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

Mr Chairman, I spoke last week on the importance of a social service sector that is sustainable. I fully agree with what was spoken by the hon Member Ms Denise Phua and I would like to just share three more factors which I feel are also important for consideration.

One, manpower. The sector also faces a crucial crunch, just like any other sector, in the availability of suitably qualified professionals. Whilst we appreciate that the Government is taking active steps to ramp up the supply of such professionals, the fact remains that in the interim, we are not able to serve as many beneficiaries as is needed.

The sector recognises that we have to play our part in the management and nurturing of our human resources in order to retain and develop them, but the fact remains that we do not have the ability to attract and remunerate the professionals and pay them as competitively as we would like. While there are schemes from the Government to assist the VWOs, the schemes are often short term and do not permit us to make long-term plans.

As such, I would like to ask the Minister whether there are plans to further train locals, whether locally or foreign, and whether we are going to have plans to arrange for them to have internship. What other financial assistance can be extended to the VWOs in order that we might be able to attract and retain talent competitively. More importantly, and also for the long term, how can we equip the social service VWOs to be able to nurture and manage their human resources to retain and to develop them for the sector?

Secondly, the change of mindsets. We need to change the mindset that VWOs should only always be run like charities. There is actually nothing wrong with running programmes that generate revenue as long as we do not lose focus of our mission, we do not neglect the needy and as long as we remain beneficiary-centric. Profit, of course, cannot be the overriding factor in our service but we cannot say profit is not important either. Can the Government assure us that when we undertake programmes and explore ways to generate revenue, the VWOs would be able to still retain their charity status and their IPC status? In

Page: 151

this respect also, can the Government help to equip the sector to generate our own revenue?

The third point relates to greater collaboration between Ministries and VWOs. We can barely, scarcely afford to have VWOs operate in silos or on a territorial basis or for Ministries to operate as if they were running their own Ministries alone. We welcome the Social Service Net and Social Service Offices, and we hope to see more of such measures to stimulate, facilitate the service delivery and for greater, better follow-through of all the services within the sector.

I would like to highlight two issues that I have raised several times before. The first being the need to enhance competitiveness of the social service sector by ensuring our social service professionals are paid a salary commensurate to the hard work that they do. The second is that more resources should be disbursed to our social service providers to ensure they are well-equipped to carry out their work.

In 2012, the Ministry set a target of 8% average increase in wages in the social service sector and up to 15% wage increase for social workers. The Government also provided assurance that salary increases would continue periodically as the Ministry conducts regular benchmarking of social service sector pay to the similar jobs in the market. I would like to seek an update from the Minister on the current salary scheme of social service professionals, in particular, one, since 2012 how many Government-funded VWOs have raised staff wages by an average of 8%? Two, how many social workers have seen the 15% wage increase since 2012? Thirdly, would the Ministry provide details on the benchmarking exercise that has been conducted since 2012, in particular, which jobs have the Ministry used as benchmarks and why? What is the wage differential between social work and these other jobs? Has the wage differential narrowed over the past three years; and if so, by how much?

In addition, I would like to ask the Ministry to enhance its funding and support to social service providers. Social service providers are the intermediaries between the Government and citizens. As such, it is important for social service providers to receive adequate funding and support. On this, I would like to ask how much has MSF done in the recent years enhancing the funding and support given to the social services.

Good and passionate teachers are instrumental in the delivery of quality preschool services. Can the Ministry provide an update on its efforts to attract and retain more to join as early childhood professionals, as well as give us an update

Page: 152

on the progress of the initiatives that it has rolled out to uplift the early childhood sector over the recent few years?

Furthermore, our Government has increased subsidies for childcare for working parents. I would like to know whether the operators are indeed using the higher subsidies to defray their operating costs? Or is it a case whereby whenever there is an increase in Government subsidies, this will translate into higher fee adjustments?

