ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR

1ST APRIL, 2008 TO 31ST MARCH, 2009

(Paper Cmd. 2 of 2008)

      Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [6th Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

     Head S - Ministry of Manpower (cont.) –

     Resumption of Debate on Question [4th March, 2008],

     "That the total sum to be allocated for Head S of the Estimates be reduced by $100." – [Dr Ahmad Mohd Magad].

     Question again proposed.

     The Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Gan Kim Yong): Sir, during the last COS in 2007, we announced the intention to introduce re-employment legislation by 2012. This will allow our older workers to work longer and save more for retirement. The tripartite partners have been working to encourage and help older workers to stay employed longer and to prepare them for re-employment.

     More older workers are employed now than ever before. Last year, 56% of residents aged 55 to 64 were working, compared to 54% a year ago. This is equivalent to about 20,000 more people – a significant improvement.

     To encourage older workers to take advantage of the employment opportunities brought about by the strong economic growth, the TriCom on Employability of Older Workers, which I chair, has adopted two major thrusts.

     First, we will press on to prepare our companies and workers for re-employment. A tripartite workgroup led by the Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF) is preparing a set of guidelines to help workers and employers implement re-employment. We aim to finalise the guidelines by the end of 2009.

     Meanwhile, the tripartite workgroup has drawn up a checklist of good re-employment practices. The tripartite partners will consult widely with industry and union leaders over the next 12 to 18 months before finalising it.

     Companies that need help to implement re-employment can tap on  ADVANTAGE!. For example, West Pharmaceutical Services implemented a re-employment policy in November last year, after it joined the ADVANTAGE! scheme. The company has put in place a process to discuss with its workers on available re-employment options 12 months before their retirement, and makes an offer to them six months before their retirement. For workers who are re-employed and re-deployed to a new job, relevant training will be provided. West Pharma offers re-employment contracts of at least two years' duration, subject to a yearly review.  Wages for re-employed workers may be adjusted to take into account the value of the job and the workers' competencies. 

     Mr Heng Chee How suggested ways to enhance the ADVANTAGE! scheme including supporting pilot projects and specific help for SMEs.  I thank him for the feedback.  Indeed, ADVANTAGE! does support pilot projects provided they lead to preparing companies for re-employment.  We also introduced ADVANTAGE! for SMEs last year to help the SMEs more specifically.

     Workers have an equally important role to play to make re-employment work. They must be prepared to accept a different job and undergo training for the new job if necessary. They must also be prepared for adjustments in wages and benefits to better reflect the value of the job and their competencies. This is particularly so if a significant portion of their wages is seniority based.

     Re-employment is still a new concept and I agree with Mr Heng Chee How and Ms Cham Hui Fong that we will have to actively reach out to both employers and employees to help them understand what re-employment means and how it can be a mutually beneficial arrangement.

     The workgroup will be driving these efforts. Feedback received and experience gained in the process will help us better address the operational issues that companies and workers may face in implementing re-employment.

     Dr Ong Seh Hong proposed to remove the concept of a retirement age. I agree with his objective of helping workers stay employed longer, but I think removing retirement age will not achieve this.  Re-employment, on the other hand, is a more flexible and effective way to help workers work for as long as they are able to. It allows both the employer and the worker to make changes to the existing job arrangements when the worker reaches retirement age. For instance, the worker may wish to work part-time or to take on less responsibility. The company may, on the other hand, need to re-deploy the worker to another job to facilitate leadership renewal. And, even if the worker is retained in the same job, the company may have to adjust his seniority-based wages. This flexibility will allow the company to remain competitive and keep the worker employable.

     A second key thrust is increasing the employment rate of older women. This chart that I am showing you shows that Singapore is among countries with the highest employment rates for older men (at 74%), but relatively lower employment rates for older women (at 39%).  We need to improve the employment rate for women.

     Currently, a significant number of women leave the workforce in their 30s or 40s. Many of them do not re-join the workforce thereafter. We need more examples like  the 52-year old Mdm Noormalin. After having left the workforce for two years, she found a part-time job as a customer service assistant at the SMRT Taxis contact centre. Having a job near her home allows her to earn an income while caring for her four children.

     Mdm Noormalin is one of the beneficiaries of a "30 minutes to work" job fair. This was launched by a workgroup under the TriCom, led by Mdm Halimah and the NTUC, and in partnership with the South West CDC. This year, the workgroup has set a goal of helping 2,000 women enter the workforce.

     Let me now move on to another issue raised by several MPs, that of help for low-wage workers. With strong economic growth, the number of low-wage residents in full-time employment earning $1,200 or less per month fell by 6.6% between 2006 and 2007. The long-term unemployment rate has also come down from 0.8% in December 2006 to 0.4% in December 2007. This is comparable to levels last seen before the Asian Financial Crisis. Nonetheless, as Mr Ong Ah Heng, Mr Hri Kumar, Mr Ang Mong Seng and Dr Ahmad Magad have observed, there are still those who are unemployed or in low-paying jobs because they do not have the skills that are in demand.

     Currently, the CDCs and other Distributed Careerlink Networks (or DCNs) already provide free employment facilitation services to residents who are unemployed or retrenched. The DCNs link job seekers to highly-subsidised WDA training programmes for skills upgrading and re-skilling for new jobs in growth sectors. We will be doing more under the newly-unveiled CET Masterplan, which the Minister has elaborated on yesterday. 

     Dr Amy Khor, Mrs Josephine Teo and Mr Seng Han Thong have also mentioned the importance of job redesign.  Job Recreation Programmes (JRPs) are being implemented in a number of sectors to make the jobs appealing to Singaporeans by enhancing job worth, working conditions, and the image of the profession. Overall, JRP efforts re-created over 15,000 jobs last year. We will press on with the JRPs.    

     For those in low-wage jobs, the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme is an important tool to help them and encourage them to stay employed. The lower CPF contribution rates for low-wage workers improve their employability, while WIS makes up for the lower CPF rates and gives them additional income.

     The first WIS payment was made in January this year, with 287,000 workers receiving $146 million. The second payment will be made in April and May this year.

     There have been many suggestions by MPs on how we can help workers benefit more.  Mdm Halimah, for example, has suggested excluding overtime pay in computing WIS.  Sir, whether a worker's income is in the form of basic salary or overtime pay, they are both income that will help support the worker and his family. Given that WIS' aim is to help low wage workers by supplementing their income, I think it is fair to consider all income earned by the worker.

     Ms Cham Hui Fong also highlighted the case of workers who had received the provisional WIS payment for the first six months of work, but later received a year-end bonus, which increased their average income to above $1,500 a month, making them ineligible for WIS.  Firstly, let me clarify that the first WIS payment is an advance payment paid for work done in the first half of the year, but WIS is actually based on the average monthly income for the whole year.  The intent is to help workers by paying them early rather than making them wait for the whole year to be over.  If we were to wait for the whole work-year to finish, they would have to wait much longer.  It is not, as Ms Cham says, a disincentive to earn more.

     It is only fair that we should recover WIS paid to those whose average monthly income exceeds $1,500, as such members are not in our target group. Excess WIS in the form of CPF can be recovered directly from the member's CPF account, but we will be flexible when recovering the cash component. Since the WIS is a long term scheme, excess WIS paid in cash will be recovered against future WIS payments should the worker receive them. This will not inconvenience the affected workers.

     During the Budget debate, Mr Inderjit Singh, Mr Christopher de Souza and Dr Ahmad Magad also made many suggestions on the WIS Scheme such as including workers earning up to $1,800 a month, increasing the payment frequency, and adjusting WIS to take into account inflation. As WIS has just been implemented, MOM can consider these suggestions during the review of the scheme in 2010.

     Mr Ong Ah Heng highlighted the difficulties faced by odd job workers in receiving the WIS.  While we have measures to help informal workers on this front, bringing them into formal employment, where they can benefit from both WIS and the CPF system, will be a better outcome.

     To achieve this, the CPF Board has stepped up enforcement against employers who fail to make CPF contributions for their workers.  The CPF Board took 14,000 cases to court last year for failure to pay CPF. One of the cases involved a labour supplier that classified its workers as "independent contractors" when they were in fact employees. The CPF Board recovered $47,500 in CPF contributions for 51 employees.  Forty-seven of them subsequently benefited from the WIS as formal employees.

     In addition, the tripartite partners have been reaching out to educate workers on their employment rights and the benefits of formal employment. Together with the CPF Board's enforcement efforts, this has contributed to some 10,000 informal workers converting into formal employment and benefiting from WIS. We will continue to encourage more workers to join the CPF system to build up their retirement nest eggs and benefit from WIS.

     For those who remain in informal employment, we encourage them to contribute to CPF by allowing them to qualify for WIS if they contribute at the lower rate as self-employed workers. As Ms Cham Hui Fong has suggested, the tripartite partners have been reaching out to these workers on the benefits of contributing to CPF and on the WIS Scheme.  We do so very extensively through the "Be a Winner" campaign. MOM has also worked with various partners to brief hawkers, cleaners and grassroots representatives, and to educate employers through seminars and workshops.

     To date, about 54,000 self-employed and informal workers have received their WIS payout. Another 46,900 have registered with the CPF Board but have not fulfilled their Medisave contributions. This shows that while they are aware of the WIS scheme, they have not made the contribution to their Medisave to qualify for WIS.

     To encourage informal and self-employed workers to contribute to Medisave and receive WIS, we introduced the Medisave Contribution Draw. The first one will be held in June 2008. We have made it easy for workers to contribute, by allowing payments in instalments and at many locations, including CPF service centres, AXS machines, and the 62 Singapore Post outlets.

     To make WIS more attractive to the self-employed and informal workers, Dr Ahmad Magad has suggested that there should be a cash component in the WIS payout to them.  Mr Siew Kum Hong has suggested waiving the Medisave contribution requirement altogether. 

     They are concerned that many informal workers and self-employed do not find it worthwhile to contribute cash to their Medisave just to benefit from the WIS. While I understand their concern, I should stress that each person must take responsibility for his CPF contributions. This principle is the foundation of the CPF system and applies to all workers, self-employed or otherwise. The Medisave Account enjoys higher interest, including the bonus interest offered by the CPF Board. It provides for the workers' medical needs and allows them to participate in MediShield.

     Furthermore, self-employed persons and informal workers already contribute far less to CPF than formal employees earning the same amount – only 8.5% compared to 34.5%. For low-wage self-employed persons, their contribution rate has been further reduced, to as low as 2.5%, for those earning less than $12,000 a year. For example, those who are earning $1,000 per month, Medisave contribution required for a 40-year old worker earning $1,000 a month is only about $25 a month, less than a dollar a day (or about the price of a cup of kopi-o ). Waiving the Medisave contribution requirement for self-employed or informal workers to qualify for WIS will undermine the principle of individual responsibility, and may inadvertently discourage informal workers from converting to formal employment.

     Given the increasing importance of the CPF system in providing for workers' medical and retirement needs, we should encourage self-employed and informal workers to put more into their CPF, and not ask for their contributions to be reduced or waived.

12.15 pm

     ComfortDelgro recently announced that they will be passing on road tax rebates to its taxi drivers in the form of CPF top-ups to the driver's CPF Account to improve their retirement adequacy.  This is a positive move and I encourage other principals to consider similar initiatives for their self-employed agents.  My Ministry together with the CPF Board will engage the principal associations and other organisations on ways to help the self-employed build up their CPF savings.

     Besides informal workers, contract workers is another area of focus for MOM.  Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Zainudin Nordin have expressed concerns about the employment conditions of these workers.  Informal workers are covered by existing labour laws such as the Employment Act and the CPF Act.  Employers are therefore required to provide their contract workers with basic employment benefits, such as CPF contributions, overtime allowance, prompt salary payment, annual leave and medical leave.

     We have been taking actions against errant contractors and helping vulnerable contract workers understand their employment rights.  The support of end-user companies of outsourced services is important.  Recognising this, the Tripartite Committee on CPF and Work-related Benefits for Low Wage Workers has formulated a tripartite advisory on responsible outsourcing practices, which will be released later today.  The Tripartite Advisory will serve as a useful reference for end-user companies when they outsource their functions.  For example, end-users are encouraged to require third party contractors to adopt responsible practices, such as providing written employment contracts for their workers and hiring workers for at least six months, so that they can qualify for employment benefits under the Employment Act.

     The public sector will take the lead to adopt the Tripartite Advisory.  The Tricom has also secured commitments from the private sector end-user companies like the NTUC FairPrice Cooperative Limited and the National University Hospital.

     In conclusion, Sir, we have made progress in helping older workers stay employed.  But we need to continue to prepare employers and employees for re-employment.  The WIS Scheme has helped lower income workers and we will continue to reach out to informal workers and the self-employed.  However, these workers must also take on the responsibility to contribute to their Medisave to benefit from the WIS.  This way, we will be able to achieve a win-win outcome for all.  My Senior Parliamentary Secretary will now respond to the remaining points.

     The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Manpower (Mr Hawazi Daipi): Sir, the Minister of State has spoken about the policies and measures to facilitate the re-employment of older workers as well as to encourage women to return to the workforce.  I shall elaborate on the efforts to promote flexible work arrangements and fair employment practices, both of which can impact the employment of older workers and working mothers.

     First, flexible work arrangements.  I agree with Dr Ahmad Magad and Dr Lim Wee Kiak as well as Miss Penny Low and Dr Amy Khor who spoke during the Budget debate, about the need to encourage economically inactive residents to join the workforce.  Indeed, one of the key strategies to achieve this would be to facilitate part-time employment and flexible work arrangements.  A study done by MOM in 2006 on economically inactive women of ages 25 to 49 and older persons of ages 50 to 64, found that more than nine out of 10 of those intending to look for work in the next two years, were looking for part-time work.  In this tight labour market, employers can therefore address part of their staffing needs by encouraging more of the economically-inactive to take up jobs.

     To address Dr Lim's concerns about the legal protection for part-time workers, I would like to point out that part-time employees are covered under the Employment Act.  Part-time employees enjoy similar benefits as full-timers, such as annual leave, sick leave and maternity leave, except that these are pro-rated based on their working hours.  They are also entitled to CPF contributions from their employers.

     Dr Amy Khor has asked for a study to examine the obstacles preventing employers from offering flexible work.  Such a study was conducted by MOM in 2005.  It found that some employers were ill-informed about work-life practices and sceptical about the benefits. We have therefore rolled out a series of promotional activities to raise awareness, including the Work-Life Harmony Week and the Work-Life Conference since 2005.  MOM also works closely with the Employer Alliance, which is a group of employers committed to work-life promotion, to generate buy-in amongst CEOs and business leaders. The results have been encouraging.  In a recent survey of four Asian countries (ie, Japan, China, Hong Kong and Singapore) by Hudson, Singapore companies were found to be the most likely to implement work-life policies.

     To encourage more companies to employ new workers on part-time work or flexible work arrangement, MOM launched the Flexi-Works! Scheme in November last year.  Administered by the National Trades Union Congress (or NTUC) and Singapore National Employers Federation (or SNEF), the scheme offers grants of up to $100,000 to help companies defray the cost of implementing flexible work arrangements, including the various examples mentioned by Dr Ahmad Magad.  The Flexi-Works! Scheme complements other work-life initiatives by the Tripartite Committee on Work-Life Strategy, including the Work Life Excellence Award, which recognises companies with excellent work-life culture and practices, and the Work-Life Works! Fund (or WoW! Fund).

     Flexible work arrangements can lead to win-win outcomes for the employer and employee.  Employees who are better able to balance their work and personal lives are likely to be more committed and productive in their work.  One example is Terra Holdings, a small IT company with about 20 staff.  With assistance from the WoW! Fund, Terra Holdings has put in place flexible work arrangements such as telecommuting and part-time work.  This has led to an increase in productivity and staff retention - Terra Holdings halved its turnover rate from 30% in 2006 to 14% last year, while improving their year-on-year sales.

     Going forward, we will continue to refine our programmes and funding schemes to encourage and facilitate more employers to implement flexible work arrangements and other work-life strategies as well as build platforms to share and recognise good practices.

     Second, fair employment practices.  Dr Ahmad Magad has asked whether legislation would be effective in addressing workplace discrimination and preventing discriminatory job advertisements.  The experiences of other countries have demonstrated that legislation has not effectively addressed the issue of discrimination.  In some cases, the number of complaints has in fact increased after laws have been enacted.  But far from addressing the problem, such legislative measures have resulted in a litigious labour-management climate.

     Ms Ellen Lee has also raised the issue of workplace sexual harassment.  MOM hardly receives complaints of such nature.  Notwithstanding this, as with cases of workplace discrimination, workers who experience sexual harassment problems could take up the issue with their management, or through their unions if they are union members.  If necessary, they could also lodge a police report.  As alluded by Ms Lee, the Penal Code has provisions against insulting the modesty of a woman and making obscene or lewd acts at woman.  Since there are already avenues of recourse and legal protection available, there is no need for additional legislation against workplace sexual harassment.

