Fourth Update on Whole-of-Government Response to COVID-19

Mr Speaker, I thank the Ministers for their detailed statements. I am a healthcare worker, with brothers and sisters in the Labour Movement in the Healthcare Services Employees' Union (HSCU). I have got brothers and sisters on the TTSH frontline.

Sir, it has been very hard for many healthcare brothers and sisters at TTSH. I hear of nurses who have been told by their landlords to move out at short notice. I know of a young mother of a newborn at home, her husband works at TTSH. He has had to move out of the home to keep her and her fellow healthcare workers working at another hospital safe from COVID-19 transmission between hospitals.

Can I ask the Ministers what is being done to help affected TTSH workers: nurses who cannot find a place to stay, healthcare workers who cannot find a Grab or a taxi to bring them to the hospital or to take them home after a shift; families which have been separated by necessary COVID-19 precautions who need help with childcare, help with getting the kids to continue in school? Is there a hotline for affected TTSH staff to call? Can the Ministry set up a care team connecting the different Government agencies to provide help to affected TTSH healthcare workers, especially for challenges that may be beyond the reach of individual hospital management?

Sir, I thank Dr Tan for raising this issue. Indeed, this is a very worrisome trend. As I have mentioned my speech, we have observed a minority of our resident Singaporeans taking steps to protect themselves at the expense of our healthcare workers' well-being. Some of them have been asked to move out of their homes by their landlords. Some of their co-workers are shunning them. I think these are wrong.

We are struggling because, on one hand, we know this is wrong and we should not condone such actions. But on the other hand, we are concerned about the well-being of the healthcare workers and we do need to find ways to help them and support them. So, MOH and the Multi-Ministry Task Force have been working together with the hospitals – TTSH as well as the other hospitals – to provide support for the affected workers. In fact, we have moved in to arrange with hotels for accommodation, to provide alternatives to these healthcare workers who have been affected.

Let me say that this should not be an excuse for the landlords to kick them out on the basis that there is now alternative accommodation and say why not just move over to the hotels rather than staying on in the flat? So, I think it is still our preference to encourage our landlords to understand the situation, to play their part to support our healthcare workers in the work that they do. I also want to urge Singaporeans to show their support to these healthcare workers. Because they are putting themselves in harm's way in order to protect us. So, let us work together to protect them.

Mr Speaker, first, I want to thank the two Ministers for their comprehensive Statements. And, certainly, I think all of us want to thank all the healthcare workers for continuing to protect all of us, given that this COVID-19 pandemic will continue to throw more curve balls at us.

I have a few supplementary questions for the Ministers. Minister Gan has mentioned that the vaccination supplies are limited. Indeed, they are, and very precious at that. First, what other drugs are being tested by HSA? We know that two of them have been certified; Sinovac is being tested. What if Sinovac is not approved? Do we have arrangements with the other drug companies that can increase the supplies from the other two companies, so that Singaporeans who have not been vaccinated can be assured that they will certainly get that vaccination?

The second supplementary question, I know it is a bit further ahead, but we always like to plan ahead: booster jabs and second jabs. Soon, for those of us who have had our jabs, one year will be up. What next?

And the third supplementary question is, I would like to know what is the all-in cost for each vaccination that is given. I think it is important that every Singaporean and everyone who is working here knows how much we are spending to get all of us safe.

And that leads me to the last question. Minister Lawrence Wong talked about the implications, the overall costs of all this. All of us, whether in Government, business and public, consumers, we need to expect that for all these, there are consequences; that the end of the day, somebody has to pay for all this. I think consumers, the public, probably also would have to expect that certain costs will have to go up. I think we just need to be prepared for all these. Businesses need to absorb, need to find ways to work around some of these. The Government, I am sure, will continue to help subsidise some of these. But I think the public and consumers too need to think about what are the implications for all of us, as all of us are in this together.

Sir, I thank Mr Seah for the clarification.