How does the Ministry therefore ensure that a larger share is being channelled to raise the wages of preschool teachers or to send their teachers for professional development? Are the subsidies also being used to, say, enhance the curriculum and the content of the quality of teaching in the childcare centres.

As announced in this year's Budget, parents with young children will benefit from more affordable and quality childcare through a new programme called the Partner Operator (POP) Scheme. This will require childcare operators to commit to quality improvements, and keep fees within reach. Can MSF share more details of the scheme and whether it will benefit our early childhood professionals as well?

Mr Chairman, the recruitment and retention of preschool teachers in the anchor operator and partner operator preschools is crucial in new towns like Punggol.

While we can make spaces available for the operators to build childcare centres and kindergartens, the recruitment and retention of the teachers become the rate-limiting step for the number of spaces that can be made available for the children. And I am concerned about what are the plans of the Ministry to increase recruitment and retention for preschool teachers.

The second issue I would like to bring up is the issue of the Anchor Operator (AOP) Scheme and the new Partner Operator Scheme with respect to Mother Tongue Language provision. There is quite a lot of effort put into the provision of Mother Tongue Language teaching in primary schools so that our primary schools provide an environment where children of all backgrounds get an opportunity to mix and socialise and learn about each other, and this may be as important in the preschool sector in bringing on board new partners and in developing the Anchor Operator Scheme. What is the Ministry doing to assist the provision of Mother Tongue Languages across all four Mother Tongues in the preschool

Page: 153

sector?

Sir, the challenge to meet the high demand for affordable childcare services continues to be a major concern faced by parents. Good childcare services are integral to the development of a child in a preschool stage, especially in our society where both parents are working. It is certainly one of the factors that they will consider when they do family planning.

To increase affordability of childcare services, it is time to look into placing a cap on the fees they are charged, otherwise each time the Government increases the grants, the operator will seize the opportunity to up their charges. Parents do not benefit.

The shortage of skilled childcare teachers and childminders remains a thorny issue. If we do not attract sufficient talent, efforts to boost the infrastructure will not pay off. We must first explore the reasons, the interest and what discourage potential candidates from making a career in a preschool industry. A committee should be set up to engage the preschool industry and analyse the situation.

In Australia which is also tackling a problem of preschool educator shortage, they find that a lack of social support is one of the major reasons. Teachers suffered from stress and burnout due to the long working hours and the mediocre pay and there were insufficient colleagues who are skilled and qualified to provide mutual support, advice and assistance. They found peer support, mentoring and professional network to be successful strategies.

Additionally, there should be an official support network for preschool educators who may get together to share ideas, support one another and, more importantly, have a collective voice to push for improvements to the sector.

Finally, Singaporeans must recognise the professionalism of preschool educators. Better salaries and more incentives are certainly the way to go but there is more to it than money. Preschool teachers are not nannies and our society needs to understand that they do more than take care of children. They are setting the cornerstones at a child's most vulnerable stage of learning where anything he or she learns is easily soaked up, like water by sponge. They deserve more appreciation and recognition.

At this juncture, I would like to take this opportunity to inform the Minister that there is an acute shortage of childcare centres in Nee Soon South. At every Meet-the-People Session (MPS), I have parents who come to seek help. In the last MPS alone, there were about a dozen of parents who came to seek help. Therefore, I would like to urge the Minister

Page: 155

to build more childcare centres in Nee Soon, especially in Nee Soon South.

Sir, about 200 preschool and childcare centres are being rolled out by the Ministry to meet demand for preschool and childcare places. However, the challenge is not in making space for or funding the setting up of the centres. Rather, it is in identifying and training qualified preschool teachers and educarers with the right qualities to helm the centres and care for the children.

In an earlier Parliamentary Question (PQ), Minister for Social and Family Development confirmed that the attrition rate of preschool qualified teachers is rather high, at about half of those who are trained. Raising the salaries of preschool teachers and educarers is one way to attract more to join and stay in the profession. While the salaries of preschool teachers have generally increased, many leave the anchor operator centres because they are lured by higher salaries offered by certain high-end preschools or other industries that pay better.

