Overview of Government's Strategy to Emerge Stronger from the COVID-19 Pandemic

Mr Saktiandi Supaat.

Mr Louis Chua.

Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the Ministerial Statement made by Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, which provides a clear path forward for our nation to reopen our economy safely and emerge stronger from this crisis.

Since the Deputy Prime Minister first presented the latest set of relief measures on 17 August, Singapore’s employment landscape has experienced another sharp contraction. According to the latest labour market report published by MOM, more than 11,000 jobs were made redundant in the first half of 2020. This figure does not include the large-scale layoffs recently announced by Resorts World Sentosa and Singapore Airlines, and we can expect that retrenchment and unemployment numbers will continue to rise in the second half of the year.

While the figures from MOM’s labour market report are concerning, the reality is that retrenchments could have been a lot worse, if not for the swift and decisive measures put in place by the Government. Many companies have told me that initiatives, such JSS, have been instrumental in helping them to retain their workers while they work on adjusting to the new normal. I am, therefore, heartened that the Government will continue to provide tiered wage support to sectors that are hardest hit by this pandemic.

Mr Speaker, beyond job preservation, we also need to provide better mental health support for our workers. In his recent address to the World Health Organisation, Prime Minister Lee acknowledged the impact that COVID-19 has had on the mental health of our population and that protecting mental health takes a collective effort. I fully agree.

The Multi-Ministry Taskforce recently announced that more employees will be allowed to return to the workplace and that the Government is working on a roadmap towards Phase 3 of the safe reopening of our economy. Working from home will, however, continue to remain as the default. In recent Parliamentary sittings, I have repeatedly highlighted the challenges faced by our workers who telecommute. They must juggle multiple responsibilities, such as looking after children, taking care of elderly parents and trying to remain productive at work. To make matters worse, because they work from home, their bosses think that it is easier for them to answer work-related calls and emails at any time of the day, even after office hours. Workplace burnout has become an issue, as many employees are not well-rested.

To help workers cope with workplace burnout, I recently asked in this House whether it was timely for us to consider a “Right to Disconnect” legislation. Since then, Singaporeans have written to me to share their thoughts and personal experiences, support as well as criticism. Let me first address the criticisms that I have received and explain how I think the Right to Disconnect can be applied to our local context.

The three most common criticisms against having a Right to Disconnect in Singapore are:

One, it would be too rigid to legislate work hours, as every sector is different, and doing so would not be feasible for those working in essential services.

Two, productivity would drop if workers are not allowed to work outside of their specified hours and it would erode Singapore’s competitiveness as a global hub.

Three, colleagues who work longer hours would obtain better appraisals from their supervisors because this is, after all, a “dog-eat-dog” world.

Mr Speaker, these criticisms, while seemingly valid, show that many people do not quite understand the exact scope of a Right to Disconnect legislation. Let me reassure critics that I am not calling for rigid laws that specify working hours, nor am I calling for Singaporeans to be less productive and, certainly, not for Singapore to be any less competitive! It is simply about ensuring that our workers have protected time to rest. But I can see why some have this misconception about rigid working hours.

In France, where this was pioneered, their labour laws were modified in the year 2000 to specify that the length of their work week was 35 hours, exceeding which, overtime had to be paid. When the country implemented its Right to Disconnect legislation in 2017, that is, 17 years later, people got confused between the scope of these two separate pieces of legislation and mistakenly thought that it was forbidden to send work emails outside of 6.00 pm.

But the reality is that many French workers still choose to work beyond their official work hours and get paid overtime. The difference is that they now have to respect their colleagues’ personal time and cannot expect them to work past official hours for non-urgent, non-critical tasks that can be completed the next working day.

For those worrying about the delivery of our essential services, our frontline officers have actually been practising protected time for years. When I was with the Police Force, my officers and I would be on call 24/7. We would receive phone alerts on incidents happening throughout the day. But between the “silent hours” of midnight to around 7 am, these alerts were restricted only to a specific list of critical, sensitive cases. This was to ensure that we were sufficiently well rested, even while we are always on standby.

On the criticism that a Right to Disconnect would erode our competitiveness and productivity, research provides evidence to the contrary. According to a 2014 study by Prof John Pencavel from the Stanford University, overworking beyond 55 hours per week causes a sharp decline in productivity per hour. He also observed that overwork led to increased workplace accidents and injuries. The professor's findings are not unique, and other researchers have also found that well-rested employees are more productive, more careful and are better able to contribute creatively at the workplace.

There were also some who were concerned that a Right to Disconnect would disadvantage them as they felt that bosses tended to favour those who worked longer hours. This is fundamentally an issue of presenteeism at the workplace, which a growing body of research has found to be detrimental to a company’s performance. According to a study by the Global Corporate Challenge, presenteeism reduces productivity and many employers have been moving away from using time spent at the office as a proxy for good performance. Staff’s performance should be measured by the outcomes achieved against clear goals set, not by the extended hours spent.

Mr Speaker, in simple terms, what I am calling for is that we help our employees carve out protected time for them to rest and recharge.

In France, the Right to Disconnect legislation makes it mandatory for employers and employees to negotiate on the protocol for non-emergency calls and non-critical emails outside of working hours. Disconnecting is all about creating protected time to rest and recharge – not unlike what MOE does for its teachers during the school holidays.

Even the Germans – who according to a survey, work on average five hours more than their contractual hours each week – they too understand the need for clearly defined periods of rest so that they can be more productive the next day. The Germans have a concept called “Feierabend”, which describes the time after their work day ends and when their rest time begins. Our German friends understand that they need to have dedicated time outside of work to rest properly in order to have the energy to work hard and be productive again the next day.

For those who remain unconvinced, let me share the experience of Rebecca Wong, a Singaporean currently working in France, who wrote to me last month. She shared that when emails are sent outside of office hours in France, it is usually accompanied with a disclaimer to state that no immediate response is expected. Alternatively, they can use technology to schedule their non-critical emails to be sent out only at 8 am the next working day. These are certainly not radical practices, but baby steps which we can easily adopt here in Singapore.

But I do agree with Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamed that we should study in greater detail how a Right to Disconnect legislation could be implemented in Singapore. But in the meantime, I hope that the Tripartite Advisory on Mental Health – which the Senior Minister of State had assured last week would be published soon – will include aspects of the Right to Disconnect.

With clearer guidelines, our unions can start a conversation with employers on the protocol to answer non-critical work calls and emails outside of working hours, as well as the provision of appropriate help for those facing workplace burnout, while keeping their identities confidential.

I also urge MOM to conduct a yearly survey on workplace mental health. This will allow us to track how well our workers are faring mentally, what are the best practices among our companies and guide our collective efforts to provide better workplace mental health support.

I hope that tackling workplace burnout will be a key priority in the newly announced COVID-19 Mental Wellness Taskforce. After all, a mentally resilient workforce leads to a safer work environment for all.

Mr Speaker, as we gradually move towards Phase 3 of our safe recovery, we need to pay special attention to workplace safety. The latest Workplace Safety and Health or WSH report published by MOM found that workplace accidents and injuries fell for the first half of this year. This is not unexpected in view of the suspension of most work activities due to the circuit breaker measures. The number of workplace fatalities had, however, remained similar to the first half of 2019.

As more workers return to their workplaces, there is a need to ease them back gradually into their jobs, as many have not returned to their worksites for months. It is imperative that companies implement a structured re-orientation programme for workers returning to work, especially in high-risk worksites. Companies should also conduct refresher WSH courses for all returning workers so that safety remains at the top of everyone's minds.

Experiences from other countries have shown that workplaces have the potential to become super-spreader events. A factory in Sri Lanka where over 1,000 workers caught COVID-19, a five-star hotel in Hong Kong and even the White House are just some of the recent high profile cases of the coronavirus spreading unabated at the workplace.

We need to ensure that Safe Management Measures are adhered to strictly. We need to avoid complacency and prevent virus clusters re-emerging from the workplace. To do so, I hope that MOM will finally heed my repeated calls for a mandatory WSH officer at every workplace.

To conclude, I would like to commend every Singaporean and resident who have been involved in this tireless fight against COVID-19. From our healthcare workers fighting hard at the frontline, to every individual who practises Safe Management Measures every single day – wearing a mask, using SafeEntry, carrying the TraceTogether token and simply keeping a safe distance where possible. It is not easy and we still have a long way to overcome COVID-19, both as a public health crisis and as an economic crisis.

Let us continue to stay united, keeping each other safe and sane as we transit together to a new normal. Mr Speaker, I support the Ministerial Statement.

Ms Yeo Wan Ling.

Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak on a topic that is professionally very important to me as the Director of the NTUC’s Women and Family unit, as well as a career woman in the making for the past 20 years of my life.

Just two weeks ago, in my Secondary school alumni chat group, one of my alumni mates posed a question to the ladies in the chat group. She asked for our opinions as females progressing in our careers and workplaces. Mr Speaker, Sir, I may like to declare at this time, that I studied in an all-girls environment for 10 years of my life and it was not by design that we excluded men in our straw poll.

