Committee of Supply – Head I (Ministry of Social and Family Development)

Mdm Chair, I would like to raise three MSF social policies. They are: (a) elderly abuse and elderly care; (b) single parents and their children; and (c) families with chronic needs.

First, elderly abuse and elderly care. The social ill of elderly abuse is unacceptable in any society, but sadly, abuse of the elderly happens and will increase in tandem with our fast-ageing population. I first raised this issue of elderly abuse in 1999 and had been raising this issue regularly in this House subsequently for some regulations to be put in place for better protection of our vulnerable elderly. I am, therefore, very glad that MSF will be proposing a new Bill for this purpose called the Vulnerable Adults Act. I support and commend the Minister for adopting it. I would like the Minister to consider the following points concerning the vulnerable elderly for this Bill.

One, empowerment of social workers, doctors, family members and home caregivers to report cases of abuse, in the same way as they can intervene on behalf of abused children.

Two, identifications on the various kinds of abuses such as infliction of physical pain and injury, debilitating mental anguish, unreasonable confinement, wilful deprivation by caretaker of services necessary to maintain mental and physical health and financial abuses.

Three, raising the awareness on vulnerable adults, encouraging victims to report, facilitating the relatives and friends of the victims to report and seeking support and care for victims.

Four, care and support for the victims of abuse to be provided for to encourage reporting of cases. Many abused elderly are unlikely to report on their own families for fear of losing whatever care and support they may have.

Page: 11

Five, could MSF also look into provision to better protect our elderly from financial abuses?

May I ask the Minister whether there is an increasing number of elderly seeking MSF's assistance due to the lack of family support? Does Minister see this to be the increasing trend in view of our ageing population and smaller family units? What steps can be taken to attenuate this trend? How would MSF plan to give support in caring for the group with no family support, especially the physically weak elderly living on their own? For those with family support, would MSF look into the availability of support services to give respite to caregivers especially those looking after elderly with demanding needs such as dementia or who are terminally ill to prevent the burnt-out syndrome of the care providers?

Next, single parents. Many single parents are in the predicament they are in because of unforeseen circumstances rather than by choice. Our policies are much geared towards supporting the nuclear families. Hence, single parents are frequently not eligible for the many subsidies and pro-nuclear family incentives.

I would like to bring the plight of single working parents who are facing difficulties. In the culture of Asian societies, many of them do face the stigma of being unmarried mothers; but they still have to bring up their children single-handedly. I am concerned about the upbringing and support these children get. How does MSF ensure that single parents and their children are provided the assistance they need? Just as with medical care where no Singaporeans will be deprived of any medical care due to the lack of funds, I would like MSF to adopt a similar policy that no single parents and especially their children will be deprived of assistance to ensure their well-being. In fact, such children should be given total assistance in terms of their health, physical, psychological and educational needs as well as their social needs.

Next, family with chronic needs. Could MSF take a holistic approach in helping those families with chronic needs? There is an urgency to assist this group of needy Singaporeans with more lasting solutions. Most times, these families may have a slew of needs such as housing, inadequate income, caring for the children and ill-health of family members and so on. They are usually families with low skills and low-paying jobs. Some of them are single-income families.

Whilst they need immediate cash assistance to tide them over, it is more important that they acquire long-term capabilities and are able to sustain themselves. Their needs have to be looked into holistically in order to lift the family up altogether. For example, in equipping parents with skills and finding them employment, assisting their wives to move away from prejudices and mental barriers to employment. Their housing needs may also need urgent

Page: 12

fixing. Their children should be assisted for the sake of their well-being, health and education.

More social workers and MSF staff are required to undertake such hands-on personalised approach to solve the various needs of each family. Most times, many of their issues cannot be solved overnight. Thus, these families are assisted with continued follow-up. Only with such holistic assistance can the needy families achieve sustained and long-term benefits. Madam, we need to adopt this policy urgently to lift this group and especially their children out of their disadvantaged predicament by the next generation. Let us put into action this proverb, "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime".

Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied) : Mdm Chair, the number of citizens with dementia is expected to grow from 28,000 in 2013, to 80,000 by 2030. It is important to ensure that the interests of our ageing population are protected.

The Lasting Power of Attorney, LPA scheme, is very useful but I have some concerns. First, there is a real risk that elderly persons are subject to the undue influence of persons that depend on. Secondly, a resident related his worry about the ease of the scheme as his brother had made an LPA in favour of a stranger to the family, without anyone else knowing of it. Thirdly, I noted a big grassroots initiative to get residents to sign LPAs, leading to masses of LPAs being issued by certificate issuers without personal knowledge of the donors.

Our current LPA scheme requires the certificate issuer to be a doctor or a lawyer. It is a safeguard but limited if the doctor or lawyer has no prior knowledge of the donor. In the few minutes spent with the donor, it may not be possible to determine if the donor's mental state is stable or the LPA arrangements accord with the donor's well-being and interest.

I have two enhancements to suggest. First, re-instituting a safeguard that was removed. Putting into the standard form of LPA the question of whether the donor wishes to inform another person of it and giving that person the right to object to the LPA.

Although the Minister had previously replied in the House that the donor could still inform someone, the safeguard is precisely for those who may be less aware of the risks. By requiring the certificate issuer to ask the donor specifically whether he wants someone to be informed, the donor can respond to the certificate issuer on this, without the donee's influence.

Page: 13

My second suggestion is to require the certificate issuer to indicate in the LPA how long he has known the donor, or how he forms his opinion that the LPA is reliable.

Finally, I refer to the regime of Court-appointed deputies. Being someone who recently went through the process to be appointed deputy, I appreciate the need for rigour especially when one is appointed deputy to handle someone else's assets. However, parents of adults with mental disabilities are also required to be appointed deputies, in order to make decisions about their children's personal welfare.

Recently, I met a resident with an adult son with severe cerebral palsy. As he could not give valid consent for a medical procedure, she was asked to get a Court order to be his deputy. Law firms quoted her legal costs at $6,000 to $7,000. In such cases, she and other parents would be caring for their disabled adult children for the rest of their lives, with or without the Act. Will the Ministry institute a more streamlined and cheaper procedure for such cases?

Miss Penny Low (Pasir Ris-Punggol) : Madam, profit maximising markets are poor allocators of social value. Hence, as economy improves, trust and productivity deproves and social capital falls. Creating a truly inclusive society with high social capital requires commitment to action from everyone.

