Global Leadership in Artificial Intelligence

Mr Speaker, the Government unveiled its National AI Strategy report (NAIS 2.0) last December. The report outlines Singapore's plans to harness artificial intelligence (AI) for the public good, focusing on enhancing AI capabilities, addressing potential risks and fostering a thriving AI ecosystem.

I appreciate the hard work that many policy-makers have put into writing this report, including their efforts to consult with industry. However, I believe that Singapore needs a more comprehensive AI industrial policy and clearer outcomes for each industry. We need a strategy that aims to make our nation the global leader in selected AI fields.

Under NAIS 2.0, the Government's main role revolves around enabling an environment for AI to grow and enhancing the efficiency of public agencies. While these are important, the Government certainly has the resources and capability to do much more. In this AI-driven era, we need the Government to intercede more proactively to create a world-leading AI industry. Simply leaving things to the free market may not produce the desired results because of the constraints of our local private sector and our small domestic market. It will risk forfeiting some promising economic growth opportunities that AI can bring for our nation.

Singapore's small population size should not deter us from global AI leadership. Historical industrial successes have been built on strategic government interventions, such as Taiwan’s support of TSMC, which played a pivotal role in its journey to becoming a global semiconductor manufacturing juggernaut.

Today, I will address NAIS 2.0’s AI labour policy and advocate for a strong AI industrial policy so that Singapore can aim for global leadership in selected AI domains.

Let us begin with the AI labour policy. The goal in NAIS 2.0 to generate 15,000 AI jobs sparked a blend of enthusiasm and apprehension among Singaporeans. Concerns linger that, as has happened in the past, foreigners may dominate lucrative positions, including leadership positions, leaving Singaporeans with mainly the routine and lower-paying jobs. This could impede our citizens’ career advancement alongside the advancing AI landscape.

NAIS 2.0 has three labour planks: scaling up AI-specific training programmes; scaling up technology and AI talent pipelines; and remaining open to global tech talent.

Will the Government commit to ensuring that a sizable majority of at least two-thirds of the 15,000 new "AI practitioner" jobs will go to Singaporeans?

I acknowledge the importance of global AI talent. However, there must be a clear differentiation between exceptional global talent and the average foreign technological worker. We should welcome the former, but, should avoid importing too many of the latter, as they may end up competing with Singaporeans who can do the job just as well. Any global talent that we bring in, must be expected to transfer their skills to locals, not just use Singapore as a springboard for greater pursuits in other countries. This can be done through tying company grants to the achievement of knowledge transfer or through limited-term foreign work passes, tied to the training of Singaporean workers.

The AI playground is level, with a highly collaborative open-source community. The core techniques and frameworks are mature enough and reasonably accessible through papers and code. With the right training, mentorship and opportunities, Singaporean talent can deliver as well as anyone in the world.

To raise a body of local AI talent, AI-training programme places and talent pipelines must be focused on Singaporeans. We need to plan ahead and start training all our students early in AI – not just students who are academically strong in the sciences and mathematics.

For mid-career workers, hands-on interaction with AI tools is one of the best forms of training. The Government should expand the scope of SkillsFuture Credits, to cover expenses for subscriptions to AI assistants like ChatGPT Plus or Github Co-pilot to accelerate their productivity. This will level the playing field for Singaporeans with less means to pay for such subscriptions. Paid models like ChatGPT-4, have been assessed to be significantly better than their free counterparts and we should give our workers more opportunities to use the best models.

Next, on industry. It was once unclear if it were possible for humans to reach the moon. But US President John F Kennedy made a speech to Congress in 1961, rallying his nation to achieve the goal of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth before the end of that decade. And the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)'s Apollo 11 mission achieved it ahead of schedule, on 20 July 1969.

A “moonshot” is an ambitious, exploratory and groundbreaking target that has the possibility of spurring breakout growth. We need moonshots in AI, which NAIS 2.0 appears to lack.