Now, in that chat group, we have women born in the1970s, 1980s and even 1990s. Many are executives in MNCs, SMEs, some are business owners, recruiters, community leaders and we even have Members of Parliament in there – not just me, but also the hon Ms Carrie Tan. As the answers came in, I saw the most fulfilled and happiest of us, are women who are able to adapt well because they have the opportunity of choice. Due to these choices, they are able to move freely in and out of different work arrangements.

Indeed, we all know of sisters, mothers, daughters in our lives who have made changes to their work and lives due to changing family responsibilities. These are women who have heeded the call of motherhood, taken on the role of being sole care-givers, stepped up to take on extra work in the face of job and wage cuts.

I recently met with Ms L, who used to work 9 am to 6p m in the office as a manager, but now works full time as an interior designer at home to take care of her home-bound adult special needs brother. She intends to continue to make adjustments to her work and her life as her brother and her grow old together. She is both the sole breadwinner as well as the sole care-giver in her household.

I was excited to hear from Deputy Prime Minister Heng that he will be setting up an initiative to look at creating micro-jobs in the community through the good and safe networks of our Community Development Councils or CDCs. Women need choices in their work arrangements and I believe that micro-jobbing would be something very welcomed in our communities.

In my constituency work, I have come to recognise that more women are coming back to the workforce as part of their efforts to supplement their household incomes. However, in reconnecting with work, the issues that took women away from the workplace still remain. Their children and elderly loved ones still need caring for and women need to be able to be in full control of when they work, where they work and how they work.

Thus, the prospects of in-community micro work will be an attractive option for many women. However, in enabling women with this option, we must be certain to be able to provide protection and safety nets. As micro-jobs pick up in popularity and leave the safe protective hands of the CDC and into the invisible hands of the free market, the House may need to consider some protective areas.

Take Mdm H for example. She was contracted to look after an elderly for three hours while his family members went out for the afternoon. After four hours, the family had not returned, and Mdm H had to leave to pick up her granddaughter from school. The elderly she was caring for told her to come back another day for payment, as his family member had left him with no money to pay Mdm H. Till today, Mdm H has yet to be paid for her services, but she has kindly deemed it to be an act of community service, even though she needed the money for her own family.

Mr Speaker, in considering safety nets, we may need to look at the following.

One, awareness and education. As micro-jobs and other non-traditional employment types come into play, we will need to educate both micro-jobbers and their service buyers of their obligations. Perhaps all micro-jobs below a certain amount needs to be cash upfront payments as an informal industry standard. Such informal practices are set by strong first movers and I look forward to the leadership by the CDCs.

Two, contractual safety nets. Micro-jobs run into the danger of work agreements that are contracted with no overriding legal agreements set into place. This is especially so should the work be contracted with individuals as service buyers. Without dampening the spirit of the flexible nature of micro-jobs, it is necessary to look into some standards for issues such as payment terms and service waivers. We perhaps can take a page from the Public Transport Council that penalises and fines fare evaders through the Public Transport Council Act.

Three, dispute management and mediation. Hassle-free escalation pathways need to be created to protect both micro-jobbers and their service buyers. In Mdm H’s case, she had no recourse other than herself to recover her service fees. She is not covered by the employment act, and TADM would be too large a blade to weld in her representation. Could we perhaps have a mediation hotline set up for a small fee for such cases?

Micro-jobs and other non-traditional career pathways can be viable livelihood choices for women seeking to balance work with home. These choices should not be seen to be second-best options. Through implementing strong protective safety nets, we can remodel these choices into strong first choices that merely look different. We need to ensure that no one falls through the cracks, so that we can build for our women to reach for the stars. Mr Speaker Sir, I support the Budget adjustment.

Mr Leong Mun Wai.

Mr Speaker, the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the stress fractures of many societies in the world today that are traditionally not discussed as much. The area that I am keen to speak on today is mental health. I would first like to disclose my involvement as a founder of an organisation that works on social issues including mental health.

Mental health is increasingly an issue that Singaporeans face. The Singapore Mental Health study in 2016 noted that millennials between ages 18 and 34 were more likely to report experiencing a mental health issue compared to other age groups.

However, mental health issues continue to be stigmatised, as respondents in this survey cited. The study found that 11 years is a median time between when they first experience symptoms and when they sought help for obsessive compulsive disorder; four years for bipolar disorder and alcohol abuse; two years for generalised anxiety disorder and one year for major depressive disorder.

Many residents have approached me to seek advice for how they can receive help to improve their mental health. They have also shared their experiences accessing mental health services. One resident shared on the long waiting times to access psychotherapy at IMH. The earliest appointment she could get was in February of next year.

As Minister for Health Gan Kim Yong noted, stigma and the lack of mental health literacy may be contributory factors to the delay. Even as we are more aware, there are some misconceptions of mental health. This stigmatisation might only have hurt us as we deal with the mental damage that the COVID-19 pandemic has wrought. I remember reading the concerns of mental health practitioners during the initial circuit breaker measures which categorise them as non-essential.

An IPSO online survey done during the circuit breaker indicated that one in four respondents were not in good mental health. The vulnerability to stress exists across a population regardless of their work situation.

To be clear, this is not unique to Singapore. A recent WHO survey has noted that COVID-19 is disrupting mental health services in most countries. As this pandemic continues, we must guard against the long tail effect on mental health, as experts are predicting.

An editorial on the Lancet Infectious Diseases publication noted that "to minimise the impact of the pandemic, we must also address the substantial unmet mental health needs of whole societies with a focus on the most vulnerable".

A High Court judge in a recent sentencing also drew attention to mental health access. She said, and I quote, "As a society, it is critical to continue with efforts to improve and enhance access to mental health services". I could no agree more with the sentiments expressed.

But there has been innovation in this time of crisis. Singapore saw the establishment of a National Care Hotline in April, now manned by 900 odd volunteers, which also has served over 28,000 calls by this August.

On World Mental Health Day, Prime Minister Lee has announced the establishment of an inter-agency taskforce to look at the psycho-social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the population. I welcome these developments but I believe we can go further to make a huge step in destigmatising mental health issues, and improving and expanding on current services.

In fact, this period may be a good launching pad for Singapore to make a society-wide effort to destigmatise mental health issues.

Mr Speaker, I would now like to make some suggestions.

Firstly, I propose forming a Mental Health Committee with various stakeholders involved, stakeholders such as Government reps, mental health practitioners, VWOs and social workers, and also people who have experienced issues pertaining to mental health. It is important that we bank on the expertise and experiences of our fellow citizens who can help shape and lead the change that we need.

Secondly, improve the quantity and quality of information on mental health resources. Finding suitable treatment requires time and effort from an individual. Therefore, improving the quantity and quality of information about mental health resources may encourage more people to seek help. Cognitively, many may be unable to find the appropriate mental health service as it can seem like an overwhelming experience. Having helpful guides for people to navigate the many options may be more helpful to those who wish to take that first step.

Thirdly, ensuring that mental health remains affordable especially for youths, especially as mental health prevalence has been largely on young people. However, they may hesitate to resolve their issues as mental health treatments are long term in nature and the cost of treatments can stack up quickly, especially for those who need weekly treatments. Can there be reviews on treatments and coverage? For instance, MediSave withdrawal limits for inpatient psychiatric treatment is subject to a withdrawal limit of $150 per day but physical treatment is subject to the to the withdrawal limit of $450 per day. If we truly want to take mental health in this country seriously, we should not draw distinctions between psychiatric and physical treatment.

Lastly, consider adding social, emotional learning to our education curriculum and mental health campaigns. Preventive work needs to be done alongside destigmatisation efforts. And that includes learning the appropriate language to use when speaking to a family member or a friend who has a mental health condition and what actions to take when they are in severe distress.

An effort to improve mental health is not only good for the self but good for our country. Psychological defence is an underlying key pillar of our Total Defence and it will serve Singapore well when any Singaporean, even at their most mentally vulnerable, can trust that society at large will also have their back. I hope the authorities will take this opportunity to reset the conversations on mental health for the betterment of society.

Ms Hazel Poa.

Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I would like to declare that I own an education company as I will be talking about education in the rest of my speech.

The Deputy Prime Minister spoke extensively about the economic plans to address the post-COVID-19 situation in Singapore, but not enough on how to prepare our people for the future. Upskilling and re-skilling our workforce is part of the solution but it is a reactive approach. If upskilling and re-skilling were our only recourse, Singaporeans will always find ourselves one step behind.

Instead of focusing only on giving working adults new skills to survive the new economy, we should also look into preparing our youths to thrive in the future. Instead of preparing for jobs that we cannot foresee, we need to focus on building resilient growth mindsets in our young people today.

Why are Singaporeans losing out in the job market in our own country? Employers repeatedly cite the lack of creativity and risk-taking, not to mention poor communication skills as reasons for this. Our grade-centric education system was also cited as a contributory factor.

In addition to facing competition for jobs from foreigners, we are increasingly facing competition from machines as well. Currently, standardised written examinations often reward behaviours like memorising and regurgitating facts and standard answers but encouraging such behaviours make our people most vulnerable to being replaced by machines. What is not easily replaced by a machine, however, is the ability to think creatively, take risk and communicating and social skills. These are the same skills that employers find Singaporeans lack.

Now, with digitalisation accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, there is even greater urgency to hasten the pace of education reform as old methods of teaching and learning become obsolete.