     Sir, the real challenge is to positively shape mindsets and behaviour.  In this regard, a promotional approach supported by the tripartite partners – unions, employers and the Government – is more effective in dealing with the issues of workplace discrimination and harassment.  In 2006, we formed the Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment Practices (or TAFEP), led by Mdm Halimah Yacob from NTUC and Mr Bob Tan from SNEF, to raise awareness of fair and responsible employment practices and facilitate the adoption of such practices among employers.

     TAFEP has received strong support from employers, with the number of employers pledging to embrace the principles of fair employment doubling to more than 600 within the last year.  Just last Thursday, TAFEP and the Association of Small and Medium Enterprises organised a breakfast session for CEOs of SMEs.  By the end of the morning, more than 30 CEOs have signed the Employers' Pledge of Fair Employment Practices to signal their support for fair employment.

     With respect to job advertisements, TAFEP will continue to work closely with the newspapers and employers to ensure that job advertisements are in line with the guidelines.  Many of the discriminatory job advertisements arise from a lack of awareness, rather than blatant biasness.  Often, it is a matter of helping employers phrase their requirements accurately.  For example, some employers advertised for fresh graduates when their intended message was that working experience was not a pre-requisite.  Such advertisements not only turned away experienced graduates, but could also be viewed as discriminatory. At TAFEP's advice, these employers reviewed their job advertisements and removed the "fresh graduates" clause.  Doing so enhanced their image as fair employers.  But more importantly, it allowed them to reach out to a wider pool of candidates.

     Dr Ahmad Magad also spoke about the need to monitor discriminatory employment practices.  Last November, the Tripartite Centre for Fair Employment, or TAFEP Centre, was launched.  It offers a channel for the public to give feedback and seek advice on fair employment matters.  The Centre will continually monitor the feedback received, and engage employers to review their employment practices and adopt the guidelines on fair employment.

     I am confident that the tripartite efforts will encourage and facilitate fair and responsible employment amongst companies, and enable them to better attract and retain valued employees and talents.

     Let me now speak on workplace safety and health.  Mr Heng Chee How would be pleased to know that the workplace fatality rate has continued its steady decline from 4.9 fatalities per 100,000 employees in 2004, to 2.9 in 2007.  This is a 40% improvement over the past four years and we are on track to achieve our target of reducing workplace fatalities to 2.5 fatalities per 100,000 employees by 2015.

     Specifically, in response to Mr Ong Ah Heng's question, high-risk sectors such as the construction and marine industries have also continued to improve their safety outcomes.  The fatality rate in the construction industry fell from 9.4 per 100,000 workers in 2006 to 8.3 in 2007, while for the marine industry, the fatality rate dropped from 9.8 in 2006 to seven in 2007.  This translates to improvements of 12% and 29% for these two sectors respectively.  The injury rates have similarly fallen by 10% for the construction industry, and 39% for the marine industry.

     Notwithstanding the progress made, the construction and marine sectors remain two of the riskiest sectors, accounting for over 50% of the total workplace fatalities in 2007.  The recent NUS crane collapse which resulted in three deaths is a reminder that we cannot afford to ease up in our efforts.  I agree with Mr Ong that efforts to expand the coverage of the WSH Act to the six new sectors from 1st March should not come at the expense of the existing high-risk sectors.  That is certainly not MOM's intention, as evident from the measures implemented in recent months.  In July last year, MOM introduced a compulsory worker safety and well-being test for workers in the marine and construction industries.  The test ensures that our workers understand their safety responsibilities, and can identify workplace hazards.  In January this year, we also enacted the WSH (Construction) Regulations, which require all worksites to have an adequate safety management system and all construction supervisors to receive safety training.

     Mr Heng Chee How has also asked about the safety of transporting workers to and from workplaces. A Work Group, which would be co-chaired by the Land Transport Authority (or LTA) and MOM, will be formed to review the safety of workers transported on lorries.

12.30 pm

     Mr Heng Chee How was also concerned that the competitive tender-bidding process

may result in safety standards being compromised by some construction companies.  As Mr Heng has correctly observed, for any WSH improvements to be sustainable, there must be industry ownership of safety outcomes.  It is in this context that the WSH Advisory Committee launched the Construction Safety Audit Scoring System (CONSASS) last November to make safety an integral part of business.  While it is a voluntary system, CONSASS has received widespread support from both developers and contractors. This will help foster a stronger WSH culture in the construction industry.

     Sir, I will now turn to the management of our foreign workers and the protection of their well-being. As mentioned by Ms Denise Phua, foreign workers play an important role in keeping Singapore competitive. As long as we have more jobs than locals can fill in, and some jobs that locals are not keen to take up, we will have many foreign workers in our midst.  This is inevitable for a small place like Singapore.  As a result, as observed by Mr Ong Ah Heng during the Budget debate, and Ms Phua yesterday, when Singaporeans see such workers congregating in HDB areas or other public spaces, they are concerned about the management of foreign workers.

     For foreign workers who commit public order offences or other offences like littering, Government agencies like the police and NEA have been actively taking enforcement action.  The feedback that Ms Phua has received from her residents is understandable.  Members of the public should report to the authorities if anyone or any group has broken the law or caused public disorder.  However, I would like to highlight that the vast majority of foreign workers in Singapore are law-abiding.  Statistics from the police show that foreign workers are no more likely to commit crimes than locals.

     The solution, therefore, cannot be to segregate foreign workers from areas where locals frequent. Indeed, we cannot completely keep them off our housing estates, because they are there.  Except for those in the construction and marine industries, work permit holders are in our midst in the housing estates.  Rather, we need to balance the housing and recreational needs of foreign workers with the concerns of Singaporeans.  And this will require Singaporeans to adopt and accept foreign workers within our society.  I applaud Ms Phua for recognising this and refusing to take a "not in my backyard" attitude.  We need to bring this message to the heartlands.

     I agree with Mr Ong and Ms Phua that this is a multi-faceted challenge that requires a whole-of-Government effort.  MOM, therefore, works closely with the relevant Ministries and Government agencies to identify and resolve the various issues concerning foreign workers.  For example, to address the shortage of proper accommodation for foreign workers, an inter-agency committee led by MOM and MND was set up in 2006 to increase the supply, as well as to coordinate enforcement efforts against errant employers for housing their workers in unacceptable accommodation.  I would like to assure Ms Phua and Mr Ong that MOM will continue to work closely with various Ministries and Government agencies to proactively monitor and address the housing and recreational needs of foreign workers, as well as the concerns of Singaporeans.

     Mr Ong Ah Heng has also expressed concern about employers who illegally deploy their foreign domestic workers (FDWs) to work in other premises and those who do not pay salaries to FDWs.  Under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, FDWs are only allowed to perform domestic duties at the residential address stated in their work permits.  Employers are also required to pay their FDWs monthly. Errant employers can be fined up to $5,000, and/or jailed up to six months, and barred from employing another FDW.

     MOM is committed to safeguarding the well-being of FDWs and treats such offences very seriously. Last year, MOM prosecuted 229 employers for the illegal deployment of FDWs.  During the same period, MOM helped to recover more than $270,000 in unpaid salaries for 276 FDWs.

     To complement the enforcement efforts, MOM has also implemented a series of educational measures, such as the mandatory Safety Awareness Course and a bi-annual FDW newsletter, to inform FDWs of their employment rights and the available channels for recourse.  In addition, we conduct random interviews with first-time FDWs during their initial months of employment to reiterate to them their employment rights, and determine if they have adjusted to their new work environment in Singapore.

     Sir, in conclusion, our efforts to nurture a competitive workforce must go hand in hand with efforts to build workplaces that facilitate optimal performance.  To maximise the potential of our workforce comprising both local and foreign manpower, our employment practices must be progressive, fair and equitable, based on an individual's merit and productivity.  At a more fundamental level, basic standards for employment as well as safety and health must be complied with.  The confluence of these factors will make Singapore a great place to work for both local and foreign workers.

          The Chairman:  We have time left.  Mdm Halimah.

     Mdm Halimah Yacob (Jurong): Sir, the number of cases involving foreign workers being swindled by agents has increased.  Are there any measures to help such abuses, which may require collaboration with the sending countries, because some of these problems have originated in the sending countries?  Are there any measures to deal with that?

     My second clarification, Sir, is with regard to the issue of discrimination against women and contract workers.  I would like to ask the MOM what is the progress and whether it is looking into reviewing the Employment Act with regard to two aspects.  The first aspect is the better protection for retrenched pregnant women who currently are not entitled to maternity benefits when they are retrenched, although they are obviously pregnant even in their ninth month of pregnancy.  The second aspect is whether MOM would review the Employment Act with regard to providing better protection for contract workers.  Right now, although they are protected by the Employment Act, the employer can truncate the contract in such a way that they will start from zero base every time, which affects their ability to earn the entitlement under the Act, whether it is for leave, sick leave or annual leave.

     Mr Hawazi Daipi: Sir, internally, we review the Employment Act from time to time.  With regard to part-time or contract work, we will look at the issues and, if necessary, we will review the Employment Act pertaining to that. 

     As to the Member's first question, it is a complex issue which involves agents in the sending countries.  As far as we are concerned, where we can manage local agents, we will do so.  In fact, in the case of foreign domestic workers, for employment agents, there are two accreditation bodies which look into standards.  The number of accredited members has increased and compliance has also improved.  In fact, I was told recently by the Association of Employment Agencies (Singapore) (AEAS) that they had actually deregistered the membership of some of their members who did not comply with their standards.  But in the case of cheating done in sending countries, it is outside our purview.

     Ms Sylvia Lim (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, two clarifications for Minister of State Mr Gan on the plans to re-employ workers between 62 and 65 years of age.  Earlier, he mentioned that the Ministry would actually allow employers to re-employ workers turning 62 at the same job but at a lower pay.  What is the justification for doing that, especially since the drawdown age for CPF monies is being moved to 65 and such a pay cut for the same job is hard to justify?

     The second clarification is: could he elaborate more on what are the enforcement mechanisms for the new re-employment law?  Does it have any teeth?  What recourse do workers have?

     Mr Gan Kim Yong: Sir, with regard to the first question why employees when they reach the retirement age of 62 and are re-employed, there will be adjustments to the salary, we have to take into account and look at this issue in perspective.  Because of the historical factors, many of our employees today are on a seniority-based wage structure.  They have been receiving annual increments for the last 30 or 40 years as they worked.  This seniority-based component in their salaries has made these employees uncompetitive, compared to the current employment scenario where some of the salaries are now based on performance.  So we want to encourage employers and employees to work together to find ways to adjust their salaries so that they reflect the value of the job, ability, contribution and productivity of the workers.  Because of this change in concept and approach, and our desire to move into a performance-based system, we would want to encourage both workers and employers to consult one another and work out a remuneration system that would better reflect job worth, and this may result in adjustments to their salary downwards, especially in the case where there is a very high component of seniority-based structure in the salary.

     With regard to the question of enforcement of the Re-employment Act that we are working on, at the moment we are still in the process of drawing up the re-employment legislation.  As I mentioned earlier, we are also in the process of preparing a set of guidelines on re-employment to help employers and employees work out their re-employment arrangement.  In the meantime, the tripartite partners have worked out a checklist which we will use to consult the industry to work with employers as well as the employees to understand better the operational issues involved in re-employment so that these issues can be incorporated into the Re-employment Bill when we present it to Parliament.  At that point in time, we will also consider what are the penalties or enforcement capacity that we need to incorporate in the Bill.  In the meantime, our focus is on how to encourage workers and employers to adopt re-employment even before re-employment legislation comes into effect by 2012.  So, this is the focus of our efforts currently.

     Dr Ahmad Mohd Magad (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Sir, I am deeply impressed with the chart displayed on the screen yesterday which plots our economic growth and job growth over the five-year period compared to several other countries.  Clearly, it takes the best brains and meticulous planning to achieve such a superlative performance.  Can I ask the Minister for Manpower to explain the extent of how well he thinks we can sustain this trend, going forward? 

     Secondly, how could we tweak our open-door foreign talent and foreign worker policies such that it has a more uniformed favourable impact on our society – professionals, PMETs, and especially our older and lower-income workers who seem not to have benefited proportionately from our economic growth efforts?

     The Minister for Manpower (Dr Ng Eng Hen): Firstly, let me thank Dr Ahmad Magad for putting it succinctly that the policies have worked. 

     But I would disagree with him that lower-wage workers and Singaporean PMETs have not benefited proportionately.  In fact, as I showed yesterday, they benefited the most.  If we look at the job creation for Singapore citizens, first of all, for PMETs, the number of job profile has changed compared to 10 years ago.  More Singaporeans are occupying higher grade jobs.  Even for low-wage workers, they have benefited.  Real incomes have gone up.  Employment for older workers has gone up.  Employment rates, as we showed today, have gone up.  So, if we look at the data, it tells us that this policy of cleverly using both our limited local manpower and allowing businesses foreign manpower when they need it, has benefited Singaporean workers across all occupations and grades.  This is why I said

yesterday, it is a very precious tool, we have to calibrate it, and we can show you some figures.  But we have to do it cleverly and I think the clever way of doing it was the Workfare Income Supplement. In other words, the market dictates a certain amount of wage rise.  The real wages even for the bottom 20% went up by 2%.  But Workfare and other transfers supplement that. So there are other measures without distorting the labour market and we can help address our low wage workers as well as our older workers.

12.45 pm

     Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): Sir, two clarifications.  One is with regard to the lower employment rate for older women.  Could I ask the Minister of State to clarify, for the 39% of jobs that the women are employed in, what kind of jobs are these?  I think that will give us an insight as we look at encouraging women to come back to the workforce.  What are the factors and the types of opportunities matching the skills base?

     The other clarification I would like to ask is with regard to WIS advance recovery.  I agree with the principle that it was advance payment.  However, WIS being a new scheme, and given the fact that this is the first payout and when the workers are looking at this, especially when we look at the segment of the workers that actually benefited from WIS, the understanding of the scheme may not have been as clear. So I would ask the Ministry to really consider, on the basis of goodwill for the first phase, the impact of the recovery because administratively it is also going to be fairly difficult, and we are talking about the lower income here.  The CPF component is another factor, but to recover cash is pretty difficult.  And, psychologically, I think the impact on that group, in terms of the motivation that we were talking about, getting people on WIS, may be higher than in terms of the disadvantages.

     So, I would like to ask the Ministry whether they can consider not recovering that particular payment, on goodwill, for this transition phase.

     Mr Gan Kim Yong: On the first question about women and employment, for the 39% that are employed, they are employed in quite a variety of jobs and women coming back to work face a number of challenges.  Some of them have to also balance the needs and demands of their homes.  That is why we introduced '30 minutes to work' to provide job opportunities within the vicinity of where they live, so that they will find it easier to go to work.  We also want to encourage some of the companies to offer flexible work arrangement so that these women can also find it easier to get back into the workforce. And we believe that once they start working, even on a flexible work arrangement or part-time, over time they will get used to it and they will be able to go on full-time employment as well.  I think it is important to get them to go back to work in a very flexible way and make it even more convenient for them to do so, and we will continue to do that.

     With regard to her second question, I have mentioned in my speech just now that for the CPF component, we will have to recover because that is in the CPF, and that is not an administrative problem. For the cash component, I have also explained that we would only recover when there is a future payment for WIS for this particular worker, which means that there will be a credit note or a debit note.  In the event that this worker is eligible for WIS in future, we will offset against future payments to him. So, there will also not be any administrative difficulty for him as well.

     Mr Siew Kum Hong (Nominated Member): Sir, I have two clarifications for the Minister, arising from of his comments yesterday. Firstly, the Minister mentioned that the unemployment rate for diploma holders is 3.4%.  This is actually 50% higher than the overall resident employment rate as at December 2007, which was 2.3%.  I would like to ask the Minister to clarify why this is so.  In particular, and I know that the Minister has addressed the issue of S-Pass holders, could these statistics be attributable to competition from the S-Pass holders?

     Secondly, the Minister touched on the drop in labour productivity last year where it decreased by 0.9%.  His explanation was that wages had gone up. I would actually like to ask the Minister to clarify just how increased wages affect productivity.  Because, as I understand it, labour productivity is the average output per unit of labour, which is not dependent on wages. Instead, it is unit labour cost that has been adversely affected by rising wages and decreasing productivity.  So I hope that the Minister can clarify this point, especially on the reasons why labour productivity dropped in 2007, and how we intend to arrest this worrying development.

          The Chairman: Can I again remind Members to make your clarifications short, so that we can take as many questions as we can?

     Dr Ng Eng Hen: Sir, on the first question of unemployment rate, there is a thing called frictional unemployment.  Within any given survey, various groups will be coming in and out of jobs.  So I will not take the 3% as something alarming.  It is quite common.  Most economies at various stages will have a certain level of unemployment.

     What is more important, really, is the employment rate, because the unemployment rate captures a number of things. You may be looking for a job and you have not found a job. I think the employment rate gives us more information because it just tells us how many people are working at any given point of time.  As we have shown, our employment rates are among the highest in the world for men.  Even for those 25 to 64 years, it is extremely high. I think that is a good measure that our labour market policies are working.

     When it comes to productivity, I did mention that it was also due to the fact that more were employed.  And exactly at this point last year, our unemployment rate grew, and I think this is something that NWC has to deliberate.