In the UK, South Korea, US, Thailand, Hong Kong and others, governments have identified social enterprises as a driver of social capital and pledge to support social enterprises at every stage of the journey. Funds, manpower, private and public sector links are forged to support ground-up initiatives.

In the case of Singapore, I think we have done some but far from enough. In fact, we are falling behind many countries that have started after us. Can the Minister give an update on the state of social enterprise development in Singapore, and also, the one-stop centre or the hub that he once thought about?

The public sector can also consider assigning social value to their procurement process or even devolve public services to social enterprises, as in the case of UK where 15% of all social enterprises (SEs) started in 2011 and 2012, and some 40% of all SEs worked to deliver public goods and services. Corporates too can be good partners of SEs in helping to mentor, provide distribution channels, generate demand and supply of SE goods and services. Would MSF facilitate these bridges or better still, engage and partner SEs to play match-maker

Page: 14

between the SE sector and corporates. Does MSF have a plan to quantum leap the SE sector?

Mdm Chair, please allow me to begin in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Members of the House, as announced by the Minister earlier, we are committed to improving the accessibility, affordability and quality of early childhood services. We have made progress over the last few years. We will embark on a few new efforts towards the same direction in the coming year to provide families with young children with more support.

First, ECDA will introduce a new Partner Operators scheme. The Government will provide funding to appointed Partner Operators and parents can expect to pay lower fees next year for better quality preschool education for their children.

Next, Government top-ups of the Child Development Accounts will also go some way to alleviate childcare and other expenses.

At the same time, we will implement a Professional Development Programme in stages to help pre-school educators to improve their professional development and raise the overall quality of the preschool sector.

Page: 22

Children are the future of our nation. We will invest in building a strong foundation for our children, to give every child the best start in life so that they have the opportunities to maximise their potential.

(In English): Mdm Chair, as Ms Denise Phua mentioned yesterday evening, every Singaporean has a mission to enable and empower those with difficulties or disabilities. It is a mission that MSF is deeply committed to. In the next 15 minutes, I wish to share how MSF aims to provide those with special needs and disabilities a chance to live full lives and to participate in the community.

As we seek to create an inclusive home for all, it is the family as an institution that gives us the strength and stability to achieve that goal. We are into the third year of the 2012 Enabling Masterplan (EM) that aims to build a more inclusive society, where persons with disabilities are integrated and contributing members. We have made steady progress and I will share the milestones of our journey and what is ahead with regard to the EM.

Earlier, Minister Chan Chun Sing spoke about investing in a strong foundation in early childhood. This is especially important for children with special needs. Early intervention is crucial to maximise their potential.

Let me describe briefly how we are making our early intervention services more accessible and more affordable. First, I will touch on accessibility. Last year, 2,200 children benefited from the MSF-funded Early Intervention Programme for Infants and Children, or EIPIC for short. That is almost double the 1,200 children five years ago. We will continue to press on to expand EIPIC, and aim to provide 3,200 places by 2018.

The other programme, Development Support Programme (DSP), was started in 2012 to help preschoolers with mild development needs. This early intervention service has, to date, assisted 2,000 children in over 300 mainstream preschools. In MSF, we are all very heartened to hear that these children have shown good progress in their development and literacy skills.

Next, we have also made improvements to the affordability of EIPIC. Last October, we increased the universal subsidy of EIPIC from $300 to $500. The eligibility criteria have also been reviewed and the eligibility for additional subsidies was extended from 50% to 80% of the population. The quantum of support was also raised. Today, the lowest-income family pay as little as $10 a month for EIPIC service, just to give an example.

Now, about student care – we will also provide more funding to voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) to build and run more student care centres for older children with special needs. This will make it easier for their caregivers, especially those from lower-

Page: 23

income families, to look for jobs and stay employed. These services will also give caregivers greater peace of mind knowing their children are in good hands. Details will be shared with VWOs later this year.

Besides early intervention and education, other key enablers like ease of transport, lifelong learning, employment support and opportunities for social integration are equally important to persons with these disabilities, as Ms Denise Phua, Ms Chia Yong Yong and Mr Png Eng Huat mentioned last evening.

In the aspect of transport, we have made efforts to reduce the physical as well as the financial barriers so that persons with disabilities can better access opportunities and gain greater mobility in public space. Last year, I shared about subsidies for different modes of transport according to the needs of those with disabilities. Today, I am pleased to report to the House that more than 10,000 persons with disabilities have since benefited from the Public Transport Concession. In addition, MSF's VWO Transport Subsidies have benefited 3,000 persons with disabilities who take private bus or van services to attend special education schools and services.

This year, we will further strengthen our support by widening the transport options. MSF has partnered the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) to award grants to three transport operators to provide dedicated transport services for persons with disabilities to access community-based services. So, we hope this will all help develop the right expertise and achieve better efficiency in meeting the unique transport needs of persons with disabilities. And we hope that these various initiatives will enable persons with disabilities and their caregivers to lead their daily lives with a difference as they tap on to the continuum of available transport options.

Another key enabler we have focused on is in training and employment. We share Ms Denise Phua's view that lifelong learning can empower persons with disabilities to pursue their aspirations. MOE has developed a framework for vocational education in Special Education schools to prepare students for employment and independent living. We can certainly do more in this area and extend support beyond the school. MOE, MSF and SG Enable are working together on a School-to-Work Transition Programme to offer customised training pathways and work options for Special Education school students with potential for work.

Persons with disabilities will also be eligible for the upcoming SkillsFuture initiatives. For example, they can take courses in communications, IT or culinary training. Like other

Page: 24

Singaporeans, they can access continuing education and training opportunities in our Institutes of Higher Learning. The Special Educational Needs Support Offices in these institutes stand ready to support them.

MSF is also expanding training options and employment support for persons with disabilities. In 2014, about 140 persons with disabilities underwent work preparation and job-related training organised by SG Enable. Most of these courses – as you can imagine – were customised to each of their different disability needs.

Annabelle, a young Special Education graduate with an intellectual disability, approached SG Enable last August for help to get a job. And very quickly, SG Enable connected her with a job coach who helped her explore the various and available options and get the needed training. She landed an interview and secured a job with Pizza Hut. Annabelle started off by clearing tables and cleaning. Today, about six months later, she serves and attends to customer requests. Pizza Hut, today, is training her to take orders. As we all know, taking orders is the most complex job for any F&B crew member. Her colleagues and supervisors praise her for her punctuality, her work attitude and her eagerness to learn. Annabelle is thrilled with her job. She is also very happy at being able to earn an income. At MSF and also at SG Enable, we share Annabelle's joy and wish her all the best. She is an excellent example of how targeted training, customised training, for persons with disabilities can expand their employment options and also facilitate integration in the community.