First, on the vaccine supply. Indeed, the vaccines continue to be limited in supply. Also, partly because there is still a resurgence of new cases every day in many other countries and, therefore, the global supply of vaccines is limited and not just the quantity but the logistics are also challenging. Therefore, we need to do what we can to diversify our sources and to ensure that our supplies that we have contracted arrive on schedule. And when we roll them out, we encourage Singaporeans to get vaccinated as soon as possible.

As to what other vaccines are being studied, we have a diversified portfolio beyond Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Sinovac. We have several other alternatives with which we have entered into advance purchasing agreements. But I am not at liberty to share the details because many of these agreements contain confidentiality clauses that limit us and our ability to share details. But as and when these contracts materialise, as and when we are able to supply and to deploy these vaccines, we will share more details with fellow Singaporeans.

Mr Seah also asked about booster jabs. As I have mentioned, let us focus on the current vaccine roll-out. I understand that some Singaporeans are anxious and want to know, should the booster jab be required, what we need to do about it. Let me share that we have put in place a planning team to look at how we can deploy booster shots, starting probably next year, towards the end of the year or beginning of next year. So, the operational plans are being drawn up and we will be able to deliver booster jabs, if it becomes necessary.

At the end of the day, it may turn out to be similar to the flu jabs that we get every year. Because of the variants, because of the different virus and bacteria that we are confronting, so we need to continue to have booster jabs for our flu vaccines. Similarly, for COVID-19, it may come a day that we have to continue to have regular booster jabs. And we are putting in place plans to operationalise that.

In terms of the cost of vaccination, it varies from vaccine to vaccine. Actually, a significant part of the cost is not in the vaccine Itself but in the logistics of it. The cost in organising the vaccination centres, mobilising the healthcare professionals, providing support for vaccine recipients; and all these are costly.

But if you compare it with the cost of the impact on lives, on livelihoods, I think it is a small price to pay and we need to continue to prepare ourselves and to focus on the vaccination programme. Roughly, it may cost about – and this is off the top of my head and I need to verify that – off the top of my head, roughly, it costs about $100 per vaccine per regimen and that it will include some of these peripheral costs and so it is not cheap. But it is important for us to continue to press on with the vaccination programme to minimise the cost on the economy and the cost of lives.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I also would like to thank the two hon Ministers for their detailed Ministerial Statements. The point made by Minister Lawrence Wong about not engaging in xenophobia is something that chimes with me.

Sir, hon Members would know that there was a serious incident that was reported in the press yesterday that strikes at the very core of what we are as a nation.

It was alleged that a Singaporean woman of Indian descent was assaulted by a man who used racial slurs and kicked her for not wearing a mask. This and another racial incident come in the wake of the community spread, once again, of COVID-19, this time, attributable to a variant coming from the Indian subcontinent.

The tension appears to be fanned by posts with false or misleading narratives in the social media and circulated through WhatsApp and other platforms.

I seek clarification from the Minister for Home Affairs for his assessment of the security situation arising from these racial incidents connected to the pandemic. What steps will the Government take to nip this in the bud to address the situation?

Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I thank the Member for his question.

The facts we have are as reported in the media. Last Friday, 7 May, in the morning, a 55-year-old Indian lady was brisk walking towards Chua Chu Kang stadium. She said that she lowered her mask below her nose to prevent breathlessness. A man wearing a light-coloured t-shirt, accompanied by a woman, shouted at her to put her mask above her nose. She told him that she was exercising. The man then shouted at her again, used a racial slur, and she responded to him, "God bless you" and began to walk away. She said that the man then ran towards her and landed a "flying kick" on her chest, causing her to fall. She had scratches on her arms and hands. She lodged a Police report that night and she said that she would seek medical attention on 10 May – yesterday.

The matter is under investigation. The attacker is believed to be a Chinese. Investigations need to be done before we can come to any conclusions. But such conduct, unfortunately, is consistent with some of the other things that have been happening and, if the facts are as stated by the lady, then it appears to be racist conduct.