     How do we maintain productivity?  Yesterday, I spent quite some time expressing my response to certain points brought up my Mrs Josephine Teo and Mr Seng Han Thong, that this is indeed something that we have to work at to upgrade skills and processes, and get our companies to upgrade, our jobs recreated, to enhance productivity.

     Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Sir, I would like to thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his comprehensive reply, but allow me to ask about the flexi-work scheme.  I read in the papers yesterday that the hotels have started to employ people using this fund. I am just wondering whether the Government sector, including the restructured hospitals and the statutory boards, has introduced such schemes in the first place.

     My second clarification: based on the example that I quoted yesterday, instead of reducing the pay by 10%, could a flexi-work scheme be introduced as well, so that there is a 10% reduction in working hours too, which is more equitable.

     Mr Hawazi Daipi: We will encourage all sectors, including the Government sector, to implement the flexi-work scheme.  I do not have the information here.  What is the second question?

     Dr Lim Wee Kiak: For those who are reaching 60 or 62 years old, because they are taking a 10% pay cut, could such a system be like the flexi-work scheme, ie, instead of working 100%, they work 90%, so as to commensurate with the 10% pay cut?

     Mr Hawazi Daipi: Sir, duration of hours of work and pay are matters for the worker and employer to decide.  We will provide the guidelines on fair employment.  I think this is a journey.  TAFEP and the various agencies – Government, unions and employer federation – will continue to work closely.  We will get companies to buy in.  There have been good signs.  TAFEP has done a very good job on fair employment, and we have been encouraging companies to practise flexible work arrangements.  It is working, and we will have to make refinements from time to time.  In the meantime, we will try to solve some of the teething problems experienced by workers as well as employers on the ground.

     Ms Ellen Lee (Sembawang): Sir, two questions for the Senior Parliamentary Secretary.  What is MOM's policy regarding workplace sexual harassment, as it appears from SPS' reply that MOM is pushing the victim to seek any recourse under the Penal Code instead?  And, secondly, what is the mechanism that MOM has in place to track complaints lodged at MOM, particularly in relation to workplace sexual harassment, because MOM would be the first place for workers to turn to for help when this happens?

     Mr Hawazi Daipi: MOM need not necessarily be the first place workers turn to, but we will definitely look into complaints and reports made by workers.  We now have the TAFEP Centre which can look into the concerns of individual workers or feedback on the bigger picture.  Yes, there is already the Penal Code to protect women at workplaces.  If they have serious concern about sexual harassment, they can report to the Police if they feel very seriously about it.  And if they want it rectified at the workplaces, they can also work with the union, which will work with the management, if they are union members.  Very often, it is something that has to be dealt with at the personal level.  But where a complaint is lodged, we will investigate it and, if action is needed, we will take action.

     Ms Cham Hui Fong (Nominated Member): One clarification – would the Ministry review the Retirement Age Act?  There is a particular provision on a cut of up to 10% for worker reaching 60 years.  Currently, there are already sectors that  have significantly reduced the salary ratio, eg, the banks which have already moved to 1.5 and below.  These sectors have also moved into a performance-based system, because the rationale of having a 10%  cut was actually to address the seniority-based wage system then.

     Mr Gan Kim Yong: Sir, I think it is more important for us to look at re-employment where we allow flexibility for workers who have reached retirement to continue working and inject certain flexibility for wages and remuneration to be adjusted to reflect the worth of the job. For retirement age, at age 60, the wage adjustment that is in the retirement age is on the same basis that we provided this adjustment to the salary, so as to ensure that older workers will continue to be competitive, and mainly because of the historical seniority-based wage  system that is inherent in the current wage structure. But companies are free to continue to pay workers what they are and for workers who are productive and performing well, companies may even give them a raise and increase.

     So we want to make sure that the structure itself does not prohibit workers from continuing to work and the structure should not make older workers less competitive.  We want to ensure that the structure under even the Retirement Age Act continue to be flexible, and allow this adjustment to happen.  But if the workers are productive and can contribute to the companies, I think enlightened companies will see value in these older workers and will continue to find ways to retain these workers within the company.

     Mdm Halimah Yacob: I just want to seek a clarification on the clarification that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary gave to me on the swindling of foreign workers by agents, where he said that some of these countries are outside MOM's purview.  Could I ask the Ministry to be more proactive, such as working with ASEAN counterparts under the purview of ASEAN Charter, to ensure that the governments take more responsibility, especially when it comes to foreign workers coming from the sending ASEAN countries.  We now have a Charter, and I expect the Charter to be more proactive as well.

     I want to seek a second clarification from the Minister.  The labour market seems to be a lot more segmented because, last year, 237,000 jobs were created.  Despite that, segments of the workforce – the women and older workers – find it difficult to get jobs. Apart from the measures already mentioned, does the Ministry envisage any other measures from the policy perspective to address this tricky problem, because it is a problem that is not going to go away?  Even as more jobs are created, these two segments will continue to face obstacles.

     Dr Ng Eng Hen: Thank you to Mdm Halimah.  She is right, we need to work with other governments when it comes to problems that arise before they come here. We want to put pressure to bear, but we have to do it in a sensitive way and MOM regularly attends global forums like the IOM (or the International Organisation for Migration) recently held in Abu Dhabi where both sending and receiving countries talk about how to resolve this.  But there has to be a language, there has to be a comfort zone, so it will take time. She is right that it is a general direction that we want to reduce problems, because you really do not want to receive foreign workers who are at the same time saddled with debts. So it is something that we want to actively engage.

1.00 pm

     Mdm Halimah Yacob is also correct to say that this third group – women and low-wage workers, a point also raised by Dr Ahmad Magad – will continually be structurally vulnerable as we move up and as the economy restructures.  This is why we want to place great emphasis on our continuing education training infrastructure.

     Policy-wise, the reduction in CPF that we did for low-wage workers, but supplemented from Government through the Workfare Income Supplement, is a structural change.  And we are already seeing results, as we showed to Members.  For the older workers, it has gone up.  For the low-wage workers, real wages, even apart from Workfare Income Supplement, actually rose.  I think we want to watch it.  I like to remind Members of the House that we only started Workfare two months ago.  I think we should give it some time, see how it goes into the market.

     Actually, the largest group of untapped labour, in that sense, as the chart shows, is women.  But, to me, that is the hardest group, because these are women in their 40s and many of them have not been working for 10-20 years.  How do we upskill them?  I think it is a potential pool, but there are also challenges.  I think this is where we want to put resources and try to bring some of them back into the workforce, because that will help their household income.

     Er Lee Bee Wah (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, I would like to clarify with the Minister.  In view of the acute manpower shortage in the construction industry, will there be any relaxation on the employment of foreign workers and professionals?  Will there be a review on MYE and S-Pass requirements?

     Dr Ng Eng Hen: Sir, first, an observation.  Contrasting questions from this side of the House show the tension in the market place.  There are some who advocate that we tighten, and make it rigid, so that Singaporeans have an easier chance to find jobs.  But those who are running companies and those who are involved in business say, "relax so that businesses can grow".  And this will continue, I suspect, in this House for many years to come.

     MOM's job is to maintain a tightly tuned balance to make sure that our economy grows.  I think, as our results show last year, we sort of got the balance right.  But there will never be a point where Members of the House will say, "well done".  We always have to live with the tension.

     We have relaxed specifically for MYEs.  We said that there are certain construction workers who do not need MYEs who work here more than two years.  We have moved it from four years to two years; so that is a relaxation.  We have also relaxed the quota.  We will continue to watch and get signals from industry players.  We have industry sensing mechanisms, and calibrate it if and when we need it.  But the overall aspect is grow the economy, let businesses get the manpower they need, because that will generate jobs for Singaporeans at the same time.

     Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong (Tampines): Sir, I agree with the Minister that there is a very tight tension now, but the balance should tilt towards Singaporeans.  As mentioned by some of the Members earlier, our older workers, especially the low skilled, find that it is very hard to compete against foreign workers, who work longer hours at cheaper rates.  Even at my MPS recently, there was a man in his late 60s wanting a job as a coffeeshop assistant, but he found that the job went to a China worker who is willing to work 12 hours for $900, whereas he was hoping to work seven hours for $1,200, which is what he needed to support his family.  Can I ask the Minister: what assurance can he give to Singaporeans, especially the older ones, who feel that it is an uphill battle, an almost impossible task, to compete with foreign workers who are cheaper.

     On the flip side, can I ask the Minister to also guard against the exploitation of foreign workers, because we see many of them exhausted, sleeping at corridors, and they work long hours at cheap rates?  Can I ask the Minister to also take care that, because of the exploitation of foreign workers, our own workers cannot compete with them?

     Dr Ng Eng Hen: Sir, I thank Ms Irene Ng for her observation, which I would say, give hope to those who feel that they cannot compete.  And indeed our figures show that the employment rate has increased overall.  So more of even those who were structurally at risk and who were vulnerable have found jobs.  That is a good sign that our policies are working right. If the number of people working in Singapore as a result of allowing foreign workers to work here has dropped, I think we worry.  But it has grown as the economy has grown.  And it has produced more jobs, as I showed yesterday, than other economies that have employed exactly these policies by trying to make the labour market very rigid.

     Exploitation of foreign workers, yes, it is something that we watch over.  Our basic strategy is to explain to the foreign workers their rights, and to take enforcement issues where we can.  And it will help if we can communicate and create channels for them to be able to have access to inform the right agencies in their languages, and we are working at that.  But this is something that we also want to watch, because I agree with the Member that if they are overworked, they can have safety lapses, they can have physical aspects.  We also want to make sure that the foreign workers are well treated and their well-being is guarded.

     Dr Ahmad Mohd Magad: Sir, looking at this chart, which was also flashed on the screen yesterday, I can still vividly remember that when we were at this point in 2001 how bleak things were then.  And to achieve the phenomenal progress that we have accomplished over the 5-6 years to where we were in 2006 and where we are today is certainly no mean feat.  So, for this, I really would like to congratulate the Minister for Manpower and his team for the sterling performance, especially in creating an unprecedented number of jobs for Singaporeans.  Most of everything else is academic if there are insufficient jobs for Singaporeans.  I would like to thank the Minister, Minister of State Gan and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Hawazi for their comprehensive and detailed responses and clear explanations to the multitude of issues raised.

     I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

     The sum of $687,107,400 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

     The sum of $37,738,300 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

     Head I – Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports

          The Chairman: Head I - Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports.  Mr Sin Boon Ann.

The Widening Income Gap, Inflation and Social Cohesion

     Mr Sin Boon Ann (Tampines): Sir, I beg to move,

     That the total sum to be allocated for Head I of the Estimates be reduced by $100.

     Sir, last year, in the Committee of Supply, the debate on public assistance prompted the Minister to ask, "How much is enough?"  The response raises rather deep questions on how we should continue to help Singaporeans cope, as the country powers along on the back of a strong and performing economy.

     Looking at this year's Budget, it would be difficult to fault the Government as being niggardly in its handouts to Singaporeans.  We note the Growth Dividends, the income tax rebates, and the Medisave top-ups, to mention a few.   This is over and above the other measures that were announced earlier, such as Workfare and Hope schemes.  And I do applaud the Government for adopting the principle of sharing the fruits of success with the people.

     Sure, there are many in this House and those outside who question whether the Government could have been more generous in giving back to the people.  No matter how much the Government has given or promised to give, not everyone will be satisfied.  There is a constant clamour for the Government to give more, even if the Government has given out $1.6 billion of the surplus, even if up to the 40th percentile of households are going to get more from the Government than they are paying to the Government, and even if the 2-room retiree households will get $3,100 in benefits from this year's surplus sharing package.

     Yet many people are still unhappy.  Unhappy with the steep increases in the cost of living, with having to pay more for almost everything from transport charges, school fees, and medical fees if means testing is fully in place.  This is no doubt aggravated by the fact that the Gini coefficient is expected to be higher, meaning a growing income gap between the rich and the poor in Singapore.

     It does not help that the visible signs of wealth among those in Singapore with plenty of cash to flaunt are fairly prevalent here.  Singapore is about one of the few places in the world where there is such a high concentration of premium continental cars.

     Such visibly open and naked display of wealth can only help to breed deep resentments among the majority of Singaporeans.  For many, the lifestyle of the rich and famous in Singapore can only be the substance of their dreams and never a reality.  The resentment runs deeper where there are pressures that come out of having to cope with the escalating cost of living.  How do we begin to tell that fellow Singaporean that the future will continue to look bright when he cannot see himself as ever being in a position to join the ranks of the rich in our society?  For many Singaporeans who barely make $24,000 a year, the idea of earning more than a million annually is just mind blowing.

     The unhappiness among many Singaporeans, Sir, is not one that can be solved by generous hand-outs alone.  We have often heard that what has been given is soon forgotten.  Soon people will be asking for what is next that the Government can give them.  Giving is the opiate of society.  The more you give, the more will be asked.  Giving generously tends to breed a dependency and a rights mentality that places increasing and increasingly unreasonable demands on the Government over time.

     Sir, we have often heard of the difference between giving a person fish and teaching him to fish.  There is a difference between consumption and investment.  Our approach towards helping the poorer and more needy Singaporeans should be likewise.  Giving Singaporeans cash hand-outs and rebates across the board may not be the most effective way to use our resources to strengthen social cohesion.  We should instead set aside more resources to provide a more holistic approach in helping needy Singaporeans to bridge the social divide.  I would like to suggest three approaches.

     First, we should strengthen our community-based organisations, such as the Family Service Centres, CDCs and the grassroots organisations to provide better integrated and coordinated assistance on a case management basis.  Currently, needy families who approach these organisations are dealt with on a symptomatic basis.  Unfortunately, for many of these families, there are root causes that have to be dealt with if their difficulties are to be resolved.  In this regard, case ownership and information sharing between the various agencies would assist greatly.  The Minister could perhaps let us know how much of this is possible currently.

     Secondly, what is important to us, as a nation, is that the underclass must never have the complete resignation and despair with our society and feel totally disenfranchised from it.  There must be the feeling that social mobility still exists within our society.  Creating a sense of hope and mobility gives many Singaporeans the drive and the aspirations to better themselves and helps to reduce the amount of resentment against those who have done well in present circumstances, because one day they hope to be like them too.  In this regard, channelling more resources into training and ensuring that children from disadvantaged background are given every opportunity to pursue an excellent education must continue to be a key pillar in our policy landscape.

     Thirdly, fostering a culture of care and share between the rich and the poor and championing values of thrift and frugality should continue to be the focus of our efforts at community bonding. Much has been said in recent years to encourage and promote philanthropy.  While it is good that people should now be encouraged to give more, it would be even better if those who are well-to-do could be seen working within the community.  The Government should continue to promote and encourage active participation in community work by those who are well-to-do and to make a virtue of modest living and less than ostentatious lifestyle.  It would therefore help if the Minister could enlighten this House on whether such steps are being taken.

Social Assistance

     Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Sir, first, I would like to point out that I am not here to ask for more money.

     The amount of financial assistance that MCYS has been extending to needy Singaporeans who need help has grown significantly over the years.  I would like to thank the Minister for heeding the calls of several Members in this House, myself included, in increasing the Public Assistance (PA) allowance.  It is a significant and most welcome increase.

     Sir, I must say that in my ward, I do not have that many residents on PA.  Beyond the allowances they receive, they also get additional help from other sources.  Our CCCs and our RCs help too.  For the RCs, in particular, they will pay regular visits to them as well and, from time to time, we give them some food provisions.

     As we know, the criteria for Public Assistance are very stringent.  Sir, I am speaking for some 3,000, not a very large number, especially measured against the larger policy issues the Budget addresses.  Nonetheless, it is a measure of our society that we spend time and attention to care for the very poor and the most vulnerable, as well as for big businesses and high net worth individuals.

     Is the increased amount enough?  The Minister has said that his officers have conducted an exercise which shows that one can eat very well on a little more than $90 a month.  The Ministry has provided to these 3,000-odd PA recipients some very good news recently. It is a result of the review that the Ministry has conducted.  As a result, I hope that the Ministry can institute a mechanism where PA allowances are reviewed on a systematic and regular basis.

1.15 pm

     If the CPI is not a good proxy, perhaps it can be tied to some basket of goods. If food is the main item of expenditure, then it could be tied to that. Alternatively, a survey could be done on the spending of PA recipients to find out the base cost, and then the inflation rate of these items and future increases can be tied to this rate.

     Whatever formula determined by the Ministry as appropriate, I would like for it be reviewed regularly, and for it to be made public.

     Mdm Halimah Yacob: Sir, I urge the MCYS to review its financial assistance scheme in two areas: first, the $1,500 income ceiling for social assistance is too low, and excludes needy families who need help. With rising costs of living and sandwiched between caring for their own children and elderly parents, they really struggle. Yes, exceptions can be made but this is case-by-case and lacks the certainty of knowing that you are eligible to get help in the first place. Therefore, I urge MCYS to raise the cap and to put in place a system to review the amount yearly.

