Debated in Parliament on 27 Jan 2016.
Order read for the Resumption of Debate on Question [25 January 2016].
"That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to:
'We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the First Session of this Parliament.'." – [Mr Christopher de Souza].
Question again proposed.
Mdm Speaker, I am glad that the President spoke about renewing our economy in his address. I would like to voice my support.
We owe it to our children to keep the country strong and our economy vibrant so that they can also chase the rainbows and fulfil aspirations. Social well-being for our people can only be enhanced and sustained if we have a growing economy that generates the financial resources to pay for the needed expenditures, which include security which the House talked about last two days, as well as to provide good job opportunities for our citizen workforce. That includes the tens of thousands fresh graduates that join the workforce each year.
In the last 50 years, we earned our prosperity largely by value adding and we are pretty good at that. Not just because we do it cheaper than others but rather, we were able to create our own competitive advantages. We engineered strong growth in manufacturing and services by way of a whole-of-Government approach – building the necessary infrastructure ahead of demand – ports, airport, industrial spaces – continually developing international linkages and connectivity to facilitate trade and investments, free trade agreements (FTAs), multinational corporations (MNCs) with their international links, instituting pro-business policies, among others, our low tax regime, and ensuring that there are sufficient manpower resources for businesses, both local sourced and foreign sourced. This strategy has enabled companies large and small to ride on the global economic cycles and thrive.
Continuing this way of growing our economy is still a viable option, particularly in areas of high value adding, and it remains a policy option. However, given the inherent constraints in our capacity, that would mean we have to settle for a much lower growth range going forward and are destined to always compete with the next cheaper player. We will also be at the mercy of the volatile global demand cycles, which tends to impact us more as a small and open economy. So, just adding value and competing on prices has become less of a value proposition for us, especially so as our economy matures and that we are near the limits in terms of manpower growth and land spaces.
Enter the value creating and innovative economy, a term that we have be hearing a lot in the last few months since the Committee on the Future Economy (CFE) was set up. It is the next logical step, and it is also time that we make bold moves to open up new growth frontiers and expand possibilities.
Any restructuring and any major re-positioning of the economy of this magnitude comes with its challenges and risks. There will be disruptions to existing businesses and jobs, and the outcomes are by no means guaranteed.
Fortunately for Singapore, we are in a position of strength. Our strong economic fundamentals, our solid financials and the adaptable workforce can help us weather the risks and to tackle the multiple challenges ahead.
Our hard-earned political and social stability also give us the scope to think and act in the long-term interest of the country – in contrast with many of our regional competitors who are bogged down with their domestic political impasses or social disharmony.
For a small country with unchangeable physical constraints, further advances in digitisation and easier access to the global knowledge pool actually works better for Singapore. With smarter resource optimisation, greater technological adoption and enhanced global linkages, our smallness as a country can be less of a disadvantage. In the future landscape, it may well be the case where the big no longer beats the small. It is the fast that beats the slow and the imaginative that will eat the lunches of the uninspired. But we need to be among the early movers and trendsetters, and to exploit the fast-expanding networked world to our advantage.
The key is how we identify the future opportunities and how we could transform ourselves to seize those opportunities. The CFE has that difficult task on their plate. The Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Finance, Trade and Industry looks forward to participating in discussions and engaging the CFE on the various suggestions and recommendations in the months ahead.
In this era of fast-paced technological changes and, as a result, shortened obsolescence cycle, it is increasingly very difficult to predict future product trends. We may be none the wiser about what the next "Big Thing" would be – more than ever before. So, building hard infrastructure ahead of demand, something that the Government is very good at, may not be as straightforward in the future world.
Hence, the road ahead towards a value creating economy is more about developing soft infrastructures to become an innovative and entrepreneurial society – and thereby be able take advantage on a range of possible scenarios that comes our way.
Singapore has been consistently recognised for its business-friendly environment and producing graduates excelling in mathematics and science. We also have among the best legal framework for intellectual property (IP) protection rights in the world as well as the high availability of venture capital and research and development (R&D) funding. These are necessary conditions for a vibrant start-up scene.
However, while Singapore ranks high in world rankings in terms innovation inputs, such as infrastructural support and business sophistication, the innovation output has not been as encouraging; and it is mostly in the area of wholesale trade and financial services.
Indeed, it was not the lack of support schemes for the businesses or the regulatory frameworks being less or not innovation-friendly enough, that is the impediment.
The smart and hardworking officers of the various economic agencies are always on top of this and will continue to add new schemes, finesse existing schemes as well as to keep up with the best practices around the world. I think we only need to look at the SPRING Singapore website to see the range of schemes available to help the start-ups. I am sure the CFE will further add more new ideas and new approaches in developing innovative capabilities for companies and to expand our market linkages. We can debate that at a later date, while the new approaches that we should explore.
But what I think we need do more, and what we are talking more about today, is the human dimension of innovation and entrepreneurship. The human factor is the spirit and purpose of innovation. Successful innovation rests on the foundation of education, skills and, more importantly, the passion and risk attitudes of individuals.
I echo calls by many Members in this House for the Ministry of Education (MOE) to do more to diffuse the high stress and high stakes situation of our education system, from the primary school to tertiary level.
In the economy of the future, having good subject-based knowledge is important but not good enough on its own. We need to foster critical and creative thinking as well as develop behavioural and social skills. Our education system cannot be narrowly focused on examination-based academic performance. It just stresses out everyone – the students, parents and teachers and even the Members of Parliament, when the parents come to see us to appeal for the scores and to get into the schools. So, it stresses out everybody with very little gain in return besides generating the national examinations scores to help us do the school postings. Instead, it risks producing an education system that dampens the innovative and entrepreneur spirit. Students may score well in exams for those subjects, but they may have little passion or interest in that subject matter, which some recent international studies have shown. So, we need to distinguish the truth from the facts.
Also, schools should avoid crowding out less easily assessed curriculum such arts, sports and aesthetic subjects as these activities stimulate a wide range of social, thinking and behavioural skills. Rather, the weightage of these subjects should be increased so that learning in school can be fun and can be enriching. So, when I heard that in some schools, co-curricular activities (CCA) were stopped for students in the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) year or the "O" Level year, just so that the students can focus on their major examinations, it disturbed me quite a fair bit. How does stopping CCA during the PSLE year or O-level year help in developing the students that we want? It is just going to increase the tension and add more stress. We need to develop students to be self-assured, confident and, for that matter, to be able to multi-task.