The Government has the resources and capability to take more risks, on a longer timescale, to pursue high-reward moonshots. These could catalyse future engines of growth. But first, the Government must catch the vision and have the determination to make our country number one in our chosen AI domains.

Achieving some of these AI moonshots has implications on our economic security and even our sovereignty. Advances in AI rely on large, high-quality data sets. We must ensure that foreign technological firms and governments do not end up extracting our data overseas to build AI products, which then get sold back to Singaporeans. This will allow such firms to profit immensely, while local expertise flounders.

Currently, no global framework governs cross-border data flows and ownership. This allows predatory dynamics to continue between countries and companies. Once market dominance is achieved, network effects and the dynamics of chasing a moving target, make it almost impossible for new entrants to catch up.

If we are not careful, Singapore may become only a consumer of such platforms, while the economic benefits and the best jobs go overseas. Singapore should avoid this, by proactively building comprehensive local data sets for homegrown AI development.

We should pursue a few ambitious, publicly-funded moonshot projects. These projects must prioritise transparency and align their outcomes with the national interest, ensuring that economic gains directly benefit our citizens.

A new government-owned AI startup will be needed to catalyse this moonshot and, I will refer to it as the AI Catalyst Corporation. It should be independently run with commercial dynamism, yet be ultimately answerable to Singaporeans.

What constitutes a well-chosen moonshot? I would like to propose five key principles: first, its products or services must directly benefit Singapore and Singaporeans; second, it should have export potential and become part of Singapore's economic growth engine; third, it needs to have "moats" – which are durable advantages to prevent it from being quickly outcompeted or swallowed up by global tech giants; fourth, there must be a genuine unmet global market gap that Singapore has advantages in tackling; and fifth, the industry should be ripe for fundamental disruption, not just incremental improvements.

Healthcare AI could be a moonshot that Singapore can aim for. I will present the case for this and answer the five questions in reverse order.

First, is healthcare ripe for fundamental disruption? Yes. Healthcare systems worldwide are under strain, due to ageing populations and chronic disease burdens. Healthcare institutions tend to treat diseases late in their course, when symptoms are severe and care is expensive.

Yet, major conditions like obesity, heart disease and cancer, are driven by shared underlying factors. This outdated care model no longer aligns well with scientific reality. Healthcare AI, supported by population-scale data, has the potential to predict risks and intervene early to significantly improve health outcomes.

This will require a reorganisation of healthcare delivery that focuses on early prevention and action. Singapore has started this journey through the Healthier SG programme. Let us turbocharge it with healthcare AI.

Second, is there a genuine unmet global market gap? Yes. Electronic health record (EHR) systems remain fragmented worldwide. Even in the US, no dominant player exists in healthcare AI. The players are fragmented among various entities, like EHR providers, tech firms, life sciences companies, insurers and hospitals. Those with vast healthcare data may not have efficient AI models and vice-versa.

Singapore, on the other hand, has a unique opportunity to build population-scale healthcare data ecosystem, tailored for AI. We can more easily overcome the coordination challenges that may oblige larger ecosystems to build healthcare AI components in a piecemeal fashion. A platform called MOH TRUST already aggregates multiple healthcare research datasets and the National Electronic Health Records (NEHR) system, aggregates clinical data across Singapore. So, the Government is already collecting and coordinating healthcare data. What is missing, is the impetus to use this data to drive the future of AI through an industrial policy.

Third, are there "moats" against global technological giants? Yes. Healthcare AI depends a lot on having local healthcare teams and physical sensors to collect and manage clinical data.

AI can serve as an assistant to local healthcare workers and give Singapore an edge over others. Singapore has already signalled this commitment to generating comprehensive data, like in the SG100K genome study. Healthcare also has more durable data moats over other AI spheres, like linguistics, where SEA-LION's defences against global technological giants in low-resource languages is uncertain.