To retain preschool teachers and educarers, there must be clear professional development pathways for them, such as training opportunities, professional-sharing sessions and recognition for doing so, as well as opportunities and funding support to present at international conferences or publish papers in journal space on their classroom experience.

I see that, increasingly, preschool teachers in our anchor operator preschools undergo professional development training on a regular basis. However, would MSF consider setting aside a research or practitioner fund for our preschool teachers to embark on practitioner research to strengthen classroom practice and be given time and resources to pursue this? Thereafter, the research carried out by them can be recognised for job promotion or advanced preschool skills certification.

I am heartened by the Minister's reply to my earlier PQ that the traineeship programme for early childhood will be broadened to consider recruiting stay-at-home mothers, mid-career entrants and retirees. I hope that the SkillsFuture credit and SkillsFuture Earn and Learn programme can be twinned with the traineeship programme so that even more can be attracted to this profession, be sufficiently trained and gain sufficient experience to stay on as preschool teachers and educarers.

Page: 156

I hope MSF, through ECDA, would be about able to encourage more preschool operations to come on board and provide opportunities for prospective preschool teachers and educarers to be trained.

However, beyond the remuneration and professional development opportunities, there is also a need for us, as a society, to give due respect to our preschool teachers and educarers and see them as professionals in their own right. As parents, we must see our preschool teachers and educarers as our partners and work closely with them. As a society, I hope we are able to recognise that for our preschool teachers and educarers, they are in the profession out of choice because they have the interest and passion to teach and care for our children.

Sir, in September last year, three of the five major preschool chains announced they will be increasing their prices from 2015 from $4 to $62, citing soaring operational costs. This is after the median monthly fee for full-day childcare was reported to have risen by $80 in 2013 – the biggest increment in the last eight years.

These childcare operators received Government grants in exchange for keeping their fees affordable and need the Ministry's approval to raise their fees. Would the Ministry consider requiring such operators to provide an itemised breakdown of their fee increases? This would be akin to the requirement that CASE made to Shell last month when they did not accept the oil company's vague reasons for raising petrol prices because of the petrol tax rise announced at this year's Budget. CASE noted that the explanation was not acceptable and that Shell did not provide CASE with a breakdown of the cost increases beyond the rise in petrol tax.

Would the Minister similarly consider requiring childcare operators to provide a breakdown of rises in the operating costs to provide additional check to ensure that higher costs are not unreasonably passed on to parents?

Sir, Singapore signed and ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), a strong signal by the PAP Government to show our country's commitment to do more for persons with disabilities in Singapore. The way by which the vision of the UNCRPD is realised is through our Enabling Masterplan in our country.

However, in my dealings with the special needs community, many families, professionals and persons with disabilities are hardly aware of the Enabling Masterplan and its progress. Some called it the "best-kept secret". It is a pity that as a result many missed out on the services available and/or remain anxious, worried or even angry over the years.

I would like to seek the Ministry's update on its achievements to date and the challenges it faced for the Enabling Masterplan. I would also like to ask the Ministry to invest in resources to develop and implement a Strategic Communications Plan for the disability community, with its own micro-site in multiple languages and in multiple media forms.

Areas of concern – adults with disabilities. Sir, my biggest concern lies with the adults with disabilities in our country. Their needs for service, their ages last from age 21 to an average of 80 to 85 years old. This is the space in the Enabling Masterplan and in the sector that is least developed and least resourced.

For those who are more severe in their disability and unable to work even with support, the progress of options available for them remains small. There is insufficient day activity centres for them nor willing manpower to care for them. New day activity centres can be

Page: 158

filled even before they officially open.

For those who are able to work with training and support, the prognosis is more optimistic in view of the good work of SG Enable and the job centres set up by several VWOs, such as SPD, MINDS, Bizlink and the Autism Resource Centre, of which I am the President.