Employers play a critical role in the opportunities we hope to create for persons with disabilities. Ms Chia Yong Yong asked last night about funding to help employers identify relevant job adjustments for employees with disabilities. A year ago, we enhanced the Open Door Programme to support a wider range of services, including consultancies, for employers to bring more persons with disabilities into the workforce and to raise their work potential. Employers can tap on grants to redesign job processes, to redesign and reshape the work environments, to train supervisors and co-workers to manage and work with colleagues with disabilities.

In this financial year, SG Enable and its VWO partners placed about 300 persons with disabilities with jobs. Under the Open Door Programme, close to 100 employers pledged to hire persons with disabilities. We aim to increase these numbers beyond 100.

Besides the private sector, we are also happy to share that the public sector employers, too, are hiring or providing internships for persons with disabilities, including professional and management positions. SG Enable is working closely with a number of them to develop more such opportunities.

Page: 25

Last year, in 2014, a total of more than 5,900 employers received the Special Employment Credit for jobs created to 7,500 persons with disabilities. We are grateful and thankful to these far-sighted employers who have partnered us on this journey. We would like more of such big-hearted employers to come forward – to step forward – and play an enriching role in creating an inclusive Singapore.

Let us turn now to the issue of adult care. Parents of adults with disabilities do worry about the care of their children. We understand their concerns and are committed to pledge more resources.

This year, we will add another 140 places to Day Activity Centres, bringing the total number to almost 1,200. We will also build a new Adult Disability Home for persons with disabilities with physical and also multiple disabilities by 2018.

To better support persons with autism (ASD) and their caregivers, we will open a new Day Activity Centre for adults with autism in 2015, as well as an Adult Disability Home in 2018.

Beyond expanding capacity, we will review, more fundamentally, the adult care landscape for persons with disabilities. In MSF, we recognise there is no one-size-fits-all approach, so we hope to have a wider range of care options in future to meet the different needs based on the type of disabilities, based on severity and also based on the different levels of family support.

We are therefore piloting several new service ideas. One example is the Drop-In Disability Programme that serves higher functioning individuals by helping them remain meaningfully engaged with the community. It is located in Senior Activity Centres, which Mr Png Eng Huat had suggested. Another pilot is the Home-based Care Services that offer home help for those unable to tap on centre-based services. We will scale these various programmes up if the pilots are successful.

We would like to assure caregivers that we would certainly continue to look into ways of increasing the capacity as well as the range of adult care services. We will also look into the needs of caregivers, as Ms Denise Phua had spoken passionately about last evening. Last year, SG Enable worked with the Tote Board to launch the Tote Board-Enabling Lives Initiative. Twenty-three million Singapore dollars has been set aside over five years to support innovation projects for the disability sector in three cross-cutting areas, one of which is caregiver support. We hope that this fund will help develop and test-bed new and innovative ideas on caregiver support.

Page: 26

We are not doing this alone and we cannot do this alone. Together with our passionate VWOs, committed employers and the community, we can uplift the lives of those with disabilities and their families. To realise the shared vision of the Enabling Masterplan, we need the active participation of all Singaporeans.

And this is why I totally agree with Ms Chia Yong Yong on the importance of public education. To this end, NCSS will be leading an effort to educate the public on disability issues and build empathy about the challenges that persons with disabilities face. Together, we can encourage community action to build an inclusive society. NCSS is working out an outreach plan with different stakeholders. And to this end, I hope that Ms Chia, Ms Denise Phua and Mr Png Eng Huat and the various Members of the House will give their full support towards this national effort.

As we reach out to help one another, we are also reminded that at the heart of our society is the family. The family, as an institution, is fundamental to Singapore. This explains why the Government's efforts to strengthen, to promote, to protect families cuts across various Ministries, agencies and policy areas, such as housing policies for young marrying couples and the Pioneer Generation Package to help middle-class families better care for their elderly parents.

MSF is committed to supporting families as they build their lives together. Besides investing in pre-schools which Minister Chan Chun Sing spoke about earlier, we will enhance support for marriages and parenting.

Couples starting a new family life together can now attend a new lunch-time marriage preparation talk as being offered at the Registry of Marriages (ROM). This talk will share tips on how couples can communicate and better manage each other's expectations. Those of us who are married in this House know this is very important – managing expectations. This talk has been launched about three months ago and it has already reached out to more than 400 participants. We polled them and more than 80% of them said that they have found this to be useful. I encourage more couples to make it part of their marriage preparation plans to attend the ROM talk together before they register their marriages.

Couples who are interested to learn more about marriage preparation can also then sign up for a full marriage preparation programme called Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Programme, or PREP. This programme will be offered as a workshop by MSF-appointed agencies from May this year.

As a mother of two young boys, 10 and seven years old, I can fully understand that parenting is not always easy. To support parents, we piloted two parenting programmes last

Page: 27

year, namely, "Positive Parenting Programme", or Triple P, and the second one, "Signposts". These two programmes identify the emotional and behavioural concerns of children, then refer the parents to appropriate support services to address and support their parenting needs.

Mdm Chua is one parent who has benefited from Triple P. She shared with us her experience. Her teenage son used to keep his feelings to himself and he would get very angry whenever his mother scolded him, chided him or nagged at him. Mdm Chua was referred to Triple P. From the course, she learned how to better communicate with her teenage son. So, now, whenever he does something she feels is not quite right, she manages her own temperament, she will exercise her patience to reason with him, to try to rationalise with him instead of reacting instinctively and raising her voice. As a result, her teenage son has become more open in his communications with her.

Like Mdm Chua, over 1,100 parents from 20 primary schools and secondary schools have completed the two programmes. We will add another 30 new schools to the pilot in 2015 and complete a detailed evaluation study next year. This will help us to refine the programmes before rolling them out nationwide.

Mr Seah Kian Peng, Ms Lee Li Lian and Dr Lily Neo spoke about the support for single parents. Minister Grace Fu has explained the Government's approach on this issue earlier in the week. We understand some single parents face financial challenges. Like other vulnerable families who need help, they have access to a range of social support from the Government and VWOs, for example, the ComCare assistance, higher infant and childcare subsidies as well as student care assistance.

