Religion, race & rights

• Gerald Giam Yean Song questioned the Minister for Education about the Ministry's guidance to autonomous universities on frameworks for evaluating speakers at campus events and their impact on academic freedom.
• Chan Chun Sing responded that autonomous universities have the authority to create their own assessment frameworks for speakers, emphasizing the importance of balancing academic freedom with respect for social norms and national interests.
• The Ministry of Education supports universities in promoting critical thinking while ensuring that events do not compromise Singapore's harmony or allow misuse of academic platforms for personal agendas.

• Ms. Carrie Tan inquired about the feedback and effectiveness of the Caring SG Commuter lanyard and card initiative for commuters with invisible disabilities since its launch in October 2022.
• The Minister for Transport, Chee Hong Tat, reported that over 15,000 lanyards and cards have been distributed, with positive feedback from users.
• A 2024 survey indicated that 90% of respondents believe the initiative encourages kindness among commuters, and 42% of card holders felt personally benefited by the scheme.
• The Ministry plans to continue gathering feedback to improve the initiative and promote a kinder public transport culture.

• The debate focused on the need for a whole-of-society approach to address discrimination, emphasizing the importance of understanding and appreciating diversity in Singapore's multicultural context.
• Syed Harun Alhabsyi highlighted that discrimination often stems from societal views formed early in life and called for educational initiatives to expose young people to diverse experiences and perspectives.
• The government, represented by Eric Chua, outlined its commitment to combating discrimination through legislative safeguards, social integration policies, and the creation of common spaces for interaction among different communities.
• Key strategies proposed included enhancing storytelling to challenge stereotypes, promoting inclusive practices in schools and workplaces, and ensuring fair access to services for marginalized groups.
• Both speakers underscored the importance of individual responsibility in fostering an inclusive society and the need for continuous efforts to combat discrimination in all aspects of life.

• The Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Bill was introduced for a Second Reading by the Minister of State for Home Affairs, linking it to the Maintenance of Racial Harmony Bill.
• The Second Reading was supported by a vote, achieving 78 "Ayes" and 7 "Noes," surpassing the required two-thirds majority.
• The Bill was then committed to a Committee of the whole House, where it was considered and reported without amendment.
• Following the Committee stage, the Bill was moved for a Third Reading, which also passed with 78 "Ayes" and 7 "Noes," confirming its approval.
• The Bill was ultimately read a Third time and passed, completing the legislative process.

• The debate focused on the Maintenance of Racial Harmony Bill, particularly the role of the Elected President (EP) as the final arbiter of Restraining Orders related to race, raising concerns about potential confrontations with the Government.
• Sylvia Lim questioned the wisdom of empowering the EP in this context, suggesting it could lead to polarization along racial lines and detract from the President's role.
• Minister K Shanmugam defended the Bill, arguing that the additional checks provided by the EP and the Presidential Council are necessary for accountability and to ensure careful exercise of governmental power.
• The discussion included clarifications on the decision-making process for Restraining Orders, emphasizing that the Minister's decisions would be based on careful assessment and legal advice, albeit without the same procedural rigor as court decisions.
• The Bill was ultimately passed after addressing various concerns, with the Minister highlighting the need for a balance between swift action and appropriate checks on governmental authority.

• The Maintenance of Racial Harmony Bill consolidates existing laws on race-related offences, introduces a Restraining Order regime for pre-emptive action against content threatening racial harmony, establishes a Presidential Council for Racial and Religious Harmony, and imposes safeguards against foreign influence on designated race-based entities.
• Ministers emphasized that the Bill does not create new substantive prohibitions but aligns with existing law, with strict safeguards for Restraining Orders and community-based remedial initiatives offered as alternatives to prosecution for non-egregious cases.
• Several MPs raised concerns about potential impacts on free speech and artistic expression, questioning thresholds for Restraining Orders and urging clarity for businesses and community groups; Ministers responded that the law’s scope remains unchanged and protections for dialogue are maintained.
• Foreign influence safeguards will initially target clan and business associations linked to Chinese, Malay, and Indian races, requiring disclosures on donations, affiliations, and leadership, with exemptions considered and compliance support provided.
• The Bill was supported by most MPs, though some, like the Workers’ Party, expressed reservations about the President’s role in reviewing Restraining Orders; Ministers stressed that racial harmony requires both legal frameworks and proactive community engagement.