There is need for more support for suitable jobs for especially those who are lower in skills and need more intensive support. I have asked several times for the Government and Government-related agencies to lead the way in redesigning jobs for this group, and I seek a favourable response to that.

I continue to worry for their employment future as they are not yet mainstreamed into our country's manpower plans for the future. Many of them stop formal learning after they leave school or get roped into the workforce. I had asked that the SkillsFuture Masterplan formally include this special-needs workforce for lifelong learning and deepening of their vocational skills.

Recommendation: I urge the Ministry to convene and resource an Interim Work Group to focus specifically on the adults group to look into and improve current help plans for faster and better outcomes in significant areas such as care options, job search, training and support.

On caregivers, it is not uncommon for parents and other caregivers to care for their children with disabilities till they are well into their old age themselves. Despite the introduction of such useful measures, such as the Mental Capacity Act, Special Needs Trust, Special Needs Savings Scheme and even the Foreign Domestic Workers Levy Concession, many still remain ignorant of these schemes. They are not equipped with planning ahead and constantly worry about their own healthcare and retirement adequacy needs as they themselves age.

Recommendation: I urge the Ministry to make a special effort to develop and launch a more strategic Caregivers Support Plan and Campaign through all major VWOs and CDCs.

Sir, in conclusion, the current Enabling Masterplan for the Disabled will soon come to an end. It is now time to start pondering over the underlying attitudes, assumptions and perception of persons with disabilities in our country. We should learn from the United Nations Convention about respecting the right of every person with disability – not pity them – respecting their rights to lead a dignified life with access to important aspects such as health, physical environment, education and employment.

Page: 159

Every baby born to Singapore is our very own and precious, whichever form they come in, whichever condition they come in. The next Enabling Masterplan must have a greater sense of urgency and focus with participation from the whole-of-Government and the whole-of-society. It is, of course, not the job of the Government alone but the Government can take the lead to signal the rest of society to include these sons and daughters of Singapore.

Ms Chia Yong Yong : Thank you, Sir. I thank the Government for the schemes such as the Open Door Programme and the Open Job Portal. Both offer opportunities that enhance the employability of persons with disabilities.

However, not every person is suitable for employment. There may be some who may be more suitable for self-employment and, perhaps, the Ministry could also look into specific or more streamlined schemes to help persons with disabilities on a micro-finance basis for them to run their own little cottage businesses. I requested for this to address both cuts together as one because I feel that the issue on employability is not just one that relates to the Open Door Programme and on and so forth alone, but it is one that involves too many sectors, too many Ministries, too many agencies.

Overall, public education and public perception is very, very important. When we look at a person with disability, there is always a concern and a fear that if I employ someone who has a different need, I may have different challenges in having to absorb that person into my employment, into my workforce. If we are able to have public initiatives – public education initiatives – and share with employers what they can do and what they do not have to do, I think it would help a lot.

There have been many conferences that had been organised but very often, I think, we are just preaching to the converted. How do we reach out to those who are not attending the conferences because these are the ones we need to reach out to? Perhaps the trade associations; perhaps all the other schools, the institutions can help us. What we need to do

Page: 160

is to equip a child from young to be employable, to be a part of a bigger community. What we need to do is to be able to train and expose young children, from the time that they are young, to children with disabilities so that they will grow up together with them as one. And when they become colleagues and when they become bosses or superiors in due course, there will be a less of an awkwardness.

That would be the long-term plan, but in the short term, what can we do? Can we have more national education initiatives starting from schools, in the trade associations, in the commercial sectors and even in the social service sector? Very often, we train people with skills and we equipped them with soft skills to go into the workforce, but is the take-up rate not as satisfactory? Why is it not the way we have hoped? On the one hand, we have people who say, "I want to work", on the other hand, we have people who say, "I want to employ". Why can we not find the match? There has got to be something that is missing in between. Is it perhaps a lack or an inadequacy in the way we are training our people? Is it an inadequacy in the exposure of potential employers?