The Ministry also extends help to expectant mothers, single or otherwise, who need support. Mrs Lina Chiam's suggestion on baby drop centres – as she has mentioned – has been brought up previously. And we have studied other countries' experience. Other countries with baby drops have reported mixed experiences, such as the downside of encouraging baby abandonment.

We have chosen instead to focus our resources and attention in ensuring that there are a range of support services for expectant mothers who may be facing distress, and to protect the safety of both mother and baby. For example, we have hotlines, counselling and residential services for expectant women to carry their pregnancy to term.

Page: 28

Children are often caught in between their parents whenever a painful divorce takes place. It can be a very traumatic experience for the child.

To manage the negative impact on children from divorce, we have appointed four new Divorce Support Specialist Agencies. They will run a Mandatory Parenting Session for divorcing parents with young children. The parents will have to attend the session so long as they cannot agree on all matters of the divorce. The session will cover issues, including the impact of the divorce, parental conflicts on children, as well as financial and housing implications, all of which we know will affect a child's well-being.

As for the children, we are working with the agencies to introduce a new programme to help affected children learn coping strategies when they get caught between their parents' conflicts.

Yesterday evening, Mr Alex Yam spoke about couples who wish to have a third child after joining the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) programme but are worried that they would lose the various forms of financial support under the scheme.

Let us give some background. HOPE is a voluntary scheme for young, low-income couples who choose to keep their families small, so that they can focus their limited resources on upgrading themselves as well as the lives of their children. Couples are aware of the benefits as well as the conditions before they join this programme.

More than 3,200 families have been placed on the HOPE scheme since its introduction in 2004. About 40% have seen an increase in their household income and the employment rate of the mothers has doubled from 30% to 60%. Sometimes, a helping hand is needed to navigate very complex issues. And this is why we have HOPE Mentoring Agencies to provide case management support to coordinate the different forms of assistance for these families.

HOPE couples who decide to have a third child can withdraw from the scheme at any time. They can also tap on other financial assistance schemes for lower income families after they exit HOPE. For example, they will continue to be eligible for additional pre-school and student care subsidies, as well as other forms of social assistance, depending on their needs. They are also eligible for the Baby Bonus scheme.

With regard to Mr Faisal Manap's suggestion to publish a report on the state of social protection, our Government agencies regularly publish information on the progress of efforts to improve the well-being of vulnerable groups. We will collect and share more useful data over time with social service partners and researchers.

Page: 29

In summary, MSF's holistic range of initiatives and programmes meet the needs of families at different life stages. From couples starting out their married life, to having their first child, their second child, their third child, to bringing them up – all are important milestones. In MSF, we pledge to support families throughout their journey because families form the basis of our strong and cohesive society. In Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The family is the cornerstone of our society. The family is not only a safe haven but also the core of our spirit and what we work for as a nation. Through the combined effort of various Government agencies and Statutory Boards, the Government has signalled its strong commitment to families and will provide more support for them. Our commitment and efforts today will shape the next generations' values and attitudes towards families.

Hence, as an individual, each of us must cherish our families, set aside time to be with our family and build a harmonious and warm home. We should also reach out to help the vulnerable groups so as to strengthen the cohesion within the Singapore Family. Let us work together to build an inclusive, warm and happy home for all!

Mdm Chair, let me now touch on the second thrust of MSF's work this year. That is, to build a future-ready social service sector. I will touch on this at five levels – future-ready services, systems, organisations, legislations and professional development.

We have talked about the evolving challenges to the family structure and also our ageing demographics. For services, we cannot just scale up what we do today. We need to think of new models to provide those services given our finite manpower resources. I will use two examples to illustrate this: (a) Early Intervention Programme for Infants and Children, or EIPIC; and (b) adult disability.

For EIPIC, our early intervention programme for children with special needs, the diagnosis rate has been going up. Part of it has been due to a greater awareness of the services provided. We have earlier diagnosis and we have more seeking services. This is a good sign because the earlier we can help our children with special needs, the better their chances of leading a fulfilling life, just like any other normal Singaporean. The benefits of early intervention are clear. However, our professional manpower is still lacking, and we cannot just replicate and scale up the current model.

We have discussed this in the Enabling Masterplan Implementation Committee and the committee members have given us many good ideas on how we can improve on the continuum of services given to these children. We need a common assessment tool. We need this tool to track the progress of all the children under the scheme so that we can give

Page: 30

them targeted help. We need the family and the pre-school teachers to be more involved, and this is why in the second half of this year, we will be developing a new model to provide services for the entire early intervention sector.

This new model will involve a common assessment tool, a common tracking tool, a better system to allow those with milder needs to be supported by the upskilled Learning Support Educators, thereby dedicating the professionals to help those with moderate to high needs. This will better utilise the finite manpower resources that we have, to provide the best services available to our children in the EIPIC programme. So, we will need to upgrade the skills of our Learning Support Educators, we will need to change the way we make our assessment and track the progress and we will need to deepen the competencies of the professionals, and at the same time widen the pool.

Ms Denise Phua and Dr Lily Neo also talked about the issue of adult disability. Indeed, we also need to rethink the model to provide such services including day care services and how we can mobilise the community to provide help for these adults with disabilities. Our challenge is how to provide those services to those who completed their time at SPED schools and are above 18 years old. It is a long journey as we will need to provide them with home care, community care and if possible, open opportunities in the job market.

We will adopt a three-pronged strategy to up our services for adult disability. First, for those who can find jobs, we should do our best to work with employers to redesign the workplace to allow them the best opportunities to be integrated into the core Singapore workforce. We have to work on partnerships with employers to redesign the work processes and get the employers on board. Second, for those who cannot go onto employment, we have to see how we can revamp the care model for them at the community level. This will allow us to better use the finite resources that we have. Finally, for those who need very specialised home-based services, we have to look beyond the current model that is dependent on foreign domestic help, which is highly labour intensive. We will be tapping on the ideas of the Enabling Masterplan Implementation Committee to see whether the models that we have going forward will be future-ready for the new demands that are emerging.

Let me talk about the second issue – building future-ready systems. I will share a story. Many of you in the House would have probably noticed that I have not used the phrase "Many Helping Hands" in my last three years in the Budget and Committee of Supply (COS) debates. And that was because when I first came on board, some of you told me that the phrase "Many Helping Hands" was a "bad" word. It was as if the Government had washed its hands or did not want to do anything.