Fourth, does healthcare have export potential? Yes, as a public good, healthcare AI can benefit other countries, while facing fewer sovereignty concerns. Debates are taking place globally about where large AI systems are trained and deployed. However AI, when used for healthcare, which can potentially benefit everyone, is less likely to attract controversies or nationalist and protectionist tendencies. By assuming a leadership role in this field, Singapore can export our healthcare AI innovations, generate much international goodwill and even use this to advance our foreign policy.

And finally, does it benefit Singaporeans? Yes, through improved public health, economic growth and global technological leadership.

Singapore has other comparative advantages in the race for global leadership in healthcare AI. We have a robust healthcare system, the SingPass digital ID, cross-domain talent and a history of Government investments and interventions in specific industries.

Singapore's demographic diversity provides rich healthcare data across ethnicities and ages. Healthcare AI can catalyse the development of adjacent fields like computational genomics and precision medicine. Singapore has the ingredients for a breakthrough in Healthcare AI. To succeed, the Government needs to take the lead in putting these ingredients together.

To realise a healthcare AI moonshot, Singapore must combine existing ingredients into a coherent strategy. We should aim to export specialised services and medical diagnoses, not raw data. We can create an advanced AI model trained on genetics, protein biomarkers, histology and electronic health records. We should aim to radically improve our ability to prevent disease, intervene and make causal inferences.

A multi-modal healthcare AI foundation model, moves beyond narrowly specified point solutions. By having a single foundation model for, say, both chest X-rays and retinal image interpretation, we can overcome data fragmentation across medical specialties and make it increasingly possible to uncover foundational principles of diseases.

As for electronic health records, the NEHR system is valuable, but, it needs to be AI-ready in order to consolidate complex datasets such as histology imaging, genetic data or protein data. We should create comprehensive longitudinal patient histories, spanning years. Existing data needs to be sufficiently standardised to serve AI analysis, without a massive amount of preprocessing.

An AI Healthcare Company under the AI Catalyst Corporation could drive this moonshot. This AI healthcare company needs its own versatile multi-modal foundation model, integrated with the NEHR. This will enable large-scale analysis to identify at-risk groups, conduct preventative screening and perform early treatment. It will also enable high-quality acute care, as a simultaneous expert in genomics, biology, general medicine and the specialties.

The AI healthcare company could build the world's best multi-modal healthcare AI and healthcare dataset. This could establish an unmatched resource – built in Singapore, for the world.

Local AI startups can also benefit from this foundation model, to build their own applications to sell to the world. Just like how OpenAI's access to ChatGPT queries, provides unmatched data for improving their future large language models, the first company to create a versatile multi-modal healthcare foundation model would likely find itself at the frontier of healthcare AI.

Mr Speaker, in conclusion, a healthcare AI moonshot strategy will position Singapore as a global leader in AI, by leveraging our unique capabilities in consolidating biomedical and healthcare data. It is a national approach, designed to secure data sovereignty, navigate data privacy concerns, ensure Singapore captures the benefits of AI and maximise public buy-in.

This is not about picking winners. It is a proactive strategy to ensure Singapore thrives in the AI-driven future to benefit all Singaporeans. I presented just one example of a moonshot that Singapore could pursue. There may be other moonshots of equal or greater merit. I welcome open debate on selecting moonshots, but, we cannot pull our punches if AI is truly the new industrial revolution.

Singapore possesses the talent, resources and infrastructure needed to compete for the top spot in selected AI fields. Achieving it requires political will, a readiness to embrace risks and proactive intervention by the Government. We can do it and we must do it, for the benefit of Singapore and Singaporeans.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

I thank Mr Giam for raising some very important issues to do with AI. I thank the Member for reading our National Artificial Intelligence Strategy, in some detail. I would encourage the Member to read the many other documents that we have written, which describe how we are already doing many of the things the Member has listed in his speech. And, I thank him in advance, for supporting the investments that we plan to make to deliver the various outcomes that he has detailed.