     Second, the current scheme provides for long-term assistance through the PA, which is very stringent, as there are only 3,000 cases now. All the other schemes are short term and recipients have to re-apply every three months. This is onerous and cumbersome. I urge the MCYS to review this and provide for financial assistance of a much longer period, as some of the problems faced by families take a longer time to resolve.

Housing Need

     Mr Wee Siew Kim (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, it is an irony that in a developed and prosperous Singapore, we still see homeless people around us. For one reason or another, there are still some who cannot manage to get a roof over their heads.  Some simply cannot afford as market rental costs have increased substantially in the last year. Others are not eligible for HDB rental flats because they do not meet the qualifying criteria. Whatever the reason, with no other means or avenues of help, they end up living in HDB void decks, underground passes, beaches and even the airport. Additionally, without an address and a place to call home, many may not be able to take advantage of the many job opportunities that are being created. In reality, a roof comes first.

     As such, I hope that the Ministry could extend greater help to such distressed individuals and families before they reach such a stage of deprivation. I understand that the Ministry spearheaded a pilot project, New Hope Shelter for Displaced Families, which provides temporary shelter for homeless families last June. They are accommodated temporarily for a few months until they find alternative lodgings or a more permanent arrangement. Could the Minister give us an update on:

     (a) number of families who have been helped by this project;

     (b) number of families who have managed to get back on their feet and moved on;

     (c) profiles of such families and their average length of stay.

     From what I read, I believe it is a scheme worth developing further. From the experience of this pilot scheme, we could learn and improve on what can be instituted as an avenue where such distressed individuals and families can turn to for help and hope.

     In our pragmatic approach to solving problems, there is always the concern that help schemes may be abused. However, let that not stand in the way of providing immediate temporary accommodation, to take homeless people off the streets and help put them on the road to economic independence and self-sustenance. Often times, with such distressed cases, there is no time to do a thorough assessment. Let us give the benefit of the doubt first. House them first and if they are later discovered to have abused and unfairly or dishonestly taken advantage of the system, then they should be penalised.

Developing the People Sector Beyond Social Safety Net

     Mr Zaqy Mohamad (Hong Kah): Mr Chairman, I am heartened that MCYS has increased public assistance as well as the budget for Comcare and Medifund to strengthen the social safety net.

     I would like to bring the focus from the bottom 10% to those just above this line – the 20-30 percentile group. These are people who are likely to be in the lower-middle or 'sandwiched' class. My concern is that many bursaries and low-income assistance are too closely pegged to the Government safety nets, and the stringent qualification that is being used for PA and assistance schemes such as Comcare and Medifund get replicated into welfare schemes and bursaries the other 'helping hands' provide such as  VWOs, especially those that are funded by MCYS.

     So, I understand and agree with MCYS' principle that the Government's welfare schemes have to be low on entitlement and high in flexibility. But if we do not have sufficient 'helping hands' across the spectrum, particularly reaching the 'grey areas' at the lower-middle and sandwiched class segment, then our whole social assistance scheme framework will seem very rigid.

     There is always a tension when we talk about where the Government's role starts and where social responsibility of the community needs to play a more active role. And I think more can be undertaken by the people sector to help those in the area just above the safety net criteria – to provide the flexibility and assistance needed and for a variety of interests.

     Late last year, when Dover Park Hospice opted out of Medifund because they felt that the Government's Medifund scheme was too stringent in its criteria, I was especially heartened. I wish that there would be more to step forward, to be more flexible in their approach, to render greater assistance beyond the Government's safety nets.

     Therefore, I urge that the MCYS need to finance and cultivate the people sector better so that the entire social assistance framework can be more effective and flexible by spreading our resources over a wider spectrum and help base, and not just focused on the 'Government-standard' low income criteria.

     To do this, the people sector also needs to develop innovative and effective social programmes. However, such talents are not easy to obtain in the people sector, because it is difficult to pay well, especially with public scrutiny.

      Many qualified social workers decide to undertake other careers, some perform counselling work in the Government sector, such as MOE, while others decide to take different career paths. To illustrate my point, there is a salary difference between working as a social worker in the VWO and being a counsellor in a school under MOE. Most prefer the latter because it pays better. And we also tend to forget the executives and administrators who support them.

     So the Government also should help by increasing support to the running costs of IPCs and accredited VWOs. The public also needs to be educated that good management and staff are needed to deliver good programmes, particularly programmes which address the needs of the sandwiched class and disadvantaged because without good talents, we only get more of the same and low income type schemes and subsidies.

Policy Matter

     Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar): Sir, may I urge MCYS to better provide the safety net for our poorest population, numbering some 90,000 to 100,000 households, who still earn around $160 per month per capita, the equivalent of around $640 a month for a family of four. Could MCYS be more pro-active and prioritise this group, especially their children? Could they be given a household comprehensive package based on human capital development as a family to achieve upward mobility?

     How does MCYS ensure that families in need do not fall through the cracks despite the existence of varied assistance schemes? Could MCYS fine-tune our present social services by revamping the delivery aspects? Could MCYS provide more social workers and assign them for hands-on approach to take charge of families in need, to match them with the assistance they require to get out of the poverty trap. These families are also required to be followed up continuously for better outcome. There is a need to have inter-ministry cooperation, especially with MOM, for job opportunities and upgrading, and MOE to ensure that these children get the extra assistance in education. And I would like to echo Straits Times' writer Chua Lee Hoong's suggestion when she wrote in ST last week: "Political will and the need for a lead agency to champion this multi-faceted problem".

Social Enterprises

     Mr Sin Boon Ann: Sir, in the late 2007, the Social Enterprise Committee headed by Mr Philip Yeo published a report on ways to grow the social enterprise sector and to encourage social entrepreneurship in Singapore.

     This is a milestone report and I must congratulate Mr Yeo and his committee for the work well done. The coverage has been comprehensive and covers the three broad areas:

     (a) encouraging socially responsible enterprises;

     (b) building pro-social enterprise environment; and

     (c) creating a culture of social entrepreneurship.

     Some of the key thrusts and suggestions include, for instance, getting both the private and the public sectors to demonstrate greater social responsibility by seeking to hire more of the physically disadvantaged and needy Singaporeans and enabling them with the capacity for work by providing them with adequate training and to redesign the job scope and the physical environment where necessary to accommodate them. Besides promoting social responsibility, the report of the committee also seeks to encourage greater funding options for social enterprises and to provide a supporting framework through the establishment of an association and a centre that will serve as a resource base for social entrepreneurs.

     Minister Vivian Balakrishnan accepted the report, recognising that social enterprises and socially responsible companies can play a role in helping the needy and those from dysfunctional families to be self reliant.

     And, indeed, I am glad to note that while the ideas of social entrepreneurship and promoting socially responsible companies are relatively recent ideas, the Government was quick to recognise the potential of such undertakings and its impact on the wider community. The acceptance of the report by the Government and the study of the ways to implement them is indeed an exciting time for those, including myself, who believe in the big potential of social enterprises in helping the poor and needy achieve self reliance.

     Minister Vivian Balakrishnan has also said in his response to the Report that he will be announcing the ways in which the Government will be implementing the recommendations of the committee. And I would therefore appreciate it if the Minister is able to give his response today, if possible, and in particular, I would like to hear from the Minister whether the Government intends to "let a thousand flowers bloom" by actively promoting such initiatives and educating the public at the grassroots; whether the Government intends to review the regulatory environment and form of business organisational vehicles; whether it would be in the form of cooperatives or otherwise, and to make it easier for social entrepreneurs and the community to start social enterprises; and also whether the Government intends to give further tax incentives to encourage the adoption of more socially responsible initiatives by the private sector.

     Miss Penny Low (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Sir, I would like to add on to the chorus on social enterprise, obviously, and  would like to declare my interest.

     I start with a quote from Bill Gates, the former Chairman of Microsoft, who said, "We need a creative capitalism where business and non-governmental organisations can come together to create a market system," a market system, I repeat, "that eases the world's inequities." The challenge is to design a system where market initiatives, market incentives, including profits and recognitions, drive the change.

     Sir, social entrepreneurs ask innovators who create value by addressing market failures and elevating current and potential social issues whether due to demographic or economic trends. In addition, due to its grassroots and bottom-up nature, social entrepreneurs are a great social and economic leveller and should be perceived as a treasured partner of both the public and the private sectors.

     How can the Government show clear signals  and help boost the development of social entrepreneurs in Singapore? I would like to ask the Minister for an update on the social entrepreneur development in Singapore to further define the role of Government in the promotion of the SE industry, including:

     (a) leveraging on private and public resources;

     (b) testing and developing solutions;

     (c) seeding social innovation and R&D;

     (d) creating and enabling an overall environment;

     (e) rewarding initiatives;

     (f) scaling initiatives;

     (g) producing knowledge that enhances the SE efforts; and

     (h) how can cooperatives also play a role in promoting and shaping the SE sector and vice-versa.

     The rest of it, I will attempt to speak in Mandarin.

     (In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] Laissez-faire economy or socialism?  Which is better?  Obviously, the laissez-faire approach will win.  This is so because laissez-faire economy offers efficiency, opportunities and innovation.  However, the laissez-faire system does not guarantee that enterprises will gain from business opportunities and profits.  Rather, it is the presence of tax and legal infrastructure, banking and bankruptcy laws, financial regulations and institutions, that offer enterprises a thriving ecosystem. 

     Pure capitalism however, leaves gaps in certain sectors – for example, healthcare, education and ageing population problem.  Many statistics bear out this social phenomenon of inequality.  If left untackled, it will further widen the gap between the rich and poor.  Social inequity can result from many causes, but a common consequence is that some people have good jobs while others do not, leading to an income gap.  Some may say that this is due to personal or genetic disability, but it could be argued that we have not learnt to make full use of the market economy to develop everyone’s potential to the fullest.

     Therefore, I would like to propose that bold efforts be put into developing social enterprises that use market-based solutions for solving social challenges, including innovative job creation for the less abled. However, social enterprise is a relatively new concept, and our legal and financial infrastructure has yet to keep up with it.  For example, currently, under the tax legislation, organisations are largely classified into two groups: tax-paying for-profit enterprises and non tax-paying charitable organisations that deliver social goods.  Social enterprises fit into neither category.  Social enterprises are hybrids with double bottomlines, often having limited economic profit but deliver maximum social goods.  However, without a reasonable regulatory infrastructure and ecosystem, social enterprises will not be able to maximise its potential for social good.

     Therefore, I hope that our Government will develop an enabling regulatory infrastructure and ecosystem, encourage the development of double bottomlines  industry, and attract capital into social enterprises.  In so doing, we can contribute to Singapore’s growth, prosperity and social harmony.

Importance of Families

     Mr Ong Ah Heng (Nee Soon Central): (In Mandarin ):[For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *.] Sir, I grew up in a family with many members and extended families living together under one roof.  Living in the kampung, we foster family relationship and cohesion through having meals and working together, and the children play games and catch longkang fishes along the drains and canals.  Through such activities, we foster family relationship.  But such big family structure is very rare today.

     The scenario now is very different due to socio-economic changes.  Let me share with you a teenager's experience at the “Father and son bonding programme”.  The aim of this exercise was to help the child appreciate the hard work and effort of the father.  However, the son, when asked and approached by the organiser, said that he did not feel anything for his father because he was never at home.  The father was taken aback after listening to what the child said.  Because all this while, he thought that he has struggled and do all that he can for the family.  But the truth is not so.  Therefore, this example illustrates the importance of family bonding. Just as it takes two hands to clap, it involves the effort of all family members to stay united.

     Given the changing social family structure, we thus need innovation, more efforts as well as resources to bond our families.  This year, I support the move that was initiated earlier in encouraging fathers to send their children to school on their first day.  More such programmes should be organised, for instance, family packages for visits to local places of interest, especially for those that are from the lower income.  These activities include visits to the Night Safari.  However, the expense of incurring the entrance fee of $32 per ticket and transport fee is not affordable to them.  Therefore, I would like to urge MCYS to explore more of such activities and provide more of such programmes.

Childcare

     Assoc. Prof. Kalyani K Mehta (Nominated Member): Sir, in recent years, there has been a mushrooming of childcare centres in Singapore.  According to the MCYS' website, there are currently 743 childcare centres or CCCs that are licensed.  The Child Care Centres Act makes it compulsory for childcare centres to obtain licensing from MCYS. This is indeed a lucrative and important industry in Singapore.  The MCYS is responsible for licensing, monitoring and lending support to CCCs in Singapore.  The MCYS' website assists a potential client, for example, a parent seeking a childcare centre by prompting for the geographical location desired, price range, menu and services required.  MCYS does not get involved in guiding a parent but advises that the parent visit the childcare centre and evaluate first hand the quality and suitability of the CCC for the child concerned.

     An individual who wants to establish a childcare centre is assisted online with information such as the CCC must observe the childcare regulations and provide information to MCYS through the childcare link.  In this way, MCYS receives regular update of the services and other important factors, such as hygiene, staff-child ratio, etc.  A licence is provided for a period of minimum 12 months and maximum 24 months.  A licence must be renewed before the tenure of the licence expires.  There are regulations relating to staff such as the Centre Director must be having a Diploma in Pre-school Education, 70% of the staff have to be trained, and about half must have certificates in pre-school teaching.

     From the customer's or parent's perspective, what would he or she like to know?  By visiting the CCC once or talking to the staff or even knowing about the CCC by word of mouth is not sufficient for the young parents of today.  What they would like to know is reviews from past parents.  In the USA, a potential parent can go to a State subsidised website maintained by a not-for-profit agency and find out all about the childcare centres in the constituency.  For example, the Community Child Care Coordinating Council, Alameda has been in existence since 1972.  It has been providing services to potential parents seeking family care or childcare as well as existing childcare providers with technical assistance and low cost training.  The complaints of parents lodged within the last two to three years are available by phoning in the CCC and, in this way, the parent has additional information.

     When we have such a large expatriate population in Singapore, this source of information would be very valuable to them, apart from the local clientele.  An additional significant benefit from such a source of information is that the quality of the CCC will be publicly available.  It will incentivise CCCs to provide better service and centre supervisors to be on their toes for any parent's queries.  On the other hand, good quality childcare can be recognised and this provides a role model for the rest.

     I would urge MCYS to consider providing such a channel of information to the public.  Both the praises or the complaints made by parents can be anonymous on the website and updated maybe every three months. Just as the public is keen to have transparency in the healthcare sector, and the MOH has done something about this, MCYS could practise a similar gesture to meet the needs of educated parents.  Needless to say, the final decision as to where the child is placed is always the parents' decision.  I would like to ask the Minister for MCYS whether he has plans to improve the current system of monitoring by a distance.  I am told that there are only two times that the childcare centre is visited, one if a parent makes a complaint; and two, when the childcare centre's licence needs renewal.

     Currently, the CCCs vary widely.  And from my conversation with childcare teachers, the quality depends largely on the childcare manager.  My suggestion is an effective and economical way to keep CCCs motivated and to provide child-centric and professional service.

     Mr Yeo Guat Kwang (Aljunied): (In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] Sir, human capital is an important growth engine for the development of our country.  In order to ensure the continuous prosperity of our country, apart from economic restructuring, we need to invest heavily in our future generation, which means to strengthen the education investment.  We have a lot of foreign maids and their pay is less than $300 per month.  Whereas sending your child to the childcare centre will cost more than an average $560.  What is MCYS view on this? Is there any difference between sending our children to the childcare centre or leaving them to our maid?  In this regard, can MCYS coordinate with MOE to include all pre-school education into the mainstream education system.

     For those non-profit making childcare centres, for example, NTUC Childcare Centre, the Government should provide grants to help them to defray their operating cost and to reduce the school fees so as to improve the quality and strengthen our manpower resources.

     (In English ):  Sir, we see MOE's expenditure for primary school children has increased by 69% over the last 12 years.  MOE has also extended its annual recurrent grant from year 2002 to help non-profit kindergartens to meet childcare teachers' qualification.  So for the childcare industry, the non-profit childcare operators are also expected to meet similar requirements.  However, there is no Government grant to help them.

     As such, I urge MCYS to increase the amount of the childcare subsidies extended to parents and also, at the same time, extend the grant to childcare operators, particularly the non-profit childcare operators, to defray the building and operation costs.  Working parents who wish to give their children a good headstart in life, should not have to be deterred from doing so because of the affordability issue.

Youth at Risk

     The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman): Sir, one important aspect of working with youth at risk is the identification of the target group, that is, who is actually at risk and at risk of what – delinquency, premature school leaving, anti-social behaviour, offending or reoffending.

    Unless we are clear of what we hope to achieve, we will constantly be asking why we are still talking about youth at risk after all these years.  Many programmes have been implemented – Streetwise, Guidance, STEP-UP, etc.  But what is MCYS' assessment of the effectiveness of these programmes?  Has systematic evaluation of these programmes been conducted?  And what are these results?  For youths who do not show positive outcomes, what are the subsequent paths for them that have been laid by MCYS? 