I agree with Minister Ong Ye Kung that we should not be too obsessed with numbers. Often, when I attend schools' annual award ceremonies, the Principal's speech and presentations sometimes really sound like a shareholder's Annual General Meeting (AGM). There will be a lot of performance indicators being shown. So, I do not think numbers are that important. The speech should be about motivating the students and motivating the parents as well.
I do believe that there exists a distribution of strengths and abilities for each cohort of students. There will be some who may appear to do less well in a whole bell curve, but who, nevertheless, have the inclination to think out-of-the-box, and are perhaps less "conventional" than others in their learning attitude. Perhaps, they have more of the "maverick-like" thinking.
These are the people who may have street savviness to be entrepreneurial and to venture into uncharted waters. These may those who may not do well in schools, very much like Jack Ma, Steve Jobs or George Quek of "BreadTalk". In the early years, they tend to daydream a lot – I agree with Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam that some of it is good. In fact, we should not dampen their natural curiosity, especially during their early formative years. Help them, open up to them and give them second chances and if not, third chances even if they have not done well academically in their early years. Keep them in the system so that they can learn on and gain knowledge.
I am glad that the two Ministers at MOE have reiterated in their Ministry's Addendum that MOE will reduce the over-emphasis on academic results and make learning more enjoyable. And that the learning institutions will help Singaporeans discover their strengths and interests and thereby cultivate passions and fulfil aspirations. I have lifted this from the Addendum. I am sure this is music to our ears. These are all necessary moves to become an innovative and entrepreneurial society. We must not just say it or signal it, but also do it in every sense and every aspect.
Another human aspect that is essential for a flourishing innovative and entrepreneurial scene is the existence of lively communities of innovators and the related stakeholders. These are very much informal social structures that may involve the university alumni support groups, networks of overseas Singaporeans, mentors or serial entrepreneurs, among others, to create buzz, facilitate sharing and mentoring, and also to foster collaborations and partnerships. We need to place-make of some sort to get the entrepreneurs and innovators to come together to participate in lively forums and to leverage on the value of interdependencies. Universities and polytechnics are among the suitable convenors for such social groups and should be encouraged to initiate such communities to form.
Mdm Speaker, the third human factor I would like to touch on is life-long learning. Continual learning and seeking new knowledge are the best response to the rapidly changing technological landscape and also equally fast changing business models. We must keep up and not be on the wrong part of the skills mismatch curve as the landscape changes.
Coupled with the emergence of the so-called "gig economy" – something that Mr Ang Hin Kee has talked about with the freelancers – the concept of full-time employment or permanent employment may well be under threat. We have already seen how Uber has disrupted the traditional taxi business and the livelihood of taxi drivers, or how waves of digitisations by fintech companies are threatening traditional bank financing and bank intermediation.
We are not alone in this challenge. A recent study in the United States (US) estimated that 47% of the total US employment is at risk of being computerised or digitised. Hence, we have to make learning continual, whether it is by seeking new knowledge or learning new skills a way of life and actually enjoy and be motivated by it.
SkillsFuture could be the mindset game changer and especially with the SkillsFuture's credit of $500 that will certainly help ease the costs barriers. What I like about SkillsFuture is that it enables individuals to take ownership of their own learning journey and hopefully inculcate the attitude to always seek new knowledge and to improve skills as part of their lifestyle routine.
However, we should also be mindful about whether the training and courses under SkillsFuture would have sufficient depth and focus and whether it would help improve individual employability and skills mastery.
Also, continuous learning should be made more accessible to all in ITEs, polytechnics and universities. There should be no age barrier. There should be no paper barrier. We can calibrate the right fee structure, but we should make it accessible to all. We should also ensure that it will not be at the expense of places set aside for each cohort of new undergraduates. Over time, we need to blur the lines between learning in schools and training during employment, and it should be a continuous journey.
Mdm Speaker, for entrepreneurship and innovative culture to permeate across the society, we need individuals who are willing to try and willing to explore to step out of their comfort zones. Going forward, we literally have to think like a start-up in the way we respond to opportunities. It is not just the businesses and individuals but the entire ecosystem including the educational institutions, social stakeholders, business associations and, crucially, the Government and regulators.
Our laws, our rules as well as our Instruction Manuals (IMs) in the Government are written quite some time ago and may need to be updated to cater for a more entrepreneurial society.
Mdm Speaker, to conclude, as we venture into the value-creating world and to become an innovative economy, we have to remain open to all talents and ideas. That is very much part of the interdependencies needed for the ecosystem to flourish. Having a diverse range of talents will strengthen our position as an innovation hub. By all means, manage and calibrate our overall foreign manpower supply in accordance to our physical and social constraints like what many international centres, such as New York and London, have done. But we must remain open and not be averse to an innovator or entrepreneur from a foreign land coming here to innovate and venture. It is all a necessary part of the buzz and vibrancy.
Staying open and staying plugged to the global network has strengthened our position as a key economic hub in the past. We need to continue to stay open, to stay connected and to stay open to changes, and that way, we will give our local entrepreneurs and local innovators access to more opportunities, and it enhances our chances of succeeding as a value creating economy. Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion.
Mdm Speaker, the President ended his Address two Fridays ago with a call for Singaporeans to write the next chapter of our future together. The next chapter, in the words of President Tony Tan, will "see Singapore progress as an exceptional nation with a thriving economy and a caring an inclusive society".
It is apt that the President has called on Singaporeans to renew our pledge at the half-century mark of our nationhood to build a better Singapore as one people, regardless of race, language or religion. But our pledge goes beyond calling on Singaporeans to merely unite as one people to build a better Singapore. The frameworks of our pledge support good politics and espouse the values of justice and equality to be the foundation of our democracy so that our people as a nation can achieve happiness, prosperity and progress.
Although the President did not talk about justice and equality when he spoke on good politics, these values are non-negotiable if we want to get our politics right in the next chapter. The President has reminded us that as Members of Parliament, we all have a responsibility to do our best for our people, regardless of our party affiliation.
About 18 months into my first term as Member of Parliament for Hougang, a resident asked me if his child would be given the Edusave Bursary, will the child receive the award from me? I believe all of you know the answer so I will dispense with that. Nevertheless, I thank the President for the reminder, and I can assure the President that the Workers' Party (WP) will do its best for the people while we wait with bated breath the impending improvement to our political system, as mentioned in his Address.