We had been facing growing uncertainty even before the pandemic struck. The key to thriving in uncertain environments is adaptability. To help build the ability to adapt to different or changing circumstances, we need to provide a learning environment that is non-standardised and non-prescriptive, one that constantly contains elements of unfamiliarity. In other words, diversity.

Diversity is also an important factor in the fostering of creativity and innovation. The modern innovations of today have always required inter-disciplinary approaches to reach fruition, a point also brought up by the hon Member Cheryl Chan earlier. So, similarly, I believe that our educational system not only needs to be diverse in terms of curriculum, but in student mix as well.

First, diversity in curriculum. We need to offer a wider range of subjects to students and greater flexibility in choices and combinations. In other words, an a la carte approach rather than set menus. Here, I would like to quote the American psychologist Abraham Harold Maslow, who said, "It is no more necessary to study animals before one can study men than it is to study mathematics before one can study geology or psychology or biology."

Take the range of Primary school subjects, for example. In UK, their primary schools have 11 core subjects including design and technology, history, geography and computing, plus three optionals. In Finland, they have 13 core subjects including environmental studies, religion, history, social studies and guidance counselling, plus optionals in art and skill subjects.

In Singapore, although we have nine core subjects, only four of them are assessed in the PSLE. This unequal treatment skews time and effort towards the four subjects, effectively further narrowing the range.

Secondly, diversity in student mix. The practice of streaming students with similar abilities and aptitudes into groups reduces opportunities for our students to interact with others who are different. This has already been highlighted in a CNA documentary "Regardless of Race".

While MOE is moving away from streaming towards subject-based banding which removes the labelling, it does not change the fact that students are still grouped based on similar results in each subject. Students with different skill sets and interest will have few opportunities to share and discuss diverse thoughts and ideas. It also stymies broader social interaction and the development of people management skills.

Thirdly, diversity in pathways. Over the years, additional pathways have been created for older students. At the Primary school level, children are still on a single track with all Primary students taking the PSLE route. But as any parent knows, the PSLE is a stressful exam for students and parents alike because the outcome has very important implications on a child's future education and development. While some feel the PSLE is necessary for Secondary school posting, there are others, like myself, who believe it is premature to assess students at the age of 12 to determine their educational paths. I therefore urge MOE to consider a pilot project of through-train schools from Primary to Secondary levels without going through the PSLE, to give parents the option to choose an education path that may be better suited for their children's future.

With so much depending on the results of examinations like the PSLE, it is not surprising that Singapore students have a high fear of failure compared to students in other countries. In an OECD survey, it was found that three in four Singapore students fear failure as compared to a global average of 55%. I believe high-stakes examinations contribute to the building of such fears by making the price of failing too high to pay. Such fears can inhibit risk-taking entrepreneurship and the willingness to venture into the unfamiliar. Assessments should take into account the learning value of failing by giving them multiple opportunities to try again. A single failure should not mark you for life. For example, in the UK, national examinations like GCSE are conducted twice in May and November. I hope MOE can give our students similar chances.

To introduce greater diversity and differentiated learning into our education system, we need smaller class sizes. With Singapore's total fertility rate dropping, the number of school-going children is decreasing. This would have been a good opportunity to decrease class sizes, but MOE has instead closed schools and reduced teacher recruitment. The number of education officers dropped from 36,400 in 2016 to 33,700 in 2018. The NIE intake dropped from 1,256 in 2016 to 556 in 2018. Not only is this a missed opportunity to reduce class sizes, it also reduces meaningful job opportunities for Singaporeans. I urged MOE to reconsider its approach.

In our local Universities, the tuition grants given to foreign students are already a recurring bugbear for many Singaporeans, and is a popular theme in media reports. Many Singaporeans are perplexed at why foreigners are given Government subsidies and question this use of taxpayers' money. In Australia and UK, full fee-paying foreign students are an important source of revenue. In UK, these students contributed 11.9 billion pounds to the UK economy in 2016. In Australia, they contributed $37.6 billion to the Australian economy in 2019.

With good global rankings, our Universities should similarly be able to attract full fee-paying foreign students. We can adopt a similar model, develop this industry and use the revenues to further subsidise the education of local students. Foreign student enrolment, however, should not be at the expense of the enrolment of local students.

In conclusion, I wish to reiterate that we are not embracing customised learning to the detriment of our children. When we personalise education, we will be able to look at everything we do in life as an education in itself. No longer bound to a classroom, children will be free to learn from life, learning to think creatively, take risk and adapt quickly in youth. Children will become more resilient in adulthood and better able to handle any crisis that comes their way. Sir, I support the Ministerial Statement.

Minister Tan.

Mr Leong.

Mr Speaker, thank you. I thank the Minister for his clarification of some of the points. In fact, just now, the Minister had already touched on the electricity tariffs, so, there is some understanding on that.

My point in the speech is that we are generally advocating that we should be paying more attention to grooming Singaporeans to be more resilient. As a result, the pricing of all these public services is a part of it. I am just expressing an opinion that perhaps the SP Group could have waited a little bit longer.

The whole pricing mechanism of the electricity market and all that – that is another topic we can deal with. For example, we know that SP has made a lot of profit when the electricity wholesale market collapsed from 2012 to 2018. They did not actually pass on the benefits to the consumer at that time because the retail market was still in the process of being liberalised. So, they had made some profits – in fact, a lot of profits – during those years. Why can they not just wait a little bit longer?

This is just a general policy attitude and things that we are trying to express here – that we hope, going forward, if we want to develop a different model, we need the Singaporean to be more resilient. Of course, there are many facets to that and we can discuss more and more of that going forward.

Minister Tan.

I think that how we have worked together as a nation, Mr Speaker, Sir, in terms of making sure that our support is very surgical, very precise, very targeted to the group of people who needs it most, perhaps not because of the fact that they lack resilience – I think, in fact, many of them are very resilient. In fact, from many of my Meet-the-People Sessions – people from the 1-room, 2-room flats, the 3-room, 4-room flats. I hope Mr Leong is not saying that they are not resilient because we want to support them. In fact, I think that many of them are in circumstances are beyond their control.

Where we think that support is needed and where it is targeted, we will not hesitate to make sure that we are able to not just care for them but to also carry for them. I think that has already spoken volumes.

To the point about fluctuations and volatility in energy markets – we are a very small country and 95% of our power supply comes from fossil fuels, which we are also trying to see how we can move out to reduce our carbon footprint, so that we can go on to more renewable energies.

If you talk about this 95%, we are subject to fluctuations. I have said it many a time that the gencos do need to have some form of returns because they have also invested significantly in the infrastructure here in our country.

Mr Leong.

Would anyone want to respond? Senior Minister of State Chee.

Thank you. My electrons need to be somewhere else. Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.05 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 3.42 pm until 4.05 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.05 pm.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate resumed.

Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Ministerial Statement by Deputy Prime Minister on the Government's strategy to emerge stronger from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Sir, while the Government must continue to support households, workers and businesses to manage during this difficult period as many had been impacted, it is imperative that we now look forward and prepare for the post-COVID-19 new normal. While we must protect lives, we must also continue to grow in order to secure livelihoods. I will speak on three areas.

First, re-making Singapore as a global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise with digital as a game-changer, while building up our domestic eco-system as a home base for innovation.

Second, preparing Singaporeans for the digital world and doing this at scale. This is critical if we want inclusive growth and Singaporeans to be ready and able to seize the opportunities.

Third, the important role of the Government needs to continue to play in building and strengthening Singapore as a Smart Nation through the right investments in infrastructure and, more importantly, policies.

Let me now touch on the first point.

The strategy to be a magnet to attract leading companies, including technology companies and building strong local companies, is an important one. Singapore's success in attracting top technology companies and start-ups to locate their operations in Singapore and providing an eco-system to nurture local companies and start-ups is strategic for growth. In this new normal, we have seen that digital is, indeed, a game-changer. COVID-19 has disrupted many aspects of life and forced people to think about new ways of doing business. Digital technology has accelerated the disruptions and has played a crucial role in enabling connectivity and operations to continue when physical borders and interactions are restricted.

But ultimately, technology is about addressing needs and solving problems. Digital technologies enable agility and new business models to respond to these needs and to capture new opportunities. Deputy Prime Minister Heng, in his speech, spoke about the progress made with the implementation of our industry transformation maps (ITMs) to restructure our economy, sector by sector, firm by firm. This transformation is important as it affects 23 sectors and our businesses within these sectors. The shifts driven by the digital transformation and, now COVID, have taught us, however, that the disruptions businesses are facing are not coming from traditional players but non-traditional competitors.

For example, a non-banking player like WeChat handles an array of payment transactions for more than a billion users in China without the need for a bank account. So, the new opportunities that are being created from the adjacencies between industries and partnerships across sectors are also equally important. As we drive the ITMs, how are such disruptions being addressed with the work that we doing with the ITMs and the opportunities that present themselves? How are they also being leveraged?

Having global technology giants, like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, LinkedIn, Facebook and, more recently, the best Chinese tech companies, Alibaba, BtyeDance and Tencent, making Singapore their Asian headquarters and base for their operations in the region, coupled with Singapore becoming a regional and global hub for technology and start-ups not only creates quality jobs – and this is very important because we need quality jobs for Singaporeans – but it brings with it talent and, more importantly, know-how that creates a vibrancy and a buzz to drive innovations and investments.