We have seen racism around the world during this pandemic: in the US, for example, Asians, particularly Chinese, being attacked; the virus being described as "Chinese virus" or "Wuhan virus", as if viruses have nationality. And we condemn that. Equally, we have to condemn such behaviour in Singapore.

I have said previously there has always been racism in Singapore like in other countries but we have managed it and, over time, we have sought to reduce it. But it has been stirred up recently.

Around the world, economic pressures have led to populism and the populists have been seeking political profit by exploiting people's fears over jobs and economic insecurity, blaming foreigners and blaming immigrants for all of a country's problems.

In Singapore, we have avoided the worst of such populism but people are concerned for their jobs, and naturally so. Amongst Singaporeans, there are legitimate concerns about foreigners taking over our jobs. The concern is fair and the Government's duty is to protect Singaporean jobs.

But these concerns have been fuelled by unacceptable practices, for example, unfair employment practices that favour hiring foreigners and discriminate against our locals. It is a minority who behaves like this, but it naturally makes Singaporeans unhappy. MOM has taken steps to deal with these bad practices.

But what has been happening also is that parties have been deliberately stoking the fears, encouraging racism, xenophobia and dog whistling, much like what we have seen in the US. That is dangerous and dangerous for Singapore because, first, it will be expatriate Indians, then it will come to Singaporean Indians. Anyway, not everyone can distinguish between foreign-born Indians and Singaporean-born Indians. The lady who was attacked has been a citizen for 25 years.

If we go down this route, eventually, all Indians can be targets of hate, the so-called "outgroup" which I referred to in a Ministerial Statement a couple of years ago. It is not the case now – far from it – but expression of overt racism is still there only amongst a minority in Singapore. The majority of Singaporeans are decent and not racist. But if we continue to fan the flames of racism, we will get to a more uncomfortable position.

There are also websites which deliberately fan racism. They are anti-Government; that is perfectly okay, but do not play with race. Comments on these sites – Indians being called cockroaches, rapists and so on – we should be ashamed that in the name of free speech, we allow such comments. This bad behaviour and open expression of racism, I invite all here to condemn. And when called out, we cannot seek to justify such racist behaviour by saying, "Oh, it is because of Government policies" or "It is because of the India-Singapore Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA)" or that the Indians are behaving badly or that we are entitled to be racist and xenophobic because of these things.

Just ask whether racism and xenophobia can ever be justified on these grounds.

There have been several canards about CECA, promoted by a whispering campaign. If anyone here believes that CECA is a problem, put it up for a Motion, debate it openly and let us hear whether Singaporeans benefit or lose from it. I am looking at you, Mr Leong. I invite you to put up a Motion to debate CECA. You know that most of what is said about CECA is false.

And what is happening on the ground? We are picking up from different coffeeshops. This morning, a friend of mine overheard in a coffeeshop a conversation among five elderly gentlemen. They discussed the incident covered in the media of an Indian expatriate family. We do not know the facts; several highly racist comments targeting Indians. So, it is getting into the ground and being repeated. This will become normalised if we are not careful.

I hope responsible Opposition parties will take a stand on this, notwithstanding that many of these sites that promote xenophobia support you.

Singapore is 725 square kilometres of rock. We have to make a living by being open to the world. We will fail if we allow racism and xenophobia to become prevalent. It is contrary to everything that has made us successful and proud to be Singaporean. [Applause.]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank Minister Gan for his reply to my Parliamentary Question and that those who have experienced allergic reactions to the first vaccine would not be able to take the second dose. I just want to confirm that that is correct. Can I confirm that this applies to all allergic reactions or is it only to anaphylaxis? And what kind of adverse events will rule out patients from taking the second vaccine? I am concerned that if we set the threshold too low, many people will be ruled out from their second dose after reporting allergic reactions and this will impact the overall immunity rate of our country.