Mdm Speaker, the President talked about the need to keep our nation safe and secure right at the beginning of his speech for good reason. The ASEAN region has taken a dangerous turn with the terrorist attacks in Bangkok in 2015 and in Jakarta a fortnight ago. ISIS has successfully taken its terror and fight right to our doorstep. Our way of life as we know and enjoy is now under threat. These are indeed dangerous and uncertain times we are living in. A terrorist attack in Singapore is no longer a remote possibility.
Thus, I fully support the President's call for Singaporeans to remain steadfast and united under these trying times, when misguided extremists are trying to tear this world apart through violence and fear.
While it is reassuring that the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) will strengthen our border security and tap into technology to help fight criminals and terrorist threats, it is my hope that this Government will also put effort in countering the spread of radical ideologies online.
The war on terrorism at our homefront is psychological as well. We cannot influence the people beyond our shores, but we can surely remind our own to value and preserve the peace and harmony we have here.
The walk with terrorism probably begins with some form of self-radicalisation, and such activities are impossible to prevent and they usually go under the radar. Self-radicalised individuals will probably pose one of the biggest threats to our security and the preservation of our social fabric.
Madam, Singapore has a lot to show the world on what it means to live in racial and religious harmony. Our cultural and religious diversity is a testament to that. Our work at achieving our unique interfaith, interracial and intersectoral harmony should be told to each successive generation to counter those dangerous and destructive ideologies propagated by radicals with misguided and violent intent.
I share Senior Minister of State Ong Ye Kung's observation that it is a sight to behold to see religious symbols of different faiths side by side and opposite each other in our HDB estates. But behind the cold existence of these religious artefacts lie a whole lot of effort in exercising tolerance, consideration and good neighbourliness. These stories must be passed down from generation to generation in all forms and means. We have to start young to sow the seeds of religious and racial tolerance in our classrooms, and hope for the best that our children will be able to discern dangerous ideologies online and reject them outright. We all have a part to play in this – this Ministry, the schools and most important of all, the parents – to make Singapore safe and secure.
Finally, the next chapter in education is critical because it is going to churn out the talents and the workforce that will take Singapore to SG100 and beyond. Madam, education is one of the key building blocks of Singapore. The Government has made many changes to our education system over the years, in search of a balanced approach to prep our young for a world that is constantly evolving. The change the educator intends to make in the next chapter must stand the test of time because lives are at stake. It must result in fostering a generation of thinking, self-motivated and innovative, and confident students.
We have to invest heavily in our human capital because it is our only hope at becoming an exceptional nation. The Prime Minister has shared that his biggest achievement as Head of Government was the emphasis he had placed on education when he first assumed office. In his first National Day Rally, the Prime Minister talked briefly about the "Teach Less, Learn More" concept of getting the maximum benefit out of educating our students through quality teaching.
The "Teach Less, Learn More" model has found its way into schools in the past decade. Can our educators say for sure that this model really works because our students continue to do well in high-stake examinations, despite being taught less in school? Has the shift to focus on quality teaching instead of quantity teaching resulted in better desired outcomes of education? Or has it merely shifted more of the learning from the classroom to the private tutors?
I am sure MOE would like to know the effectiveness of the "Teach Less, Learn More" model, but without a corresponding study into the tuition culture here, nothing can be conclusive. I do urge MOE to commission a study into the tuition culture because it will help our educators to formulate better policy decisions in the next chapter.
Moving away from basic education, how far are we prepared to inspire our young to shoot for the stars in the pursuit of their interests at the tertiary level? Is the Government pull out all the stops to attract a Nobel Laureate to take up a research or teaching chair at one of the local universities so that the Laureate can inspire a student to dream big?
We need role models in life to inspire ourselves to greater heights. This Government has gone to great lengths to pursue an Olympic medal using foreign talents in the hope that the move will bring glory to the nation and the imported Olympians could be role models for our young athletes.
In the next chapter, it is my hope that Singapore will produce a Nobel Laureate of our own. Almost 900 Nobel Laureates have been recognised since 1901. Countries such as Azerbaijan, Cypress, Algeria, Guatemala, St Lucia, and Madagascar, to name a few, have all produced a Laureate or two each. Is this Government prepared likewise with the same vigour in our human capital outside of sports? A Nobel Laureate is recognised by his or her own country of birth, so we cannot engineer that by import.
Mdm Speaker, in the next chapter in education, I do hope to see a deeper engagement between our institutes of higher learning and local small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and government-linked corporations (GLCs) in the area of R&D.
Many American universities were intricately involved in the US Space programme from Project Mercury to Project Apollo and to the Space Shuttle programme. The benefits that such deep collaboration brings to the schools, the students and the community at large are immeasurable. I am heartened to read in the papers that six students from Singapore polytechnics have had their invention patented by Boeing and their names listed as co-inventors of the patent recently. Such news is inspiring. I wish our young inventors well and hope that their inventions will go into commercial production someday.
The R&D Framework under the National Research Foundation cuts across many Ministries. I am unable to determine who gets the lion share of the R&D budget, but I do hope that our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) will be given ample opportunities to nurture our young Singaporeans into exceptional scientists and inventors if the future.
In conclusion, I agree with the President that the political system here needs to be refreshed. We all want a clean, effective and accountable Government, but not at the expense of less democracy, justice and equality. I am also quietly confident that Singaporeans of all faiths will stand united to reject terrorism and attempts by misguided extremists to sow seeds of discord among the diverse and peace-loving people of Singapore.
And finally, Madam, we all know education is not all about classroom and examination. It is a never-ending journey. The Chinese has a saying “活到老，学到老”. The SkillsFuture initiative announced last year is certainly a step in the right direction. However, the values we impart to our young must stand the test of time. Each successive cohort that leaves our classroom must be resilient and, most important of all, must have a sense of belonging, without which we can never have an exceptional nation. I certainly believe that when we get our education right, we will get our security right, we will get our economy right, we will also get our society right, we will get our living environment right and most important of all, we will get our nation building right. We will be an exceptional nation.
Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion of Thanks for the President's Address. I fully agree with the five key priorities of the Government as outlined by the President. The devil, of course, is in the details.
Madam, the world confronting us and those who come after us will be different. Our society is ageing rapidly. Every job task that can be replicated can be replaced by a machine. Citizens who cannot add value enough are at risk of being left behind. Income gaps widen between those whose skills are in demand and those who cannot catch up. In the words of Albert Einstein, "The significant problems we face today cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when the problems were first created."