But to that point, as these opportunities present themselves, I would like to touch on the second point that Singaporeans must also be ready for them. And today, as we have discussed quite a bit in this House, many Singaporeans have had their jobs impacted or at risk of having their jobs impacted. At the same time, companies are hiring. But we are saying is, many times, that match is not quite there.

So, I want to touch on this point that we must also look at how we ready Singaporeans. And this is not something that we can leave to chance. We must be deliberate in preparing Singaporeans for these new opportunities and we must be able to do it at scale. If there are too few people with the appropriate skills for the jobs created, this not only has a gap but increases the cost of talent and will drive business cost up and, therefore, again, create other disamenities. So, more importantly, while there are good jobs available, Singaporeans must be ready for them.

Training at scale – I spent a lot of time thinking about this point about training at scale because it is not easy. How do we do it? This is done in schools today. It is done in tertiary institutions. However, with technological disruptions, many in the workforce are finding that they need new skills to stay relevant and to take on new opportunities. So, the training actually needs to happen for those who are in the workforce and not just for those who are entering the workforce. And COVID-19 has just accelerated this even more. So, what we need to do is to have platforms for training large groups of experienced people in the workforce to build new skills, especially digital skills, and this process needs to be iterative because technology and changes in the workforce will continue to keep moving and it is not static.

So, training must be demand-led and, therefore, a very key competent of this must be the companies. They must be key participants in the development process and the programmes to provide context. Understanding what industry and employers need will allow us to appreciate the skills and competencies needed to do these new jobs and the appropriate training and development programmes. Precisely because we are preparing people for the digital world which is fast moving and dynamic, agility is an important criterion embedded in these programmes.

In today's context, to achieve relevant training at scale and to do it in a timely manner are difficult. Why? Because while training and development are available and we have lots of it, it is disparate. Many different institutions provide development programmes but they are in silos. What do I mean by that? We must get educational institutions to come together for training programmes and endorsements of each other's training programmes to support a mutual recognition of prior learning so that we can accelerate the learning because what we need is speed but not speed in just getting it done, but quality. So, we have got to recognise the adjacencies.

What does not happen enough today is the understanding of competencies that individuals already have in the workforce, because what individuals have is knowledge of businesses and that is a very, very precious knowledge. What we need to then equip them is today's skills to accentuate that knowledge. And that part, I think, we also have not done very much in profiling what we have in the workforce today. And being able to then say to individuals, "What is the experiences, competencies that we must preserve, and then accentuate?"

We talk about data analytics, for example. Data analytics only make sense if you understand the business. Otherwise, you do not see no pattern. You do not see the pattern at all, unless you know the business. And then, suddenly, illumination happens, but how do you marry the two? You have got to preserve what is in the workforce; where is the experience? And many of our mid-career people have these. But they are at a loss because they lack that little piece to join the puzzle. And we need to do this and scale that – I repeat that.

This will then allow us to leverage all the adjacencies – the adjacencies of what educational institutions themselves are doing, but also the competencies we have in the workforce and the experiences as well as what the companies need; and bringing that knowledge together.

So, how do we create these right platforms to get people in the workforce and those whose jobs have been impacted to participate? That is the other thing. Because until your job is impacted, you tend to just keep working. You forget about upgrading yourself and picking up the skills when you do not need them. Because it is too late sometimes when you need it.

And that is the point. How do get people to go for the appropriate training. It is a very bad analogy but I just could not find another example. I asked myself, "What have we done in Singapore that we brought people altogether really fast and really quickly?" And actually, the mask distribution was amazing, because there was a need! And because there was a need, we pulled people together, we brought the resources together, and people came together. But this is not a one off. You got to keep doing it. So, same thing – we then use the same mechanism to do the next round and the next round. And so I think we need to think about training in that aspect; not training for a skill but really to equip people with the pieces that they need to then function effectively and be able to take the opportunities.

To make this happen at scale will require the policy framework – most importantly to bring stakeholders together, meaning companies, training institutions and people in the workforce to address demand, accelerate training and encourage experienced people to want to learn – what I call a culture of continuous curiousity in learning.

The last point I want to talk about is the Government's role in Smart Nation. To foster a culture of innovation to support growth and quality of life for Singaporeans, I firmly believe that as much as we want society and businesses to participate, the Government now has a very important role to play in making the Smart Nation's efforts really scale and be really forward-thinking. And no one else will be able to do that. Not businesses because businesses have a PNL to run. They are never going to be that much ahead, unless they are doing R&D. Otherwise, you need the Government to play that role.

In today's context where digital is critical for resilience and agility, it is even more important that the Government continues to drive and strengthen Singapore's Smart Nation efforts. I must say the Government has been doing a good job in this, and I am glad that we started this early because otherwise, we would not have been able to respond the way we did so far.

Investing in state-of-the-art open and connected infrastructure, business friendly environment, policies, intellectual property, data and cybersecurity laws will provide the eco-system for people and businesses to thencome together to create value. It is not about digitalising the economy as much as I have talked about digital, let me be very clear. It is not about digitalising the economy, but it is about connecting Singapore to the world and in understanding the opportunities such that Singapore can be relevant, so that our people and our businesses continue to have opportunities and better lives.

In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, as we adapt to the COVID situation and keep our people safe, we must move forward and grow our economy and most importantly, the eco-system to provide quality jobs for Singaporeans. To do so, Singapore must continue to invest in the eco-system to develop the digital capability of our workforce to be ready for the opportunities that do exist in the post-COVID-19 world. While the journey will not be easy, I am confident that if we do it together, truly together, we will emerge stronger.

Mr Gerald Giam.

Mr Sharael Tahar.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I rise in support of the Ministerial Statement made by Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat. I would like to declare my interest as an employee in the aerospace industry, one of the 22,000 workers in the industry, many of whom whose employment or income have been affected by the pandemic.

I would like to touch on three key areas. Firstly, as we rebuild and grow our physical connectivity, we – people, Government and businesses are responsible to do so while protecting our lives and livelihood. Secondly, we need to incorporate the lessons learnt from this pandemic and build on the Industry Transformation Map to create an inclusive and resilient society with a dynamic and growing economy. Thirdly, though the pandemic has brought challenges for us to overcome, we must also leverage on the opportunities it brings while preparing for the upcoming challenges facing our workforce to remain competitive in the global market.

As Deputy Prime Minister Heng has shared in his Ministerial Statement, compared with last year, passenger traffic has fallen by more than 98% in August. This has had a huge impact on the livelihoods of many Singaporeans. I am in support to rebuild and grow our physical and digital connectivity.

Our position as an airhub is not only important to those working in airlines such as SIA. Our position as an airhub is a strategic economic asset as it serves as a conduit for other industries and it is the source of livelihoods for many of our fellow Singaporeans in dependent industries.

Take for example, the following residents in Pasir Ris. Mr Faizal Sains, father of seven, a licensed aircraft engineer who works in the maintenance, repair and overhaul industry. Mr Ahmad Khalili, father of two, who works for a major airframer and ensures aircrafts for airlines from across the world, not just SIA, are dispatched safely and reliably. The Tan family – Mr Tan drives a taxi and Mrs Tan is a tour agent whose family has to deal with more than 50% drop in their income. Mr Foo, who sells prepaid telephone card supporting his 80-year-old mother and his income has since significantly dropped because there is no demand for prepaid cards by local Singaporeans. And many similar Singaporeans families whose livelihoods are dependent on Singapore's status as an airhub.

While Minister Ong, shared the plans for us to safely, and in a controlled way, open up our borders to protect our livelihoods, it is also important that as a community, we come to the realisation that it is our collective social responsibility to ensure that the safe management measures are adhered to, in order to protect each other.

As we look beyond our shores, we see countries such as Australia, South Korea and Japan hit by the second wave of infections. As we open up, we must work together in order to minimise the risk of that happening in Singapore. We must not let our guard down and slip into complacency. We must be psychologically prepared to overcome the challenges that still loom ahead.

Businesses such as restaurants, cafés, shops and workplaces must ensure that safe management measures such as sufficiently-distanced tables and chairs, are adhered to. We must continuously remind each other, to keep a social distance, wear a mask, practice SafeEntry and Tracetogether, because together, we can minimise the risk of infection and we can swiftly contain the episode in the event a transmission occurs.

As we work towards rebuilding our physical connectivity, we need to remain vigilant and protect both our lives and livelihood.

As we aspire towards an inclusive and resilient society with a dynamic and growing economy, we need to incorporate the lessons learnt from this pandemic and integrate these lessons into the Industry Transformation Map. We must take actions now that will allow us to not just get through COVID-19, but more crucially, transform and prepare us for our next lap of inclusive economic growth.

With six of 10 of us Singaporeans working as PMETs, the past six months have been the biggest exercise in redesigning jobs and reassessing the way we define work. Many of us have not been back to office, yet we remain productive. To cite an example, one of the Pasir Ris residents, Mr Ismail, is in his late 30s, smart and gets around in a wheelchair as he lost his foot to diabetes. Working from home, behind a computer, he is equally, if not more capable of performing an office-based job just like everyone else.