Secondly, I understand that all hospitals have started mass swapping all their staff and patients. When COVID-19 cases were discovered in Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH), the hospital completely stopped accepting new admissions and many patients were diverted to other hospitals. Should cases be uncovered in other hospitals after the mass testing, will they, too, stop accepting new admissions? If so, the remaining hospitals may get overwhelmed.

I am not saying that we should not conduct mass testing, but do all hospitals have a business continuity plan to avoid a complete lockdown if new cases are discovered?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree with Mr Giam that we need to be very careful in calibrating the criteria for exclusion from the vaccination because we do want as many Singaporeans as possible to be vaccinated. But I must say that I am not a doctor. So, I cannot give the Member a medical advice here. My suggestion is that if you go down to the vaccination centres, there are medical professionals there, they will make an assessment and it will have to be on a case-by-case basis.

Generally, if you have anaphylaxis, you will be excluded from the vaccination. But different forms of allergic reaction will have to be assessed by the medical professionals. But generally, if the allergic reaction is mild, you should be able to continue to receive vaccinations.

But we have to be careful because we do want to minimise adverse reactions, particularly those which are more severe. So, it is a calibration and we will have to leave it to the medical professionals to make an assessment on the ground.

Mr Giam also asked about our contingency plan for hospitals if there are cases where clusters are found. They all have a contingency plan and they will continue to see their patients. What we want to do with Tan Tock Seng Hospital is because the clusters are big and we need time for us to ascertain that there are no other underlying transmission of infection within the hospital before we reopen the hospital for new patients. So, this is something that we are working on.

But it is again important for us to test all our workers at this point in time because we are concerned that similar situations might happen in other hospitals. If we do not detect the clusters and cases fast enough, it will become a widespread transmission within the other hospitals and this will be an even bigger problem.

Sometimes, some may say it is better not to know. But, as far as I am concerned, I think it is better to know than not to know. At least, if we know that there are cases, we can deal with it, we can implement contingency plans to manage the patients and to also help the healthcare workers in these hospitals.

So, I would urge Singaporeans to also refrain from going to emergency departments. If it is not an emergency case, not an urgent case, then go to our primary care clinics and get your issues attended to. If it is an emergency, if you are having a stroke or have a heart attack, if you have problems, do go to the emergency departments and we will take care of you.

Mr Speaker, thank you. I want to thank Minister Gan for acknowledging the dutifulness of the staff and all of Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH). I am married to a TTSH staff and many TTSH families are now made to live apart to reduce risk to other hospitals, to better support the needs of Singaporeans.

But I am concerned about possible on-going community spread. Would there be a consideration to make it compulsory to swab all patients visiting a hospital, whether inpatient or outpatient?

It is something that we are studying but it is not easy to swab all patients because some of them would already have symptoms and some of them may already have pre-existing conditions. Some of them, even after swabbing, could be negative. They could also be infected by visitors and they could also be within the incubation period and they can become positive thereafter. So, it is important for us to put in place safe distancing, safe management measures even within the hospital to ensure that precautions are taken. The staff, healthcare workers must wear the necessary protective wear, whether it is PPE, depending on the setting; even in the inpatient wards or outpatient areas, precautions have to be adopted.

We cannot assume that after swabbing, everyone would be safe. But we are looking at to what extent we can extend the testing for visitors and for patients that are admitted into hospitals.

Many of my residents and friends who have taken the jab at the vaccination centres, they have had very good experience. They said the staff are patient and efficient. Kudos to the staff at all the vaccination centres in Singapore. Meanwhile, I have supplementary questions for the Ministers.

We know that Changi Airport Terminal has a cluster and it is developing. So, what are the lessons learnt from the clusters as they are developing in Changi Airport and what impact does it have on the upcoming Shangri-La Dialogue and the World Economic Forum that are to be held in Singapore?