Madam, let me first share a simple poem that shows the different levels that we can view and address the challenges we face in life.
This poem by a Ms Portia Nelson is entitled "Autobiography in 5 Short Chapters".
Chapter I
I walk down the street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I fall in.
I am lost ... I am helpless.
Is it my fault?
It takes me forever to find a way out.
Chapter II
I walk down the same street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I pretend I don't see it.
I fall in again.
I can't believe I am in the same place.
But it isn't my fault.
It still takes a long time to get out.
Chapter III
I walk down the same street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I see it is there.
I still fall in ... it's a habit.
My eyes are open.
I know where I am.
It is my fault.
I get out immediately.
Chapter IV
I walk down the same street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I walk around it.
Chapter V
I walk down another street.
Madam, the new world is full of deep holes. Sometimes, we patch up the holes. Often, when it involves entrenched mindsets and structures, it will take more than patching up or just walking around them. We may have to walk down another street or make U-turns.
Let me share some observations and suggestions on two areas that I think will require more than patching. First, in the space of Learning; next, in Caring and Doing.
On Learning – the future of learning will be far from the teacher-directed, traditional classroom settings we are used to. In the future, learning can take place anytime, anywhere; not constrained by time or the physical dimensions of a school. We can choose from a quiver of tools, devices and learning solutions that can be face-to-face, online or blended. If SkillsFuture were to succeed, then learners will come in all ages with all backgrounds. They will have to be self-driven lifelong learners – a habit that is not yet pervasive today.
Many positive changes have taken place in the education landscape in Singapore in the last decades – learning support; online learning resources; special education; teacher recruitment and compensation; and, most recently, to me, a brilliant move of having MOE actively take on the SkillsFuture portfolio in Continual Education and Training (CET) for adult learners.
As a GPC member for Education for the last 10 years, I have met many authentic, diligent and professional educators who want the best for our young.
However, Madam, our education system is one that is pimpled by three unhealthy "P"s: one, a pre-occupation with academic scores; two, parentocracy; and three, physical segregation of our students.
One, on our pre-occupation. Our pre-occupation with academic scores is an outcome of years of conditioning, a choice borne out of a perceived lack of other better avenues of social mobility.
Academic rigour is a good thing, but it becomes an impairment when even academically stronger students start seeking extra help through tuition. It is an impairment when the posting criteria to popular schools is based on cut-off points of high-stake examinations at the age of 12. It is an impairment when teachers teach to test, and parents feed the $1-bilion tuition industry in order to ace examinations and increase one's options.
It is hard to cultivate or inculcate a love for learning when all that matters to the majority is the score from a series of high-stake examinations. When the curiosity and love for learning is snuffed out when one is young, it will be hard to re-ignite it after one's formal school years when he leaves the school gate.
On parentocracy. The second unhealthy "P" of our education landscape is parentocracy. It is commonly described as a phenomenon in which a child's education is shaped according to the wishes and opportunities that can be afforded by his parents. As the stakes of academic scores become higher, parentocracy will further rear its ugly head. Parentocracy restricts social mobility and can unfairly deprive those with lesser resources and networks, undermining the development of their potential.
In the case of the Direct School Admissions (DSA) programme, for example, it is an open secret that children from more affluent backgrounds stand a higher chance of benefitting from it since they could be nurtured from young in the arts or even sports. In the case of overseas exchange programmes or internships, the more affluent parents will be better able to put their children through. We need to level the playing field as much as possible.
The third "P", physical segregation of our young during their school years especially. Madam, we have acquired the habit of feeding the sacred cow practice of physically segregating students into different geographic settings whenever they are assessed to be different, or they learn differently.
We tend to promote a system where those who excel in the academics are placed in the top academic schools, those who excel in arts in School for the Arts (SOTA); those good at sports to the Singapore Sports School, and so on – a very efficient system that sorts and places our students in geographically different location, meeting occasionally at school-driven projects or events.
But, Madam, one of the most effective ways of keeping our country safe, secure and empathic is to forge relationships of acceptance and trust among citizens of different abilities, faiths, and socioeconomic status, during one's growing-up years, in natural settings. Trust and empathy cannot be built deeply when Singaporeans are physically segregated from young. Madam, this is a sacred cow that ought to be examined closely and slaughtered if need be.
Suggestions on Learning. I would like to make four suggestions today, to address the unhealthy three "P"s − a pre-occupation with academic scores for high-stake examinations, the risk of parentocracy and physical segregation.
At times, it would take walking another path or making a U-turn, when tweaking and patching will not work.
Suggestion one is to create an open architecture and invest in e-learning developers and curators to accelerate the sharing of best learning materials including lectures and self-driven learning modules. This is especially urgent across some 400 primary, secondary and special schools in order to level the playing field and empower more teachers, students and families.
Invest at the national level for learning management systems like Canvas or the like. Make templates on these platforms available for easy development and sharing. Reward those who share materials and pedagogy of good standard, lesson plans as well. Create 21st century jobs of Curators and Coaches who can help sieve through the submissions and advise on usage. Take reference from the smartphone apps platform where both developers and users can interact actively and put the power of learning content development into the hands of those beyond the Ministry as well.
Suggestion two is to remove the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) without compromising academic rigour and pilot a 10-year through-train school model. This is not the first time that I and other Members of the House have raised this.
Seriously, walk another path − remove one high-stake examination, the PSLE! Even educators, I understand, call for this. At the age of 12, it is too early to sort. Tweaking the assessment grading system will not remove the deeply entrenched mindsets of chasing the scores. The problem is unlikely to disappear even if we replace PSLE T-scores with Banding – students will start scoring four "A"s, five "A"s and so forth. We are back to square one.
Suggestion three is to re-dream and slay the sacred cow of physically segregating people who learn differently. Re-think the concept of the School of the Arts, the Singapore Sports School, Normal (Technical) schools, the Special Assistance Plans (SAP) schools, and the Special schools. Think programmes, yes, even programmes for the gifted, and make these programmes available across more physical school campuses – so that students of different abilities and talents can grow up together under one roof.
Suggestion four is to pilot inclusive education villages across Singapore to house students of different abilities and backgrounds. There is no better way to learn inclusion except to play, eat, interact and learn with others who are unlike yourself. Let those who are academically stronger learn via subject-banded classes, but design school campuses that allow diversity and vibrant social interactions for all groups.