The past six months have taught us that for some jobs, it also did not matter that you start working remotely at 8 am at home or work every single minute including extended hours. We found a way to remain equally productive in this new flexible environment.

Can this provide an opportunity for care-givers, who need to have more flexible work schedule to take care of their young and the seniors? Could this also be the solution for mothers or fathers, who gave up their career and now want to rejoin the workforce while still taking care of their loved ones?

We must incorporate these lessons learnt, to provide more equal employment opportunities for the seniors, less-abled as well as care-givers seeking employment such that Singaporeans will benefit from the inclusiveness of employment opportunities and there is a place for these each and every Singaporeans in our industry transformation. This is an opportunity to relook at how we work closer with help-groups such as SGEnable and Agency of Integrated Care or AIC to ensure that there is a place for all Singaporeans in our inclusive growth.

COVID-19, new technology and digitalisation will also bring about structural changes that will give rise to unemployment and place greater pressure on the vulnerable lower wage workers.

Hence, it is important that the Tripartite Working Group, comprising of MOM, NTUC and SNEF, work together to expedite the implementation of the Progressive Wage Model across other sectors. Through the Industry Transformation Map, the Tripartite Working Group can chart out opportunities and create stepping stones for the vulnerable groups to upskill and go up the ladder so that they have a lower risk of being redundant in the future.

One example could be for the pump attendants who tend to comprise our senior workers. I had a very interesting conversation with my 12-year-old daughter earlier this week. My daughter asked, “Dad, what will happen to the Uncle at the pump station when all cars are electric?” That got me thinking. As we move from hybrid to electric cars with our goal of phasing out vehicles with internal combustion engines, what will happen to these pump attendants, petrol station clerks and similar lower wage workers in industries that are undergoing transformation even as I speak?

This is where the Progressive Wage Model complemented by the Workfare Skills Support Scheme and other needs-based social safety nets such as ComCare and KiFAS will be able to help lower wage workers with needs-based support. More importantly, these initiatives help to provide the stepping stones to train and increase the skillset of these lower wage workers to prepare for the changes to their respective industries that lay just beyond the horizon.

When the majority of us are working from home, we took a while, but we managed to reach the a new norm. Many found that the savings from commuting time can be productively used as exercising time or time for the family. A study by EngageRocket, in partnership with Singapore Human Resource Institute and Human Resource Professionals showed that nine of 10 employees shared that they would like to continue with some form of remote working as a new way of working. This new norm on the way of working could improve our worklife balance and quality of life as we are able to use the time more productively.

Remote working has brought many opportunities. However, it brings additional challenges. In the past six months, while we have enjoyed working from our our homes in Pasir Ris, Punggol or Jurong, it also means that our jobs can be done anywhere else in the world. Whether it is in Pasir Ris or a cafe in India, for example, PMET job competition is no longer confined within Singapore. The challenges our PMETs face is no longer a question of quota to protect our jobs but rather how do we ensure the Singaporean workforce is competitive in the global market. Global companies will be looking at how the Singaporean workforce create additional value. This is no longer a question of lowest cost but one of creating best value to maintain the competitive edge and remain relevant in the global workforce market.

The pandemic has shown that digital capabilities represent the game changer to open markets and opportunities for businesses which then creates jobs and ensures that jobs are preserved. Companies that leverage on these digital capabilities and evolve their business model have been able to survive and unlock growth during this downturn. Take for example, the company cited by Deputy Prime Minister Heng, Decks Pte Ltd which increased its sales tenfold after it revamped its e-commerce platform.

As much as it is about increasing the workers digital skillset, it is also important for us to look at the mindset, and the ability to leverage on these opportunities that are available. We need to equip our workforce with the softer skills of change management in driving changes to the workplace. To quote Charles Darwin, “It is not the strongest or most intelligent who will survive, but those who can best manage change.”

This is especially true in at this juncture, as we, in Singapore, will have to transform to not only just get through COVID-19, but more crucially, gain strategic advantages that prepare us for the next stage of economic growth.

With the right skillset and mindset, we need to leverage on these opportunities to drive the change. We have invested heavily in SkillsFuture courses. As we look at assessing the training providers and courses, the effectiveness of SkillsFuture courses should not only be based on attendance or the number of courses taught but rather it should also be assessed on its ability to drive real changes.

We must structure and integrate training with business solutioning to support business performance and industry transformation. One example is a course I attended on Lean Six Sigma Blackbelt. It is an operational excellence course and in order to receive the course subsidy and certification, the attendee will have to prove that he has brought improvements to drive a $1 million cost saving for the organisation.

This same concept can be applied for digital courses. An example would be for a company to receive full subsidy if the attendee to the course can show proof that they have led the change and contributed in some form to the digital transformation for the company

These are just some examples of how we can integrate training with business solutioning so that our investment in resource, both time and money, is able to generate change.

I would like to thank our fellow Parliamentarian Mr Yip Hon Weng for the question he asked earlier, how can Singapore workforce remain competitive with remote working. With the right skillset, the right mindset and working together to leverage on the opportunity the Singapore eco-system brings, we need to drive this change, this game changing transformation to develop the competitive edge for economy and our workforce. Mr Speaker, Sir, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] As we rebuild and re-establish our physical connectivity, we need to be cognisant of the importance of doing so in a safe and controlled manner. Businesses and the general public must continue to maintain our psychological resilience and not be complacent about the safe management measures that should be implemented. Among others, businesses such as restaurants, cafes and shops, as well as workplaces must ensure safe management measures are adhered to.

In our efforts to rebuild physical connectivity, we need to protect both our lives and our livelihoods. We need to use the lessons learnt from this pandemic and apply it to the Industry Transformation Maps. For example, working from home has changed the employment structure

We have to learn from this experience and re-design jobs to provide inclusive growth opportunities for older and less able workers. We need to provide equal job opportunities for the elderly, the disabled as well as caregivers who are seeking employment. This is to ensure that there is a place for these Singaporeans in our Industry planning and they can also reap the benefits of this inclusive job opportunity.

Structural changes will cause workers to lose their jobs and exert greater pressure on workers who are more vulnerable to these changes

We should support the Tripartite Working Group. We need to accelerate the implementation of the Progressive Wage Model for certain industries and provide opportunities for more vulnerable groups of workers to upgrade their skills.

While working from home has created many opportunities, it is also accompanied by several additional challenges. Competition for PMET jobs is no longer limited to Singapore alone. This means that the question of foreign worker quotas becomes less relevant when compared to the need to ensure that Singaporeans remain competitive in the global job market.

To ensure that we remain competitive in the global market, we need to have the right skills, the right way of thinking and the ability to seize the opportunities available

We need to equip our workforce with soft skills, such as change management, to implement changes at work. To quote Charles Darwin: "The one who survives is not the strongest or the most intelligent, but it is the one who can best manage change".

(In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, in summary, as we rebuild and grow our physical connectivity, it is our collective social responsibility to ensure that we protect our lives and our livelihood. As we aspire towards an inclusive and resilient society with a dynamic and growing economy, we need to incorporate the lessons learnt from this pandemic towards creating inclusive growth.

This pandemic is often called the crisis-of-a-generation. However, many have also called this, an opportunity-of-a-generation. With the right skillset, right mindset and leveraging on opportunities that are available, we can transform, our future, and together, we will emerge from this stronger.

On that note, Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion by Deputy Prime Minister Heng.

Mr Yip Hon Weng.

Mr Edward Chia.

Mr Speaker, Sir, my speech today will focus on three interconnected areas of our economy where I believe further refinements can enhance our global competitiveness.

Firstly, I would like to touch on the interconnection between retaining local jobs with enterprises. The Jobs Support Scheme or JSS has clearly helped to save good jobs and kept many Singaporeans employed through this year. It does that by providing wage support to the employers, giving them the resources to retain their local employees when revenue has taken a severe beating this year.

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

The extension of the JSS to March 2021 is a strategic necessity and I support the tapering of the JSS to ensure fiscal prudence as we look towards the long-term growth of the Singapore economy.

The next JSS payouts will be made in October 2020 and March 2021, with a six-month gap in between. I would like to suggest that an interim payout in December 2020, as it is necessary to enforce the interconnected value of the JSS to the enterprise's cash flow. Many companies are only beginning to see sustainable revenue returning. For other companies, they may need the cash flow support for their industry's uneven recovery. Such an intermediate payment will not increase any cost to the Government. It spreads out the payouts and instead increase the relevancy of the JSS in this next phase. Otherwise, the risk to these jobs will increase, which runs contrary to the goal of the JSS. I hope MOF will consider my suggestion to help enterprises during such economic uncertainty while focusing on the long-term growth of Singapore.

Secondly, I would like to focus on how we can build future industry roadmaps such that they take into consideration our connection with the region. The Industry Transformation Maps or ITMs were first launched as part of a $4.5 billion industry transformation package in Budget 2016. They were industry-specific roadmaps which aimed to take an integrated approach where trade associations and chambers, companies and the Government worked together to help each sector prepare for the future.

These ITMs are currently being reviewed to ensure relevance and effectiveness. I would like to propose that we frame ITMs 2.0 in the context of the region because this would be the right time for our industries to start building new capabilities that can immediately include broader opportunities beyond our shores.