I have another version for the "Many Helping Hands" approach. I want the "Many Helping Hands" to be like the "Thousand Arms Bodhisattva" or the “千手观音”. We can have

Page: 31

many hands but we must have a body and a central nervous system to coordinate the helping hands. Like the “千手观音”, we must also be close to the ground and to be able to listen and discern the needs of the people on the ground. Over the last few years, we have worked quietly behind the scenes to put in place these systems. While we have many outreach points and many helping hands, we must put in place a nervous system and a body that can continue to provide that help as needed.

This is the reason we have set up the SSO network; so that services can be closer to the ground; so that the needs of the ground can be heard more immediately. Going forward, the SSOs will also act as a nerve system to help coordinate case management, especially for the very complex cases on the ground. They are already doing this in many of the towns that the SSOs have been set up. The SSOs will coordinate not just the work between the different VWOs, they will also coordinate the back-end support by the different Ministries and the different agencies; so that for someone or some families who need the help, they need only to access one point of contact.

Over these few years, we have also aligned the boundaries of all the Family Service Centres and the Senior Cluster Networks. With aligned boundaries, we can provide more localised and integrated services at the town level to avoid our "Many Helping Hands" approach being seen as uncoordinated. In fact, I am always inspired by the image of the "ThousandArms Bodhisattva" who is compassionate, who reaches the ground and who hears the cries of help. We may never reach that but we must strive that all the hands, be it hundred hands or thousand hands, are all coordinated, all working closely together, all with their ears on the ground to meet the needs of our fellow Singaporeans.

This is also the reason why we are improving our system with the Social Service Net, which we will roll out in the second half of this year. We have one vision: "One Client, One Record; One Sector, One System." Once the system is rolled out, first to the SSO and the FSCs, then subsequently to the VWOs, we will have an integrated case management system across the entire social service sector. There will be no need for clients to repeat their stories and there will be no need for us to search for files, to see the kinds of social intervention that had been given previously to those clients. With that, we save manpower and we can deploy the time savings to better interface with the families in need.

But I must also urge patience. It will take us some time to transit into the new system. We will need time to download and upload all the records onto the new system, just as how we did it for the medical system many years ago. So, we will do this progressively but, in time to come, I am confident we will reach our vision of "One Client, One Record; One Sector, One System."

Page: 32

Beyond the level of future-ready services and future-ready systems, let me talk about the third issue of future-ready organisations. I think Ms Denise Phua and Ms Chia Yong Yong had also talked about this. We expect no less from all the VWOs in terms of corporate governance. We want to professionalise our front-end services; we want to systematise our back-end functions; we want to ensure business continuity from leadership to operations; and we want to manage risks just like any well run organisation.

In order for us to do that from this year, we will invest $6 million per year under a Corporate Development Funding Scheme to target VWOs that can scale up to help support their back-end functions so that we can level up the corporate governance in all the VWOs, especially those that utilise time, talent and treasures from the public. We will set high benchmarks in order to inspire confidence in the sector. Only when we are good stewards of the resources given to us, will we engender more resources to be entrusted upon us. To support this growth, each eligible VWO will be given $150,000 to $300,000 per year to help them hire experienced corporate professionals in areas ranging from IT, HR to Finance. This will help them professionalise such services.

In parallel, NCSS will look into shared services to support other VWOs. NCSS has already rolled out the Compensation and Benefits consultancy in June 2013 to help VWOs with remuneration matters. NCSS has also piloted small consultancy projects in five capability areas – financial processes, community engagement, client empowerment, utilisation of space and services and process delivery – and they have appointed consultants to help 12 VWOs. We will evaluate the success of these schemes before we roll out more.

The Care and Share Movement will also be extended for another year to help us build up the capability and capacity of the social service sector. With the one-to-one matching, we will have up to $1 billion to build and deepen the competencies of the social service professionals and have our infrastructure ready for tomorrow.

Miss Penny Low has also spoken about the third organisational framework of being future-ready and that is the role played by social enterprises. We thank Miss Penny Low and Mr Seah Kian Peng for championing this cause all these years. Over all these years, we have had various measures to help many of the budding social enterprise. And I applaud all these founders, because they have now decided to come together to provide a one-stop centre, called the "Singapore Centre for Social Enterprise", to be set up by the second quarter of this year to help our budding social enterprises to do good and to do well.

Page: 33

This one-stop centre will bring together all the partners, from the previous Social Enterprise Association, Tote Board, NCSS and staff from MSF. They have laid the foundation and we will build on this foundation to further the cause of the social enterprises. The new Centre will be situated at the JTC LaunchPad@one-north. It will be a single touchpoint to help sector-wide development. It will provide a wider range of financing options to meet the evolving needs of the social enterprises across different stages of growth. It will help to link up with other mentors and other successful enterprises to help make sure that our social enterprises get the best chance to succeed commercially.

Let me now touch on the fourth area of being future-ready and that is legislation.

We have all spoken about the increasing number of elderly amongst us. I am glad to say that the rate of elderly abuse has been stable over the last few years. But because the numbers of elderly are growing, we must eventually expect that there will be more such cases in time to come. This is where we have to get our legislation ready, not because we are in a crisis today, but because we want to build up the capacity, the capability, the common language, the common referral protocol, before the problems even emerge in Singapore.

This year, we will enact the Vulnerable Adults Act to help better protect our vulnerable adults, as mentioned by Dr Lily Neo. There will be a three-pronged approach to this Act. First, to better support the families, to better support the community, and as a last resort, for the Government to come in as required.

The family plays an important and critical role – they provide emotional support, financial support and caregiving support. Where families are unable or unwilling to care and if there is abuse or neglect, or if the vulnerable adult neglects himself or herself and is unable to care for himself or herself, then the community comes in.

For the community, we need to build the common screening and assessment tools, and common training programmes for the community to help us pick out those instances where the vulnerable adult may be abused. We have started this programme to equip many community partners with the detection and intervention services. We will continue to push on.

Social workers have also highlighted to us that there is a legislative gap today, as we are not allowed to intervene. For example, we came across a case of a Mdm Tan. She is an 80-plus-year-old lady who is invalid, bedridden. She is taken care of by her son, her primary caregiver, who has been abusive and who has been depriving her of her medicine and, sometimes, food. The son did not allow the social workers or the community partners to

Page: 34

access her, to give her help. In today's situation, it takes a lot of moral suasion, a lot of hard work by all the social workers and community partners to reach out to this elderly lady. With the law in place, as a last resort, we will have the authority to go in and intervene before harm befalls the elderly lady.

