellness support for individuals and businesses.

With more than a year and a half of living with COVID-19, while businesses are now more ready to adapt to the disruptions, demand and business volumes have taken a beating when operations have had to stop or scale back due to the various phases and, most recently, the Phase Two (Heightened Alert).

For consumer-facing businesses, for example, food businesses, gyms, personal services, many have not been able to do dine-in or to continue offering their services during the Phase Two (Heightened Alert) and Phase Three A or have had to scale back significantly.

However, overheads and ongoing business costs still need to be paid. Manpower and rental are major business expenses. The Jobs Support Scheme (JSS), rental relief and access to credit have been critical in supporting businesses tide over. The support is important for businesses to stay afloat, adapt and pivot for the new normal as well as to enable workers to stay employed.

The support measures announced for Phase Two (Heightened Alert), Phase Three (Heightened Alert) and this current Phase Two (Heightened Alert) are timely and much needed.

Managing costs, however, can only go so far. This prolonged disruption and the uncertainties have and will continue to impact cash flow for even the most prepared and sound businesses if demand and capacity to operate are significantly lower over a prolonged period of time. To survive and to get back on track, businesses must be able to continue to do business.

The ways of disruptions have shown us that COVID-19 will be with us for some time and the new normal will include living with COVID-19.

I am thankful that the Ministers in their Ministerial Statements yesterday gave us a view of the roadmap of opening up. This gives some idea of the steps and a line of sight of how businesses can expect in terms of going forward, albeit the caveat is still that we may continue to still face bumps or some bumps along the way.

The cost of doing business. We have to recognise that the cost of doing business has increased with the additional actions needed for the safe management measures. Just to name a few, this includes additional manpower to ensure customer compliance with SMMs and regular testing of staff.

For the safety of everyone, SMMs are needed. So, while giving relief to businesses to deal with the impact of COVID-19 has helped in the intermediate and the interim, we do need to find ways to better handle the cost of operating in the new normal as SMMs will still be required on an ongoing basis.

Can the Minister share if there are any measures to reduce and effectively manage the costs of SMMs required of businesses in the new normal? How can the cost of routine antigen rapid tests (ARTs) or the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests and the ART self-test kits be made more affordable for businesses as they will be ongoing costs?

As businesses pivot and adapt with the new business models, there may be a need to also rethink the use of physical spaces.

For many businesses, rental cost is usually a major part of the operating costs. So, as businesses transform, they may need less space or may need to relocate due to the changes in the type of space required.

Rental release and cost-sharing among stakeholders are welcomed in the short term but what help can there be to allow businesses the flexibility for amicable restructuring of tenancy contracts without significant penalties while cushioning some of the impact for landlords?

Let me now touch on the COVID-19 Recovery Grant – Temporary or the CRG-T scheme.

The expansion and the coverage of the scheme is intended to provide short-term support to lower- and middle-income employees and self-employed persons who suffer from sudden and significant income loss during this period. Given that the pandemic has been ongoing for a year and a half and still is with us, the impact of COVID-19 on individuals has been prolonged and not just during this period of heightened alert. Just like businesses, employees and self-employed persons have been dealing with the many waves over the last one and a half years since the outbreak.

Can consideration for eligibility be given to individuals who meet the eligibility criteria for the CRG-T scheme and need the support but live in properties with an annual value above $21,000 but do not own the property or own only one property?

Let me now touch on my last point on mental wellness. As Minister Lawrence Wong had highlighted in the Ministerial Statement, "This has been a long and difficult journey." People have had to deal with the stress of adjusting and living with the restrictions and disruptions brought about by this pandemic. This has affected everyone in the way we live, work and play.

The COVID-19 Mental Wellness Taskforce was formed late last year to review the impact of COVID-19, to take stock of the various initiatives introduced by the Government to support the mental needs of Singaporeans and to identify the gaps.

Can the Minister share if more support will be given to help individuals cope with the stress and pressures brought about by the long-drawn pandemic? What help can be given to employers to put in place the appropriate employee support programmes to promote mental health and wellness? What more can be done to provide appropriate support for individuals?

Mr Deputy Speaker, this is not an easy time for everyone. To overcome the challenges that this pandemic brings requires all of us to do our part to keep Singapore and everyone safe. Despite the current outbreak, we have made progress and I am confident that, together, we will emerge stronger. I support the Supplementary Supply Bill.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. I am in support of the additional support measures for Phase Two and Phase Three (Heightened Alert). However, I would like to raise two clarifications: one, on the additional assistance for some affected individuals and, two, clarification on the transition roadmap.

JSS support has been well-received across some of the affected industries. However, the reality is that the pandemic has affected different groups of people to different extents. One of the groups that has been very badly affected are our freelance team sports coaches. While there are other freelancers, such as gym instructors and tuition teachers that have pivoted effectively and gone online, the incomes of team sports coaches, such as for hockey, floorball, netball and football, have seen a drastic decline as they face an uphill struggle to move their trade online.

One of our Pasir Ris residents, Mdm Sa’adiah Khamis, the lead coach and owner of Singapore Netball Academy, which has 12 netball coaches, has shared that during the Heightened Alert period, the income of coaches may drop by 80%! This concern was echoed by Mr Vijayan, Head Coach of Maruti Hockey Academy. Under normal circumstances, these coaches will be physically coaching for 30 to 34 hours per week but during the Heightened Alert period, they are only able to provide at most 10 hours of Zoom training sessions per week.

Similarly, the owner of Youth Floorball Academy, Mr Norani Zaini, and another Pasir Ris resident, Mr Rizal Rais who was previously the football coach at White Sands Primary, shared that their incomes had been generally reduced by more than 20% and, in the months of the Heightened Alert, it can be reduced by more than 50% to 60%.

Freelance team sports coaches are often paid an hourly rate. The nature of team sports makes it difficult for effective coaching through Zoom. Yet, despite these challenges, they have held on, persevered and, even in such adversity, continued to coach, hoping that the situation will get better soon. At times, they even do it for free! Why? Because of their passion to coach our young athletes and their desire to see the sports, such as netball, hockey, football and floorball, continue to grow despite this pandemic. This is especially pertinent with the Tokyo Olympics going on even as we speak. We should continue to support the growth and development of our coaches and sportsmen, especially at the grassroots level, where they already face considerable challenges even under normal circumstances. Can the Government consider extending more support for these affected individuals?

Another vulnerable group is our market and hawker stallholders. Our market stallholders at Pasir Ris have shared that their income loss during the Heightened Alert period stands at between 40% and 60%. Hence, I am glad to hear about the support packages for them, including rental relief, the Market and Hawker Centre Relief Fund and Food Delivery Booster Package. I would also like to inquire on the progress of the SG Together Alliance for Action (AfA) - Online Ordering for Hawkers. How can we quickly get more of them on board?

Beyond these groups of workers, many others have had their income affected, too. The situation is more strained this time as it is not just about entering into another round of Heightened Alert; it is the broader challenge of having to endure more than one and a half years of restrictions and continued disruptions to their livelihoods. Many have shared that they have exhausted their savings during this period.

Given these circumstances, under the CRG-Temporary Support Scheme, 50% loss of income may be too stringent a criterion before some support is extended to them. Can we instead consider a tiered support at different levels of income loss, for example, starting at 30%, 40% and so on?