He suggested a number of important outcomes. We have made some of the same points in the past. I thank him for agreeing with us on a number of key ideas, such as the use of technology and AI should benefit Singapore and Singaporeans, we agree. How we approach AI development should result in better jobs for Singaporeans, we agree.

Our approach should lead to skills development and knowledge transfer to Singaporeans and Singapore, we agree.

Ambitious, innovative projects should be attempted to create opportunities, AI can be transformative for healthcare and our small size as a nation should not deter us from seeking excellence and potentially global leadership in AI, we agree with all this, we have said all this before. And I am glad that he thinks we should do this.

But how we do so and how we proceed, matters. How we should achieve these outcomes. Here, perhaps our views differ. I will point out that in talking through the mechanisms and the suggestions that Mr Giam has made, his speech does have some internal contradictions. Statements that he makes to support one strategy, perhaps contracts another. Here are three examples.

He talks about the constraints of our local private sector and our small domestic market, but he wants to suggest exactly doing that in restricting the development of an AI system within Singapore. He talks about how there is no global cross-border framework around data sharing, but he wants to worsen that by suggesting data localisation and sovereignty strategies. At one part of his speech, he talks about how there is a level playing field for AI with a highly collaborative open source community and then later on, he worries about how there is market dominance and network effects that would make it hard for us to penetrate the market.

So, there are internal contradictions. He has differing views, depending on the differing recommendations. I think the Government also has a different view of how we should achieve the outcomes, but I would reiterate, we agree that the outcomes are the same.

So, on the outcomes, traditional industrial policy approaches, where governments pick winners and centrally plan the way to success, are not going to be effective for frontier digital technologies like AI. Our approach should target excellence in key domains and create an environment with solid foundations that maximise our chances of success. We should not seek global leadership just for the sake of it. We advance Singapore's interest by growing our AI ecosystem, partnering internationally, creating good jobs, benefiting our companies and our citizens. We will be sharing more details on the implementation of the recently launched National Artificial Intelligence 2.0 at the Committee of Supply (COS) debates. But let me just recap on a few ideas.

The strategy focuses on harnessing AI for the public good for Singapore and the world. It outlines key enablers and actions that Singapore will take in the coming years to achieve the twin goals of excellence, developing peaks of excellence in AI, including to address the needs and challenges of our time, such as climate change and population health.

Secondly, empowerment, where we raise up individuals, businesses and communities to use AI with confidence, discernment and trust.

Our approach is for AI to have widespread and positive impact on our economy and our society. That is why we will develop peaks of excellence across domains, across our economy, selected on the probability to deliver an outsized impact to Singapore and the lives of Singaporeans, including leading economic sectors such as manufacturing and financial services, those relevant to Singapore's smart nation priorities, healthcare and education.

For healthcare, we have dedicated $35 million through the AI in Health Grand Challenge since 2019 to support innovative projects that use AI to predict risk, tailor treatments and enhance health coaching. We already use datasets across various healthcare registries and databases to train AI models, and these are already being piloted for use in clinics across Singapore.

SingHealth, together with the Ministry of Health (MOH), A*STAR and the National Supercomputing Centre recently organised the AI Health Summit 2023. It featured local and international experts discussing the application of advanced AI in healthcare, and it demonstrated many of the projects that are already in development here in Singapore.

Across our society, we will address peaks of excellence for AI. We will anchor integrated and transformative AI innovation and value creation activities here, working with companies to base their AI Centres of Excellence, to build new products, develop intellectual property across the AI stack here in Singapore. We have a new model of sectoral Centres of Excellence, partnering industry champions to identify sectoral use cases, developing a broader base of researchers and companies to intensify sophisticated AI development and deployment here. We are also working to speed up value discovery, experimentation and innovation, including the AI Trailblazers Initiative, working with Google Cloud to help enterprises bring novel generative AI use cases to life in a hundred days.

Creating this environment for many projects, many peaks of excellence, has two key benefits. One is that it makes it more likely that we benefit all either through economic opportunity by being part of the industry or as a beneficiary of the new service. The second key benefit is that not all projects are successful. With moonshots, Mr Giam will know that outcomes are inherently uncertain and the original moonshot certainly did not have a friction free path to success.