Better still, make full use of these Education Villages to allow SkillsFuture learnings for adults to take place there too. There is no better time to consider taking another path in this aspect especially when enrolments are falling, and some physical capacity can be found.
Next, on Caring and Doing. Madam, there will be those who are at risk of being left behind in the new economy we are heading towards. I am most concerned with the elderly, especially those who are lower skilled and those with special needs and disabilities. Building a caring society is an aspiration expressed not only in the President's Address; it is the desire of many Singaporeans who participated in the "Our Singapore Conversations" led by Minister Heng Swee Keat.
The Government has made some excellent moves in ensuring the essentials of healthcare, housing and transport for the vulnerable amongst us. It is time for us to consider taking bolder steps to entrench this value of Care into our system.
Can the Government exercise the moral authority to commit schools and corporations, including Government agencies to adopt, on a regular and longer-term basis, vulnerable groups, especially the low-skilled elderly and those with special needs and/or disabilities? Do we have the courage to legislate the protection of their rights and welfare into our way of life? We should.
The women have the Women's Charter; abandoned parents have the Maintenance of Parents Act; those who are mentally incapacitated have the Mental Capacity Act; even the animals have the Animals and Birds Act to protect their welfare. We should do the same for the education, employment and care support for the elderly and the disabled.
Should we aim for a way by which Civil Society and the Government can work more collaboratively to achieve their mission and shared values? We should.
In this matter, I beg to differ from the WP's desire to have the Government out of the way as much as possible. At times, getting the Government out of the way may not work when it is in the interest of the target community or the cause to have more of Government engagement and involvement.
Two experiences come to mind.
One is my journey as an advocate for the special needs community and the second, that of Member of Parliament Mr Louis Ng, an animal rights advocate. We were both not Members of this House when we first began our work in the two causes. Separately, we decided at some stage, that the confrontational "name and shame" way of advocacy could only go that far. We learnt that if we truly have the interest of the communities we care for at heart, then we need to be part of the solution, to persuade, to coax, to explain and dirty our hands, where necessary, and to engage those, including the Government, who can help us as partners.
We do not all need to end up as parliamentarians, but we can lead, sponsor and/or run initiatives that can advance those whom we care for. Sweep and clean up the school compound or the animal habitat, if necessary. We learnt that we need to move beyond criticising, and initiate or join others and get involved in Care Projects ourselves.
That is the purpose of the next series of citizen engagement in the form of the SG50 discussions, and the mission of agencies such as the Community Development Councils (CDCs). There is still much more to be done for the vulnerable in our midst, but they will not get any better unless we collaborate with, instead of simply naming and shaming or pushing away, those who could make a difference with us.
In conclusion, Madam, I believe the "Future of Us" is only as strong as our humility and boldness in taking another path or making the U-turn when we confront the deep holes or even craters in our pathways. The "Future of Us" is only as strong as our determination to stick our necks out for what we instinctively know is right and humane. The "Future of Us" is only as strong as our willingness to be part of the solution and dirty our hands if we need to, and our ability to genuinely collaborate – giving credit when credit is due; refraining from naming, shaming and posturing to score points for oneself or for one's political party.
Someone once said in a political satire that politicians will lose votes when they advocate something controversial, but they will lose an election if they choose to be too bold or courageous.
But for the deep holes that confront our nation, I urge us all to be bold and walk another path if need be; for not doing so, may not only cost us an election but cost us our beloved country. Madam, I support the Motion. [Applause].
Mdm Speaker, the President highlighted that one of the challenges we face is a rapidly ageing population. By any definition – statutory, scientific, common sense – I am or will soon be in the "aged" category. That I suppose qualifies me to speak on this subject.
This is not a new subject, but one that has exercised the minds and skills of policymakers for many years now. We need to plan far ahead to adequately meet this challenge.
Hence, the Ministerial Committee on Ageing announced last year an Action Plan for Successful Ageing. It is a collaborative effort among Government agencies, Voluntary Welfare and Non-profit organisations, business and community organisations as well as union leaders, and reflects the aspirations and ideas of more than 4,000 Singaporeans from all walks of life who were widely consulted over a period of close to one year.
The Action Plan offers more than 60 initiatives in 12 areas such as health and wellness, employment, volunteerism and retirement adequacy. And we welcome ground up innovative ideas including those suggested by Members Miss Cheryl Chan and Ms Joan Pereira yesterday.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) has plans to co-locate Senior Care Centres (SCCs) at Community Clubs and town hubs such as at the Bedok Integrated Complex.
The first such SCC, co-located with Ci Yuan Community Club, will be welcoming its first clients in the coming months. The SCC will also provide home care services to surrounding residents.
We are also planning for Active Ageing hubs in new HDB developments with both aged care and active ageing programmes together. We hope to work with more grassroots organisations to develop a range of active ageing and aged care programmes, using existing CCs and Residents’ Committees (RCs) as platforms.
Let me clarify, just in case they are misconstrued or misrepresented. SCCs, nursing homes, and other forms of long-term care facilities would be provided in places where we assessed that there are needs from the residents. Just like Edusave awards which are awarded based on eligibility criteria, they will be awarded to students who qualify regardless of which constituency they stay in. I think these are very fair and objective assessments based on needs and merits.
Indeed, we should not be consumed by what we see on one side of the coin – the fear of a silver tsunami, with all of its attendant problems. If we do, we are shortchanging ourselves.
The other side of the coin is longevity, with the immense opportunities for Singapore and Singaporeans that come with a population living longer. I would urge all Singaporeans to be bold and positive about our ageing population, and not just look at the challenges this brings.
Just as we have turned our water insecurity into path-breaking water technology solutions highly sought after even by other countries, we need to reframe our ageing problem as a platform for us to innovate and create new opportunities. We need a new "philosophy of ageing" to guide our national narrative on ageing at the individual, community and national levels. So, how can ageing be re-framed?
For individuals, ageing can be a positive force. Longer life spans could open up new life choices, new learning, new careers and new experiences. To allow this to happen, we will need to provide the platform for seniors to keep their minds active and their spirits fulfilled by working for as long as feasible and providing them with opportunities to learn new skills and develop new interests.
For the community, ageing can become a powerful, unifying cause that rallies residents, students, community organisations, and grassroots organisations to create new programmes and develop new social networks to embrace our senior population as active and participating members of an inclusive Singapore society.
One aspect of this is promoting senior volunteerism. We can help them start the journey by matching volunteering opportunities to seniors with the appropriate backgrounds, and by providing the necessary tools to equip them to function more effectively as volunteers. This will be the proof of concept for an inter-generational volunteer movement to help and be helped by seniors in our community.