Asia as a region will continue to grow even as COVID-19 has thrown a massive curveball. From North Asia to Southeast Asia and the Oceania region, the entire region is in the midst of a global re-orientation as it takes its cue from uncertainties from the US-China tensions. New supply chains are being reimagined as fast as new markets are emerging following the rapid uptake in digital transactions from the variety of circuit breakers or movement control orders employed by governments to contain the spread of COVID-19.

This is the time to prepare our industries to include the region in our bid for continued competitiveness. Singapore is already inking digital agreements, and new travel bubbles are on the cards.

ITMs 2.0 should include components where the region is integral. One obvious area would be to ensure that the Continuing Education and Training or CET as well as SkillsFuture components for each ITM include understanding the industry models of our neighbours, the supply chains in these countries, the ways of doing business and the cultural context of how things are done. Even language courses could be included as we need to be more connected at the people-to-people level for economic and social win-win outcomes.

Another area would be for the new ITMs to focus on our regional opportunities even more within the internationalisation component of the blueprints. Encouraging more cross-country business chamber collaborations or joint ventures in the co-creation of new products and services that can serve two or more cities could provide a larger market, even at the prototyping stage.

Making the region a core context of our ITMs rather than the "next step" would accelerate how our companies are thinking in this new decade. This crisis is the right moment to pivot our local enterprises away from a local mindset.

An added area under ITMs would be the welfare of our low-wage workers. Minister Josephine Teo mentioned about the formation of a new taskforce that will explore ways to raise the wages of our low-wage workers. While the ITMs are being reviewed to ensure its relevancy in the ever-changing environment, each ITM should also focus on the low-wage workers in their own industries. They should dovetail upskilling of these workers, thereby leading to higher wages with higher productivity.

Moreover, higher productivity should also lead to business sustainability. Businesses need to remain competitive and avoid passing on the cost to consumers. We must ensure both upskilling of our workers and business sustainability to avoid a case where a low-wage job becomes no job. This is especially so with the growing trends of automation. For example, the role of cashiers at supermarkets is needed lesser with auto check-out machines and cashless payments. These cashiers need to be upskilled and their jobs redesigned to take on higher value-added jobs so that they can continue to be employed, enjoying good wages with better skills and productivity. Hence, ITM 2.0 needs to ensure that as we push industries towards innovation, it has to be coupled with upskilling and job re-design to ensure our workers are not displaced.

My final area of focus would be to draw the all-important interconnection of technologies with design. While we encourage innovation driven by technology, we should also encourage innovation driven by design. We only have to look at countries, such as South Korea, Japan and Denmark, to appreciate how they have embraced both technological advancements with deep design capabilities resulting in innovation that has provided economic and societal returns for their citizens.

Design is the economic equivalent of creation with the user and customer at the core. It is about designing for specific needs of markets and segments so that real value can be unlocked. Design is also the skill to bring about integration and synthesis – how different technologies or platforms could be organised into appropriate economic units that are scale-able. Design capabilities are even more essential today when we look at how technologies have evolved. For example, we are now seeing how social and live commerce has cut into omni-channel sales because buyers are now showing signs that they prefer to purchase through existing well-designed social messaging platforms rather than another app.

I believe that we need to match our investments in technology with a renewed focus on design – a 21st century duet of design and technology where we draw the value out of these interconnected twin engines of growth. Just like how we do not isolate one specific technology from another, we must go beyond looking at design simply as vertical industries, such as publishing or furniture, but, rather, cross-sectional skillsets, such as interaction design and experience design. We must also go past buzzwords like "design thinking" to better appreciate the deeper substance of design, which is a serious academic discipline of creation that focuses on divergent and convergent problem-solving with the user and customer at the core.

Many of our Autonomous Universities and Polytechnics have already included design as a core curriculum. Even the recently announced proposed integration of the Faculty of Science with the Faculty of the Arts and Social Sciences at NUS will see design as one of the compulsory core modules. We need to deepen this capability inside companies and across industries so that new technologies can be even more successful. Design leaders and design departments need to be created to work with the strategy and digital functions of the business.

A good example of a local company that has brought design into its core business is DBS. DBS strives to be the "Apple in banking". DBS uses design methods and approaches to focus on serving customers better both in their digital services as well as in their branches. I am sure all of us have heard of ATMs. But I recently found and learned about BTMs – the Branch Teller Machine! DBS discovered that many senior residents were still queuing in their branches to withdraw cash because they value the traditional passbook over card-based ATMs. Hence, DBS created the BTMs where seniors can simply scan their passbooks to withdraw cash and still have their passbooks updated without having to wait for a physical counter to be available. This has shortened waiting times for seniors while continuing to provide the all-important psychological and emotional comfort for this segment of seniors who still want to use their passbooks. This BTM example shows the user-empathy element in interaction design when adopting technology. This is possible when technology solutions are designed and implemented with the customer at the core. Thus, DBS is able to be socially inclusive while still using technology to enable productivity of their business. I believe design is a critical partner for technology and this will further enhance our country's competitiveness in the economic sphere.

Our public service needs to embrace design in significant ways, too. I would like to urge IMDA, which is the lead agency for technology adoption, to build its own design capabilities so that all future roll-outs of new plans will have an even stronger design-empathy component in them. This could also be the right time for Design Singapore Council to undertake a strategic update of the Singapore Design Masterplan that was launched in 2016, considering how much has changed in just the last two years. Design 2025 would require new thinking, especially in the spheres of economic inter-connections and societal value creation.

I would like to conclude my speech by echoing Deputy Prime Minister Heng’s economic strategy for Singapore. We need a dynamic and growing economy to deliver our priorities as a society.

In a nutshell, we need to, one, ensure that our enterprises survive and grow to save jobs and livelihoods of Singaporeans. Enhancing the next phase of JSS with an interim payout in December will aid in this endeavour. Two, we must ensure that our next phase of ITMs is focused on cross-industry and border collaborations with a deeper cultural understanding of the growing Asia region. In addition, the new ITMs should also ensure the upskilling and job re-design of our low-wage workers while ensuring business sustainability. Three, we must augment innovation driven by two-fold engines – technology and design.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in this way, I am confident that Singapore can continue to retain and grow our competitive edge in today's fast-changing world and emerge stronger. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Ministerial Statement.

Mr Fahmi Aliman.

Mr Deputy Speaker, today, I would like to affirm my support for the Supplementary Supply Bill while speaking on how we can and must continue to support and uplift our low-wage workers.

During Budget 2020, it was announced that Singaporeans who had been receiving the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) payments for work done in 2019 will receive a Workfare Special Payment (WSP) of $3,000 in 2020, with the second tranche being paid out this month. This has been much welcomed by the WIS recipients.

Since the implementation of WIS in 2007, Singaporeans aged 35 and above in the bottom 20th-30th percentile of the workforce has received over $5.5 billion in support. This is an effort to be applauded, but we must continue to see how the scheme can better benefit our citizens and uplift the workers who need it the most.

I previously called for the Government to consider providing a higher WIS payout to workers in the essential services to acknowledge their actual social value and the hardship faced in their line of work. This has been even more prevalent in the last few months, where many of our essential service workers have stepped up to become our "everyday heroes", continuing to keep Singapore clean, green and safe. Perhaps, the Government can reconsider this suggestion with a view of giving these workers greater recognition.

Under the current structure, the WIS payout is dependent on the age and income of the worker. In general, this means that older workers and those with lower incomes will receive higher payouts.

This differentiation assumes that younger workers have greater potential to move up the career ladder and, with that, move up the wage ladder. The Government must study if this assumption still holds and consider lowering the age eligibility to 30 years old for workers to qualify for WIS.

While I do not discount that we should support our older workers, it does stand to reason that our younger workers may have dependants, such as elderly parents or young children, which can be a strain not only financially but also mentally. Any extra income that these workers receive from the WIS can make a difference to many families and workers with young children.

Another improvement to WIS is for the Government to consider having the payout to be the same across different age groups, based on the worker’s income, meaning that a 35- or 65-year-old worker earning the same salary, will receive the same payout quantum.

Mr Deputy Speaker, last month, Manpower Minister Josephine Teo had announced the PWM Mark to recognise companies which voluntarily pay their workers progressive and fair wages with good job advancement pathways. This is a step in the right direction in recognising that all of us, be it workers, employers, the Government and the greater community, have a part to play in creating an environment conducive to improve their work prospects.

The creation and implementation of the PWM Mark should involve unions, employers and the Government to ensure that the PWM Mark will take into consideration the specific circumstances of each occupation and industry. More importantly, each stakeholder should lead by example to be the first movers. Only then can we see PWM Mark gaining traction on the ground.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, please allow me to speak in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Another way to keep supporting our workers is for the Government to consider extending the Jobs Support Scheme or JSS.

The JSS has helped businesses and companies to retain local workers during this economic downturn and its impact should not be underestimated. As mentioned previously, more than half of the jobs that were saved are due to the JSS alone.

While this should be commended, the Government should consider extending the JSS beyond March 2021 especially in industries where the impact of COVID-19 is more keenly felt. A large number of these industries are industries with a large proportion of low-wage workers such as the retail sector, or the food and beverage sector.

This measure can help us save jobs for our local workers, while we are slowly and cautiously rebuilding the economy.