Last but not least, I would like to touch on a point by Dr Tan Wu Meng to say that taxis are shunning the Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH). Before I proceed, I would like to declare my interest as the ComfortDelGro Taxi CEO. I would like to assure the House that the taxis, especially the ComfortDelGro taxis, are not shunning TTSH or other clusters like Changi Airport. In fact, a cabby had just texted me that he has been encouraging his fellow cabbies to not shun TTSH.

Mr Speaker, the experience from the latest cases picked up in Changi Airport as well as the clusters we have seen from ICA and Tan Tock Seng Hospital so far suggests that, as Minister Gan mentioned in his earlier speech, this strain or the variant that we are experiencing now is more infectious. Each time we pick up an infected case, we are seeing larger clusters. More people are being infected than, say, the experience last year.

So, what this means for us is that we really need to take this seriously. We should take all the safe management measures and all the infection protocols very seriously. People who need to wear PPE need to be very diligent about this. Those who are in close contact or doing high-risk jobs need to be very diligent about wearing of masks, for example, and make sure they are wearing a proper mask. So, these are all basic things but I think it is worth re-emphasising.

The other point is that testing can be a big help. We have seen how, through very frequent testing, either by doing a special sweep of everyone or doing it on a regular basis, we are able to pick up cases very quickly. So, that is an important point that we should not give up. Vaccination is important but testing remains an important way for us to detect the virus quickly.

When we talk about events that are coming up, certainly, we will apply all of these lessons – infection control, safe-management measures and frequent testing – to ensure that these events can be conducted safely.

Thank you, Speaker. I have a clarification for the Minister for Health and one for the Minister for Education.

First, to the Minister for Health. Before I do that, I would just like to assure him that I, too, feel nostalgic that this may be the last time that I would have the chance to pose health-related questions to him after the last 10 years. So, the feeling is mutual in that sense.

On to my question, it is about the Vaccine Injury Financial Assistance Programme which he gave some figures on just now. Earlier, he said that there were 104 applications received and about 30 applications were adjudged to have met the qualifying criteria. So, does that mean that these 30 claims are going to be allowed and some payment is going to be made on these 30 claims? Then, he also mentioned that there were 75 that were rejected. I would like him to clarify the reasons for rejection because, from the portal for submission of the application, it appears that every application has to be accompanied by a doctor's certification that the side effect is related to the vaccination. So, for these 75 rejected cases, was there actually an accompanying medical certification that the side effect is related to the vaccination? And could he clarify why those applications were rejected?

For the Minister for Education, the recent round of tightening measures included some that affected the fitness industry. I think he is aware that this has caused a lot of unhappiness and anxiety, as it affects the livelihoods of trainers and also the customers. Subsequently, there was a slight adjustment to this announcement to say that low-intensity activities would be allowed to carry on indoors. But I understand that this has been accompanied by a requirement that the patrons have to bring their own equipment to the fitness studios or the gyms, which, to most people, would be a disincentive to go to the place in the first place because these are things you go to the studio for because you cannot do them at home.

So, I would like to ask him whether the Government will review this requirement because it is already setting capacity limits, it is saying that the activities have to be low intensity, masks have to be on at all times. If there can be some additional measures, such as requirement to wear gloves and so on, would the Government re-look at this requirement for customers to bring their own equipment to the fitness studio?

Thank you. Let me just clarify that 75 have been evaluated; 45 were rejected, 30 were approved. That is the number; not 75 are rejected. Among those that were rejected, some of them, the panel will have to assess whether it is more likely to be associated with vaccination or not. There is also a balance of probability that they have to assess. And some cases did not qualify because the severity did not meet the mark of a severe reaction. Some of it may be rashes, maybe some swelling, but does not require extensive medical care and, therefore, may not qualify for the application.

So, there are a variety of reasons. But suffice to say that they are all assessed thoroughly by an independent panel before they were approved or rejected.