At the national level, ageing can be an opportunity for businesses to create new products and services to tap the silver market, in the same way that millennials constitute a distinct market segment for smart phones, tablets, social media marketing and the like. Whether it is gym facilities for those over 65 only or anti-ageing products – if you swear by them – or holiday packages for retirees, the opportunities are limited only by our imagination.
Likewise, rather than fret over a declining workforce, or dependency ratios in some cases, we should instead seek to harness the productive and creative energies of more mature workers, many of whom bring a steady hand to help and guide the younger ones.
Beyond the mere economics of a longer stream of income, productive work has many benefits such as bestowing on the elderly a sense of fulfilment and keeping their minds alert.
Mdm Speaker, population ageing will be a part of the Future of Us. Minister Heng's Committee on the Future Economy (CFE) will also need to blend in the demographic inevitability of an ageing population into its deliberations and recommendations. Our seniors should not be taken out of the equation in the future of our economy. Based on our current demographic trends, they are part of the future of our economy.
So, instead of being overwhelmed by the prospect of a silver tsunami, let us ride on longevity to create a distinctive Nation for All Ages.
However, this is a future that can only be created by all of us working together as partners – Government, Community, Businesses, Grassroots organisations and individuals.
And this is my three-fold appeal. I appeal first to families. We must have strong families that provide emotional support and are willing to love and care for older members.
Some frail and older people can be forgetful and walk very slowly. They can become quite grouchy and difficult to get along, like Carl Fredrickson, the elderly widower in the 2013 Disney Pixar movie "Up". But they are still family members with whom we have long ties of kinship and bonds of love.
Though still a minority, it is painful to read about cases of cheating, abuse or even neglect of elderly parents. It was recently reported that social workers are seeing more senior citizens who have been cheated or financially abused by their children. I myself have also recently seen a few such instances of financial abuse at my Meet-the-People Sessions. In one tragic case, an elderly parent was convinced to sell her home to live with her son who purchased another house with her money, only to be asked to find a home of her own when the relationship with the son's family turned sour.
While we strengthen legislation to protect the vulnerable elderly, what is key is that every Singaporean parent must help to inculcate the right values of filial piety and care for our seniors in their own children.
Our young Singaporeans should not only learn about such values in schools. Most importantly, they need to see how their own parents live out these values in caring for and loving their grandparents, in word and deed. They will do the same when it is their turn to look after their parents.
Secondly, I appeal to businesses. Businesses can unlock productivity and innovation in longevity for their own companies and for our economy as a whole. But they can only do so if they see older workers as assets, and if they can create ageless workplaces to enable older workers not only to continue to work but also to thrive in their jobs.
Take, for example, Virtual HR. This human resource solutions specialist has tailor-made its working and remuneration arrangements to enable older workers to take on payroll processing and other jobs in the company. As a result, it has seen mature workers in the company bring in more revenue per dollar of salary than some of the younger staff.
This need not be a rare exception and indeed it is not. We can find other examples of such age-friendly companies but there can be many more. In fact, I believe it can be the norm if business leaders apply their minds and hearts to it.
The Government will continue to help both employers and workers to transit more seamlessly into this new regime. However, employers as well as HR and line managers must take ownership of this challenge to avoid unconscious ageist employment attitudes.
Much work has been done over the years to encourage employers to hire older workers. According to the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP), complaints against workplace ageism have been falling, but TAFEP also noted at a seminar last year that some employers here still lack a sense of urgency when it comes to employing older workers.
As one The Straits Times reader, Loke Soo Heng, puts it in a Forum article dated 19 November 2015, re-employment legislation caters to older workers who are already recognised for their value in their current companies. But older workers who leave their jobs due to restructuring may be perceived differently when they apply for jobs.
The Government will do its part to encourage and engender an ageless workplace. But ultimately, the business community must be convinced of the benefits of being age-blind and to hire purely on merit.
Thirdly, I appeal to our communities. We need neighbours and residents living within each community to look out for older residents among them and lend a hand in supporting them to age well in place. This is even more pertinent as families are getting smaller and there is also increasing incidence of singlehood.
More fundamentally, we want to provide an environment where the elderly can age with dignity and be supported by family, friends and the community. But the ecosystem for this to take place is multi-layered. Because of the immense strain that caregivers bear, they themselves also need support.
We have all read about the tragedy of caregivers in Japan going down a slippery slope after they quit their jobs to look after the elderly, only to find themselves unemployable after their loved ones pass away. We ourselves may also know of friends and family who are triply strained by the stress of their day jobs, the pressure from looking after young children and caring for their ailing elderly parents.
We need therefore to refresh and strengthen the support environment for caring for the elderly so that they can age in place in their own homes, in the community, among people who know and care for them. This will also help to strengthen family ties and the community spirit so essential to a cohesive society.
How can this work in practice? An example is the befriending programme that has sprouted in different communities. Various community organisations have taken the lead to recruit, train and deploy befrienders to visit and help frail seniors living in the neighbourhood.
In Marine Parade, the local senior activity centre Goodlife! started a community kitchen in the precinct called "Goodlife Makan", after they noticed that there were many stay-alone elderly in Marine Terrace. So, there is now a kitchen in the void deck, where stay-alone seniors can come down, cook together, eat together and clean together. I am told that even the gentlemen themselves are learning to cook. We hope to nurture and grow more of such movements.
Mdm Speaker, the vision of a distinctive Nation for All Ages I have sketched may sound impossibly hard to achieve because it means changing thought patterns, and ingrained practices. But challenges have never deterred us as Singaporeans from striving to build an exceptional nation. We can apply that to population ageing too.
With the same shared vision, many determined hands and many strong hearts, we can chart a positive path ahead for population ageing, one that will inspire not only Singaporeans, but hopefully even other ageing cities.
But a key ingredient to creating such a Nation for All Ages as in tackling other national challenges is leadership and good politics. President Tony Tan has also raised this subject in his address.
How do we further strengthen the political system such that the right leaders – honest, selfless, capable, and committed – can surface? How do we sustain a robust political system that does not paralyse Government unnecessarily, but also does not stifle well-reasoned, cogently argued dissent? How can we assure alternative and minority voices a platform to be heard at the national stage?
Singapore has implemented various political innovations over the past few Parliaments. One such innovation is the Non-Constituency Member of Parliament (NCMP). The NCMP scheme presently allows for nine highest scoring Opposition members to enter Parliament.