As I mentioned earlier, the WIS has supported many low-wage workers by providing additional income to them. I urge the Government to continue looking at how the scheme can benefit more workers, such as through higher WIS payouts to workers in essential services, as an acknowledgement of the hardship faced in their line of work, especially during this COVID-19 period. The Government may also wish to reconsider the assumption that younger workers should get lower WIS payouts as they are more likely to get wage increments.

In addition, I am very much encouraged by the PWM Mark so that companies that pay progressive and fair wages to their workers will be recognised. Workers, employers, Government and the community are all playing a part in creating a better environment for our vulnerable workers. I would like to encourage more companies to participate once the scheme is ready.

(In English): In conclusion, as Deputy Prime Minister Heng mentioned, we are currently in the “test of a generation”. I echo his sentiments that there is light at the end of the tunnel for us as a country to emerge not only stronger and more united, but also emerge as a society with more empathy who believe in creating a fair society for future generations.

But we are not out of the woods as yet and we must remember not to leave behind those who are most vulnerable in our society.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Ministerial Statement.

Minister of State Mr Alvin Tan.

Mr Shawn Huang.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we face immense challenges. COVID continues to cause massive disruptions to many industries. As we hope for normalcy and eventual recovery, we must expect that recovery will not be uniform. For some, the impact of COVID will have permanence. Some countries will recover faster and with less disruptions. A few will face more permanent dislocation. We can already observe shifts that will affect us with permanence: the changes in the nature of retail, the realignment of supply chains with reshoring of capabilities, how educational services are being delivered, and the rise of teleworking – just to name a few.

What does it mean for us? There are a few things to think about.

The world has become more global, more digitally connected, sophisticated and culturally attuned to global competition. And at the same time, the world has also become more localised where circumstances have forced corporations and governments to rethink their strategies to build local economic resilience. With such a backdrop, how do we build up our local SMEs to become regional and global champions? For us to do well, we must be able to stack the competencies of different industries to build services and products. We have much unrealised potential in Singapore that has the legs for expansion.

One of these local SME is BH Global. When it first started in 1963, it was a small hardware company selling electrical products. It has evolved. The mass fever screening equipment that you see at Changi Airport is locally produced by them. Today, it is being deployed worldwide in major airports in Europe, US, UK, India, Kuwait and many more. I wanted to suggest to them that they should start printing the Singapore flag on their product. BH is continuing with this strategy of stacking different competencies, for example, cybersecurity for ships, advanced materials for marine sustainability.

The true productivity gains of our Singapore companies must be their ability to develop cross industry solutions, to be able to stack different competencies and develop high value products and services to compete regionally and globally.

In Singapore, we have strong and diverse competencies within a small geographical area. We are better poised to collaborate and leverage on one another's strength. As the African proverb states: "If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together." We must move away from focusing on being faster, cheaper and better. We must develop an eco-system to enable Singapore companies to move into high value, differentiated markets.

Closely related to our survival is sustainable infrastructure. We are now increasingly aware of the dire impact of climate change. This includes food shortages, large-scale human migration, threat to our coral reefs and extreme weather events.

An area of growing interest is the concept of a circular economy: resources are being recycled in a loop to maximise their value. One such example is the collaboration between Sports Singapore and Dow to upcycle 300,000 pairs of used shoes into sports infrastructure, such as jogging tracks, fitness areas and playgrounds.

According to the World Green Building Council, building and construction account for 39% of all carbon emissions in the world and with buildings' operational emission accounting for 28%. We must be strive to look into more sustainable methods of construction, such as the use of steel structures. They are usually stronger, lighter and easier to recycle.

Steel buildings can almost be entirely recycled. The rails, frames and cladding can be melted to make new steel, and this takes three times less energy than making new ones. The concrete floors for steel structures can be much thinner than regular concrete floors, and the salvage rate for such buildings is around 94%. It enables manpower savings of up to 20%, allows flexibility in design with less columns and load-bearing walls, less dust and smoke at construction sites and is environmentally sustainable.

Another sustainable action is to be deliberate in building new infrastructure. This means not demolishing existing structures unless we really need to. We should look into the conservation or to design future buildings to enable modular upgrades, lifespan extension and to be retrofitted for other purposes. South Beach Tower and our National Gallery Singapore are noteworthy projects.

Repurposing and integrating conservation buildings can be environmentally sustainable and modern. For example, in London, one of the world's most prestigious art galleries, the Tate Modern, is located at a former power station on the banks of the River Thames. By deploying modern technology, it uses 54% less energy and generate 44% less carbon today with natural air circulation and advanced temperature controls.

The recent proposal to conserve Golden Mile is also noteworthy. Another consideration is conserving and repurposing the “zhap tze yit lau” Diamond Blocks located in Jurong. Both Golden Mile and the Diamond Blocks have the potential to become the hallmark of conservation and sustainability.

I recall vividly a number of Singaporeans had expressed a sense of loss over the demolition of existing structures over the years. Demolition for progress and development is crucial to land-scare Singapore. But as we grapple with ways to feel connected with our heritage and in our aspiration to protect the environment, we should explore with increasing urgency the alternatives.

Like recycled steel, we constantly recast ourselves for the future but deeply aware of our history that made us who we are. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Ministerial Statement.

Mr Vikram Nair.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of this Motion. It is hard to imagine that when this year started, COVID-19 was still a little known virus in China and it seemed to be largely contained at that time. I looked back at my Facebook page and still saw happy gatherings and get-togethers at the beginning of the year. Barely 10 months later, the world is a different place. Many have lost and continue to lose loved ones to the virus. Globally, the number stands at 38 million infected people and 1.09 million people have died. Global travel has frozen and all across the world, economic contraction is the reality. For those who have not been directly impacted by the virus, livelihoods remain a key concern.

Much has been mentioned in this debate about the uneven impact of the virus. And one of the most stark example of this is perhaps the US. The US is the country with the largest number of cases and the largest number of deaths from the virus. Yet, at the same time, US stock market indices continue to make new highs. What this really shows is that there are many companies that continue to thrive even as others in this virus. This is what the Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter would have called creative destruction. There are new businesses coming up, they innovate and break the mould even as old ones suffered and get destroyed. The gains in the US markets are largely driven by tech stocks that were not only unaffected by COVID-19, but in fact have thrived in that environment.

Against this backdrop, Singapore has done remarkably well in its fight against COVID-19. From early on, a Ministerial Committee was formed which met regularly and coordinated decision making with a focus to contain the virus. Coordinated efforts were taken as the need arose. And if we look back, the developments in this was really quite significant. It started with guidance, eventually, restrictions became more serious as the spread of the virus grew in Singapore, culminating in a two-months circuit breaker where many of us remained at home.

As a result of all these efforts, although we had a spike in cases, largely from a combination of Singaporeans returning from abroad as well as a spread in the dormitories, fatality rates were kept low and are amongst the lowest in the world. Our testing rates are now amongst the highest as a percentage of the population and we had expanded our medical capacity so that everyone who needed medical attention would be able to get it.

At the same time, the economic impact of COVID-19 has been significantly cushioned by the Government. The wide range of measures provided – from jobs support packages for employers, rental reliefs for businesses and supplementary income for both employees and the self-employed – has provided many Singaporean businesses the ability to stay afloat and provided many Singaporeans with money to spend even if their income has dropped. This is important because if businesses shutter, then when the economy recovers, there may be significant gaps and recovery may be stalled.

Life is slowly becoming more normal, and while wearing masks has now become part of our lives, most Singaporeans are otherwise returning to work and more and more businesses are opening doors and resuming. Some sectors remain under significant pressure, including travel and tourism, as well as those related to oil and gas. Singaporean businesses also continue to be under pressure and as Government support is taken away, things may get more difficult, which is why it is important to continue to provide some buffer for them to stay in business.

Against this backdrop, I believe these latest Budget measures provide a well-thought through suite of measures focused on economic continuity. I think it rightly recognises that performance across sectors is uneven and provides tailored support as needed. So, in sectors such as aviation, retail and tourism, support packages, which include the Enhanced Aviation Support Package, which is a temporary redeployment scheme for affected employees so that they can still get jobs at the moment while at the same time, they get to return to the industry if it recovers.

The wage support packages for hiring new employees are helpful, particularly for companies in the start-up sector, as it helps share the risk of hiring new workers. That greater support is given for hiring workers above 40 or workers with disabilities is also a good incentive to help groups that may otherwise have a harder time finding jobs.

The lifeline of businesses is of course credit and the bridging loan programme supported by MAS continues to provide businesses with credit lines even as the outlook remains uncertain. The low interest rate environment is also helpful as this keeps the cost of borrowing lower for businesses.

I would also like to congratulate the National Jobs Council for curating 117,500 opportunities as at end of August. Given that we do not know when hard hit sectors will recover and given the current warnings that the economic scarring is likely to take full effect in the coming months om the MAS, I think it is important for us to continue to create new opportunities so that displaced workers can find new jobs.

While “creative destruction” is a necessary component of development and progress, as a Government, I think we can help our people to continue with their lives even if the businesses they are working in get disrupted and they are forced to change.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I will deliver the first half of my speech in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to express my support for the Supplementary Supply Bill and thank Deputy Prime Minister Heng for his Ministerial Statement. Deputy Prime Minister's statement emphasised developing Singapore into a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise which will be supported by a strong, skilled and yet inclusive workforce. I am very much encouraged by the plans to prepare our nation for the next phase as we emerge from the uncertainty of the past few months. We are not out of the woods yet but we must stay positive, do our best, and work hard for our future.