I am heartened to note that the Minister and fellow MTF Co-Chairs have been preparing a roadmap for Singapore to transit to a scenario where we learn to live normally with COVID-19. Can the Minister share when we can expect the roadmap to be completed and shared in greater detail? I look forward to hearing the details about the roadmap.

I would like to highlight two issues here.

Firstly, on increasing our vaccination rates. Given that our target is 80% by September and we still have many seniors who are unvaccinated, do we have sufficient teams to do the mobile vaccination? How are we increasing the capability and capacity of our healthcare system to better manage the possibility of more infections that may arise from the gradual reopening of our economy, even if they are possibly less severe? What else can we do differently to reach out and encourage more people to be vaccinated to achieve our 80% target? Have we deliberated on the risks of vaccinating children under 12 or should we extend the unvaccinated children under 12 to do home-based learning while we overcome this transition?

Secondly, the Minister had said the economy is recovering and our employment situation is improving. However, we must take into consideration that there are people currently employed in temporary COVID-19-related roles, such as swabbers, safe entry screeners, Safe Distancing Ambassadors and vaccination staff. These temporary roles may no longer be required as more and more people are vaccinated. What can we do now to avoid a situation of structural unemployment for these workers in temporary COVID-19-related roles as we prepare for the transition to normalcy? Mr Deputy Speaker, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.]  While the JSS has been able to provide support for industries and individuals affected by the pandemic, the reality is that the pandemic has affected different groups of people to different extents. One of the groups of people who have been very badly affected by the pandemic are our freelance team sports coaches, such as those providing coaching services for hockey, netball, floorball and soccer. It has not been easy for them to conduct the training online and, as such, they have seen a drastic drop in their income during Phase Two. Despite these challenges, these coaches remain positive and strong. As the Malay proverb goes, one must see through any task, regardless of how difficult it may be. They diligently conduct training through Zoom. In fact, there are those who provide free training!

Coaches like Mr Rizal Rais, a football coach, Mdm Sa'adiah Khamis, a netball head coach, and Mr Norani Zaini, owner of the Youth Floorball Academy, did it out of their interest to teach young athletes and their hopes of seeing the sport grow even during this pandemic. Can the Government consider more assistance for these individuals?

I also support the help given to food stall owners and stalls in the markets. Many stall owners have indicated that their loss of income in the Heightened Alert period is between 40% and 60%. Therefore, I am glad to hear about the support package for hawker centre and market stallholders, including rental assistance, the Market and Hawker Centre Relief Fund and the Food Delivery Booster Package.

In addition to these workers, many have also experienced declining incomes. The situation is getting tougher this time around as this is not just about losing income during Phase Two, but it is a broader challenge as they have experienced restrictions for over one and a half years and their livelihoods were disrupted during this pandemic. Some have also stated that they have exhausted their savings during this period.

The Minister has outlined in the Transition Roadmap where we can return to some degree of normalcy. To achieve this, more people have to be vaccinated. Currently, we have been successful in getting two-thirds of our seniors vaccinated and continue to encourage more to receive their vaccination. However, we must find more ways to reach out not only to our seniors, but to every segment of our community to encourage them to get vaccinated.

In Pasir Ris-Punggol, the M3 volunteers visited elderly residents who have not taken the vaccine to encourage them to be vaccinated. How can our community encourage those who have not been vaccinated to take the vaccine to protect themselves and their families?

With more people vaccinated, we would be more confident in reopening the economy and allowing greater freedom to gather with family and friends, to travel for business and pleasure, as well as to participate in religious activities together.

Lastly, as our economy and employment rates improve further, let us keep in mind that some jobs arising from this pandemic are temporary roles. Jobs, such as swabbers and Safe Distancing Ambassadors, will not be so critical as we transit into a more normal situation. We must provide support for such workers to face this transition so that they will not be caught in a situation where they find themselves unemployed or unable to contribute meaningfully to the economy.

(In English): Let me conclude in English, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. Notwithstanding the above, I stand in support of the additional support measures for the Phase Two and Phase Three (Heightened Alert).

Mdm Deputy Speaker, COVID-19 is an unprecedented crisis. As of today, we have been battling COVID-19 for slightly over one and a half years. Apart from the significant socio-economic challenges faced, COVID-19 has taken an unprecedented toll on our mental health and will continue to do so during our transition to a new normal. In my speech today, I want to focus on the mental health of our students and supporting our arts, entertainment and recreation sectors.

The term "COVID-19 fatigue" has become part of our everyday speech. Almost everyone I speak to has experienced mental fatigue and tiredness in coping with the impact of COVID-19. As adults, we feel this acutely, be it in trying to keep businesses afloat, looking after the safety of our families, adjusting to frequent changes in restrictions or the barrage of negative news.

But we need to pay closer attention to our younger generation. This pandemic is happening, for them, in their formative years and will shape their perspective on life as they go on to become adults. Students are a group who may be especially vulnerable to the long-lasting mental health toll.

I note that the Government also acknowledges the scarring effect that school closures have on learning and that some sense of normalcy is needed for our students. As our schools remain open, I am also glad to know that there are stringent safe management measures being adopted in our schools to prevent school-based COVID-19 transmission.

But following these measures can take its toll on students too. Co-curricular activities have sometimes been halted, celebration and orientation activities have been scaled back. Such safe distancing has led to reduced interactions with peers that are so important for the development of social skills. I am glad to know that CCAs will resume soon.

While necessary, given the current situation, the schooling experience of our students today is vastly different from what it was pre-COVID-19. Coupled with a more uncertain future, these circumstances may lead to unhealthy pessimism and mental health issues taking root among our students, including recent graduates.

Looking back at my educational journey – and, for me, it was not too long ago – I am reminded of the extremely stressful points. We were lucky then in being able to release some of the pressures through social activities, such as going to the movies with friends and meeting extended family members. With the uncertainty of the pandemic, our children have not been able to do the same. I worry about the effects that may result, given that they are already in a stressful educational environment.

In recent years, there has been increased awareness surrounding youth mental health, with mental health education being incorporated into the Character and Citizenship Education curriculum from this year and groups formed to raise mental health awareness and stress among youths. These are definitely important steps in the right direction. I hope we can have more conversations on mental health among students, a topic that the President recently raised following the tragic event at River Valley High School.

Perhaps, we need to re-evaluate how we approach mental health in our educational institutions, incorporating some activities to deal with the impacts of COVID-19.

The Minister for Education has just shared with Members and the public the resources and capacities we have available to support our students and staff and the near-term policies MOE is implementing to address mental health issues. I hope that, in addition to those policies listed by the Minister, there can be further policy options explored to improve our mental health infrastructure.

I specifically call on the relevant Government agencies to look at the feasibility in two areas: firstly, establishing another tertiary psychiatric hospital; and, secondly, the implementation of a Professional Conversion Programme (PCP) for Counsellors, akin to the PCP for Social Workers and Allied Health Professionals.

Let me also touch on our arts and recreation sectors, which share an intricate relationship with our mental health as a society. During the tough months of the circuit breaker last year and in the past one and a half years, people from all over the world have turned to various forms of entertainment to keep themselves healthy.

The arts and recreation sectors are crucial to our mental health wellness and it is integral we keep them alive and survive the pandemic.