The NCMP scheme was introduced some 32 years ago to allow for alternative party views to be aired in Parliament. This was in recognition of Singaporeans' desire for alternative views and the value of contest of ideas and robust debates to sharpen policy making.
But while the People’s Action Party (PAP) has won a strong mandate from Singaporeans in the recent General Elections, the desire for alternative voices has not waned. In fact, I believe that with greater diversity of our population, as well as rising political interest and awareness among a better educated population, such a desire would grow.
I would thus support further expansion of the NCMP scheme, say to 12 or even beyond, recognising the value of having issues dissected from various perspectives that can sharpen and refine policy formulation. This is especially relevant as the challenges we face becomes even more complex and unpredictable. In fact, this would also affirm our desire to build a more inclusive society.
The number of Parliamentary seats has also increased since the last election in 2011 from 87 to 89 in 2015, and it is envisaged that this number could continue to rise given the rising population. Hence, it would be sensible to increase the number of NCMPs in this House.
But, regardless of the number of NCMPs admitted, what is most important, to ensure that our Parliament continues to have robust, well-informed and quality debate that will help shape and sharpen policies, is for Singaporeans to judge and scrutinise every Parliamentarian with the same lens and apply the same set of standards – whether it be of conduct or the substance of the argument.
Another political innovation has been the Elected Presidency (EP). The EP is the custodian of our financial reserves against pilferage by irresponsible government. He also safeguards the integrity of our public service. The EP is therefore to be above party politics and should play a unifying role.
The issue of the EP has drawn vigorous debate in the media recently. One key issue is how to depoliticise the EP scheme, such that it is not an alternate power centre that keeps "checking" on the government of the day or offer presidential endorsement of everything the Government does. Both actions would be contrary to the EP's role and lead to either policy paralysis or cause divisions in our society.
The last presidential election was widely perceived as a kind of proxy contest between the PAP and the Opposition. Some commentators have suggested that we do away with elections for the Presidency by the People. However, an Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) survey after the 2011 Presidential Elections suggests that a majority of Singaporeans wish to choose their President through an election.
As the 24 January 2016 Sunday Times lengthy feature on impending political changes has suggested, the qualifying criteria for candidates, which has remained unchanged for the last 25 years, should be raised to ensure that the candidate is up to the task given the greater complexity and demands of the EP's custodial roles in today's environment.
For instance, the minimum paid up capital of the private or public company that a candidate leads as CEO or chairman of the board of directors should be raised significantly from the current $100 million. I would also support more public education so that Singaporeans have greater clarity on the role of the EP.
Mdm Speaker, in many ways, getting our politics right is a pre-condition to Singapore's survival over the next 50 years as we cast our eyes toward SG100.
Way before then, quite a number of us in this House, myself included will be in the aged or very aged category. Hopefully, by then, through the inventions of science, and our efforts in living a healthy lifestyle, we will have many more years to life. But I also hope that our Nation for All Ages will be a shining reality, and that it will also add life to our years. Madam, I support the Motion.
I propose to take the break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.55 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.35 pm until 3.55 pm.
Sitting resumed at 3.55 pm
[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]
Debate resumed.
Mdm Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to join the Members of this House in expressing my support for the motion of thanks to the President for his Address.
The President had spoken passionately about the importance of building a caring society. And as the hon Member Dr Amy Khor had mentioned earlier, a key characteristic of this society of ours is that an increasing proportion of it will comprise the elderly. So, for this speech, I will be focusing on strengthening the care of our seniors.
The numbers are familiar to all of us. Just five years ago, under 10% of our population was aged 65 and above. In 2013, that number had crossed the 10% mark, and by 2030, this would increase to 24%. Our old age support ratio would drop from today's 1:5.2 to 1:2.3 in 2030.
While these statistics may sound alarming but, in fact, getting old is not necessarily bad news. What we need do is to focus on functional age, not chronological age.
Healthy lifestyles and preventive health measures play a big part in ensuring that an older person remains as functional as possible, enabling him/her to lead an active and fulfilling life in his/her golden years. Socially and economically active seniors will lessen concerns about the support or dependency ratios – 60 will be the new 40; 80 the new 60, and so on.
In the Ministry of Health's (MOH) Addendum, one of its priorities is to intensify efforts to keep Singaporeans healthy, such as through plans to reduce obesity and smoking. As a society, we must work together to make ageing a positive experience for all. And in my opinion, there are three important criteria for positive ageing.
First, one must be healthy and stay connected to the community. Second, in the event that one falls ill, I am glad to note that help for our elders has been significantly expanded. Third, when the elderly need to be looked after, they should have a range of options to choose from.
Keeping healthy and connected. Health is the foundation for positive ageing. This does not mean taking more medicine or going to see the doctor more often. In fact, over-medication or treatments could do more harm than good and is costly for both the patient and the country. Recent studies suggest that reducing medication, a process that has been termed "de-intensification", has significant benefits in terms of both morbidity and mortality.
The other day, I wished a sprightly octogenarian lady the best of health, and she brightly replied that she was indeed in the pink of health, and whereupon to emphasise this point, she proceeded to show me a fistful of pills that she takes every day. This led me to ask her, "Since you are so healthy, why is there a need to take so many pills?" She just smiled wistfully but did not have a reply.
Singaporeans should take preventive measures, such as eating healthy and exercising regularly to slow biological ageing.
I am very happy to see the many efforts in our community for our elderly to keep healthy. There are wellness programmes in all 87 constituencies in Singapore. In addition, we are embarking on community-wide longitudinal health screening in some parts of Singapore, more recently in the Mei Ling and Stirling estates in Queenstown.
Workplace health has also not been neglected. We have health programmes that are customised for mature workers in workplaces. For example, some 3,000 taxi drivers have had health screening and follow-up consultations and since last June, about 400 bus drivers had gone through a customised programme that includes chronic disease management, eyesight monitoring, ergonomics and hydration.
Keeping healthy is not just a matter of exercise but feeling involved and connected. Many elderly want to continue to lead active lives. I know of examples of many nurses and other healthcare workers whom I work with, who continue employment way past the official retirement age and still continue to contribute significantly to the care of our sick and elderly.
The role of family and friends is very important. Our seniors should be able to live in a familiar environment surrounded by loved ones, friends and neighbours, not segregated from the rest of the community. Ageing-in-place is a principle that should be robustly defended.