     Sir, the above programmes have been around for many years and they are aimed at youth at risk for getting involved in crime and delinquency.  One wonders who do we explain the over 4,000 youths arrested every year, over 1,200 teen girls going for abortions every year.  The question that arises then is whether these youths fell through the cracks and did not receive the preventive intervention programmes mentioned above or whether these programmes were not effective enough to achieve the desired outcome of preventing such behaviour.  Has MCYS studied this issue and assessed where are the gaps in service delivery in reaching out to these youth at risk?

     Sir, while we often look at the youth at risk to prevent them from committing crime and delinquency, we must also look at those who are already involved and work towards preventing further crime and delinquency.  In this regard, what is the current success rate of rehabilitation programmes such as probation service and programmes in custodial homes, institutions like the Boys' and Girls' Homes.  There is also a group of homes run by VWOs.  What is the effectiveness of the programme in these homes?  What are the recidivism rates of youths who have undergone the programmes in these homes?  What are the KPIs set by MCYS and whether they have been very effective?

Juvenile Homes

     Ms Sylvia Lim: Young offenders reside at the Singapore Boys' Home or Girls' Home when the Juvenile Court thinks that they need to be removed from the community in order to be rehabilitated.  But how successful have these homes been in helping our youngsters turn over a new leaf, or have we inadvertently made things worse?

     According to Ministry data, the rate of recidivism or those who reoffended within two years of release rose from 23% for those released in 2000 to between 25% and 30% in subsequent years.  Recently, the Minister gave a written answer that for the cohorts released in 2003 and 2004, the rate was 38.5%.  In the Budget estimates, the actual recidivism rate in FY06 was a peak of 48%.  What are the reasons for the sharp upward trend?

     Regarding the Boys' Home, about a year ago, Dr Carol Balhetchet of the Singapore Children's Society noted that there would always be boys who emerged from the home even more aggressive and would have "contaminated" others too.  She noted that boys she counselled did not fear going to the Boys' Home.  So the boys released from the home told the press that the disciplinary regime was too lax.

     I note that MCYS is increasing its expenditure on the purchase of additional security services to reforce the supervision and security in MCYS' Homes.  Is this a recognition that the homes are too lax?

Dysfunctional Families

     Mr Sin Boon Ann: Sir, the family unit is an important cornerstone of our society.  What we are and who we are is very much determined by the upbringing we get as children and young adults.  Conventional wisdom believes that having strong and stable families would provide the right environment to bring up better adjusted children who are emotionally stable and who in turn can contribute to an orderly society. 

     Unfortunately, for many, including those in my generation, starting a family and being able to keep the family unit strong is very much of an experiment; an exercise of learning by trial and error.  Certainly, when I started my family, it was based on my own experience with my parents and my wife's parents.  And with the changing values that come with the changing times, we had to adapt as we went along.  Surely, there were classes and books that existed.  However, we never felt a compelling reason to read up or attend classes on starting a family because there was very little expectation to go for any formal training during my time.

My wife and I tried various methods on our three children and, after close to 20 years, I am grateful to say that my three children are reasonably well adjusted and I have a wife who still stands by me today.  I am sure, however, if both my wife and I had more formalised exposures to parenting and acquired a better understanding of family dynamics, we could have been spared the trial and errors and the risk of failures as parents.

1.45 pm

     Not everyone has been as fortunate as we have been in building a successful family unit.  There are many out there who, for one reason or another, have been unsuccessful and the family has become highly dysfunctional, resulting in divorces.  From our MPS sessions, we can appreciate that, for many of these families, the situation at home can be highly tense and stressful.  The root causes can come from a variety of sources, such as financial, physical, illegitimate relationships, drug abuse and early marriages.  When a family is broken, it is sadly the children who suffer.  It cannot be denied that, for these children, it is their very own experience that will leave an indelible mark in them; oftentimes, leaving them emotionally scarred.

     Help for these dysfunctional families often come from many fronts - financial, counselling and job placements, to name a few.  Unfortunately, by the time help is extended, it is often rather late in the day and usually limited to temporary relief.  One, therefore, often asks whether more could have been done to save the day for these families.  I would, therefore, be grateful if the Minister could respond to the following questions:

     (1)  Does the Government feel that it has done enough to prepare Singaporeans for marriage and to raise a family?

     (2)  Is there not more that could be done by way of early detection and counselling to minimise or reduce the risk of families becoming dysfunctional, such as better coordination between the various agencies assisting the family concerned;  and

     (3)  What more can be done to help dysfunctional families, particularly children of these families, to cope in their situations?

     Dr Ahmad Mohd Magad: (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] The issue of dysfunctional families is becoming an increasing concern to the community.  These families usually involve divorced couples, single parents or children involved in negative activities.  The issue of dysfunctional families must be controlled, as it can affect the community's progress. 

     One main way is to encourage women, especially single mothers, to work and to be independent.  I hope the Government will think of ways as to how we can encourage companies to establish a more flexible work system for women, especially single mothers.  Besides medium and large enterprises, another system can also be introduced in every HDB estate where grassroots organisations, or the CDCs, can link up with stalls and service providers to offer job vacancies to mothers who are seeking part-time work.  I hope the Government will consider these ideas and look for ways to give incentives for its implementation.

     Apart from that, more efforts should be done to help single mothers who are suffering because their ex-husbands neglect their responsibilities and do not pay maintenance to their children.  Some are unsure of their rights and do not realise that they can bring their cases to court.  I hope public education and awareness efforts can be increased in this regard.  Social workers and counsellors must also make the single mothers aware that they should not let their ex-husbands ignore their responsibilities to their children.

     Sir, some of these divorcees then start new families.  Although there is nothing wrong with this, the newly-married divorcees are not prepared emotionally, mentally and financially and this can bring about new problems when they remarry. 

     The situation is worsened if it involves a low-income man who is unable to pay maintenance for the children from his previous marriage.  Then the man remarries another divorcee with children, or a single woman, and they start a new family.  From one dysfunctional family, this low-income man might then start another dysfunctional family. 

     Media reports say that the rate of remarriages, ie, second marriages, and so on, is higher among the Malay community a few years ago.  It is the same for the rate of re-divorce.  Does the Ministry have the latest figures? 

     Today, Malay couples who want to remarry must attend a two-day course.  I feel this is enough for couples who are emotionally, mentally and financially prepared.  However, I propose that the counselling and mentoring process be extended to three groups, namely:

      (1)  Couples where one partner has divorced at least twice;

      (2)  Couples where the man does not have the financial means to start a new family; and

      (3)  Couples where the man has neglected the responsibility to his children from his former family by not paying maintenance.

      A more advanced mentoring course that is more detailed, and maybe tailored for such couples, must be made.  Without this measure, the problem of dysfunctional families can worsen. 

   A media report in 2003 said that three out of four re-divorces or serial divorces involved unemployed men or women, or those with salaries less than $500 a month. 

     Must such individuals be allowed to remarry when they obviously do not have the financial means to start a new family? 

     In this matter, can ROMM delay marriages for such couples for the time being?  These couples can be required to attend advanced counselling and mentoring courses, and be given job matching services.  After they have shown the capacity to be self-sufficient, they can proceed with their marriage plans.

     Mr Zainudin Nordin (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Sir, families, as the basic social institution in the community, play a pivotal role in contributing to raising healthy responsible members of society.  Family breakdown and the social isolation of some families contribute to social problems in many communities.  The fragmentation of family life and the emergence of a higher number of dysfunctional families are all too often the symptoms of a deteriorating society. 

     Sir, in a secure nurturing home environment and healthy family life, the individual can naturally develop his or her sense of self-worth, belonging and sharing, can develop self-control, tolerance and a sense of morality and, not least in importance, cultivate feelings of affection and willingness to sacrifice for others.  Numerous studies have proven that dysfunctional family conditions contribute to future delinquency.  Dysfunctional family members, especially children, are deprived of developing into rounded human beings.  Ultimately, a broken nuclear family with no real support impacts the society negatively.  It is almost certain that, without support, the dysfunctional family problem will perpetuate into the next generation, a vicious cycle of fragmented families will continue, and the problem can never end.  Such families desperately need the chance to stand up on their own feet, not just through financial resources but also through proper attention, care, such as counselling and empowerment programmes that build esteem, confidence and self-determination that are all focused in creating change and improvement in their beleaguered lives. 

     Recognising the issue of dysfunctional families has become the new social menace and plagues our society, we have to ask ourselves: have we done enough to tackle the problem?  What kind of help is available presently?  Are we allocating our resources in the right areas?  Are we giving our hands to those who are reaching out for help?

Community-based Social Assistance

     Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Sir, our communities have been generally structured along geographical boundaries by virtue of the success of our public housing programme.  The delivery of social and community services have also taken a geographical perspective with the formation of CDCs, GROs, FSCs, etc.  Between these organisations, there is a wide range of services that families in need can access, eg, financial, job placement, marital counselling, childcare, eldercare, befriender services, the list goes on.  We see annual reports of the number of Singaporeans who have benefited from these services.  Yet, we also hear Members of the House repeatedly call for more that needs to be done – more assistance for the poor, more assistance for dysfunctional families and the elderly.  Does this mean that the help is still not enough, help is not reaching out to the targeted group, or that not the right help is being delivered, thus resulting in the failure to help these families get out of their predicament?

     Sir, working with dysfunctional families is more than addressing the financial problems that they present when they first seek help.  The complexities that these families come with require a comprehensive and systemic assessment of behavioural, developmental, marital and environmental factors.  Indeed, there is much that exists in the community that needs to be done.

     Sir, helping an abusive husband to accept the responsibilities of his actions and to stop the violence, helping an abused wife and her children pick up the pieces of the suffering years of abuse when she finally decides to leave her husband, helping women whose husbands are constantly going in and out of prison to cope with pseudo single parenthood, helping youths involved in gang activities overcome self-esteem issues due to failure to cope with the mainstream system or helping families with heads of households who suffer from chronic illnesses, these are only some of the typical cases confronting social service providers in the community.  Intervention with these families is often resource-intensive, involving personnel equipped with professional social work skills.  Financial assistance, such as ComCare, is only merely touching the surface. 

     Sir, much has been said about the role of social workers in this regard.  Today, they are located in the FSCs providing intensive casework services.  One can imagine the intensity of the work involved and the energy that is required of the social workers.  It is not only physically draining but emotionally and psychologically challenging.  The attrition rate of social workers is very high.  On the average, they stay for three years and they burn out.  I urge the Ministry to comprehensively review the structure of our community-based social service system, with particular emphasis on manpower needs and development.  We need to attract more people to come in and stay in the profession.  As the challenges facing these families become more intensified and complex, so too will be the need for trained social workers to work with them. 

     Sir, much has also been said about the coordination of services and collaboration between service providers.  I urge the Ministry to take a more proactive role in this effort.  We have started the development of the ComCare local network.  However, we need a clear understanding of how such a network will operate.  What is the desired outcome of such a network?  And how does this relate to the overall strategy of addressing problems of dysfunctional families?  As we adopt a community-based approach to address the needs of these families, who in the community is monitoring the progress of such efforts?  We need to build the capacities of our community service providers in assessing needs, implementing intervention and evaluating effectiveness.  Otherwise, we will continue to just touch the surface with financial assistance and face downstream problems, including the potential inter-generational transfer of dysfunctionality.

Social Workers

     Mr Sin Boon Ann: Sir, I echo the sentiments raised by my colleague on the conditions for social workers.  This is a topic I raised last year, and the Minister, in his reply, affirmed the Government's commitment to introducing a $1 million package under the Social Work Professionalisation Package and new schemes to offer good and experienced social workers paid sabbatical leave to recharge, re-energise and renew themselves.

     Sir, I would, therefore, like to ask the Minister for an update of what has been done since, eg, how many social workers have benefited from increasing fundings to these voluntary welfare organisations in the form of better salaries and how many good social workers have been able to take advantage of the sabbatical programmes that have been promised?

     In addition, I would also like to ask the Minister whether the Government would consider reorganising the present profession of social workers to be governed by a chartered body similar to the Law Society, with powers to admit and recognise professional social workers, set standards, maintain discipline and to improve the image and standing of social workers in Singapore generally.

     Dr Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): Sir, with rapid development, globalisation, a fast ageing society and the coming up of the IRs, etc, those who cannot cope physically, psychologically and financially will be needing more assistance in the various forms in our community.  One of the main and crucial approaches to these issues is counselling and case management.  In this light, the demand for social workers and counsellors can also increase tremendously. 

     Currently, there are only about 600 or so social workers in Singapore.  Many have left the related sector and some did not even work in this area in which they qualified.  We realise there are challenges related to the job, which include the low level of recognition, the relatively low remuneration and the very labour-intensive type of work.  Are there plans to recruit and train more social workers and counsellors?  Can their career path be made more comprehensive and exciting, in line with the need to retain and recruit more social workers?

2.00 pm

     Ms Ellen Lee: (In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ]  Sir, a social worker friend recently shared with me her plight.  She hopes to see some improvements in the professionalisation of the social work profession.  I was at first very puzzled. 

      Why?  This is because, last year, the Government had injected $12 million into the voluntary welfare sector.  This is to boost the social workers’ salaries and provide upgrading programmes for them.  But after talking to some of them, I realised that it is common for social workers to be treated as merely volunteer workers doing community work instead of recognising them as professionals.  Therefore, many social workers still feel that more can be done for them to enhance their image and improve their profession. Many feel frustrated with the profession and they leave the job to pursue other careers. 

      Last year, MCYS rolled out plans to put in place a social worker accreditation scheme.  Besides accreditation, MCYS has also put in place various initiatives to help to enhance the professionalism of social workers.  I know that it takes time to upgrade the social workers’ image, but how long can we afford to wait?  We know that a social worker’s work has great impact on peoples’ lives, especially those involved in court cases.  The nature of a social worker’s job is not as simple as a 9-to-5 work.  It requires fine assessment skills with the ability to listen, counsel and connect. 

      As a family lawyer, I have come across complaints of the social workers' poor attitude and prejudices.  But, fortunately, these are in very small numbers.  When these social workers are not up to a reasonable standard, the reports they put up can be very harmful and damaging, especially in cases where their reports are relied upon during the court trials. 

     The court requires such reports to decide on whether to grant probation in juvenile cases, divorce proceedings involving custody, care and control of the child in a marriage, and also in adoption proceedings.  And in some cases, I know of some fathers who felt that they have been prejudiced against because they cannot see their children as often as they hope to, and they feel that strangers are dictating their lives as far as their children are concerned, after a few interviews. 

      Therefore, I would like to ask the Minister how many of the social workers in MCYS have a degree in social work, or how many of them have been trained professionally in this area.  And how many people, not trained in social work, are holding such jobs in the community?  If training is required, how much time is needed to train someone who has no background in social work?

      I am aware that a social worker has to have a degree in social work to practise, but I have received feedback that there are agencies which employ people from various disciplines as social workers. These people take up counselling courses, some as short as three to four months, and then become a counsellor.  If this is true, is the training sufficient?

     A distinction must be made between the two – counsellor and social workers.  Social workers do case work, and they are trained in generic counselling, but counsellors do not do case work.  It is not as simple as interviewing people and putting up reports and the case is closed for filing.  Good and professional social workers are concerned with social problems and they assess the problems presented to them and the impact their assessment has on the individual and the system.

     Therefore, in short, I do not think that this is a straightforward and easy job.  Therefore, I strongly urge the Government to dedicate resources to upgrade this profession and to improve the image and standing of this often neglected sector of our economy.

The Social Service Sector Landscape

     Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Sir, I would touch on two areas which the Ministry oversees – the charity sector and the Enabling Masterplan for the Disabled. 

     In the aftermath of the NKF incident, the charity sector is swamped by a wave of control measures to ensure charities do not get out of line.  This included the launch of the Code of Governance for Charities and IPCs, the Charity Council, and transfer of the Commissioner of Charities from the Ministry of Finance to MCYS, and numerous governance training workshops and audits.  Three levels of governance checklists now apply to a wide diversity of registered charities, churches, temples, homes for the aged, philanthropic foundations, special schools, community hospitals, and special interest groups promoting animal welfare, environmental protection and the arts. 

     Sir, whilst I am all for accountability, we must not think that the magic pills of governance and audits will transform the charity sector.  I have three suggestions for the Minister to consider:

     One, distinguish the different types of charities and provide more tangible support for those deemed critical.  Sir, some services like step-down hospital care, early interventions, special education are critical functions which in some countries are undertaken by the State.  Board members and key staff face tough challenges.  Quite a lot of them need to raise funds to close the gap where Government funds fall short, but, more importantly, attract competent, technical and leadership talents in the face of fierce competition from the private and public sectors which have deeper pockets to pay their people.  The same leaders are now faced with doing even more. 

     I urge the Ministry to review the proposed terms of reference, spelling the deliverables members in each board committee in the board – in audit, programmes, fund raising, HR, finance, etc – are accountable for.  Many of these deliverables cannot be realistically expected of part-time volunteers. 

     It is difficult enough to sign up good board members or even schedule board meetings convenient for everyone to attend.  I suspect even the full-time Commissioner of Charities himself faces challenges in resources too because his last annual report in the charity portal is for the year 2005. 