Since the pandemic started, this sector has been affected heavily and is still facing prolonged slumps. Just as these sectors were beginning to pick up this year, recent clusters have resulted in further rounds of restrictions. Those affected include performance groups, art theatres and even gyms, all of which provide Singaporeans with ways to unwind and de-stress and work on their physical health.

I appreciate the various grants the Government has introduced in Budgets 2020 and 2021 to support the arts and sports sectors. I would like to seek an update on how much of these grants have been disbursed thus far.

Safe management measures have a sizeable impact on the bottom lines in these sectors, as not all of these activities can be easily moved online. The prolonged slump in the arts and recreation sectors, coupled with restrictions that continue to affect businesses and individuals, brings the long-term viability and revival of these sectors into question.

These challenging times may lead people to pivot out of these sectors, as they look for ways to survive economically. For example, in February this year, a Mr Chiya Amos penned his experience in TodayOnline. Mr Amos worked as a conductor in opera houses prior to the pandemic, but now works with Foodpanda making deliveries. His story is admirable, as it shows his strength and resilience, but it also compels me to think if there is more that we can do to support individuals like him.

There are probably many more such stories untold. It speaks to a nationwide phenomenon where many leave these industries, including recent graduates and young adults who have spent the last few years investing their education in these areas. Our arts and recreation sectors include many independent contractors and Singaporean-owned businesses.

Uncertainty caused by the pandemic, especially that surrounding their livelihoods, will inevitably add to the toll on such business owners and potentially create long-term scarring of these sectors.

How does the Government plan to work with these sectors to ensure their medium- and long-term viability? Can the Government provide an update on how it is looking to partner and understand the concerns of the businesses serving the arts and recreation sectors and help them work through the issues they face?

I recently spoke to a resident of Compassvale who started her own business partnership before the pandemic. Her father is the owner of a gym. Both of them shared with me that before the pandemic, both businesses were doing well and that they were able to pay their workers fairly and make a profit. After the pandemic, however, they have been struggling. They have had to let staff go and are even considering closing their businesses.

I believe we can do more to support these enterprises. For example, as my colleague Mr Leon Perera has suggested, we can include more businesses from these sectors in the SingapoRediscovers Voucher scheme so that they can be assisted while enabling the public to benefit from the services they provide.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, the effects of COVID-19 are multi-faceted. Among these are socio-economic consequences as well as psychological ones. This is a time where we need to support one another. Part of this is to make sure that assistance is going where it is needed most.

Among those who need our collective backing right now are those in the arts and recreation sectors who are among the many SMEs that account for a significant proportion of Singapore’s employment.

More broadly, mental health issues can fester if ignored. If we are not careful, we may risk a generation of students who have to grapple with mental health issues over the longer term.

In October last year, I spoke in this House calling for greater awareness on the importance of mental health. Awareness on the issue has since improved, with more open discussions, but more can and should be done. The mental health impact of COVID-19, which is a worldwide phenomenon, can have real implications for well-being in our society. I ask policymakers and fellow Singaporeans to continue to treat this issue with the urgency and openness it deserves.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, this latest Ministerial Statement, which details additional COVID-19-related financial measures, does much to shore up the most affected sectors of our economy. There is certainly more that can be done to offer short-term transitional support that the most vulnerable segments, especially displaced workers and those operating in the F&B and hospitality sectors, along with our local SMEs, as my Sengkang colleagues Mr Louis Chua and Ms He Ting Ru have pointed out.

I wish to focus instead on the longer-term elements of the Statement, especially surrounding SINGA. I will pose three questions about spending reallocation, a timeline for bond issuance and the scheme for income-contingent student loans.

My first question has to do with better understanding why the Government has decided to reallocate development expenditure from an underutilised Budget, instead of accelerating spending so that projects may be completed according to the original timeline. Specifically, why not fund the delayed $0.6 billion directly from more SINGA borrowing instead?

After all, we should recognise that the delayed $0.6 billion in development expenditure has an opportunity cost in terms of foregone benefits from these capital projects. If we truly believe that the benefits of our development expenditures have not been irrevocably altered by pandemic-related delays – and I believe they should always be the case for long-term capital projects – then we should be working hard to get these delayed projects back on track by boosting immediate spending rather than passively accepting the delay. This will also allow the revenue streams associated with projects to accrue sooner.

Moreover, doing so would not only ease the restraints on the supply side, it will also serve to strengthen the demand side in the hard-hit construction sector, still among our hardest hit, having shrunk 11% in the second quarter, which will, undoubtedly, benefit from a short-term expenditure boost.

And, of course, this is not an abstract cost existing only on paper. I have many residents whose living situations have been significantly compromised by the delay in the expected handover dates of their BTO flats. Could we not accelerate our spending, temporarily increase our inputs, so that the construction of these flats does not face an inordinate delay? To be entirely fair in our conversations with our contacts in the construction sector, they have shared that the ability to ramp up activity has been constrained not just by demand limitations, but also those of supply. Construction raw material prices, like those of all commodities, have increased sharply worldwide. This spike has been further exacerbated by US infrastructure building, Chinese restrictions on material exports and difficulties in procuring Malaysian-manufactured materials due to its shutdown.

But activity has also been curtailed by some of our own policy decisions, which have served to dampen demand in the sector. While we have attempted to relax some of the immigration controls, they remain comparatively restrictive and our friends in the industry share that this remains their most binding constraint. Thus, while we recognise the importance of exercising caution to limit imported cases, as well as the longer-run need to transition away from low-cost labour in the construction sector, as my Aljunied colleague Mr Gerald Giam had shared, there is, in the meantime, an immediate need to relieve labour needs on this front. Moreover, we know that well-executed quarantine procedures have proven their worth in containing spread along this channel.

Will the Government be willing to offer an update on their plans in restarting our inflow of foreign workers in this sector and the accompanying measures for managing imported cases? Furthermore, mandatory quarantine routine testing and safe distancing measures all have added to costs, which, inevitably, renders some projects no longer economically viable. Could some of these overheads be partially offset by the Government to help the sector as it tries to get back on its feet? And, ultimately, the surfeit of projects could potentially have lasting consequences. Our sources also report that skilled workers are leaving, hollowing out a sector already struggling with low productivity.

Another important question, Mdm Deputy Speaker, is to enquire about whether the Government has a detailed plan for upcoming SINGA bond issuance, or if it plans to dip into markets on a more ad hoc basis. More pointedly, are the Deep Tunnel Sewerage System and North-South Corridor the only projects that can be brought forward to be capitalised now?

I will contend that we require not just a clear, if amendable, issuance timetable, but also one that is front-loaded as much as possible. After all, it is useful to keep in mind that low interest rates will not remain with us indefinitely.

Between the start of this year till the end of the first quarter, the US long-term interest rate almost doubled, from 0.9% to 1.7%. This rate remained elevated through most of the second quarter, before easing significantly to around 1.3% in more recent times. Surveys of market forecasters suggest that the rise in rates through mid-2022 may only be slightly higher than 2%.

On its face, then, it may seem like we have ample time to return to markets for our future infrastructure borrowing needs but markets are unlikely to remain quiescent forever. Indeed, a more careful consideration of the underlying components of long-term yields reveals that since mid-May this year, the real long-term interest rate – that is, the true underlying cost of capital – began to rise. What this means, in practical terms, is that as markets normalise, surplus capital is beginning to be dissipated. Once this process takes hold, we should expect a more decisive climb in the observed long-term interest rate.