In a recent survey by the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), about 80% of household heads aged 65 or above prefer to age-in-place at their existing flats. Many of the elderly I spoke to speak of the joys of remaining part of the community, living in their own homes. For those living with family members, they benefit from the inter-generational bonds.
For those who are living on their own, ties with long-time neighbours and even shopkeepers keep them integrated within their communities. I was delighted when the Ministry for National Development (MND) supported a programme to allow up to six neighbours to select their replacement flats together, as part of the en-bloc redevelopment of the historic precinct of Tanglin Halt.
This social glue is important. We want to see as many Singaporeans grow old with dignity within the community where they have spent the better part of their lives.
Second, support for the elderly. I believe that this is one area in which this Government has done a lot, and I am sure that our seniors can be assured that the Government has invested significantly in building up capacity across the healthcare system.
In addition, medical bills have become more affordable through higher subsidies for Specialist Outpatient Care (SOC) and outpatient drugs, Flexi-Medisave, the Pioneer Generation Package, MediShield Life and Medifund has also been strengthened. Our elderly will get the care that they need, without unduly worrying about healthcare costs.
Outside of healthcare, our elderly will get help with their daily living expenses through a variety of programmes such as CPF LIFE, the Silver Support Scheme, Enhanced and Additional GST Vouchers. And they also receive assistance with housing matters through, for example, the Enhancement for Active Seniors (EASE) scheme which helps to put age-friendly improvements in the homes of seniors, studio apartments, the Lease Buyback Scheme, the Silver Housing Bonus, priority schemes and/or additional grants for children and parents to live close to one another, such as the recently announced Proximity Housing Grant.
Housing estates are also undergoing continuous improvements to make them as senior-friendly as possible, and even our traffic system and road networks are making the transition, for instance, outdoor lifts in housing estates and for overhead bridges, and the Silver Zone programme which has a suite of age-friendly traffic safety enhancements, the latest example of which was inaugurated in Lengkok Bahru just last weekend.
Moving on to long-term care needs, I think this is one area where we still face many challenges. About 3% of residents aged 55 years and above are non-ambulant and require physical assistance. Long-term care needs can last for several years if disability strikes. This group of elderly require a lot more support from their families to care for them and their daily needs. Many prefer to age-in-place, but strong family support is needed to make this happen. They also need the support from services in the community, for example, like home nursing care.
I applaud MOH's efforts in expanding long-term care capacity, including nursing homes as well as home and centre-based senior care services, to ensure that the disabled elderly have access to the care that they need. Since 2011, nursing homes beds has increased by 1,000, home care places by 2,700 and centre-based care by another 1,000 places. I am glad to note that the Government is committed to increasing nursing home beds to 17,000, home care places to 10,000 and centre-based care to 6,200 places, by the year 2020.
MOH has also worked on enhancing the quality of aged care services by introducing new licensing standards for nursing homes and new guidelines for home and community care services.
The Government has been increasing support for long-term care and more Medifund assistance has been made available. Patients can receive subsidies of up to 100% in some cases, and that eligibility has broadened from half to two-thirds of households by the year 2012.
Other measures include the Enhanced Interim Disability Assistance Programme for the Elderly, the Senior Mobility and Enabling Fund, ElderShield and the Pioneer Generation Disability Assistance Scheme.
So, it is evident that much has been done, and yet it is timely to ask if we should consider other ideas to address nagging concerns among some Singaporeans. One of these is the uncertainty over long-term care costs. Many Singaporeans believe this to be large and required for an extended period. They also worry that nursing homes may be their only option, when they prefer to age at home. Quite a number of families are willing to have grandpa or grandma or their parents at home, if they have access to quality home care services.
Another worry they have is being a burden to their families – financially, physically and emotionally – should they lose their independence with severe disability. Naturally, they are apprehensive about long-term suffering if they were bedridden and needs various aids to survive. I have some suggestions for the Ministry's consideration.
First, we should have a comprehensive action plan to help our seniors remain healthy and connected. We have to accelerate the development of more alternatives to nursing homes. Our seniors want to be with their families even when they become frail. Family members want to be assured that they can rely on skilled help and nursing support when their parents or grandparents require it. And for seniors without family, or when their families can no longer look after them, new models of care such as assisted living centres should be explored.
The level of care delivered by a traditional nursing home may be excessive for some residents. Studies have shown that restoring the autonomy of nursing home residents, while theoretically putting them at higher risk of accidents, may actually have many positive effects on their well-being that more than offsets the potential risks.
My medical colleagues have recently called upon the MOH to reconsider building subsidised single and twin rooms in nursing homes, as research has shown that residents with dementia in nursing homes with individual rooms have less anxiety, irritability and aggression, and also sleep better. And so, they have called for a move towards providing more individualised care for the elderly in nursing homes and also to allow them to retain some degree of independence. Not only is this good for the elderly, but it may also reduce the need for manpower in the long run, as earlier stated. And so, perhaps a mix of both single and multiple bed setups can be considered for future subsidised nursing homes, so that we can explore both paradigms.
Second, we should have an ongoing public education campaign to sensitise our young and middle-aged to the need to plan ahead. This means putting aside some savings for old age, not to over-commit in terms of property purchase and not to opt-out of ElderShield. And if they do buy a larger flat, to consider downgrading after their children move out, for ease of upkeep and to release cash for post-retirement needs. I have seen the recent advertisements on our television channels highlighting this issue, and I think this is a good start.
Third, we can consider a bigger role for insurance in long-term care financing, just as we enhanced MediShield. As there are plans to review ElderShield, I urge MOH to be comprehensive in this exercise and address the most important elements – the role of individuals in saving, the role of the family in supporting them and the role of the community and Government in sharing of the risks.
Lastly, in line with our aim to be a Smart Nation, I hope that the Government will increase funding for the research and development of health and mobility aids and monitoring devices such as variables and robotics and even drones to help out our elderly. To accelerate our development in this area, we should look into partnering foreign leading firms and institutions in this industry. Japan is one of the leaders in this field and exoskeletons like those developed by Cyberdyne and interactive personal robots, such as Pepper, which was launched by SoftBank recently, provide us with an endearing view of the future.
Much has been said about the future of us but literally, the future of us is ourselves in old age. And to answer this call, I would ask that we, all of us, work together to help our senior citizens remain healthy and socially connected within the community, to give them and their family better assurances in their golden years and provide options for them to age within the community.
PAPERCUTS