     Sir, I urge the Minister to continue to seek ground feedback on the progress of the current governance system and simplify the Code further without compromising the need for accountability.  I ask him to consider funding the cost of not just installing but maintaining the governance systems that were recommended and other tangible ways to add value to the charities.

     Two, in conducting governance audits on the charities, sector administrators should stick to the basic principle of materiality, and beware of the excesses of the auditors' enthusiasm to surface every deviation.  I received feedback from discouraged board members of several big charities which have recently undergone governance audits. 

     I urge the auditors to treat the board members and staff respectfully and not assume that they are premeditating criminals where past lapses in governance are found.  Those of us who have sat in boards of commercial firms know realistically that there is a limitation to what board members really know about the business or what they can do to prevent planned frauds. 

     Albert Einstein once said:  "Ours is the generation that has seriously mistaken means with ends."  The Charity Council, the Code of Governance, the training and audits are all means to the ends of serving the mission of the charities.  We want to encourage and not deter good volunteers from serving, and for the target community to be helped.  Let us keep a balance and not mistake the means for the end. 

     Three, I propose that the Ministry and its agencies take on some duties directly instead of resorting to the default mode of outsourcing to a VWO each time a need arises.  This is a special regard to the essential services  I have mentioned.  I applaud the recent decision by the police force and the NCSS to directly set up a Police SMS hotline for the deaf community, knowing that security is an essential state service even for the deaf.

     Sir, my next point focuses on the Enabling Masterplan for the Disabled.  The Masterplan was released more than one year ago.  It covered 30 main recommendations with many sub-recommendations.  When I accessed the Ministry's homepage, the Masterplan was nowhere to be found.  I found it only after I used the search function. 

     Sir, if I may use an analogy – the person with disabilities is like a diner eating at a restaurant.  He had come in response to an advertisement showing the Masterplan or menu of food items he could look forward to.  The appetiser arrived in the form of some assurances.  Desserts were sometimes served in the form of awards, but the chef had too much to do and was busy with the casinos and the Youth Olympic celebrations just down the street, and the diner was still waiting for his main course. 

     Sir, I urge the Minister to appoint a focus team to eyeball the implementation of the Enabling Masterplan, refine the Plan, track and communicate its progress. 

      I also ask the Minister to re-examine the way the proposal for a National Office on Disabilities is implemented.  I hear the office has been formed and populated by top civil servants, some of whom may not have seen or heard directly from the ground.  I recommend Patricia Seybold's book "Outside Innovation – How your customers will co-design your company's future", which recommends the engagement of key users to co-develop successful products and services. 

     Sir, more than one year has passed since the releasing of the Masterplan and we are waiting for the main course to be served. 

     Lastly, I wish to specially thank the Minister and his Ministry for taking on what –

          The Chairman:   Ms Phua, sit down, please.

Governance and Charities

     Mr Sin Boon Ann: I will provide the dessert. 

     Sir, the recent media attention on the potential impropriety of certain decisions taken by certain members of Ren Ci Hospital has once again put the spotlight on charities and governance.  But like private sector organisations, charities are organisations headed by governing boards and held accountable or answerable for any wrongdoings of the organisation.  However, unlike private sector organisations, charities by their very nature are not-for-profit entities.  The entire philosophy and foundation of charities are often based on the need to help with particular noble causes, usually the alleviation of poverty, and would therefore expect a voluntary spirit and some measure of sacrifice on the part of anyone who works or helps out with these charities.  This understanding provides the basis on which charities are allowed to raise monies from the public without the need to pay tax on the monies raised.  However, the lavish lifestyles of some members of charities, the failure of governance and the public censure of some board members, have raised issues that I believe charities and even the Commissioner of Charities are still trying to resolve.  I shall name three.

     Firstly, as a result of the relatively onerous nature of running these charities, how can charities continue to get good men and women of high integrity and substance to provide governance as board members and managers?  For the private sector boards, financial incentives are often the reason why people are prepared to come on board.  However, the very suggestion of appropriately remunerating board members and paying executive would run counter to the philosophy of charities.  Not only are charities going to find it difficult to find suitable and capable men to serve, even auditors are reluctant to come on board because of the perceived high risks involved.  In any event, it is my understanding that if an auditor would agree on the assignment, there is usually a premium to be charged.  Essentially, one can no longer get the auditor for the charity on expectations that the rewards are going to be in heaven.  The question is:  have we thrown the baby out with the bath water? 

      Secondly, at the moment, our policy is not to interfere with the way the money is raised and spent so long as the charity is able to disclose the spending and have proper resolutions to back the decisions of the board.  What made for a bad case for NKF was not the gold taps but that the gold taps were not disclosed to members of the public whose donations went towards their acquisition.  However, there is a deeper concern here.  What if the leader of a charity is able to, through sheer charisma, raise money from members of the public to partly fund his lavish lifestyle, and his followers willingly give the money, even if the wider society may frown upon it?  Should the State intervene and decide otherwise for the charity?

     Thirdly, should the monies raised by a charity be separately and independently managed by external parties so that the people who run the programmes will not face the temptation of putting their fingers in the till?  Part of the problem of rich charities lies in the freedom to spend the money once raised, at their absolute discretion.  Whilst the rules may be tightened to some extent in this regard, a case could be made for putting the money in the hands of an independent trustee and only to be applied for the purpose for which the money is raised, with the trustee closely scrutinising the budget.  This process of putting charity money in the hands of the trustee would help to strengthen public confidence and trust in charity funding.

     The Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (Dr Vivian Balakrishnan): Mr Chairman, Members of this House, this is my fourth occasion at the MCYS COS.  Each year, it gets longer.  This year, we have budgeted six hours and 35 minutes for this debate.  I do not intend to go that long.  What is coming round to Members is a file which contains some handouts, not money, brochures, which will summarise the progress of what we have committed to do last year, and also a summary of what we intend to do in this coming year.  So I do not want to go through those details because I am hoping that we can assume them as read.  Instead, what I will spend my time doing is to share a personal story, and then attempt to answer some of the more urgent and relevant queries which you have raised.  My colleagues in the Ministry will also take all the other questions, and then we will settle it at clarification. 

     First, a personal story – about 80 years ago, in fact, exactly 80 years ago, a young man on a business trip to China fell ill and passed away.  That young man was my grandfather, my mum's father. When he passed away 80 years ago, he left behind a young widow.  This young widow had two children and was on the verge of delivering her third child, my mum.  You can imagine the deep grief, sorrow, fear, helplessness and despair of a young widow, losing a young husband and about to deliver her third child.

And because this was 80 years ago, there was no MCYS.  We only started 60 years ago.  And all those schemes which we debate and quibble about were not present.

2.15 pm

     My grandfather and his two brothers ran a motorcar and, I suppose, bicycle spare parts shop in Dhoby Ghaut.  Because my grandmother was a young widow, she was not going to inherit a share of the business.  But, nevertheless, his two brothers continued to run the business, committed to giving an allowance and helping my grandmother bring up the children.  They were not penniless, they were not roofless, but life was tough and money was tight.

     My mum had a tough life.  She talked about malnutrition.  She talked about losing all her front teeth.  She talked about getting TB (tuberculosis) as a teenager.  She talked about being so skinny that when she married my father, she told my dad, "I'm probably infertile."  Of course, she was wrong.  She went on to have five of us.

     But this experience of childhood left an indelible imprint on my mum.  For the rest of her life, she could never spend money on herself.  She could never really even enjoy taking luxuries.  She could definitely not accept wastage.  She worked hard.  She became a teacher, and I can tell you in those days, MOE was not as enlightened as it is now.  I do not think she enjoyed the final few years of teaching, but she slogged through it anyway because it was a means for living.  The family was middle class but we were not rich.

     My uncle went on to become a doctor.  He became a GP in Albert Street.  Those of you who were treated by him or lived in that area will know that, I think in the first 10-15 years as a GP, he never took a single day off.

     So what does all this mean and why am I sharing this?  I am sharing this with Members so that they will get some idea of what my inner most feelings, values and attitudes are to poverty, to family, to social safety nets, and also to give them a better understanding of what I bring when I contemplate policies and plans in this area.

     What have I learnt?  First, life can be tough, life can be unfair, and life is unpredictable.  And bad things can happen to good decent people, and good decent people, regardless of whether it is their fault or not, at some point in time in their lives, they will need help, deserve help, and need hope.

     The second thing I have learnt from this family story is that one needs family support.  Do not talk about MCYS first.  The first thought is: who in your family is going to be there, to be with you at times of crisis, at times when everything looks bleak and dark?  My grandmother had her two brothers-in-law, and my family has to be eternally grateful to them for supporting my grandmother.

     The third lesson, a value imbibed from my mother, is that it is all about discipline and hard work.  No matter how wealthy or successful we think we are, if we lose that ability for discipline and hard work, we will fail.  Life for me has been, in comparison, very much easier and much blessed.  But, at least, for me, I think my mum has successfully transmitted those values.

     My current angst, when I talk about young people, is whether our children or our grandchildren, born in the midst of plenty, spend more time thinking about how to spend their inheritance.  And sometimes even in this House, we hear debate that we are a rich country, we can spend more even if it means being wasteful.  Instead of coming back to the basics that, yes, we do need safety nets, but we have to start with the family, and we have got to be self-reliant, disciplined and hardworking.  Because we must remember that, at the end of the day, even when we talk about MCYS, money is important.  Anyone who has been poor, directly or indirectly, will tell you money is very, very important.  But money is also not enough.  All the wealth in the world will not buy you happiness and success, nor will it eliminate all the social problems which we face.  Those of us who do regular meet-the-people sessions, we see people coming with problems.  Let me ask Members: do you really think their most fundamental problem is the lack of money?  Is it a poverty of material wealth? Or is it usually a poverty of relationships?  I think those of us who have been in this and lived long enough will agree that the real and bigger problem is the poverty of relationships.

     So we all need families and we do need  a compassionate society.  And if we look around us, and we look at a child, we will know that the greatest predictor for failure is a dysfunctional family, if his parents are not there, if his parents do not care or do not know how to care, or his parents are physically in prison or  because of addiction, gambling or whatever, and not there to provide that ballast and the emotional stability for the child.

     But we also know that it is not just about families, because we all want a more compassionate, caring, a "softer" society.  However, Singapore will fail, if our society degenerates into nothing more than a collection of successful individuals just achieving success and earning money for themselves and looking for pleasure and satisfaction for themselves.  If we have no shared values, no shared ideals and no dreams, the Singapore experiment will fail, even if we have money and even if we have reserves.

     One point I want to come back to in today's debate is I want Members to remember Mr Sam Tan's brilliant speech last week.  I was not here because I was overseas with the President, but I read his speech three times.  He talked about how it is not a dilemma between the young and the old.  It is not even a dilemma between the rich and the poor, but between head and heart.  He said that the head knows we cannot be overly generous; the head knows that we sometimes have to be cruel to be kind.  And yet the heart wants the poor to be rich and the weak to be strong.  And he said that it is better that now we are preparing for all these problems before they become insoluble problems; the time to do it is now.

     I also read with great distress Mr Siew Kum Hong's speech.  I am a debater.  That was a very brilliant debating speech.  And I actually share his hopes when he said that he wants Singapore to be a more generous society that helps its most vulnerable members – beautiful words.  But the danger was in the rest of his speech when he said, in order to fulfil this hope, we should be prepared to waste, we should be prepared to have a bloated bureaucracy, all in the name of helping people.

     I believe in getting all the different actors on the social stage to do what they are best at.  I believe in a small, efficient, rational, even calculating Government, because that is what governments can and should do best.  I believe in a social service sector, a voluntary welfare sector led by many champions, people like Ms Denise Phua, no matter how much I disagree with her on points, I will always respect people like her because they do what they believe in, and they care passionately about it.

     When we say we want a more generous, compassionate, caring society, the lazy way out is to say, "We want the Government to be generous, compassionate and caring, and the Government can express that generosity, caring and compassionate by simply spending a lot of money."  Raise taxes, spend a lot of money and pretend that we have achieved a generous society that helps people who are most vulnerable.

     Our model is a small, efficient Government, with low taxes, so that people like Dr Loo Choon Yong can still continue cheerfully paying his taxes, because they are actually very low than if he were to live anywhere else in the world.  But more than paying low taxes, we want him and people like him to donate money, time and attention to social causes which they care about.  So I was very happy when I saw his name and Mr Sim Wong Hoo's name mentioned in the Forbes list of philanthropists.

     What I am trying to spell to Members is a system in which individuals work hard, individuals look after their families, community organisations care and express the best parts of our heart, while the Government acts in the background carefully, rationally, logically and sensibly to make sure that the overall system functions.  That is the context behind which I view every  single policy, every single plan that my Ministry puts up.

    Sir, let me now go through some of these.  I ask Members to look at the handout which describes the Public Assistance Scheme.  Much angst and many words have been uttered in this House about the quantum of the Public Assistance.  Last year, we had a long debate on $290 and whether it was enough.  This year, we have raised it to $330.  I am sure if Members want to, we can have another long debate as to whether $330 is enough.  But I put this up because I want Members to understand and put things in perspective. The cash allowance that we were arguing about, whether it is $290 or $330, is just one component of the overall Public Assistance Scheme.  There are three other components.  Look at the second column which lists the Government subsidies for housing, medical care, rebates for utilities and service and conservancy charges.  And, also, later on, I will describe the educational subsidies.

Obviously, these subsidies, not everyone gets all of them.  It depends on their needs.  But these subsidies are considerable.

2.30 pm 

     Then, now, we move across to the third column.  I have labelled it "Many Helping Hands" – community expression of support, in a very real way.  You look at that column, – the first item there [indicating] that says average hong baos  ($27).   First, I  was very suspicious, and I asked:  "Are you very sure, exactly this amount?"  And they said, yes, we know of at least three organisations in Singapore that make it a practice to give every PA recipient $100 a year.  So that is $300; $300 divided by 12, you end up at least $25.  This is just from three organisations.  You include all the other organisations out there, you will know this adds up. 

     And then look at the fourth column.  I just totalled it up.  I asked my staff, just calculate in cash and rebate terms, what has the Government given away this year to PA recipients who you know will generally be old and, obviously, by definition, low income.  Because of the way our Budget giveaways are structured, you know it goes disproportionately to them.  So you add column 1 and column 4, what would you end up with?  My understanding, and I have checked it with my staff again this morning, is that for this year, every PA recipient, in terms of cash and rebates, actually gets at least $450 a month. 

     Last year, Dr Lily Neo insisted that $290 is not enough, it must be $400.  This year, she has not asked for it yet.  But Dr Loo Choon Yong asked for $400.  I have never wanted to let the cat out of the bag.  But the truth is they actually received more than what you have asked for. 

     But, if you add up the other two columns, the variable subsidies given by Government and the other subsidies given by community organisations, the number goes up several-fold.  Just think about healthcare, for instance.  We had a long debate the day before about healthcare.  The PA recipients are the only people in Singapore, with a totally blank cheque, as far as healthcare is concerned.  For all of Mdm Halimah's pleas, even NTUC cannot secure that for the workers of Singapore; but for the PA recipients, it is totally free.  Those of us who work in public hospitals, and I have run SGH, would know if it is a PA recipient, no need to worry, the doctors can do anything they like, and Government foots the bill.  So I hope this will show you that the question is not lack of money. 

     Let me move on the next slide, which will show you the amount that a family on public assistance will get.  The cash allowance – the first column – for a family (two adults, two children) is $1,020.  You look at the right-hand side, all the Budget giveaways.  You will see that, in effect, this year, a family on public assistance receives in excess of  $1,200, cash and rebates.  Then, you include healthcare; more importantly, you include education, and again all the other variable components that community support gives, you get a considerable sum of money.

     Now, I am not here to make a case that we are treating people on public assistance very generously.  But I would ask you this – one of our favourite questions we ask: how much do you give your parents every month?  Some of you may be generous, but there are many other people, whether or not they are wealthy, who will give their parents less.  When their parents fall sick, they have to pay for those bills, whereas a person on public assistance does not have to pay any bills. 

     So that allows me, really with a very clear conscience, to say that there is no reason for anybody in Singapore, if you are truly destitute, if you have no family support, to say that you must go hungry, or that you have no roof over your head, or that you will suffer.  Yes, I know there will be cases, you can point out to me from time to time, but those cases are the exception to the norm.  And you must point out those cases to me so that I can make sure help goes to them.  But the key message is:  nobody goes hungry,  nobody should go hungry. 

     Our social safety net is robust and multi-layered but, more importantly, is sustainable for the long term.  I lived and worked in London for two years – home of the great, from cradle to grave, welfare state.  I looked at their housing, I looked at their healthcare, I looked at the lives and the hopes of people on welfare down there.  They are not better off; in fact, they are worse off than our people.  So, please, while you criticise and whilst you ask for more, put a sense of perspective of where we come from and how we compare to any other country.  And I will still say to you, in terms of housing, in terms of healthcare, in terms of educational prospects, in terms of social mobility – this is still the best place in the world.  If you are going to be poor, or may be disadvantaged, you have a chance and you can succeed.  

