Government’s Response to Recommendations from Institute of Policy Studies Report on Stay-at-home Fathers

Mr Speaker, fathers play an important role in their children's development. International studies have shown that when fathers are more involved, their children have better physical, cognitive and emotional developmental outcomes. Greater paternal involvement in the home also helps mothers to stay active in the workforce. Local research has shown that Singaporean fathers are playing a more active role in care-giving and family responsibilities. This is encouraging.

We have progressively increased parental leave for fathers over the years to better support working parents and help fathers to play an active role in caring for their children.

In 2017, we increased paternity leave and shared parental leave to two and four weeks respectively. This took into account feedback from some parents that shared parental leave was helpful in allowing fathers and mothers to decide flexibly how best to care for their child, based on their own family circumstances. Today, fathers can tap on eight weeks of leave in their child's first year, almost double the amount compared to five years ago.

We are glad to see that more fathers are using their paternity leave, with take-up rates increasing from 25% in 2013 to 53% for recent cohorts. Our priority should therefore be to encourage and enable more fathers to take their paternity leave before considering further enhancements. We are also mindful of the need to carefully balance the needs of parents with the concerns of employers over the needs at the workplace.

The Government will continue to identify ways to better support parents in managing their work and family responsibilities, such as by promoting the adoption of flexible work arrangements, and working with employers and community partners to strengthen attitudes and norms in support of fatherhood.

The study by the Institute of Policy Studies recognised that fathers' roles are also shaped by societal norms. MSF partners non-profit organisations such as the Centre for Fathering to promote the "Dads for Life" and "Mums for Life" movements in schools, workplaces and the wider community. These movements go a long way in driving mindset shifts among employers, colleagues, friends and families, to give greater recognition and support to the important roles fathers and mothers play in the lives of their children. The Government will continue to work with business and community partners to promote greater paternal involvement.

Can I just get the Ministry's response to the IPS study, which said that our policies actually continue to signal that childcare is a woman's responsibility and that they reinforce this gender stereotype. Two, whether we are going to review the Shared Parental Leave policy as well, which was one of the IPS recommendations? Third, the IPS was a very small scale study. I am wondering whether PMO or MSF can do a larger scale study to really look into this issue?

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think the IPS researchers have done a serious piece of work. They are entitled to putting forward a point of view. We do not necessarily agree or disagree with them. But we can look specifically at their proposals and in that regard, the policies are never static. They are continuously being reviewed and continuously being enhanced where there are opportunities to do so. But at different junctures, we would have to look at what is of greater priority. And for these, the Government itself conducts surveys; the Government itself engages with different groups.

What the groups have told us very clearly is that in addition to all the things that we are doing on parental leave, it is also important to address workplace norms, and actually, more importantly, we have to make alternatives available to the families. The alternative that is available in today's context of nuclear families, smaller families and also because grandparents are working, is, "Please do more with regard to pre-school". And that is what we have put a lot of emphasis on.

As to what could change in the future, can we perhaps even strengthen it more, I think that would be a relevant question for further review.