As I had previously documented in my two prior Parliamentary interventions on the issue, one of the main advantages underlying SINGA is the ability to lock in current low financing costs for long-term projects that we fully expect to realise and that will disappear or, at the least, face a much higher hurdle rate to justify the debt incurred if we do not seize the day.

Put another way, once interest rates begin an inexorable climb, many projects will no longer be economically justifiable. If so, we may inadvertently end up significantly undershooting the approved SINGA loan limit of $90 billion and all the benefits associated thus.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, I had also previously flagged a number of potential projects on the human capital side that could be considered under SINGA. If I may indulge in this opportunity to elaborate on one more suggestion: could we consider dedicating a part of SINGA financing to fund an initial pool of income-contingent repayment student loans? I should also add, before I proceed further, that I am an educator at an Institute of Higher Learning.

To reiterate, the idea is to use SINGA to seed a fund for income-contingent loans. The Government commits to fund all the costs of tertiary or continuing education programmes upfront, perhaps subject to a very, very modest co-payment as collateral. As the graduate secures a job and contingent on them earning enough, the recipient would then pay off the acquired debt. To maximise repayment probabilities, we could limit, at the outset, the scheme only to courses with a clear economic need, such as information and computer science, biopharmaceutical sciences and digital and social media marketing, among others.

Just as important, such loans stand apart from SkillsFuture, because it will cover the full cost of an extended training programme. It will also not be constrained by the need to identify employer matches as the Work-Study Degree programme is. And it is meant to be accessible to young, college-age students rather than mainly targeted at reskilling displaced workers. Such schemes already exist elsewhere in the world. In the United Kingdom, the government runs student loans, companies operate several plans where incomes must cross a fixed weekly or monthly threshold before loan repayment deductions are made.

In the United States, various permutations of the programme have been proposed and implemented since 1971, enjoying bipartisan support and has been championed most recently by the Institute for College Access and Success.

Australia, Hungary, New Zealand, the Netherlands and South Korea have all introduced various variations of the scheme. Importantly, such a programme in the local context will also free parents of tertiary students from the perceived need to finance their children's University education, especially when their parents' CPF funds are already stretched in terms of meeting retirement needs and, all the more, by the income shocks endured during the pandemic. The risk of repayment would be transferred to the main beneficiaries of this human capital investment, the undergraduates themselves, while being underwritten by the Government. Since human capital investments, as a whole, pay off in the long run, such an investment is eminently suitable for funding via the long-term bond issuance under the auspices of SINGA. And, most importantly, surely, nobody can credibly argue that education should not be considered infrastructure in our 21st century economy. Notwithstanding these three questions, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I support the Statements.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, on 14 May, the Government announced the commencement of Phase Two (Heightened Alert) after the outbreak of the Changi Airport cluster which had about 43 cases around 14 May. Phase Three (Heightened Alert) was in place by 14 June 2021, with two-person in-room dining. Five-person in-room dining was later resumed on 12 July, only to be short-lived by a change back to two persons within one week from 19 July.

On 19 July itself, I was at a coffee shop in Hougang for my dinner after house visits. Many residents present asked me whether it was true that there would be a lockdown of sorts in a few days' time. This was the day when there were reportedly 163 new locally transmitted COVID-19 cases, then, I believe, a single-day record. True enough, the next day, the Government announced that Phase Two (Heightened Alert) would be resumed from 22 July till 18 August with no in-room dining.

It has been over a year since the circuit breaker was ended for the General Elections to take place, yet it has been an unsettling period of ups and downs for businesses as the country copes with successive, growing COVID-19 clusters. Today, I would like to touch on three aspects: one, work from home; two, more systematic and consistent supervision of safe management measures in businesses and less abrupt, reactive changes for businesses; three, impact of dining restrictions on F&B outlets.

Work from home. The Government has continued to insist on work-from-home (WFH) as the default for many of our businesses and offices, with exceptions for small numbers to go back to office when necessary. This may compel many to WFH as the default and going to office on only certain limited days of the week. The argument goes that this will keep more people from taking public transport and congregate in larger numbers in their workplaces.

On the employees' end, many have, in fact, gotten used to WFH. For those who are fortunately able to work effectively from their laptops or other devices away from the office, many even relish the flexibility of incorporating childcare and other domestic responsibilities, which is not a bad thing.

I have residents who are parents of toddlers, both fathers and mothers, who shared with me their concerns of less flexibility with childcare once they cease WFH and have to go back to the office full-time.

On the other hand, the flexibility of working from home has its downsides. For example, as emails come in at all times of the day, many find it difficult to draw the line between work and time off from work. This takes a toll on rest, family time and even mental health. There have also been more neighbours' disputes reported in the past year since the circuit breaker as more people stay at home.

On the employers' end, some businesses have adjusted to WFH and may not even go back to having an office with full daily staff attendance. Again, for many others, WFH is not ideal for their business operations, whether for getting more businesses, for internal management, for employee supervision or for managing staff morale.

Many businesses struggle with this uncertainty of how long this will last. Beyond a short renewal to see if things get clearer in the following year, how do businesses plan their rental renewal, keeping their space pending a return to the pre-COVID-19 modus operandi or adopting, permanently, some degree of WFH like Mastercard or Prudential and perhaps downsize office spaces?

What is the roadmap that the Government has so far as far as WFH is concerned? When do we stop working from home? What exact targets do we have to hit?

Minister Gan Kim Yong, in answering the hon Member Sylvia Lim's question in Parliament not long ago, has shared some factors for the Government's consideration. But as vaccination rates increase significantly next few months, can the Government consider setting clearer criteria or milestones so that businesses can also plan accordingly?

Next, a more systematic and consistent supervision of SMMs in businesses and less abrupt reactive changes for businesses.

In the early days of the circuit breaker, I remember that the criteria for law firms was not clear and some received indication that they could operate while others did not. Fortunately, things got clearer subsequently.

Indeed, businesses strive on certainty, and systematic and consistent supervision of safe management measures should be encouraged. Sudden changes should be avoided. Let me raise a recent example of this.

The recent KTV cluster highlighted what was not known to many Singaporeans previously, that some businesses in the nightlife industry had pivoted to F&B. As the KTV cluster unfolded, the Multi-Ministry Taskforce announced a two-week suspension of operations from 16 July 2021 through 30 July 2021 for all nightlife establishments that had pivoted into F&B establishments, which affected over 400 such establishments. It was announced that all the staff will be tested and their SMM protocols will be inspected to ensure these are properly implemented and before they are allowed to resume F&B operations.

Given the timing of the suspension, it looks like a direct reaction to the KTV cluster. However, I am concerned whether the abrupt two-week suspension is fair to all affected nightlife businesses which pivoted to F&B outlets, bearing in mind that many of the 400 over establishments may not have the same kind of business or operating conditions as KTV bars with social hostesses and, hence, should not be regarded as having the same risk level as the intimate KTV bars.

In the first place, nightlife establishments were allowed to pivot to F&B outlets as a way for their businesses to survive and we heard this, too, in the House yesterday. In fact, MTI reported that only 18 out of 400 outlets received funding for kitchen, installation and conversion. The rest had to dig into their pockets to do the conversion in the face of indefinite closure of their businesses in the earlier days.