Mr Speaker, our approach towards these high-risk activities has been consistent, in the sense that if you look at what we have done for nightclubs, karaokes, for example, we have not allowed these activities which we think are of higher risk, but the premises have been allowed to pivot to other activities which are permissible. Last year, Members will recall, Zouk, maybe even now, has been transformed and changed to different kinds of activities.

So, in that sense, we continue to apply the same approach now to gyms and fitness centres. Why did we specifically identify this activity? Because we have seen evidence of spread in other places, we have had infected persons use gyms and fitness centres in Singapore, and we have been very worried of large clusters potentially breaking out in these settings. Because in a gym fitness centre, it is an enclosed space, many people are there, very often without masks on, spreading a lot of droplets each time you are exercising, shouting or whatever you are doing in the gym, Zumba or whatever that lesson is, the chances of a spread within that environment is very high. That is why we have decided, during this period of heightened alert, this is one of the highest risk kinds of activities; better to put a stop to it temporarily. But if the operators are able to pivot or do something differently, something of lower risk, then we will be able to allow it.

On the specific issue of equipment, we will be prepared to look at it. There is concern, obviously, because there will be infection, not just through droplets but also fomites and touching the surfaces. Remember how last year we encouraged everyone not to use your hands to touch your face? That basic advice still remains. You can still get infected by contact.

So, that is the reason why we suggested people bring their own equipment, but we will continue to monitor the situation very closely. And we will see if there is any possibility of modifications along the way, depending on how the next few days and weeks unfold.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thought I would just add more to the answer that the Minister for Education had given to Mr Ang Wei Neng on the lessons learnt for Changi Airport. We know that the sea port and the airport are points of vulnerability when we have a pandemic. So, in fact, just this morning, we got information that, in Taiwan, their biggest airline has been infiltrated by the virus. So, they are tightening up rules on pilots. So, even for Taiwan, which has kept itself domestically very safe, the virus will find itself through the borders.

Airport, sea port, causeway, these are our points of vulnerabilities, regardless of where the variants and the virus come from. We have been implementing a very tight posture both for sea port and airport. The workers all observe safe management measures, masks on, some are even in full PPE when they carry out their work. We test them regularly – some on a seven-day cycle, some on a 14-day cycle – which is why we are able to pick up these cases quite quickly this round when we had the outbreak of cases.

Thirdly, it is to push them for vaccinations. They were one of the first to go for vaccination. Mr Ang asked about the airport. At the airport, in total, we are talking about 46,000 workers; 26,000 are what we consider more high-risk. They may come into contact; actually, they do come into contact with travellers, so they are higher risk. For that group, 92% are fully vaccinated. Then, there is an outer ring that does not come into direct contact but we, nevertheless, consider them exposed to some risk. That is another 20,000. And for that group, more than 80% have had at least one dose.

So, we have taken all these measures, but the mutant virus still found its way through the kink in the armour.

So, what are the lessons learnt? I think never be complacent, not even when you are vaccinated; never be complacent.

What are we doing? I put out some information two nights ago, but let me just briefly recap. The first thing when something like that happens is to press the reset button and contain the problem. Put two rings immediately, that Minister Lawrence Wong and Minister Gan Kim Yong mentioned. First ring, who are the close contacts, quarantine and then isolate. Second is the wider ring, who could have been affected; put them all through testing. So, today, we are putting several thousand through a one-time special operation. It should be carried out these few days; started yesterday.

Members should expect that, as we do such special operations, we will be picking up cases in the next few days. So, please do expect some cases coming out from the airport because we are doing a very massive one-time sweep.

Beyond that is to put in place greater, more effective segregation measures, so that airport workers who are more risky do not mix with other workers or members of the public. So, places like the canteen and food court, we now do takeaways for them, so that we do not mix them.