Under the Vulnerable Adults Act to be enacted by the end of this year, we will also cover adults who are incapable of protecting themselves from harm arising from abuse, neglect, or self-neglect. We will have the powers to conduct social investigations, enter homes and possibly relocate vulnerable adults to places of safety, if necessary. We will enable the application to Court for intervention orders to help those in need. Family members can also apply to Court for some of these orders. MSF will build up the capability to perform these statutory functions under the Vulnerable Adults Act; but most importantly, we hope most of these cases can be resolved amicably without using the Act as a last resort. We must also respect the individual's right to self-determination and this Act must not replace other Acts. In fact, this Act will complement the Mental Capacity Act, which we will also update and amend in the later part of this year.

For the Mental Capacity Act, we will first want to encourage and empower more individuals to plan ahead before they lose their mental capacity. We have since simplified the Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) Form 1 in July 2014. It has led to more than 30% increase in the number of applications. It has served the vast majority of the people well.

As part of our regular process of updating our legislation, we will continue to take in feedback from all sectors. In fact, in this regular process, some of the suggestions that Ms Sylvia Lim made, will be taken into consideration. But whatever we do, we must make sure that we continue to have a rigorous system that can cater to the needs of the vast majority to enable them to act. On the other hand, the system must be robust enough and have a risk management matrix that can catch the outliers and to flag out those outliers for us to take a deeper look at them. We must continue to find the correct balance, as we have an increasing number of LPAs being done up to take care of our future elderly.

Secondly, we want the Mental Capacity Act to also support families who are taking care of the mentally incapacitated individuals who did not or could not make an LPA. Today, the families need to go to Court to get an order, and it can be a laborious and expensive process. We will work with the Court to simplify the process and improve the accessibility of the court processes, and also to reduce the cost to make it easier for the families.

Finally, for mentally incapacitated persons who do not have family to be their decision-makers, we will form a group of public-spirited persons, who will apply to the Court to act as deputies for the mentally incapacitated adults with modest assets but no family support. They will be known as the Panel Deputies. So far, we have 16 of them – lawyers, accountants

Page: 35

and social workers.

We will put in place all these legislation by the end of this year.

On the fifth prong, let me talk about the heart of our social service delivery, and that is our social service professionals. They are the heartbeat of all that we do. In order for us to have good social services, we must make sure that we have a strong social service professional core. They must have meaningful career prospects, good professional development opportunities and receive recognition from society. We will be rolling out various initiatives to further this.

In terms of salary norms, we will be reviewing the salary norms for social service professionals this year. Following our review in 2012, the MSF-funded VWOs have made progress to better remunerate their social service professionals. For example, shortly after our adjustment in 2012, the median salary increment for employees of these VWOs was 8%. In 2013, the median increment was 4.5%, slightly higher than the national average. Between 2012 and 2013, the percentage of employees paid within NCSS' recommended range has also increased from under 80% to more than 86%. We are seeing signs of improvement but I still want to push further.

This year, we will, once again, revise the salaries for social service professionals, for them to be closer to the market benchmarks. MSF will increase VWO programme funding by $16 million in 2015, starting from 1 April. Twelve million dollars out of this $16 million will go into supporting the VWOs in raising the salaries of their social service professionals. The rest will go towards helping the VWOs cover their operational expenditure. Adjustments to programme funding in subsequent years will also take into account market wage movements, among other factors, for the salaries of our social service professionals. For the social service professionals in the sector, they can see a salary adjustment from 3% to 19%, depending on their level of professional competency and also depending on the sector which they are in. For example, a junior therapist will get about a 9% increase with this new funding arrangement.

Beyond salary remuneration, we will also strengthen the professional development opportunities for our social work professionals. The Social Service Institute (SSI) will be providing more training courses for our social service professionals to undertake bigger roles, for those who are going on to the leadership track, and for the rest who are on the specialist track, to deepen their competencies in order for them to be future-ready.

MSF and MOH will be rolling out the National Social Work Competency Framework for social workers this year. It will map out all the core competencies of all the social workers at

Page: 36

different career milestones across the community and health sector.

MSF and the family services sector will also develop a Code of Social Work Practice that will be implemented across the Family Service Centres (FSCs), so that there is a common language and common professional standards when it comes to protocol. This will fit in nicely with the work that we are doing in SSNet, where we have the vision of having "One Client, One Record; One Sector, One System".

This year, we will also be rolling out a new Social Service Fellowship programme to better recognise our accomplished social service professionals. This will recognise the top echelon of social service professionals. They will inspire the younger professionals to aspire towards the apex of their professions. This will apply to all social service professionals, such as social workers, therapists, EIPIC teachers, psychologists and counsellors. This Fellowship will not only recognise their higher level of competencies and contributions to the sector; it will also tap on the expertise of these Fellows to do work at the sectoral level to help us improve the sector as a whole. They will supervise and mentor younger professionals; they will partner MSF to develop the Continuing Professional Development frameworks. We expect to appoint about 50 Fellows by 2017.

We will also be expanding our Therapy Hubs to have a third Therapy Hub. We will be investing $7 million over the next three years to expand the two existing Therapy Hubs at Society for the Physically Disabled (SPD) and Thye Hua Kwan Moral Charities, and also to fund a third Therapy Hub. This will allow us to pool the services provided by a finite professional pool of therapists in the sector. This will also provide our professionals a better career path because they now can devote maximum time to their professional area of work. We target to increase the MSF-funded therapists at the Hubs to 125 by 2017.

We will also be setting up a new Community Psychology Hub to help VWOs to deliver quality psychological services in the social service sector. VWOs will be able to tap on the Hub for qualified psychologists to provide needed services. We will invest $8 million to fund this Hub from 2015 to 2017. It will be located at SG Enable and will start deploying psychologists to the sector from the second half of 2015. The Hub will first focus on disability services, especially EIPIC. As we scale up, we will cater to other areas of emerging needs, such as family services and elderly services.

Mdm Chair, let me now round up for MSF and also, perhaps, for the whole COS debate. There has been much talk over the last two weeks about us shifting left, shifting right, increasing funding for social support and so on and so forth. The Government is committed to providing all support necessary for Singaporeans and their families. We have never been shy to spend money. It is not about being hard-hearted or soft-hearted. But we have a duty to make sure that whatever we spend on gets the greatest impact on the beneficiaries that

Page: 37

we want to serve.