Outcomes are inherently uncertain. They are not always clear, and even with the best efforts we may not get the desired or expected results.

So as we embark on ambitious and innovative projects, I hope we can count on Mr Giam's support to still stand in support of us having made the attempt in the spirit of a moonshot even when it does not quite work out in the way we expect.

So, trying several different ideas, creating the opportunity for innovation and inventiveness, rather than trying to pick symbolic projects, is far more likely to generate a success.

Anchoring AI activities is only one part of the picture. A strong AI ecosystem also requires skilled AI practitioners. We want to grow a pool of such high value and skilled jobs here in Singapore.

As discussed extensively in this House, including by Dr Tan Wu Meng on behalf of his Clementi residents and I think representing the concerns of residents across Singapore in successive Budget speeches, the 2023 Presidential Address Debate, Parliamentary Questions, our recent Parliamentary Motion. None of this will become a reality if we do not train, upskill and reskill our labour force. That point has been made and the Government's key focus is thus on training our people. This will allow Singaporeans to capture new opportunities and shape their future.

For example, the Tech Skills Accelerator and AI apprenticeship programmes have trained many Singaporeans to take on AI related roles and we will elaborate on additional plans at the COS. We have also started work on equipping our students with skills relevant to artificial intelligence. The Ministry of Education develops students foundational knowledge of AI and promotes its safe and responsible use in schools.

That said, it is important to recognise that global AI talent plays a complementary role. They serve as a bridge to expertise, perspectives, innovative approaches elsewhere that are crucial for the information exchange and skills transfer to strengthen our ecosystem. Today, we are already experiencing strong demand for AI talent here in Singapore. Given the fierce competition for this talent globally, it would be quite unwise to limit the pool of skilled practitioners we can draw from and potentially hindering our ecosystem growth.

There are some other essential enablers that we need here. We have to have sufficient compute power so that industry, academia and the Government can innovate, build and deploy high value solutions.

Our strategy on data is important in advancing our AI aspirations. Our approach on data is premised on supporting innovation, serving the public good and making sure that relevant safeguards are in place. We focus on improving the quality of data sets, building up our capability and ensuring that data use for AI development is aligned with trusted data sharing frameworks.

But domestic data and local AI models are not enough for Singapore to achieve our ambitions. We must maintain our ability to access and use global data and models to deliver good outcomes for Singapore and Singaporeans. It is important to resist the allure of data localisation narratives. It sounds very seductive. But instead, we need to remain connected, allow for and advocate for cross-border data flows as long as adequate protection is ensured.

Recent legislation in large countries avoid this idea of explicit localisation provisions. Even with their large markets and large data sets, they recognise the benefits of being connected to the world. And we benefit from openness and connectivity to the world for our partners to share with us in good faith, and they are less likely to do so if we close ourselves off. Singapore has thrived as part of a connected world.

Mr Giam spoke about industrial policy. It is the nature of the tech and digital space that Government cannot pick winners and certainly cannot centrally plan their way to success. There is also the issue of the cost associated with the approach he suggests. He proposes, I believe, that we rely on our own data only and develop an AI model at scale ourselves. I think that is what he suggesting.

I would point out that companies have to invest tens-of-billions of dollars – billions with a "b" – of US dollars for one generative AI model. If we took the approach that he suggests, we may only be able to afford to participate in one or two projects. And is that going to be the best approach for Singapore?

AI is a fast-moving, inherently borderless technology. For Singapore to succeed, we must remain open. Open to innovation, to talent, to data, to ideas from around the world. We will also need to work with partners from around the world to address the wide-ranging impact that AI can potentially have. Taking a protectionist stance will do us more harm than good and it will undermine our hard-won credibility as a serious, constructive, inclusive society and nation.

*Question put, and agreed to.*

*Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn."*