     The story that I told you about my family is not unique – all of you, all Singaporeans will have their own stories – which proves the fact that there is social mobility and there is hope.  But do not destroy the foundation upon which we achieved our success. Let me move on now to people with disabilities.

     I was a bit upset when Ms Denise Phua said that people with disabilities have been forgotten in this Budget.  I am sure she did not really mean it literally.  So I asked my staff: what are we doing for people with disabilities?  So they showed me this chart [indicating ] which I made sure they did to scale, meaning between the years 2002 and 2006, how much did we spend on the disability sector?  They told me – $400 million.  Then, I said, "Okay, from the years 2007 to 2011, how much are we intending to spend?  How much have we committed to spend on the disability sector?"  $900 million.  We have not forgotten the people with disabilities.  In fact, some others will say that maybe we are spending disproportionately or spending too much on one segment of people of the larger sub-set of people who need help in Singapore.  But I do not want to engage in that debate and pit one group versus the other.  But, nevertheless, look at it, it is $900 million.  How are we spending the $900 million?  Primarily in education.  Why education?  Because we want people with disability to fulfil their potential.  We want people with disability to have a chance to make their own living if they can or, at least, to achieve a dignified living, and we want them to gain access to larger society – mainstream society – and to be integrated, and the key to that, I am sure we will agree, is education.  So, a big chunk of it on education.

     Ms Denise Phua also said that she appealed for more flexible implementation of means-testing.  Those of you would remember that we introduced means-testing for early education for disabled children about two years ago.  It is still being implemented.  What I will say, and the assurance I will give you, is that no child, no disabled child of any family, rich or poor, will have to pull out of the early intervention programme (EIPIC) because of a lack of funds.  Yes, we will still do means-testing.  Means-testing will be used to determine the level of subsidy which that child is entitled to.  But over and above that, if you still need additional help, we will establish – when I say "we", in this case, NCSS and MCYS – another fund.  We will put in $3.6 million into this fund and we will call it the Support Grant.  And this fund will be used flexibly to enable children from borderline families, who have difficulty coping with the fees that they would have had to pay after means-testing.  And we will then chip in and make sure they continue with their education.  So, we will implement means-testing flexibly in this area. 

     We have also extended the Foreign Domestic Worker levy concession to the disabled who require care-giving assistance.  There were 853 applications last year and 99% were accepted.  This meant that MOF has forgone revenue of $1 million per year.  As this number grows, the amount of revenue forgone can only increase. 

     In addition, my Ministry has also set aside half a million dollars over the next five years to fund the Caregiver Training Fund, and this has benefited 140 caregivers so far.  Because clearly for people with disabilities, the caregivers may sometimes need additional skills and training. 

     Ms Denise Phua also expressed concern about paying GST.  For those Members who do not know, there are 21 schools for special education.  Of these 21 schools, six schools have now reached the status where technically they have to pay GST, because their parent organisation has now grown so big that their revenues exceed $1 million.  We should congratulate Pathlight, run by Denise, for having grown so successfully that they have now graduated into the GST class.  The other five schools are run by MINDS, which, as Members all know, is a very long-standing and large VWO that has been in this line for a very long time. 

     Denise made the point that by imposing GST on these organisations, they, in turn, have to pass it on to their beneficiaries, and we are, in a sense, penalising them for success.  I thought about what she said, and I think she has a point.  I will therefore work with MOE – I have not decided exactly who is going to pay for it – to provide additional funding to those schools who now have to pay GST because their parent organisation has become so successful.  So, you will not be paying more GST and you should not charge your beneficiaries more in the name of GST.  I hope that satisfies her request.

      The other thing I want to update this House on the Mental Capacity Act.  Remember, last year, I floated the idea.  In fact, we put up a draft for public consultation.  We have been very pleased with the feedback and suggestions that have come back.  We are going to make some amendments to that draft and we should be ready to come to Parliament with the introduction of the Bill sometime in the second half of this year.  So that is work in progress.

     Let me now ask Members to move on to the next handout, which is our key initiatives for 2008.   

     Our first priority, the first theme throughout our plans, is to make Singapore a great place for children and families.  

      Our children are our future.  And it is our duty to nurture them and educate them to the fullest potential.  There is increasing scientific evidence that investing in early childhood development yields a great impact on the child's cognitive, emotional, physical and social development.  And many Members have expressed concerns and, in fact, appealed for more investments in the early childhood development centres.  I sympathise with all these appeals.  So we have decided that we will enhance the supply, accessibility, quality and affordability of centre-based childcare facilities.  This means infant care, childcare and student care facilities. 

     As of January this year, we have some 740 childcare centres across the island, that means a total capacity of about 63,000 places.  If all these places were occupied, it would mean that we have capacity for 30% of the cohort between the ages of 18 months to six years.  But, currently, we have not reached full utilisation.  So about 23% of each cohort attends institutional childcare.

But this 23% represents an increase because in 2003, only 16% of children were going to childcare centres.  So we have seen an increase of some 7% in the last five years alone.  I anticipate that this demand will increase and therefore we are planning on having another 100 childcare centres over the next five years.  And MCYS will facilitate the development and the roll-out of these additional 100 centres.

2.45 pm

     But having said that, it is not just a numbers game because people also want these childcare centres to be nearby.  Today, 70% of childcare centres in the HDB estates are within 300 metres of their homes.  Those of you who use such centres will agree that closeness, accessibility, is an important factor because you can just walk, you do not need to take a bus or a train, bring and leave the child there and then go to work or do whatever other commitments you have to fulfil.

     We will work on increasing the number of childcare centres, especially in HDB estates and also near key transport nodes so that people can leave their children there before they go to work.  But at this point, I must share with Members one implementation problem which I had on the ground.  I want to build the childcare centre in the void deck within my area.  I had a petition from the residents who said, "Yes, you can build a childcare centre, but not in my void deck."  This has become a variant of the "not in my backyard" syndrome.

     I must appeal to all Singaporeans.  As we say we want to be a gracious and a more child-friendly society, we must give space in our public areas for childcare centres.  Do not always complain about congestion and noise.  Of course, there will be some congestion and noise.  Of course, we will ask the operators to control themselves and try to minimise the disamenities.  But let us learn to be a little bit more tolerant, and to give and take.

     I also heard Prof. Kalyani when she said that quality is important.  And the key thing about quality in childcare centres is, like everything else, like most things in life, the quality of the staff, specifically, the quality of the teachers.  Yesterday, you heard MOE's announcement that we are going to raise the hurdle for teachers in kindergartens.  MCYS decided that we should follow suit and the same criteria will apply for childcare teachers.  So that means new entrants must have five 'O' levels, and a Pass in English.  And they will also have to be properly trained in the certificate or the relevant Diploma in Early Childhood Education.  Of course, in the case of childcare centres, because it is not only teaching but child-minding facilities, we need some additional staff.  So we will not place as onerous a condition on the academic qualification for those additional service staff who are not necessarily involved in teaching.  But I give Members that assurance that we will raise standards.

     Prof. Kalyani's idea about making some indices publicly available so that parents can make informed choices, it is a good idea.  I am not so sure whether we should publish every complaint that goes up because, sometimes, people have an agenda.  But we have to find the way to make more information available so that parents can choose which is the most suitable centre for their child.  So we will work on her idea.  This then brings us to the final point in childcare centres. If you increase the number of childcare centres, if you increase the quality of teachers and you put all kinds of checks and balances in place, what about affordability?  Members will know as well as I do that, ultimately, that means prices must go up.

     I would remind Members of this House, in case you have forgotten, that every child whose mother is working receives a subsidy of $150, if he or she attends a childcare centre.  So we call that a universal subsidy.   In addition, you will also remember that since 2001, we have introduced the Baby Bonus and especially the co-savings element in which Government matches what you put into that account, and that account can be used for attendance at kindergartens or childcare centres.  So additional Government help has gone in there. 

     We have also had schemes like the Financial Assistance Scheme for Childcare and Kindergarten Financial Assistance Schemes (KiFAS) for low-income families which make it very, very affordable for low-income families to put their child in kindergarten or childcare centre.  I can tell you honestly, especially for dysfunctional family, we can get a child in childcare centre for close to zero, so long as the mother is willing to go out to work.

     In addition to that, just now I mentioned the Baby Bonus, I also have got some further good news for that.  From 1st August this year, we will have Baby Bonus account which will be able to pay higher interest rates.  How did I achieve that?  It is not my money.  Basically, what we did was to use competition.  We put up a tender to the banks and we said, "We have these accounts that need to be managed.  Give us your best offer and, in particular, we are looking for higher yields and more convenience for parents."  So from 1st August, two banks will be operating the CDA accounts.  Parents will get a choice as to which bank and, with this competition, interest rates, terms and convenience will go up.  More details will be released later on.

     We will also be working on Student Care Centres.  We know that it is quite popular to have Student Care Centres within school itself because it is very convenient.  The child does not have to take transport to another place.  And we will have to work with MOE and the schools so that we can increase the number of such Student Care Centres within the school compound itself to make it more convenient.

     The second key theme in our new plans focus on the protection and rehabilitation of children and young persons.  We are currently reviewing the Children and Young Persons Act.  We have engaged in public consultation the last few months as to what amendments we need to make to provide better protection and make the entire scheme more relevant.  Many of the ideas we have received relate to increasing the standards of care in our institutions.  I will give Members an example.  Currently, there are 24 homes where children, either they are orphans or for a variety of reasons their parents cannot look after them, are placed there for institutional care.  Eleven of these 24 homes are gazetted homes and therefore directly regulated by my Ministry.  Last year, we realised, especially because there was a problem in one of the ungazetted homes, that there were statutory limits to how far we could intervene in inspection, auditing and ensuring standards.  So we have decided that we will license all homes for children and young people.  So there will be a board of visitors; there will be minimum standards imposed; there will be checks and balances in place to make sure that no child abuse takes place and that optimal child developmental environment is present in these homes.

     I listened to Ms Sylvia Lim's query on the rate of recidivism in our Boys' Home and Girls' Home.  And I will tell you I share her discomfort with the rate of recidivism.  The figures which I have is that 31% of juvenile offenders reoffended within two years of their release from homes, that means, one-third.  I was not happy with that figure, although my staff told me that actually this compares very well with the published rates overseas which range between 30%-40%.  I said, never mind, even if we are not doing too badly with respect to overseas rates, we still need to bring our own rates down.

     Why have our rates gone up?  Partly these changing social norms. Partly also because the boys whom we are admitting into the Boys' Home now are a tougher sub-group who perhaps, in the past, may have been put in a more rigorous regime in Prison or otherwise.  But be it as it may, we need to do more to make sure we bring this rate down.  And I also agree with her that a key thing is to make sure discipline is enforced.  Because in these homes, if you have no discipline, you cannot ensure security.  If you cannot ensure security, boys will have to look for protection through the formation of gangs.  So we must not allow that culture to take place.  I will be very happy to bring Ms Lim for a guided tour or maybe she can become a volunteer in our Boys' Home and our Girls' Home, and we will take whatever ideas she has on board to solve this problem, because this is a problem worth solving.

      Another announcement which Members will see in there is that we have decided to accede to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, what it actually means is that now, especially with more of us marrying foreigners living overseas and sometimes, unfortunately, marriages break up and one parent or the other is tempted to kidnap a child from one jurisdiction into the other.  By acceding to this international convention, we are trying to put the necessary safeguards so that children do not get kidnapped transterritorially, and that judgments awarded by a court with proper jurisdiction are enforced in other parts of the world as well.

     Let me move on to the third theme which is dysfunctional families which many Members have also referred to.  Families at risk of dysfunction include families where one or two parents are incarcerated, families where there is minor marriage before the age of 18, or, as some of you have also alluded to, serially reconstituted families, ie, you got children by his and hers and ours, and it becomes large and complex, and you will see problems on the ground. 

      Many Members have asked what measures we are going to take.  We have formed an Inter-Ministry Committee.  Apart from me, Prof. Ho Peng Kee, Mdm Yu-Foo Yee Shoon, Mr Masagos, Dr Maliki as well as Mr Teo Ser Luck are in this Inter-Ministerial Committee which includes basically MOE, MCYS, MOH and MHA.  There are three principles on which this Committee will do its work.  First, there must be holistic support for the child.  Second, we must not take away family and community ownership of the problem because we must not make these children of dysfunctional families wards of the state.  They must remain members of families.  And, third, as some Members have quite rightly said, "do not treat symptoms, identify the cause, and then deal with the root cause". 

     So there will be a couple of things which we will do.  First, better identification of families at risk, those who need help.  And this means better coordination between the Ministries.  I will give Members an example.  If one child drops out of school, very often, there are other siblings who may also be at risk.  There may be parents who are facing social problems, or financial problems, or absent parents.  So we need to have a system in which what happens in MOE's sphere of influence, the message gets transmitted to MCYS, gets shared with MHA and sometimes with MOH, so that there is a coherent system that transmits information.  But even as we devise this system to transmit information and establish the database, we also have to be mindful if issues like confidentiality and the right to privacy.  So it is easy for me to describe it.  I will tell you honestly, operationalising that will be difficult.  But, nevertheless, we should have a system which identifies proactively children and families at risk.

     The second thing is, having identified families at risk, to take preventive measures.  In the several programmes which we actually already have in place, for instance, the Healthy Start Programme which provides intensive case work centred on the child.  Another example is the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) scheme in which we provide up to $100,000 of grants and training support to a family if both parents are low income and really do not have good prospects in the short term to improving their economic status.  So far, we have 1,300 families who have come on board and that means that the Government has committed more than $120 million to help these families.

We are currently reviewing some of the criteria for eligibility for the scheme.  I will tell you that we are not changing the Stop-at-Two policy for these families because we really do want them to focus limited resources on the two children.  But one criterion which I am thinking of tweaking is that, for instance, if a person becomes divorced, to allow that woman, even though she is divorced, to carry on HOPE so long as she commits to keeping her family small, ie, not having more than two children.  So even if she gets married, as long as she herself does not have more than two, we will continue to make sure at least all or some of the benefits of HOPE stay with her.  Because what we really do not want is a situation in which a vulnerable woman or a widow desperately needs to find another man, offer fertility, produce more kids, and they are abandoned by that man and then she has got to go and look for a third or fourth man.  Unfortunately, what I am describing is a reality amongst some families on the ground.  So the key thing is to reassure women that they do not need to look for or be dependent on another man. 

     I enjoyed the speech by Dr Ahmad Magad.  It was a speech in Malay but I hope Members will all listen to the translation.  He talked about the problem with multiple divorces, serial reconstituted families, and men unable to afford paying off the alimony in support of their first family going on to find another woman and setting up a second family, and ultimately shortchanging both families.  At the risk of being politically incorrect, I will tell Members something I have always shared with my staff, that I suspect most social problems we have in the world today are because of irresponsible men, and the burden almost always falls on the poor women with the children.  And we see that in our MPS.  We see the woman desperate, the man has gone off having a good time or whatever else he is doing.  I do not want to make this a sexist debate, but this is the reality which I see on the ground.  Maybe the women MPs can take that cause up.  I do not have any quick fix for this.  For myself, even before we got married, every single cent I earned goes into a joint account in my wife's name.  Every single dollar in my wallet comes about because she gives it to me.  I cannot help wondering whether if women insisted that men handed over all their money first, whether it will result in fewer dysfunctional families.  Just think about it.  I know this sounds politically incorrect.  But just think about this.  Reflect on the relative roles of men and women and the attendant social problems that result from this. 

     If we can get men to understand that we have to fulfil our responsibilities, the moment a woman has agreed to marry you and have your children, regardless of whether or not you fall in love with her, you have to support her and your children.  And you do that first before you go and think about starting another family.  That is the way it has been in traditional societies, even in societies with polygamy.  But if we start fooling ourselves that simple monogamy will solve everything and what we see in effect is serial monogamy and irresponsible men, then we have not really improved as a society.  So much for the politically-incorrect portions of my speech!

     Let me now move to social workers, because this is another area which many Members in this House have highlighted.  Social workers are professionals and they deserve to be treated as such.  Last year, MCYS revised the salary benchmarks for social work professionals, and we increased funding to the VWOs by some $11 million, ie, we increased the total funding to that sector to $80 million.  And I said, when I announced that, that I would be watching to see how much of that money actually reaches the professionals, ie, both the social workers, the counsellors and the other professionals involved with this sector.  We had a 2007 manpower survey conducted by NCSS which showed that 72% of VWOs have implemented or are implementing the salary revisions.  I do not have the exact figures, so I do not know exactly how many dollars it has gone up by.  But even the remaining VWOs have indicated that they had already adjusted salaries earlier.  But to further address this pay issue, MCYS is now studying benchmarking the salaries of social workers in the VWOs against that of their contemporaries in the public service.  In the case of social workers, an easy benchmark is: what is a social worker in a public hospital paid?  We have those figures and we can use them as a benchmark.  Making their pay competitive in a sense recognises their contributions but it is not a complete solution in itself.  We also need to structure the job correctly, make sure their precious time is used most productively and to also make sure that there is a professional track.  What does that mean? 

     First, we need to increase the intake of training capacity for social workers in our institutes of higher learning.  Then, we also need to make sure they have time to recharge.  We have a sabbatical leave scheme so that they can take time out.  MCYS will cover part of their time for them to recharge, upgrade professionally. 