Thirdly, we continue to do surveillance and the testing. One thing we can possibly do – and I have to discuss this with the Minister for Health, besides the PCR test once every 14 days – is how can we intersperse it with something like the antigen test, something faster? We are also developing a breathalyser test, something that can pick up quickly even though it may be less accurate. But the speed with which we pick up cases is absolutely critical. And, lastly, push those that have not gone for vaccination to go for vaccination as fast as we can.

I would like to thank both Ministers for their very helpful Statements. Just two points of clarification for the Minister for Health.

Firstly, he mentioned that HSA is studying the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for adolescents and children. I understand that the US Food and Drug Administration has just approved the use of the Pfizer vaccine for children aged 12 to 15, and this is just a very recent development. So, I am wondering, assuming that HSA finds that it is safe to do so, can we assume that we will proceed to vaccinate school-going children above the age of 12 with the vaccines that we have?

My second clarification is on the vaccination effort. I think the Minister for Health shared very heartening figures about the progress that we have made. The majority of people over 60 years old have been vaccinated. Given how key this vaccination effort is to our fight against COVID-19, I am wondering if MOH is studying the example of a handful of countries which have been very successful and made very rapid progress in vaccination – Israel is one example. I believe roughly 90% of those over 60 years old in Israel have been vaccinated in a very short time. Are we studying those examples to see what lessons we might be able to learn in order to accelerate the speed of this vaccine roll-out in Singapore?

Sir, as I have mentioned in my speech, HSA is now evaluating the use of Pfizer-BioNTech for the younger population. And I believe the results should be out quite soon. Once the results are out and if it is, in fact, deemed effective and safe for deployment to the younger population, we will roll out the programme to vaccinate the younger population, also shortly. So, be patient with us, we are doing the assessment. I have to also explain that the assessment differs from country to country. While WHO and some countries may have approved the use, we still need to assess the efficacy and safety of this vaccine in our own context. So, it will take some time and I believe the results should be out shortly.

Mr Perera also asked about whether we have learnt the lessons from other countries on the promotion of vaccination. Yes, indeed, we watched what the other countries do and we try to learn as much as we can from them, whether it is through promotion, through messaging and even through family members to encourage them.

I think all of us will understand that every country is different, the culture is different, the context is different and beliefs are different. Therefore, we also have to evolve our own system of outreach to encourage people to sign up for vaccination. I must say that I am encouraged by the take-up rate so far. But I think it is always the last 20% to 25% that is most difficult to reach. Therefore, I would encourage all of us, Members of Parliament, as well as grassroots leaders, to do what we can to reach out, especially the harder to reach, the older population, to help to explain to them the importance of vaccination.

I do house visits myself, before the recent tightening of the measures. I bring along my grassroots leaders to see whether we can persuade the individuals, the seniors at home, to sign up and we help them sign up on the spot because many of them are waiting for their children, and their children will be very busy and unable to help them. So, we tried our best to reach out to them and make it easy for them to sign up. We also organise activities on the ground; to invite the seniors to come down, explain to them why vaccination is important and to also help set up a station to help them sign up on the spot.

I think there are quite a few things that we can do and we can have our own way of reaching out to the seniors, to see how we can further promote vaccination among them. Again, it is also important to stamp out false information, misinformation and rumours that may stop them or discourage them from getting vaccinated. So, I would encourage all of us to verify our message that we have received before we virtually just forward them to all our friends. Please verify them. If they are not true, please do not forward them.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to thank both Ministers for the updates and the tremendous efforts put in by everyone to safeguard life and livelihoods for Singaporeans during this difficult time. One clarification is that with the resurgence of the community cases happening just a few months after our Phase Three re-opening from end of December last year, and with the roll-out of vaccination, what is the learning? And how might we plan our re-opening differently this round, after the current tightening measures, ending May, especially with the June school holidays coming up? Should we be prepared for the measures to maybe last for a longer period?

Mr Speaker, as I think we have highlighted and shared, there is no place for complacency. Assuming we are able to curb the current community cases, bring things back under control, yes, I think there is a chance we will be able to then get back on track with our re-opening plans. But really, even if we were to be able to do that, there is no place for complacency in our community.