When they were allowed to operate as such, one would have expected that their premises were subjected to initial and subsequent regular inspections for compliance to safe management measures, for example, wearing of masks when not eating, safe distancing, kitchen and service hygiene and many others.

If such inspections were carried out on a regular basis, would not the SFA or other Government agencies have been reasonably assured of the SMM compliance of these outlets or, at the very least, those establishments which do not have the intimate KTV operations or have similar characteristics? The abrupt closure of all premises would have been avoided.

Businesses need certainty and abrupt orders to cease business like this will cause sudden damaging losses. Moving ahead, I urge the Government to have a more proactive and consistent supervision of SMMs in businesses and avoid abrupt reactive changes.

Next, impact of dining restrictions and other measures on the F&B industry. What I have said above about businesses requiring certainties and avoiding abrupt, disruptive orders also apply to F&B outlets. This is, indeed, one sector that has constantly been affected by the changing COVID-19 phases: from the circuit breaker across the various Phase Two and Three sub-categories, from hawker centres, coffeeshops, food courts to cafes, restaurants and caterers.

Hawker centres and coffeeshops are not spared. Popular stores do well during lockdowns. Drinks sales go down and soup-based food suffer more. Economical rice stalls do better. Mookata stores turn to online sales to mitigate their losses. Zi char stalls suffer as there are no group sit-downs to multi-dish dinners.

WFH also meant that F&B businesses near workplaces and away from residential areas, for example, food centres like Amoy Street Food Centre or Lau Pau Sat suffer a drop in business.

So, when Phase Two (Heightened Alert) was reinstated recently, I remembered the many hawkers I spoke to in my constituency over the past year and made a mental note of how I think each would be faring the next few weeks. I cannot help feeling a sense of dread for many of them.

Coffeeshop assistants or even local drinks promoters have been asked to do less work or even no work. Store tenants have complained that they have to spend more on takeaway packaging and yet crockery clearing fees have not been waived. I hope rental reliefs will be available to support stalls in privately run food centres and coffeeshops.

Many caterers have suffered badly because of the lack of events over the past year and more so during the circuit breaker and Phase Two (Heightened Alert) periods. I shudder to think of the outlook for them until more and larger-scale events with catering can take place.

Many may not realise that stalls in canteens in schools and Institutes of Higher Learning are also affected.

In June, I met a resident during my house visit who runs a food stall in a Primary school canteen. Her income went down during the Phase Two (Heightened Alert) in May, with more home-based learning (HBL). Another resident shared with me how the family business of running a few food stalls in tertiary institutions was also quite seriously affected by the COVID-19-related closures and online classes.

Have all such institutions waived or reduced rentals when students switched to HBL or online classes even before the Phase Two (Heightened Alert) in May?

Since the circuit breaker, life has not been easy for many in our F&B industry. Changing dining restrictions and work from home add to their woes. I hope the COVID-19 Recovery Grant, another support scheme, will go some way to reduce some of the losses but F&B operators, hawkers and staff will certainly look forward to the end of dining-in restrictions once and for all when our vaccination rates rise in the coming weeks.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, before I close, I would like to seek clarification from the Government on a different issue.

Due to the increase in cases detected at markets and hawker centres, the COVID-19 Multi-Ministry Taskforce has recently directed that all Town Councils are to implement access control with interim fencing and mandatory SafeEntry check-in at all markets and hawker centres by Monday, 26 July, yesterday.

As additional personnel are required to assist with the access control work, including personnel to man the access control, I would like to ask whether the Government will be reimbursing Town Councils for additional manpower expenses incurred in implementing access control and SafeEntry check-in at markets and hawker centres.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, notwithstanding the concerns I have raised here, I support the Ministerial Statements.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, this ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has been unprecedented and unpredictable. The year 2021 is proving to be another tough year for our businesses. Companies have been coping with suboptimal business conditions for close to one and a half years now.

I am heartened that the Government is mandating commercial landlords to match the two-week rental support provided by the Government to tenants during the latest Phase Two (Heightened Alert) measures. It is also notable that smaller landlords who rely on rent as their main income will also be given fair consideration since they may not have the financial ability to sustain themselves.

Some businesses have shared that since the last Phase Two (Heightened Alert) in May, they are still locked in discussions with their landlords on adequate rental support. Hence, I fully support the move by the Government to mandate the rental reliefs and believe that this will avoid inefficiencies derived from such protracted negotiations between landlords and tenants. This will also minimise disputes, misalignment of expectations and erosion of trust between landlords and tenants.

To confront COVID-19, the Government had introduced various support measures to help businesses cope with its impact. To ensure that these measures are more timely and targeted in helping businesses cope with challenges brought on by COVID-19, I would like to put forward three recommendations: one, to add an additional criteria for rental relief; two, to consider extending moratoriums for Temporary Bridging Loans; and three, to further improve the disbursement and criteria of the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS).

This Supply Bill has differentiated rent relief for companies solely based on revenue, which may not be sufficient to assess a company's ability to withstand long-drawn challenges like the one we are going through now. My suggestion is that we consider adding the criteria of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) for companies in industries that operate with low margins.

I am aware that this would add additional administrative requirements but this would differentiate critical companies who need help from those who enjoy better margins because of the nature of their industries.

My second recommendation is for the Government to consider extending moratoriums for the Temporary Bridging Loans.

Since 2020, businesses need help for moratoriums of loans, especially for sectors that are unable to restart core business activities. Through my engagements with some businesses, they shared with me that these Temporary Bridging Loans require them to make principal payments after a year while this pandemic has lasted way more than a year.

MAS made an announcement in June this year that businesses will enjoy a further suspension of 80% of their principal loan till September 2021. However, with this current round of the Heightened Alert phase, businesses do require a much longer runway and even an additional principal payment moratorium. This is against the backdrop of suboptimal business activity for more than one and a half years. I believe it is necessary for such an extension of principal moratoriums to provide businesses with this additional runway to restore cashflow, which dovetails with the overall COVID-19 resilience safe reopening plans.

In addition to this recommendation, this is a good time to review the criteria to obtain a Temporary Bridging Loan, specifically, the need for preceding bank statements in applying for a Temporary Bridging Loan. Unlike last year in 2020, when such a criterion could have shown how well the company was in 2019, its relevance now is clearly a problem because the preceding year was the ultra-difficult 2020. A review of such criteria could well be needed to help our companies get through 2021.

My third suggestion is to further finetune the disbursement and criteria of JSS.

After close to one and a half years of battling COVID-19, many businesses are facing low cash reserves. Through my conversations with several businesses, they hope for an earlier and quicker disbursement of JSS to aid their cashflow issues. To quote one business owner, "We need water to arrive earlier to fight this fire."

Some businesses have also shared with me how the Singapore Standard Industrial Classification (SSIC) categorisation of their businesses has a clear impact on the support measures they receive. Some businesses shared that due to their SSIC codes, they have fallen through the cracks.

At this juncture, allow me to highlight some of the concerns from businesses within the events industry, concerns that are consistent with what the hon Member Liang Eng Hwa shared earlier.