Gerald Giam Yean Song asked about the possibility of mandating a minimum number of seating areas in shopping malls to support the elderly and those with mobility challenges. Desmond Lee responded that the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) requires compliance with the Code on Accessibility, which mandates resting areas with seats along long paths within buildings, spaced no more than 50 meters apart. The BCA provides Universal Design Guides for additional accessibility features and regularly reviews the Code to meet population needs. Currently, a Draft Code for 2025 under public consultation proposes requiring at least one seating area at passenger alighting and boarding points.

Jean See inquired about the number of youths with special educational needs (SEN) in tertiary education since 2018, their internship experiences, and initiatives for employer engagement in creating inclusive environments. Chan Chun Sing responded that approximately 7,000 students with reported SEN are currently enrolled in Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs), with support systems in place for their transition to post-secondary education and internships. The SG Enable IHL Internship Programme facilitates matching students with disabilities to inclusive organizations, and various workshops and job programs are provided to assist their workforce transition. The Ministry of Education (MOE) collaborates with SG Enable to enhance vocational education and incentivize employers to redesign jobs for students with disabilities, promoting a more inclusive workforce.

Saktiandi Supaat raised a question regarding potential regulatory interventions for social media, inspired by Australia's ban on social media for children under 16 and Albania's TikTok shutdown. He suggested that the Ministry of Digital Development and Information consider creating age-appropriate versions of social media content for children and teenagers in Singapore. Mrs. Josephine Teo referenced her previous answers to related parliamentary questions, inviting Saktiandi to clarify any points if needed.

Saktiandi Supaat sought clarification on the implementation timeline for a landmark Bill and the resources available for TAFEP after its enactment. Tan See Leng indicated the Bill is expected to be implemented by 2026/2027 and affirmed plans to review and potentially increase TAFEP resources. Pritam Singh inquired about the range of administrative penalties in the Bill and whether offending companies would be named; Tan responded that penalties would be detailed in subsidiary legislation and emphasized an educational approach before penalties are enacted. Usha Chandradas asked about reviewing the definition of a protected characteristic, to which Tan mentioned a commitment to ongoing review post-implementation. Leong Mun Wai pressed the Minister on the effects of immigration on PME ratios, prompting Tan to suggest filing a specific question for further clarity. The Bill was ultimately read a second time, committed to a committee, and passed without amendments.

Dr. Tan See Leng expressed gratitude for strong support for the Workplace Fairness Bill and emphasized the need to create fairer workplaces while balancing various stakeholder concerns. The approach to the Bill is cautious to avoid disrupting social harmony and ensures that it starts with a foundational baseline of protection against workplace discrimination. Key discussions highlighted the complexities of addressing various forms of discrimination such as mental health, ageism, and sexual orientation, with a commitment to ongoing improvements and reviews. The Bill includes provisions for grievance handling processes, protections against retaliation, and supports for small firms while maintaining flexibility for employers' genuine needs. The Minister acknowledged there is more work to be done and emphasized the importance of fostering a culture of fairness and inclusivity within the workforce.

The debate on the Workplace Fairness Bill in Singapore covered multiple perspectives on addressing workplace discrimination. Key points include:

• Saktiandi Supaat emphasized the importance of the Bill as a stepping stone for fair employment practices, urging enhancements beyond the minimum standards and raising concerns about employee characteristics not covered under the Bill.
• Leong Mun Wai questioned the Bill’s sufficiency for protecting Singaporeans against biased hiring practices favoring foreigners, suggesting the need for stronger language in favor of local employment and effective policies to prevent wage disparities.
• Fahmi Aliman addressed issues of racial and religious discrimination, advocating for cultural sensitivity within workplaces and proactive measures rather than relying solely on legislation.
• Various members raised concerns regarding the exclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity from the list of protected characteristics, asserting that this omission could perpetuate stigma and discrimination against LGBTQ+ employees.
• The discussion highlighted the necessity for clear enforcement processes, adequate support for employees facing discrimination, and the need to address the challenges facing outsourced workers, who often encounter discrimination outside the Bill's provisions.