If Ministry could work with the relevant agencies and look into more of these issues at a more specific level, I think we would be much better able to grasp the issues. And I raise this even though I am from SPD. I must say that we really do not have the answers. We feel that it has got to be driven at a much higher level because this has got to be done from different Ministries at different levels. And I also, at this point, urge that the Government, as the largest employer, lead by example as well. If you show to the employers out there that you can and you do employ persons with disabilities because you are able to train them and because you believe in their potential as well.

Sir, the Enabling Masterplan 2012/2016 has identified many issues goals and visions to address the needs of persons with special needs and their caregivers, as we strive towards making Singapore an inclusive society.

One of the findings in the report addresses the need to fill the notable service gap after persons with special needs leave school at age 18. Issues brought up include limited vacancies at day activity centres and range of care options to cater for different needs. The report made an interesting suggestion to open up the many conveniently located eldercare facilities to adults with special needs so as to reduce transport costs, reduce travelling time and to enable these adults to go to the centres on their own if possible since eldercare facilities are conveniently located in the heartlands.

Many of the eldercare facilities, especially the senior activity centres, have the capacity to do more since the premises are already equipped with elderly and handicapped-friendly

Page: 161

features. These neighbourhood facilities can conduct classes and activities for these adults with special needs, some of whom could be highly functional.

I wish to ask the Minister for an update on this suggestion to be put forth in the Enabling Masterplan. How many eldercare facilities have piloted such initiative and what type of support the Ministry is providing to these centres to take on the added role of providing care for adults with special needs?

Sir, I prefer to use the term "adults with special needs" instead of "adults with disabilities" for good reason. Many years ago, while on a train overseas, I chanced upon a person in a motorised wheelchair in the same cabin where I was seated. The person has limited mobility and he was alone. The conductor came, asked the passenger a few questions, unzipped the person's waist pouch, took out a note, issued the ticket and put everything, including the change, back into the person's pouch. Do I see a person with disabilities? All I saw that day was an independent person with special needs going about his life living in an inclusive society.

Sir, I argued for paternity leave to be legislated for six consecutive years and this became reality two years ago. Of late, I have also raised the issue of single mothers.

While the policy change for fathers and single parents is most welcome and encouraging, it had come after many years of lobbying by myself and other like-minded colleagues. I am glad that today, we have had progress in the areas of paternity leave as well as help and benefits for single mothers. Yet, while paternity and maternity leave have been extended to single parents, a heartening change, there are still privileges that single unwed mothers are not entitled to, including the Baby Bonus Cash Gift, Child Development Account, the Parenthood tax rebate and various tax reliefs.

Single mother's maternity leave is also limited to eight weeks as compared to married mothers' who enjoy maternity leave of 16 weeks. Furthermore, single parents continue to be at a disadvantage when it comes to housing grant for families and housing priority schemes.

Fortunately, single unwed mothers do receive some childcare leave support. Sir, I urge the Minister to consider extending more help to single unwed mothers and their children.

Page: 162

For the single unwed mother, could she be accorded the same maternity and childcare leave as married mothers? Could their children also enjoy various top-ups and grants that they are now lacking such as the Child Development Account?

Sir, we are constantly encouraging families to have children in view of our falling birth rate and ageing population. Our notion of a family is determined by what constitutes the societal norm. Yet, we do not accord the family with only one parent the same consideration and compassion as those with two.

Many, if not all of them, did not choose to be in the difficult circumstances that they are in. If anything, single unwed mothers are in need of more help and consideration. I hope the Minister can give this a favourable review and I certainly hope it would not require me to raise this for six consecutive years to make it a reality.

Sir, I have repeatedly brought this up in the Committee of Supply (COS) since 2013. Currently, single parents below the age of 35 and their child do not qualify as a family nucleus when applying for a new HDB flat or rental flat. They are also not eligible for any housing subsidies. Single parents are not entitled to certain tax reliefs. Single parents are not entitled to Baby Bonus and CDS support. Single mothers are only entitled to eight weeks of paid maternity leave. Single fathers are not entitled to paternity leave at all.