Those whose businesses include audio-visual, staging and backdrop, event landscaping, event design, event logistics, booth carpentry, artiste management and so on are currently categorised as Tier 3 in the SSIC code structure. This means they qualify for lower support measures, compared to those in the F&B, hotels and MICE industries when their work is highly integrated with them. In addition, being classified as Tier 3 also meant that they will not receive loan moratorium extensions.

The core events industry is intertwined with inbound corporate and leisure travel. Each phase of dining-in restriction affects the confidence of event clients and leading to eventual cancellations. The continued cap on weddings guest size and suspension of social and community events have also meant lower revenue for event-related companies. While there are “pilots” for events to take place, the capacity cap makes them commercially not viable. Those who have pivoted to digital formats have found that the revenue is unable to support existing costs and borrowings incurred prior to COVID-19. With high overheads and borrowing costs, event business owners had to bear continued losses and exhaust their own savings to preserve their business to retain capabilities built over many years. Therefore, I would like to ask that we review the support mechanism for the wider events industry ecosystem to preserve capabilities that are much needed to maintain Singapore as a business hub.

I would like to request the relevant Ministries and Statutory Boards to undertake deeper engagements with companies to reassess if current SSIC classifications are still relevant and need to be updated. This allows us to be more targeted in supporting our companies now and in the future.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, as Singapore continues to progress while battling this pandemic, support grants and financing measures are essential and beneficial to Singaporeans. We must continue to hear the voices of Singaporeans from different industries and ensure that no one, no one, is left behind. Targeted and equitable support that is commensurate with the impact specific businesses face is necessary. We need to preserve critical capabilities so that we can emerge stronger.

Hence, I hope the Government can consider my three recommendations: one, to add an additional criteria for rental relief to support more businesses in need; two, to extend moratoriums for Temporary Bridging Loan and review loan eligibility criteria; and, three, to accelerate the disbursement of JSS and tweak the tiered criteria tied to SSIC so that these measures are more timely and targeted in helping our businesses cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. Notwithstanding my recommendations, I support the Bill.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, we entered a new phase of fairly severe restrictions about a week ago. These and earlier events have taken their toll financially as well as mentally on our communities.

At this point, I would like to express my deepest sympathies for the family and all those affected by the tragic incident at River Valley High School. We cannot imagine the grief that they are facing and I would like for us to keep them in our thoughts. We need to take care of one another at this challenging time.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, for the rest of my speech, I would like to address the Supplementary Budget and the current phase of this COVID-19 pandemic, mainly in the context of SMEs. By SMEs, here I mean micro-businesses and small and medium-sized enterprises. Many who run or work in SMEs have been severely hurt economically after the last few rounds of restrictions, especially after coming out of a very challenging 2020.

Madam, our SMEs employ roughly two-thirds of our workforce. Many of those who run micro-businesses, in particular, work extremely hard. Running a company or business can be very challenging, especially in the initial stages when most start-ups fail, but also when world-shaking events like COVID-19 happen. Even in the best of times, entrepreneurs have to deal with curveballs on a regular, sometimes daily basis, as they grapple with issues related to winning and keeping difficult customers, retaining employees and ensuring cash flow. As the founder of a company, I know this first hand. The dot-com bubble burst around the time my company was founded, affecting many of our clients. And about a year later, 9/11 happened, again, dealing a big blow to the economy.

It is often noted that this long COVID-19 pandemic has had a very uneven impact on individuals and on countries. Individuals who are better able to work from home have fared better, for example, as have countries with better access to vaccines. What is less often noted is that COVID-19 has also worsened the inequality among companies. Those who are better able to adapt to the digital economy and to e-commerce have fared better. Those in certain industries like biomedical, infocomm technology, food production and fast-moving consumer goods have fared, on the whole, very well during the pandemic, some seeing record profits. Others in sectors dependent on tourism and travel, as well as retail and food services, have struggled with whole swathes of these industries being setback or wiped out.

Yet, interestingly, the COVID-19 pandemic has also seen a burst of new start-up formations in many countries around the world, including Singapore: 63,418 new enterprises were set up in 2020 amidst the worst recession in our country's history versus 61,573 in 2019, the highest such figures since 2016.

We should ensure that we create the right eco-system to enable these new start-ups and SMEs in general to flourish and both safeguard jobs in a competitive environment as well as contribute to job and GDP growth alongside MNCs and state-linked enterprises. In the rest of my speech, I shall outline some suggestions for nurturing our SMEs and, as I do so, I would also like to make a general observation first, as have many of my Parliamentary colleagues.

It is crucial for our Government agencies to take the realities of running a business, especially an SME business, into account when formulating policies. Most SMEs do not have the manpower and capacity to digest and enforce complicated regulations. Many SMEs operate on thin margins and a cash loss can have an outsized effect on their sustainability.

There have clearly been gaps here. For example, when the Jurong Fishery Port cluster erupted, many fishmongers were tested and not told that they are to cease operations. So, they went ahead and bought their seafood at the wholesale market and, a few hours later, they were told to stop selling, meaning that the seafood they had bought could not be sold. Another example is from the initially complex rules issued for dining-in earlier in July. How eateries were going to enforce those rules was something they grappled with. Some food service chains simply said it would limit dining-in to two persons to avoid the risks and costs of enforcement. Let us strive towards fewer of such examples going forward.

Before I begin, I declare my interest as the CEO of a company, a research consultancy.

Firstly, a few narrowly scoped points on the COVID-19 support packages. Madam, one group of businesses that seems left out are wholesalers, distributors and importers who support restaurants and F&B outlets. It does not appear that such distributors qualify for JSS and I hope we can support them in some way.

Some such firms I am aware of have already dutifully paid their suppliers for goods they have ordered in the expectation that dining-in would be allowed and are now paying an even higher cost to keep kegs and food produce in cold storage.

Next, one of my constituents also shared that his business did not qualify for JSS. The line of business, listed as a secondary business activity, would by right, entitle him to JSS. However, he was told that because it was not his primary business activity, no JSS would be paid. I would argue that some degree of JSS support should be paid, pro-rated perhaps, in cases where the company has a line of business that warrants JSS but it is not the primary line of business, provided the company can prove that they are still doing some amount of that secondary business. We should also bear in mind that the revenue split between primary and secondary business can be fairly dynamic. I hope we can take a balanced approach in administering this and other schemes.

Next, we should also review the rental support given to SME tenants who rent a mixed-use property, that is, a shophouse for both retail and residential use. Due to COVID-19, there are SME tenants who have to resort to renting a mixed-use property to keep their business afloat.

However, doing so would seem to prevent them from obtaining the cash disbursements automatically. Some SME owners who are renting mixed-use properties find the process complicated to manage, sometimes due to language differences or unfamiliarity with Government applications. They have also raised their concerns about how costly it would be for them to get hired help just to assist them to submit their claims with supporting documents. I hope we could look into providing an automatic service for the SME tenants renting mixed-use properties, especially during this crisis, to reduce their financial burden.

Next, I would like to speak on the need to keep track of our SME schemes and this really speaks to more of our medium- and longer-term considerations about our SME ecosystem. Madam, a significant amount of public money goes into SME schemes. Workers' Party Members of Parliament have filed many Parliamentary Questions over the years, keeping track of the outcomes of these schemes.