I am inspired and moved by the many Singaporeans who are taking brave steps to learn new skills, take on new jobs, and adapt to a very different world.

I am grateful for the unity and cooperation of Singaporeans and residents during this difficult time. Unlike some parts of the world which are polarised over measures to contain the virus, we are working together to overcome this pandemic based on scientific advice, logic and common sense. People from all walks of life are putting up with inconveniences and making sacrifices for the greater good.

All these qualities put us in good stead for the future. I am confident that we can achieve the goal of remaking Singapore as a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise. In view of the difficulties we face, this is an ambitious, perhaps even audacious, vision. This vision requires a huge investment in our human capital, especially as we want to achieve it together with the objective of inclusive growth.

We are deep in the midst of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. We must seize the opportunities presented by new technologies, particularly in the digital domains of the Internet of Things, robotics, artificial intelligence and cloud computing, just to name a few. If we fail to do so, we will become irrelevant. Being a small nation state with no natural resources, our survival will be at stake.

(In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I appreciate that SGUnited Jobs and Skills Centres in the HDB estates will reach out to the disadvantaged ones to help with job matching. The extension of the COVID-19 Support Grant and the continued support for households, such as the GST Voucher, Grocery Vouchers, Service and Conservancy Charges or S&CC rebates, and Workfare Special Payment, are also helpful.

However, there is room for us to do more. I appeal to the Government and its agencies to make an additional effort to provide a better living and learning environment for the underprivileged children. In a knowledge-intensive future, these children will not stand a chance if they live in overcrowded flats with access to borrowed equipment, limited or slow connectivity and minimal adult supervision and guidance. We may need to tighten our collaboration with the volunteer groups and private companies which are willing to sponsor and mentor these children as well. This will be a worthwhile investment to help them break out of a vicious poverty cycle.

Allow me to quote from the 28 September article, "The Equality Issue” of the Bloomberg Businessweek. Harvard economist Raj Chetty's research suggested that, and I quote, "Improving education for poor kids wouldn't just help them personally...it should also boost the economy overall. An analysis of the patents filed by 1.2 million Americans found that children of the top 1% are 10 times more likely to be inventors than equally smart kids from other backgrounds...if...children from low-income families could invent at the same rate... these 'lost Einsteins' could quadruple innovation in the US.”

I would venture that we can expect a similar situation in Singapore with regard to our future in innovation.

Children grow up quickly. Within 10 to 20 years, we will be able to see the fruits of our efforts in these children. In less than a generation’s time, we can boost literacy and education levels, reduce crime and recidivism rates, and improve health outcomes. But we must be prepared to intervene more, and the earlier the better. As the saying goes, "A stitch in time saves nine". Early intervention is important and necessary.

Under our laws, children already have rights for living necessities, education and healthcare. What we need is effective oversight for children in low-income families to ensure that they are receiving these essentials.

For example, if the adults in the families pass away or are imprisoned, the state must step in to protect and provide for these kids. Children unaccounted for must be traced. Schools should alert relevant agencies when children do not seem to cope well. Protecting them, helping them, lifting them up will prevent a future group of potential permanent underclass. We should watch over our children as zealously as we would over our reserves.

I would like to suggest that for the underprivileged children, a “Children and Youth” equivalent of the Agency for Integrated Care to be set up in order to enable coordinated and holistic oversight. The children must have guaranteed access to basics, regardless of their families’ situation – accommodation, food, water, electricity, mentoring, healthcare, transportation and so on. The agency should also provide and manage the eco-system of support, such as supervision, mentoring and fostering, so that these vulnerable kids will have better chances of growing up healthy and well-adjusted, enjoying school and be capable of learning well.

Increasingly, underprivileged kids who will find it harder to catch up with their peers in a knowledge- and skills-intensive economy. Can the kids from these underprivileged families fulfill the specialised roles required by the Foreign Direct Investments brought in painstakingly by the Economic Development Board? I am not too sure.

Deputy Prime Minister mentioned that the best way to protect the welfare of our workers is a good job. Thus, we need to ensure that these underprivileged kids can level up and have a good education now so that they can take on the specialised roles and uplift their families in 10 to 20 years’ time.

For workers in the lower income brackets, Government will help them by expanding the implementation of the Progressive Wage Model or PWM to more sectors. I am heartened by recent announcement about the Government’s commitment to this. The cleaning, landscaping and security sectors have already seen the fulfilment of the four objectives of PWM, namely, career progression, skills upgrading, higher productivity and wage increases.

Hopefully, more sectors will follow, such as for the waste management, construction, retail, food and beverage, accommodation and hospitality sectors. With the PWM, we can look forward to attracting more Singaporeans to work in these essential jobs and becoming less dependent on foreigners.

During the transition period, we may face some difficulties recruiting Singaporeans. However, I am optimistic that the pressure from the demand for the services will drive productivity and result in better work conditions for these jobs. Workers will be paid higher wages and be respected as professionals in their own right. Building a strong Singaporean Core in these various sectors will boost our resilience. On this note, allow me to conclude with my support for the Statement.

Mr Leon Perera.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. Sir, it is my understanding that I am due to speak tomorrow.

You would like to speak tomorrow? Is that your intention?

Yes, please, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir.

All right then. Ms Joan Pereira.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, today, I would like to speak on helping those who have fallen through the cracks and the issue of a harmonious society.

During this difficult time, I would like to appeal for more help for the sandwiched class, especially our young families. The young parents are just starting out in their new careers and new family lives when this crisis struck. I have spoken to many young families in my constituency and I share their worries. I hope the Government will consider providing higher subsidies for their children’s medical and insurance expenses, including some support for expenditure for the third child onwards.

Next, I welcome the one-off $3,000 Baby Support Grant or BSG, for newborns. This will be in addition to the current Baby Bonus cash gift of up to $10,000. The BSG is intended to help parents of Singaporean children born between 1 October 2020 and 30 September 2022 to defray the cost of raising a child amid the pandemic, and hopefully, to also encourage couples not to delay parenthood.

However, I have received a lot of feedback from parents whose babies were born after the onset of the pandemic this year but before 1 October 2020. I understand that all policies have to have a specific start date. But I also understand how difficult it has been for parents who were expecting or who just gave birth during or after the circuit breaker period. They shared with me how they had trouble getting a confinement nanny, grappled with the challenge of obtaining supplies when shops were closed and how they fretted over getting necessities for their newborns. Many couples also could not have their parents visit and help out due to safety measures during the circuit breaker period.

I appeal to the Government to consider extending the $3,000 Baby Support Grant to all Singaporean babies born in 2020 so that we can better support our young families in these very trying times. I hope babies born to single mothers can also be included to help reduce stress for the mother in an already very challenging situation. Sir, in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I have received a lot of feedback from parents whose babies were born after the onset of the pandemic this year, but before 1 October 2020. I understand that all policies must have a specific start date. But I also understand how difficult it has been for parents who were expecting or who just gave birth during or after the circuit breaker period. They shared with me how they had trouble getting a confinement nanny, grappled with the challenge of obtaining supplies when shops were closed and how they fretted over getting necessities for their newborns. Many couples also could not have their parents visit and help out due to safety measures during the circuit breaker period.

I appeal to the Government to consider extending the $3,000 Baby Support Grant to all Singaporean babies born in 2020 so that we can better support our young families in these trying times. I hope babies born to single mothers can be included too to help reduce stress for the mother in an already challenging situation.

(In English): For vulnerable families, they need more support and guidance during this very difficult time. Will the Government be channeling more resources into counselling services for them? How about setting up mutual support networks, supported by experienced professionals and other community partners, where they can learn helpful tips from one another and provide mutual encouragement? It is important for them to know that they are not alone and to realise that they do not need to walk this journey alone.

Next, I would like to express my concern and slight alarm over the increasing discomfort in some parts of our society towards the idea of a cosmopolitan Singapore. We have to be very vigilant and take proactive steps to ensure that this will not worsen as it may lead to fault lines widening in our society. I am worried that part of this problem may be along racial lines, which may cause discomfort among members of our minority groups. I think that the acknowledgement of this problem is important in order for us to start the process in managing this issue.

National education for our young and public education for the rest of us will continue to be essential. All of us must understand that a Singapore that closes its doors to the outside world is bad for all of us. I am keenly aware that some of these questions and comments arose because there is an impression that foreigners are here competing with Singaporeans for jobs. We need to strike a balance between meeting our economic needs and maintaining our social fabric. If we were to keep our goal of being an open, global and regional hub, we need to accept the presence of international firms and foreigners living and working with us in our society.

But I wish to call upon the Government to be more selective and ensure that only foreigners with specialised skills or experience that are less commonly found in our local workforce are brought into Singapore so that our citizens will feel more secure and can be convinced that the foreigners are here to add value and not compete for their jobs and other resources. We have to keep a careful balance so that we do not feel overwhelmed while trying to maintain our economic competitiveness.

Sir, I would like to conclude with my support for the Ministerial Statement.