We all still need to realise, whatever we do on our borders as you heard just now, even for places that have been very, very tight – China Australia, Taiwan – cases leak through. Leaks will happen. Even in our community, it is not likely that we have ever throughout this whole period been able to eradicate the virus. There has always been a low level of circulation.

So, even if we can get today's outbreak under control and we start resuming more activities, there is no place for complacency. We must remain alert, vigilant and uphold all the necessary safe management measures.

Second, vaccinations, as I have said, is an important game changer. Today, you have heard where we are now, we are making good progress. By May, June, July, we will continue to scale up and get more of our population vaccinated. The more we do so, for example, once we cross 50% of the population getting vaccinated, all the models and all the studies suggest that then, even if a cluster were to happen, the number of people infected will not be as large. It would be more contained and we will be safer.

So, if we stay alert, stay vigilant, uphold all the prevailing safe management measures, continue to press forward with our vaccination programme, then I think there is a good chance we can remain on track with our re-opening plans.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. First, a quick response to Minister for Home Affairs on his short statement. Yesterday, the Head of the Workers' Party media team, Mr Leon Perera, put out this Facebook post, this is 13 hours ago: "It is important that as a society, we each do our part to help make sure that difficult times bring out the best and not the worst in Singapore. We should take heed of incidents like this as it is a reminder of the part we all play to deny acceptability to acts of hate such as this appears to be." This was in response to the Police announcement that it was investigating a man accused of using a racial slur and kicking a 55-year-old woman. Insofar as the Minister for Home Affair's statement is concerned, indeed, we are in agreement. There is no place for racism in Singapore – no "ifs", no "buts".

I have two supplementary questions with regard to the Statement by the Minister for Health.

The first pertains to the HSA safety update that was recently released. It covered the suspected adverse event reports and I think this is a very important document released by MOH, because there is significant misinformation fuelled by not just misinformation alone, but different understanding of the safety of the vaccine. So, it is not necessarily misinformation, but genuine concerns that people may have. As usual, when you are concerned, you tend to be more animated and this can take on a life of its own. So, my request to the Minister is to consider whether this very useful document can be made into an infographic for easy sharing amongst members of the public, particularly the last 20% to 25 % that Minister said is hard to get through to with regard to the messaging on vaccination. The Workers' Party Members of Parliament have been doing their part to encourage older Singaporeans, in particular, to get vaccinated.

My second question is, again, to the Minister for Health. This pertains to the cluster at Tan Tock Seng Hospital. We have some residents – as I am sure Members in this House also have – who are in Tan Tock Seng Hospital because of some terminal illness or who are very ill. And the cluster at Tan Tock Seng Hospital has resulted in the visitation hours for family members of some of these patients to be severely curtailed. I am requesting the Ministry to consider whether there could be some regime to help these family members to have a bit more face time with their ill or terminally-ill family members.

Sir, the answer to both questions is yes. We will try to make our report as easy to understand as possible. Maybe we will rely on "Mr Phua Chu Kang" to help us convey some of these messages. I believe some of you have seen the recent video that we have put out, which has been very effective in communicating some of these messages. We will see how we can make it simpler, easier to understand and to also avoid misunderstandings and rumours.

Secondly, on the visitation to Tan Tock Seng Hospital, I think the Member would understand why we need to tighten our visitation rules because we do want to prevent any infection that is in the hospital from spreading to the community and also to prevent visitors bringing in new infection to the hospital that will complicate the management process at the moment. But we do understand that there are family members who want to visit their elderly, their frail loved ones, particularly those who are terminally ill. They want to spend time with them and the hospital will make exceptions. And if you do come across any of these cases, you can either appeal to the hospital or to me. We will make adjustments and we will make allowance for them to visit as much as possible, but to also take into account the various precautionary measures that have to be put in place.