Madam, when our economic agencies disclose data on schemes, these are usually effort indicators, such as how many companies were helped, the median quantum of support and so on. But what would be more meaningful is to analyse the outcomes of these schemes, what marginal impact the schemes made to business success. I know that this is not easy to measure; there is a problem of differentiating between correlation and causation, for example. But solutions to measurement problems can be found. Publishing such outcome measures should be done from time to time. The case in point is the Productivity and Innovation Credit scheme which was discontinued earlier. Did it really help to increase productivity?

Next, we should improve the user experience for our grant applications for SMEs. In a previous speech in this House, I called for a one-stop portal for all citizens and companies to transact with the Government on assistance schemes. One such portal for SMEs now exists, businessgrants.gov.sg. However, it appears that not all the SME schemes across the whole all Government can be accessed on this portal. I recall a number of letters, also to The Straits Times Forum page, explaining issues which users faced on this portal. One such letter, dated 30 June this year, referred to an endless cycle of questions and answers because replies by email or phone call were not entertained.

Before leaving the subject, I should note that many SMEs still feel that the process for applying for grants and support is too administratively time-consuming and difficult. According to the UOB SME Outlook 2021 survey, small SMEs wanted more assistance to apply for existing grants in schemes and placed this wish as one of their top three wishes for Budget 2021.

Next, Madam, I would like to speak on the need to nurture entrepreneurship and small businesses for the long run and this starts with the very lifeblood of SMEs – people. Partly because of stubborn mindsets and partly because of competition from MNCs and the public sector, SMEs are often not sufficiently attracting, retaining, developing and investing in their talent. This is a vicious cycle that reduces their ability to offer quality goods and services as well as survive into the future. SMEs without talent do not do well and not doing well means they are discouraged from investing in their talent.

There are Government scholarships that allow scholars to take on roles in SMEs rather than in GLCs or other major companies. For example, some IMDA scholarships allow for this. Is this something the Government is putting effort into developing and expanding? Co-marketing these scholarships with boutique SMEs that are leaders in their own right could be a way to push students to explore the breadth and depth of our SME ecosystem.

It could well be that SME scholarships are not as attractive to many young Singaporeans as other types of scholarships, such as PSC or GLC scholarships. To widen the potential talent pool for such SME scholarships, can we give the option to PSC scholars to transfer the latter part of their bond to an SME? This may attract some PSC Scholars who realise they would rather develop their career in the private sector. Also, as times have changed, more young people are realising that SMEs and start-ups can offer exciting employment opportunities and this is something that can be built on. There have been hit drama series produced in Korea, America and elsewhere about the fast-paced world of start-ups. There may be fresh opportunities these days to market SME scholarships to youth, if we are bold and ingenious in designing this kind of marketing.

Next, on the talent deficit that many SMEs face. Again, I would like to talk about the role of shared service providers. Many SMEs struggle to hire people to fill vacancies, especially in fields like finance, human resources, administration and accounting, as the pool of locals qualified for such work is limited and there is competition from MNCs, GLCs and big professional service firms for such talent. SMEs can outsource this work, but outsourced service providers often charge high fees. Some SMEs form relationships with individual freelancers to do such work on a part-time or flexible basis, but not all SMEs have access to such freelancers.

I would like to suggest that the Government look into nurturing players that provide shared services, such as finance, human resources, accounting and administration, at low cost to SMEs. Such a shared service industry would potentially be a strategic industry for our SME development and having such firms providing such services at low prices on an ongoing basis would perhaps be more helpful to SMEs than many of our existing schemes which prioritise the partial funding of one-off consulting work.

If we have a good pool of such shared service players, SMEs can outsource much of this back-office work to these companies at reasonable costs, thus enabling entrepreneurs to focus more on their core business and core competences. Our economic agencies should treat the development of the low-cost shared service industry as an industry development priority. Technology can be leveraged to provide low-cost services.

Next, Madam, I will speak on what more can be done for business succession planning, including exits via entrepreneurs selling their business. I asked a Parliamentary Question about what the Government was doing on this front in 2017.

Madam, many small and micro-business owners may toil away for years to build a business with a significant product, customer base, employee base and brand. Yet, many struggle with business succession planning. Nowadays, it is common to hear that the children of family business owners do not want to take over the business.

And it is hard for family business owners to be able to find acquirers. Many such business owners may not have the skills to identify acquirers and pitch their business to those acquirers. At the same time, many would be unable to avail themselves of the services of M&A advisory firms or investment banks, as these usually handle deals above a certain size threshold and the SME’s valuation may fall below that threshold.

All of this means that many SME owners may be unable to ensure the continuity of their business nor be able to monetise the value that they have created. Instead, they may end up simply winding up the business – and we have seen quite a few examples of this happening during this long COVID-19 pandemic. The other group of people who would lose out from this would be the long-time employees of such firms which close down.

Would the Government look into providing low-cost services to SMEs that cannot engage M&A advisory firms to help match them to potential acquirers? A basic form of matchmaking could be set up via an online portal which allows potential buyers and sellers of small firms to express their interest, for example.

I would also note in passing that, in some countries with a vibrant SME landscape, institutions other than the state play the role of providing general strategic advice to SME owners on matters that include business succession planning. Such institutions include regional banks in Germany, Switzerland and Japan and the giant chaebols in Korea, some of whom take an interest in the SME suppliers within their ecosystem. But in Singapore, such traditions are, by and large, absent which explains the context for the suggestions I am making.

Next, another point relates to SMEs starting up overseas. Can Enterprise SG provide small hot-desking facilities and business centres in its key overseas centres to support SMEs going abroad for the first time? Some foreign countries’ embassies and High Commissions provide such facilities for SMEs from their home countries in key global cities.

Such facilities would enable SMEs to rent a desk or a small office for a limited time, as they explore an overseas market or start their presence. While such facilities are available commercially in most global cities, having Singapore SMEs use the same facility and having that co-located with the office of Enterprise Singapore and other Singapore Government agencies in-country would facilitate networking with Government and collaborations among Singapore firms in that overseas market. Subsidised rental rates could also be provided to ease market entry. Access to such facilities should, of course, be limited to SMEs and not extended to large firms.

Next, Madam, I would like to talk about financing the growth of SMEs. Back in 2010, the Economic Strategies Committee (ESC) mooted the option of establishing an EXIM bank but the Government concluded that gaps in trade financing could be addressed by expanding the suite of trade and internationalisation finance schemes under what was then International Enterprise (IE) Singapore, without the setting up of an EXIM bank. Since then, Enterprise Singapore has launched various internationalisation finance schemes where the Government co-shares risks with participating financial institutions to support our SMEs.

However, I am not sure if all our SMEs feel that it is easy to secure financing, especially for overseas expansion. It should be noted that even with the Government sharing a high proportion of the risk, commercial banks may prefer other options to deploy their capital than lending to SMEs, as that still may be seen to carry some risks.

Surveys still show that many SMEs believe that there are gaps in our financing ecosystem. For example, according to the UOB SME Outlook 2021 survey, smaller SMEs with a turnover of less than S$10 million stressed a greater need for financial support to ease short-term cash flow issues and that they desired easier access to funding and grants. Larger SMEs with a turnover of between S$10 million and S$100 million wanted easier access to funding and grants; and collateral-free loans for business transformation.

While existing financing schemes have certainly helped some of our SMEs, it would be worth considering if the creation of an EXIM bank for SMEs could help us to reach greater outcomes in SME growth and development.