I am bringing this up again because I think the state should recognise them as parents, regardless of their marital status. Their parental responsibilities and their children's needs are the same.

As a parent, I am grateful for the much needed support I get from my spouse and parents. I cannot imagine how difficult it is for single parents who may not have any support and cannot even take the same amount of leave as other parents, to take care of their children. This is not about encouraging more single parents but ensuring better and fair support for the children who have been born to them.

Sir, I find it ridiculous that we are even discussing this. Today, we are penalising children by denying their single parents the ability to support and care for them. Once again, I want to urge the Ministry to consider equalising these entitlements.

Page: 163

In Malay, Sir.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I would like to ask the Minister what is being done to reach out to young families that are facing difficulties to encourage them to leverage on the available schemes.

During my Meet-the-People Sessions (MPSs), I occasionally come across young Malay families facing financial pressure and they receive little support from their immediate family members. I am concerned that their young children are affected as they are denied early childhood education.

Unless help and support is given, their problem will worsen and become complicated, and may lead to further strains on family ties and eventually may lead to divorce.

I would like to know if the Minister would, firstly, tighten and enhance social support schemes targeted at young families that are facing difficulties, especially those who are specifically designed to help their young children in early childhood education. Secondly, what are the efforts to ensure that the support from such schemes reach those young families?

Mr Chairman, when the Small Families Improvement Scheme was enhanced in 2004 and renamed as the Home Ownership Plus Education Scheme, I applauded and welcomed the scheme as one which was comprehensive and would serve to provide a way for families to break out of the poverty cycle.

Yet, today I speak with a somewhat heavy heart. I believe that a good policy is one that has moral weight but not one that places a difficult moral burden on those that it seeks to help. The scheme is generous: $60,000 in Housing Grant paid out over 20 years; $1,000 in utilities; $6,000 in training incentives; $10,000 for employment incentives and $3,000 annual bursaries for children. Yet, in two recent encounters, the scheme has come with a moral burden. The scheme requires families to have no more than two children. Let me share just one case to illustrate this point.

I met Mdm A at my MPS, she had just moved into my town and needed some financial help as her husband had just lost his job. She needed a childcare place for her daughter as well. I thought, "Okay, a straightforward case". We have many available interim schemes to help them. But then, she added that she believed that she was three to four months'

Page: 164

pregnant, but had not seen a gynaecologist. She was afraid of the cost and was considering aborting the child. She had lost two previous children and went into depression.

Over the next two weeks, my team and I made numerous phone calls and a gynaecologist, a paediatrician and even a private hospital stepped forward, volunteered to care for her and her child free-of-charge. We kept up contact with Mdm A but she waivered, somewhat hesitant. Then, in the phone call she said the reason is because "I am afraid to lose hope". I was confused slightly by the statement, until I realised that it was not so much the cost of raising the child she was afraid of, but the cost of losing the HOPE scheme.

Never did I imagine that those words would be so impactful – "afraid to lose HOPE". Tried as we did, she quietly went for an abortion. Yes, we could say that the family could have practised better family planning. But what if families do have another child? This was the child that she shared she really, really wanted. How many children have we potentially lost? How can we better improve the scheme that was set up to provide hope – not take it away?

The scheme has certainly made improvements to the majority of families who have come on board, compared to before they joined the scheme. But I am certain that we do not track some of the hidden costs for providing HOPE.

The sample size is not large. The last update that the Minister gave to this House was that an average of 300 families have joined the HOPE scheme in the last five years, on average, and about 3,000 families have benefited since 2004. This is but a small portion of needy families. Is there more that can be done to expand the scheme and remove the painful moral burden that it places on families already saddled by many challenges?

The HOPE scheme was designed to give hope. I hope we will not allow it to take hope away instead.