Our benchmark for success in the social service sector and, perhaps, in the larger Singapore system, is not and cannot be framed in any philosophical or monetary term. I have never judged MSF's success based on the amount of money that we spent, the number of Social Service Offices (SSOs) that we have built, or even the number of people that we are currently helping on our various schemes. These are not my measures of success.

I think that, as a system, our measures of success should be the following four.

Our first measure of success is not how many people are being helped now. Instead, we should measure ourselves by the number of people in the entire system that are able to stand independently and do not need help from society. We can divide the whole society into three parts: those who need help; those in the middle; and those who can provide help. The more that we are able to expand the centre – the broad middle – to take care of themselves and to take care of their families, the more successful we are. Once we have expanded the centre to as big as we can, then we can focus our attention and bandwidth to get those who are most able in society to help those who are least able. Therefore, our measure of success is not how much we transfer from those most able to those least able. Yes, that might be a matrix, but, actually, the biggest success for our Singapore story is when we can expand the broad middle so that the broad middle can take care of themselves; and we will have fewer people requiring assistance at the national level.

Our second measure of success is to make sure that whatever we spend on will do the maximum good for all the people that we want to serve. I will be the last one to go to the Ministry of Finance (MOF) to ask for more resources if I do not think I can do justice to the resources that MOF can give me. On the other hand, I will never be shy to go to MOF to ask for more resources when there is a pressing need and when we can do justice to the resources entrusted upon us. I think the Care and Share Movement is a good testimony of the faith that MOF has given MSF. They have given us $250 million, in addition to the $250 million last year, because they can see the good work being done. When we are good stewards of the resources entrusted upon us, I trust that MOF will open their hearts and their wallets to support all the good work in this sector.

The third measure of success is not just about helping those people in need. It is also about our ability to mobilise the community to come together as one to take care of our fellow Singaporeans in need.

Page: 38

But, finally, our greatest measure of success is not how many people are still on our schemes. It is how many of our people who have gone through our schemes are able to stand independent once again and, perhaps, to reach out to help others who are more in need. That will be our greatest measure of success – the people who have gone through the system and are independent once more, rather than have more and more people in the system.

Members, I thank you for your support for the work of MSF. Let us walk this journey together not just to celebrate SG50 this year, but to celebrate SG100 in time to come. Inequality, social stresses and strains will not define us. On the other hand, what makes us stand out as Singaporeans and Singapore is our commitment to social mobility, helping all according to needs, and being good stewards of the resources, time, talent and treasures entrusted upon us.

What makes us stand out, what will define us, is how we anticipate our challenges, put in place services, systems, organisations, legislation and professionals to be ready for tomorrow's challenges. If we can do all this together, then I think we will be proud of ourselves as Singaporeans not just at SG50, but also towards SG100.

Thank you, Madam. Just three clarifications. One, I wanted to ask Parliamentary Secretary Ms Low Yen Ling on the strategic communications plan that I have suggested. This is so that the good work on the Enabling Masterplan and its progress can be updated and so that it is not always kept as a "best-kept secret" in our country. There are information gaps that need to be determined; it is good to allocate resources to make sure that there is a plan for strategic communications to the various stakeholder groups and to regularly deploy that plan.

The second is to do with special needs adults. I am thankful to the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary that work is going to be done especially for the care options portion, and that there will be more attention given to that end, due to the urgency. But for the people who can work – and I am glad that the Deputy Prime Minister is here to hear this – because of the SkillsFuture Council, I think it is one thing to say that the courses are available and open to anyone who wants to take it, regardless of your ability and where you come from. But it is quite different in reality – courses can be open but may not be accessible due to pedagogy, instructions and so forth. I would like the Ministry to work with the SkillsFuture Council as well as the whole-of-Government to ensure that structured official efforts are made so that the workforce has access.

Page: 39

I want to thank Ms Denise Phua for her very thoughtful comments. I will make a response to the first two. The first is regarding the request for a strategic communications plan under the Enabling Masterplan. She is part of the Committee and we thank her for her thoughts and her leadership in this journey. We will certainly continue to press on with the progress of the Enabling Masterplan.

Our efforts in this journey, the Enabling Masterplan, really must be a concerted one not just by the Ministry and SGEnable but also the community, employers, families, caregivers, teachers, therapists who have the skills and training, and we will give them all the necessary infrastructure and support. Members will remember last year, as I was giving an update, I showed the brochure which had already been pushed out to all the VWOs, SPED schools. Admittedly, we must do more in this area and we will certainly give this suggestion of a strategic communications plan greater thought as we press on in our journey as part of the Enabling Masterplan.

Page: 40

With regard to adult care, we would also like to thank the Member for her passionate speech in this area. As an inclusive community, we can all come together to further empower and enable those with disabilities and learning difficulties to participate fully in our community, in our society. Like what the Member and Ms Chia Yong Yong mentioned, the SkillsFuture Credit is for every Singaporean, including persons with disabilities. While the amount of SkillsFuture Credit given to persons with disabilities and Singaporeans is the same, persons with disabilities have access to dedicated and also specialised avenues of facilitation of help, support for training and employment, as I have mentioned, the Open Door programme and so on. We want her to rest assured that the Ministry and SG Enable will certainly work with MOM and the relevant agencies to ensure that the SkillsFuture efforts are relevant and are also structured to benefit persons with disabilities.

In so doing, we would like to call upon everyone in the House and also fellow Singaporeans – business owners, enterprises, individuals – to join us in transforming disabilities into opportunities so that each and every one of us, regardless of ability, can co-create a better future for all of us.

Mdm Chair, I have a clarification to ask and it concerns single unwed mothers. I acknowledge that we have moved significantly to help single parents over the years, and I am sure these schemes will be enhanced over time. But for the single unwed mothers, I think notwithstanding the social assistance schemes that the Government is extending to them, it is quite different from having certain benefits being

Page: 41

mandated versus getting handouts.

So, I would like to ask the Minister and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether they agree that single unwed mothers should be given the same maternity leave and childcare benefits as married mothers. If they do, can the Ministry set some timeline to achieve these goals? Likewise, for the children of these single unwed mothers, can they also be entitled to top-ups to their Child Development Accounts?