Having an institution that has the sole mandate to lend to and boost our SMEs, rather than relying on schemes driven by commercial banks who will, understandably, pursue primarily commercial priorities, can help us better address SMEs' financing needs. Hence, I believe the establishment of an EXIM bank for SMEs is an idea worth revisiting.

Next, protecting the intellectual property of SMEs is critical to fostering innovation in the SME sector. However, anecdotally, there is still a perception in some quarters of the business community that for very IP-dependent kinds of work, such as creative and consulting work, for example, large Government agencies may take ideas contained in the proposals submitted to them by companies and either adopt those ideas internally or pass those ideas on to cheaper vendors to execute, without the permission or knowledge of the company submitting the proposal that contained those ideas.

It is sad to think that some companies have this perception of their own Government agencies but I have come across this perception in conversations with SME owners. SMEs which feel that this may have been done to them would mostly not be inclined to complain or take legal action, due to the costs involved as well as the fear of antagonising the Government.

I would like to ask if all Government agencies are given strict guidelines to not treat ideas contained in proposals in this manner?

In conclusion, Mdm Deputy Speaker, the COVID-19 pandemic provides an opportunity for us to leverage the burst of start-up formations that we have seen by creating an eco-system that enables these start-ups to thrive and scale-up as far as their ambitions can take them, driving job creation and creating a third engine of value creation that may be more rooted in Singapore than perhaps all MNCs are. Other successful economies around the world have thriving SME sectors, showing that these can co-exist with open economies and large global MNC sectors. Our very own equivalent of the German “Mittelstand”, or middle-sized companies sector, can form one of our pathways to the post-COVID-19 future.

Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. I would like to declare that I work for a private real estate company.

Yesterday, I was very heartened to hear from the MTF an unequivocal commitment for the transition into living with the virus. I cannot emphasise enough how important this commitment is to the local and international business and investment communities who are making their long-term investment decisions into Singapore. Some have started to refer to Singapore as a "zero COVID-19 society", implying that we do not have the psychological resilience to transit into living with the virus. It is thus important for Singapore to signal our commitment clearly, not just to Singaporeans but also to the rest of the world our commitment. And it will be a great story to tell the world we will transit into the new normal through the methodical and pragmatic Singapore way.

Moving on, I would like to express that I support the Supplementary Supply and Budget Adjustments Bill and support the fact that, in this time of hardship, we must support one another where we can.

I would like to raise a relatively philosophical question on the sanctity of contracts. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we are living in exceptional times and the Government has the unenviable task of making difficult decisions like the need for a circuit breaker or the Heightened Alert.

The Government has been very proactive in supporting businesses and saving jobs through very substantial schemes, such as JSS, tax rebates and so on. In addition, the Government has, through legislation, such as COTMA, directly intervened into private agreements. In essence, it has appropriated private resources to support certain segments of the value chain. I understand that these measures are extraordinary and even necessary, and the Government has explained that these unprecedented steps are not to be taken as the norm.

However, it is fair to assume that the path to recovery will be long and arduous. It is also fair to assume that there will continue to be shocks and disruptions that will require the Government to activate decisive steps for future lockdowns or other responses.

A critical part of Singapore’s foundation for its economic success is being business-friendly and transparent and demonstrating a respect for legal contracts. Rare instances of intervention in private contracts are understandable, but repeated interventions will make businesses and investors wonder if that will be the Government’s modus operandi going forward.

It would be useful if the Government could outline its philosophy on intervening in private contracts. For example, what are the considerations to activate such interventions and whether intervention is limited to certain sectors or would be applied more broadly, if need be? Besides the actual substance of the policies, the signalling from the policies is also important, especially for the business and investment communities that are making decisions on future long-term commitments.

Notwithstanding my clarifications, I support the Supplementary Supply Bill.

Mdm Deputy Speaker, I declare that I am working with a Singapore bank but I am not involved in the credit application process. I am in favour of all the measures in the support package.

I appeal to the Minister to provide additional support to our SMEs through Enterprise Singapore (ESG). Many of our SMEs are facing difficulties due to the prolonged pandemic crisis. For those utilising SME Working Capital under the Enterprise Financing Scheme (EFS), ESG shares the loan default risk with the Participating Financial Institutions (PFIs).

I propose that ESG increase its risk-share to 80% for both mature and newer companies, up from 50% and 80% respectively, and extend the maximum repayment period from five to eight years. This is because many financial institutions remain conservative, relying on old business models and track records, despite significant changes in our business environment. In the face of COVID-19, rapid technological developments, climate disruptions and changes in geopolitical dynamics, our SMEs need capital to transform their businesses and become more competitive. A higher risk-share by ESG will make it easier for our SMEs, especially newer companies, to get the necessary loans. Extending the repayment period will reduce the burden on these companies during the transition period.

I also hope that ESG can increase its risk-share for Enhanced EFS-Trade Loan (EFS-TL) from 70% to 80% and allow the existing trade loan to be included and eligible under this scheme.

For local companies providing products and services to Government agencies, Ministries and Statutory Boards, such as PUB, LTA and HDB, financial institutions may be able to provide them with bigger loans at lower interest rates if Government-related receivables can be used as collaterals. This is because of the trust financiers or banks have in our Government agencies as excellent paymasters.

Would MOF allow the transfer of such Government payment obligations and receivables from their vendors to third parties without the need for the suppliers to seek explicit approval from the Government “buyers”, in other words, the Ministries and Statutory Boards?

The flexibility to use these future cash flows as collaterals will be a big help to these contractors and suppliers.

IMDA implemented the nationwide e-invoicing network in 2019 to help businesses improve efficiency, reduce cost, enjoy faster payment and stay green at the same time. This network is an extension of the International Peppol eDelivery Network which enables businesses to transact with other linked companies. The nationwide e-invoicing network was launched in January 2019 and the nationwide e-invoicing network was renamed as InvoiceNow in September 2020.

The Singapore Government is one of the largest buyers in Singapore. Have entities like MOF’s VITAL started to require that its suppliers submit the invoices through InvoiceNow? This is the optimal period or timing to catalyse digitalisation, especially when the SME suppliers need faster cashflows.

Next, would the Government consider extending the tax exemption period to the end of this year for residents working in Singapore remotely for overseas firms?

Finally, I have a couple of requests on behalf of the retail and food and beverage sectors which have been hit hard by rounds of restrictions and closures. The first is for full waivers of foreign worker levies and work permit related fees until the end of the year. The waivers will lighten the burdens on retailers and F&B operations as they have problems finding Singaporeans to fill positions in the frontline and back-end. Many of these jobs are now being done by foreign workers. The second request is for subsidies to be also given to distributors and food producers who are also suffering due to the reduction in demand. Mdm Deputy Speaker, in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.]  My work in a bank has exposed me to several small and medium-sized enterprises which are facing many challenges, such as protecting the jobs of their employees, worrying about liquidity and also adjusting their mindset to digitalisation. SMEs employ more than 60% of the local workforce. Their survival also affects workers and their families.

I believe that the Government will, as always, help SMEs, but in the past two or three months, some areas have really experienced "roller coaster"-like changes in regulations, proceeding then stopping, turning on and then off, and some had been unable to recover. I hope that the Government will take this opportunity to revisit some policies and to help some sectors pull through this winter in a more targeted manner.