• Dr. Lim Wee Kiak raised concerns about the ethical considerations, medical risks, and safeguards related to prescribing puberty blockers to minors experiencing gender dysphoria.
• Minister Ong Ye Kung stated that there is insufficient evidence supporting the safety and clinical benefits of puberty blockers for children, noting that many do not continue to experience gender dysphoria into adulthood.
• The Ministry of Health does not recommend the use of puberty blockers for minors with gender dysphoria.

• Dr. Wan Rizal raised concerns about the stigma surrounding mental health conditions, particularly among older adults and those with lower education levels, and inquired about targeted interventions for these groups.
• He also questioned how the effectiveness of current initiatives to reduce stigma is being evaluated and what plans exist for sustaining these efforts over the next five years.
• Minister Ong Ye Kung referenced a previous parliamentary response that addressed these questions, indicating that the issues have been discussed in detail in an earlier session.

• The Workplace Fairness Bill aims to address workplace discrimination in Singapore by establishing protections against discrimination based on 11 characteristics, including age, nationality, and mental health, and seeks to promote fair employment practices.
• The Bill has garnered support from various Members of Parliament, with discussions highlighting the importance of protecting vulnerable groups, such as older workers and persons with disabilities, while also raising concerns about the exclusion of indirect discrimination and certain worker categories from its scope.
• There are calls for clearer definitions and guidelines regarding reasonable accommodations for employees with disabilities, as well as the need for training and resources for employers to effectively implement the Bill and foster an inclusive workplace culture.
• The Bill includes a phased implementation approach, exempting small businesses with fewer than 25 employees for five years, which has raised concerns about potential loopholes and the need for support to ensure compliance and fair treatment for all workers.
• Overall, the debate reflects a significant shift towards recognizing and legislating against workplace discrimination in Singapore, with an emphasis on the need for ongoing education, awareness, and support to achieve true workplace fairness.

• The Workplace Fairness Bill aims to enhance fair and harmonious workplace norms while preventing a litigious environment.
• It provides protection against discrimination based on abilities, race, or religion, ensuring that workers have recourse without suffering in silence.
• The Bill allows employers flexibility in decision-making based on genuine business needs and acknowledges the role of religious groups in employment decisions.
• An education-first approach will be adopted, focusing on compliance and support for employers who follow fair practices.
• The initiative encourages a collective effort to foster a culture of fairness and openness in workplaces across society.

• The Workplace Fairness Bill aims to enhance protections against workplace discrimination in Singapore while maintaining a balance between employee rights and employer flexibility.
• The Bill identifies five categories of protected characteristics: age, nationality, sex, race/religion/language, and disability/mental health, addressing the most common discrimination complaints.
• It establishes grievance handling processes to facilitate communication between employers and employees, ensuring that complaints can be addressed without fear of retaliation.
• Small businesses with fewer than 25 employees will be exempt from the Bill for the first five years to allow them time to adapt to the new regulations.
• The Bill emphasizes an education-first approach, encouraging compliance through guidance rather than immediate penalties, reserving enforcement actions for serious violations.

• The Maintenance of Racial Harmony Bill aims to promote racial harmony and establish a Presidential Council for Racial and Religious Harmony.
• The bill was presented by the Minister of State for Home Affairs, Ms. Sun Xueling, on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs.
• The bill was read for the first time and is scheduled to be read a second time at the next available sitting of Parliament.
• The Speaker wished all Members a Happy New Year before proceeding with the agenda.

Leong Mun Wai questioned the Minister for National Development about HDB's policy on disposing of flats that have been compulsorily acquired or bought back under the Ethnic Integration Policy. Desmond Lee responded that HDB currently owns about 150 such units. These units will typically be offered for sale progressively through HDB’s Sale of Balance Flats exercises and open booking of flats.

Leong Mun Wai asked about the number of appeals related to the Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP) received by HDB, the number approved, and the assistance provided through buyback measures, including breakdowns by ethnicity. Desmond Lee reported that HDB received 693 EIP-related appeals in 2023 and 2024, with 211 appeals acceded, including assistance for 8 households through the buyback measure. HDB offers several assistance measures for owners who face challenges selling flats due to EIP quotas. The specific breakdown of appeals by ethnicity was provided in a table.