Mdm Chair, I thank Mr Seah Kian Peng for speaking up passionately for the single mothers. It is an emotional and emotive topic. I just want to assure Members of the House that I understand what single mothers go through. I grew up in a single-parent family. The journey is not easy; and, often, it goes beyond providing sufficient monetary benefits and incentives. For children growing up in single-parent family, there are many challenges, including the social and emotional upbringing of the child. We are committed to do what we can to help all Singaporean families, particularly those more vulnerable families and those more in need.

In this House, we have heard various calls for us to provide better support for single unwed mothers. I think there are merits for us to consider this seriously. In this House, we have also heard various calls by Members to better support parenthood within the context of marriage. That, in itself, I think, is also valid and worthy of consideration. In this House, we have also heard even more calls for us to provide the best support for all Singaporean children, regardless of their parentage. Indeed, children do not select the families that they are born into.

Between and amongst these three policy objectives, we will have to continually find that balance. I looked through all the things that we do to support our children. I asked my staff to give me a table of things that are being done. The bulk of all our support focused on the child as the centre because we believe that the child is innocent and should be given the best support possible. The best thing and the most important thing that we must do for the child is to provide education opportunities, good healthcare and a good social environment for them to be brought up to fulfil their talent as much as possible.

Within that context, how do we balance providing more support for parenthood within the context of marriage? Some countries have decided to forgo the second objective. It is something that we have to think about. But if we say that we want that objective, then how do we moderate that gradient between the first objective and the second objective?

As Mr Seah Kian Peng said, it is an evolving journey. Let us continue this evolving journey but, at the core of it, even if there is a gradient, because of the two different policy objectives

Page: 42

between supporting the child as the centre of what we do and supporting parenthood within the context of marriage, then let us use the third policy objective of the social service support to give our children the best chance. I think that is what we are committed to do, and MSF will continue to work with Members of this House and our society to find that balance between these three valid policy objectives. We have to continue to find that balance.

Madam, two clarifications, please. I spoke on these two issues earlier in my speech, but the Minister has not replied.

Firstly, does the Minister have any scheme in place to assist physically weak elderly living on their own with no family members to depend on and how does MSF assist in attenuating this trend?

Secondly, could the Minister comment on my suggestion earlier on assisting cases of families with chronic needs by taking a holistic approach and helping the family as a whole in adopting the same concept as "teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime"?

Indeed, for the increasing number of elderly who have no family support, there are two things that we can do more and do better.

First, for those who are still ambulant, able to walk and step out of their own house, we have to see how we can expand the suite of services at the community level for them to be kept active and engaged. But, then, there will be another growing group of people who can, perhaps, no longer so easily step out of their own home, but we do not yet want to institutionalise them in the nursing home – this is where we need a new care model whereby, perhaps, having a pool of care workers that can go on rotation in the community and just watch out for them. In the interim, we have piloted the "Care for Your Neighbour" scheme in Jalan Kukup, whereby able-bodied neighbours help to take an interest, to care for those who are less able. This also keeps the able-bodied ones active and healthy with a sense of mission. So, that is an area that we need to do more.

On her second point, indeed, for the chronic needs cases, if Members have watched the programme "Don't Call Us Poor" by CNA, you will know that many of the poor families have multifaceted problems. In order for us to provide help to them, this is where the SSO, the local planning team, comes in to have the case conferences with all the agencies involved – from WDA to MOE to FSC and so forth – to provide that integrated care management.

Page: 43

The SSO can give the short-term ComCare assistance. The longer-term plan requires us to place them on jobs, to get WDA, to get e2i, to come on board to train them and place them on jobs. Even after they are trained, we need to make sure they continue to stay on the job, so that the family situation is stabilised. On the other hand, we have to help them settle their housing options, their school options, so that their children have a stable platform to get out of the problems that their families are having now.

So, the Member is absolutely right to say that we need to increasingly go on this integrated approach, one family at a time. This is why I want the SSO to play a greater role in coordinating the local services at the local family level, taking care of each family's needs respectively.

Mdm Chair, I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the reassurance that MSF is committed to caring for families. But coming back to my point, the elements of the HOPE Scheme have seemed to run counter to this. Yes, there is support for families, but if you have more than two kids in some families, we are very sorry we cannot give that to you. And the amount of benefits that the HOPE Scheme provides is quite significant, so, it can be an offer that is hard to refuse for some of these families. So, how does the Ministry reconcile this?

Secondly, does the Ministry keep track of figures of any children that have been aborted because of the HOPE Scheme? And, lastly, yes, there is an option for them to withdraw from the scheme if they would like to keep their third child, but what are the penalties, because they have already received quite a lot from the Scheme? Is there anything that they need to give back and does that become a barrier?

Let me assure the Member that there is no penalty for those who withdraw from the Scheme. Training grants that have been given will not be clawed back. The aim of the Scheme is to encourage young families, the low-income families, better plan for the future, for themselves and for their children, and we fully recognise that some of them may not be able to stay on the Scheme. If they cannot stay on the Scheme, we do not penalise them. We will transit them to other help schemes as necessary.

Thank you, Madam. I agree with the Minister that the pre-school sector is fragmented and I support the idea of consolidation. My question is, can an application for POP be from a group of operators banding together, rather than from a single operator? This may speed up the process of consolidation. Also, is

Page: 44

POP applicable to private or for-profit organisations? Because I think they play a role in offering diversity and innovation.

Lastly, I like to ask about the student care sector. I noted the many training initiatives for early childhood, such as the skills framework, fellow schemes and PCP. Are there similar types of initiatives for student care? The Minister did not cover anything on student care in his speech at all.

Mdm Chair, the answer to the first question is yes.

The answer to the second question about private operators, you have to convince us that if you are a private operator, you are not taking the public's money for your profit. That will be my basic guideline. I think I am accountable to the public on how we spend money, and I am prepared to spend money so long as it leads to stable prices, affordable prices for my families, quality education for my children and fair remuneration for my teachers. But if the private operators come and make us a proposal that does not meet these three criteria, but instead benefit from enriching their profits, then my answer is no. So, I leave it to the private sector to make me a proposal. And I want to reiterate what I have said. I am committed to operators who put the social mission of caring for our children first. That is my first priority. I want to make sure that their services are affordable for the families, quality is assured and teachers are paid well. But it will not be in my remit to help private operators make profit.

On the third issue of student care, we will be announcing more initiatives in the later part of this year. I think Minister Heng Swee Keat has already said that we will expand the suite of student care services in the schools, and MSF is committed to working closely with MOE to expand this suite of student care services in the school system.