     Second, we also have the Professional and Leadership Development Scheme (PLDS) which will groom dynamic leaders to prepare them for leadership positions. 

     In tandem with all these, we are also exploring the possibility of accrediting social workers with a view to eventually licensing them.  This will be a big step, and it is not one which I want to make unilaterally.  So we will have to discuss with the sector to see how best to bring this about.  But it will, I believe, put the sector on a surer footing that this is a profession, there are proper entry criteria, proper training, proper standards, and not anybody can get in there and say, "I am a social worker" but who is actually untrained.  It is almost like being a quack doctor.  So we do not want to have that situation.  But let us manage this transition carefully. 

     Let me now turn to the management of charities which, again, unfortunately, is a hot issue.  We seem to have a regular litany of problems in this area.  My first suggestion to all of us would be not to over-react.  Yes, there are problems, and, yes, problems will surface from time to time.  But we should not jump to the conclusion, as someone has said, that everybody involved in the social service sector or in the boards is a criminal.  That is not the case at all.  The vast majority are good, well-meaning people.  Nevertheless, we do need to have a system.  My job in MCYS has been to make sure that, despite all the political pressure to have more checks and balances, more systems, we do not over-react and throttle the sector by over-regulation. 

     What we have now is a Commissioner of Charities.  And, as Ms Denise Phua has said, yes, he is heavily overworked, because there are so many charities.  I agree with her that the Commissioner of Charities has to adopt a tiered approach and a priority, which means he cannot check every single one.  But we can identify those which are bigger, those which are at higher risk if they fail, and we can have a tiered approach, ie, more intensive checks for those at higher risk, but less intensive for those not at such high risk. 

     Secondly, we will, wherever possible, still promote self-regulation in the sector.  That is why we have the Charity Council.  Although it is appointed by MCYS, it is led by the people sector.  Mrs Fang Ai-Lian is currently the Chairman of the Charity Council.  I wanted her to lead because not only is she an accountant, but she also has real experience running and being in charge of voluntary welfare organisations and, in fact, being the Chair person of several organisations.  So I believe that she would have both the professional expertise as well as the sensitivity to make sure that our codes of governance and the rules which they promote be sensible, practical and reasonable.

     So far, I think the work that they have done is excellent work, considering the pressures and the time limits within which they are operating.  If we look in terms of what we are actually asking from the VWO sector, yes, we have got some things which are compulsory, we have many other things which are good to have which we are not insisting on, but we are asking for greater transparency.  For instance, if you cannot comply with this best practice, tell us that you have not complied and why you cannot comply.  Publish it on your website so that donors can read and make their own decisions as to whether or not you are worthy of support. 

     Let me now turn to a new entity which the NVPC is thinking of starting.  This is the Community Foundation.  Members would be aware of reports that the number of millionaires in Singapore has increased, partly because of our own economic growth and partly also because globalisation has presented huge opportunities to people with talent and innovative ideas.  Even as these emerging newly wealthy people come about, many Members have said that we want them to also contribute back to society.  We have a few large family foundations.  Members would know the Lee Foundation, Shaw Foundation, Tsao Foundation, Tan Chin Tuan Foundation and now, of course, more recently, the Khoo Foundation.  But, unfortunately, we do not have as many foundations as we ought to have. 

     So what we are hoping is that, as these newly wealthy people emerge, we would get them to start thinking about starting foundations.  But, obviously, a foundation is not worth starting if you have only a million or even $5 million to put aside, because the administrative cost of running a foundation could make it not worthwhile.  But NVPC's plan is that, by establishing a Community Foundation, by aggregating these million-dollar donations or $5 million donations, we can create an endowment pool with economies of scale and managed professionally.  The money would be donated by you but you would still have a say in how the proceeds from that money are used for your favourite causes.  In other words, it is a kind of a starter kit for foundations.  We hope that once people get used to giving a million, $2 million, $5 million or $10 million, eventually, when they become fabulously wealthy, they will decide to start their own foundations.  So this is a new idea which NVPC will be working on this year.  If everything goes according to plan, we hope that they will be able to find significant donors who will build up a pool of $50 million and get that going. 

     On the part of MCYS, we have committed to giving them the administrative support and the start-up cost in the first instance so that the people who are donating in the initial years will not feel that they are just paying for administrative cost.  The money which they put aside would be used to earn interest, to generate dividends which can then be used for charities and causes of their choice. 

     Sir, I think I have spoken for quite some time now.  I was going to suggest that Mdm Yu-Foo Yee Shoon carry on with the detailed queries.  But perhaps you might want to take the break now.

          The Chairman:  Order.  I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.35 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 3.17 pm until 3.35 pm.

Sitting resumes at 3.35 pm

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

     Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

     Head I (cont.) –

     The Minister of State for Community Development, Youth and Sports (Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon): Mr Chairman, Sir, I wish to reiterate my Minister's point about making Singapore a family and child-centric nation. Singapore must be a place where our children can grow up safely and get a good education, where youth and adults can realise their potential and contribute to society, where the elderly can age gracefully but actively, and where those who fall behind are helped by a caring community to get back on their feet.

     However, the Government alone cannot build this society.  The Government will be the facilitator and lay down the overall framework.  But we need to mobilise the social capital in our community and adopt a Many Helping Hands approach.  Every individual must take responsibility for his own future, each family must be a source of strength for its members, and the community must be actively engaged in helping the needy.  These are the foundations of our success as a society and we must build on these foundations.

     The Government can and will do more to help Singaporeans.  We will do so by strengthening marriages and families, helping the low income and strengthening self-reliance under ComCare schemes, promoting good relationships, neighbourliness, and empowering the community to help itself, and forging a close partnership with the people and private sectors.

     Let me begin by talking about families.  Strong families are the bedrock of a resilient society, so we must ensure that family ties are robust.  And, we will provide a range of services to support families at different life stages.

     We will continue to create an environment conducive for marriage.  A 2006 MCYS' survey showed that eight out of 10 Singaporean respondents agreed that it is better to get married than to remain single.  However, many are either unable or unwilling to find that special someone.  A relatively high proportion of males and females remained unmarried in 2006.  Among those aged 35 to 39 years, 19% of males and 16% of females were single, compared to 11% and 12% in 1985.

     Developing the local dating industry will help create an environment conducive for marriage.  Through The Partner Connection Fund, the pioneer batch of recipients has successfully launched their dating services.  The development of credible and professional dating agencies will offer more options for singles to socialise, and hopefully, find that special someone.

     And it looks like there are plenty of fun and easy ways to find Mr or Miss Right.  For example, Eteract.com offers online speed-dating services for singles. Alternatively, he or she could try out GoMovieDate.com, which allows members to send movie invites online or through SMS.  The enterprise and creativity of these commercial dating agencies are good signs that the industry is vibrant and growing.

     But getting married is only the beginning.  We must ensure that marriages can withstand the test of time.  This is an increasing challenge, as divorces are on the rise.  The crude divorce rate increased from 1.29 per 1,000 resident population in 1994 to 1.96 in 2006.  The absolute number of divorces and annulments has been increasing, from about 3,800 in 1994 to 7,000 in 2006.  The number of marriages has stayed at about 24,000 over this period.  More worrying is that "young marriages" are breaking up.  In 2006, marriages of less than five years formed about a fifth of all divorces.  There was also a rising number of divorces among long-lasting marriages.  Divorces for marriages that lasted more than 20 years increased from 10% of all divorces in 1988 to 18% in 2006.  These divorce trends are a cause for concern, especially if they affect children.

     Although Singapore's divorce rates are low compared to countries like Japan, Australia and the US, we must continue to strengthen marriages.  That is why the National Family Council, or NFC, announced its plans to set up the Marriage Central in March 2007.  Marriage Central will provide one-stop access to marriage information, resources and counselling.  It will tap on existing service providers like voluntary welfare organisations specialising in marriage issues.  It will equip married couples with skills, and enable couples in difficulties to seek help before it is too late.  My Ministry will work closely with the NFC to set up Marriage Central this year.

     Let me now move on to talk about strengthening family ties.  I am glad to report that Singaporeans' attitude towards family bonds is still very positive. A 2006 MCYS' survey showed that 96% of respondents agreed that they have a close-knit family.  Inter-generational bonds are strong.  A 2005 MCYS' survey showed that more than 70% of 2,000 seniors interviewed speak to their children daily.

     While attitudes towards families remain positive, families in Singapore are facing challenges with rapid globalisation and competing demands.  We share the views of Mr Ong Ah Heng, Mr Sin Boon Ann and Dr Lim Wee Kiak that the family needs to be strengthened.  To promote strong and stable families, my Ministry adopts a proactive approach through various public education  efforts.  These are implemented mainly through People-Private-Public partnerships, or a 3P approach.  We need the people and private sector to play a part, as the Government alone cannot preserve family ties.  I shall touch on some of the efforts in this area.

     The mass media is very effective at reaching out to people.  With the support of my Ministry, the National Family Council will tap on the influence of television to raise awareness of family bonding.  You can look out for an emotive mini drama on the importance of family on TV soon.  One major effort held annually is the National Family Week (NFW) which was organised by NFC.  More than 150,000 people, young and old, participated in some 80 events and talks in last year's NFW.

     We have established a large network of partners in the schools, community and workplaces to help us in our public education efforts.  In schools, the Parent Education in Pre-Schools (PEPS) and the School Family Education (SFE) programmes have been much welcomed.  There are also the community based Family Life Champion and work-based Family Life Ambassador programmes.  Such efforts are growing in numbers – we now have over 370 schools and centres offering PEPS and SFE programmes.  We have over 1,500 Family Life Ambassadors.  We also have 84 Family Life Champions representing each constituency.  Some of our 880 Deputy Registrars of Marriage have been trained to provide mentoring and counselling services to those about to get married.

     Through these efforts, our partners have helped to organise many family education programmes and events.  These include marriage education, parenting skills and personal work-life effectiveness programmes.  Programmes like "Parenting with Confidence" and "Connected Family", available in some SFE schools, provide skills to individuals and family members and help to promote family bonding.

     Businesses are also important in our 3P partnership.  To further promote a pro-family environment, my Ministry encourages businesses to provide services and infrastructure that welcome families through the Pro-Family Business Pledge, Mark and Grant.  To date, more than 2,900 establishments have adopted the pledge and 160 have been awarded the Pro-Family Business Mark.  To provide practical support, the Government offers a grant of $2 million over three years to assist and encourage businesses to adopt and implement pro-family business practices.

     But, most importantly, the nurturing of family bonds and values starts at home.  Parents and relatives play a critical role in inculcating the right values in their children from young.  Families are encouraged to make use of the many avenues made available to equip themselves with the relevant skills, so that they can promote bonding with family members.

     While these initiatives will equip families to deal with challenges head on, we also need to understand present family dynamics and anticipate new problems that families may face in the future.  My Ministry will set up a Family Research Network to involve policy-makers, professors and practitioners in research on family issues.  The Network will discuss policy challenges and share research findings regularly.  There will be collaboration among network members and exchanges with international family research experts.

     Developing such research capability is vital, as we keep a close watch on global and local trends that affect families in Singapore.  Good policies are grounded in solid research.  The Network will help to encourage a vibrant local research ecosystem which will enable our policies and programmes to remain relevant even as our environment changes.  This is the Ministry's commitment to be family and child-centric.

     I agree with Dr Amy Khor, Mdm Cynthia Phua, Mdm Halimah Yacob, Prof. Mehta, Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, Ms Ellen Lee and Ms Lee Bee Wah that the long-term financial security of women is important.  Many women, especially housewives, have little in their CPF accounts.

On average, women over 35 years have lower CPF balances than men of the same age. Women over 60 have around $11,000 in their CPF.  This is about half as much as what men over 60 have.  They are also likely to outlive their husbands. Moreover, about a third of female respondents in a 2007 survey of baby boomers have never worked before.  Recent MOM statistics showed that 89% of economically-inactive women, aged 25-54, were not working or not looking for work for family reasons, such as childcare, eldercare or household responsibilities.  This is about 230,000 of them.  I urge husbands and children to take responsibility for the well-being of their wives and mothers by transferring money into their CPF accounts.  A practical suggestion for husbands and children is to consider this as a gift for their birthday, wedding anniversary or Mother's Day.

     The Women's Desk in my Ministry will work with the Singapore Council of Women's Organisations (SCWO), People's Association Women Integration Network, NTUC Women Development Secretariat, grassroots organisations, CDCs, and the Ministry of Manpower to raise awareness of the CPF transfer options through a personalised outreach.  I am glad that Mdm Halimah Yacob and Dr Amy Khor had agreed to this campaign yesterday.

     I also hope to see women take advantage of opportunities to join or re-join the workforce.  My Minister had earlier elaborated on more accessible, affordable childcare services to facilitate this. I would like to encourage women to go for skills upgrading and training to re-integrate into the workforce.  The Tripartite Workgroup on Enhancing Employment Choices for Women, chaired by Mdm Halimah Yacob, will be coming up with recommendations to enable and empower women to harmonise their family and work commitments.

     I will now talk about help for needy Singaporeans.  Let me give an overview of social assistance in Singapore.  I think the Minister has outlined the philosophy of the Ministry.

    The ComCare Fund was set up in June 2005 to help the neediest, which are the bottom 20% of our society.  Through ComCare, we ensure that no needy Singaporean is left behind. With the $200 million top up to the ComCare Endowment Fund, the Fund now stands at $800 million.  We will be able to do more for the needy.  I would like to refer Members to the handout, which lists all the ComCare enhancements we will be making.  All in, we will spend $63.7 million in FY2008.  In comparison, we spent $47.6 million in FY2007.

     We base our help for the needy on several principles.  In particular, we are work-focused and low in entitlements.  We stress family as the first line of support.  We help the needy to stand on their own two feet.  And we focus a lot of our help on the children, so that they can break out of the poverty cycle.

     Our help for the needy is mostly delivered through the Community Development Councils (CDCs).  MPs who feel that there are too many schemes need not worry, as these schemes can broadly be grouped into three pillars.

     First, ComCare Self Reliance is targeted at those who can work. The Work Support Programme comes under this pillar. The new ComCare Transitions will also be part of this pillar. 

     Second, ComCare Grow is targeted at the children. Besides administering childcare, kindergarten and student care subsidies, the CDCs also administer bursaries. They also link needy school children with help under the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme, and give them free textbooks and school materials.

     Third, under the ComCare Enable pillar, the CDCs administer Public Assistance, and also work with hospitals and HDB to apply for Medifund and rental flats respectively.

     Mdm Halimah Yacob had suggested raising the income ceiling for social assistance schemes.  Our ComCare schemes should remain targeted at the neediest.  The Government already provides substantial support for lower middle-income Singaporeans, such as housing grants, medical subsidies and growth dividends.

     Nonetheless, we are child-centric and keen to do more for lower-income families with children.  This is the best way to ensure social mobility.  Already, ComCare expenditure for children from lower-income families made up 40% of all ComCare expenditure in 2007.  In 2006, about 5% of children did not attend pre-school.  Thanks to the extensive outreach efforts by the grassroots, today, only 3% of children in Singapore did not attend pre-school in 2007.  We will continue to work with the grassroots to reach out to such children.

     And we will do even more. Currently, only families earning $1,500 or less per month can receive up to 90% subsidies for kindergarten and $320 per month subsidies for childcare, under ComCare Grow.  We will extend kindergarten and childcare centre financial assistance to help children of families earning between $1,501 and $1,800 per month.  These families will receive a 70% subsidy to cover the cost of sending their children to pre-school.

     For example, a two-child family earning $1,700 a month, with one child in kindergarten and the other in childcare, will need only pay about $25 per month for kindergarten and $150 a month for childcare.  They will save about $265 each month. It will make pre-school much more affordable for them.  We expect an additional 5,000 children to benefit from this change.

     We will also extend kindergarten financial assistance to cover the fees of children attending nursery programmes.  Families earning $1,500 or less a month will receive a 90% subsidy, while those earning $1,501 to $1,800 a month will receive a 70% subsidy.  A family earning $1,500 per month may receive subsidies of about $65 per month to offset the cost of the child's nursery education, and have to pay only about $7 a month to attend nursery.  We expect some 3,500 additional children to benefit from this.

     On top of this, we will ensure that families receiving financial assistance for their children in childcare will not be affected by the recent increases in the childcare fees.  We will increase the subsidy amount by up to $20 for children attending childcare. This is the same amount that childcare fees have risen by.  This brings the total subsidy for childcare fees to $340 a month.  It means that despite the recent increases in childcare fees, a two-child family earning $1,500 will still only need to pay about $100 for each child to attend childcare. 

      All in, some 19,000 children from lower-income families are expected to benefit from these changes.  It will help to make pre-school affordable, so that every child has the opportunity to benefit from a good education.

     Many of my colleagues, including Mr Inderjit Singh, Mr Siew Kum Hong, Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed, Dr Ong Seh Hong, Mr Seah Kian Peng and Dr Loo Choon Yong have expressed particular concern for the needy elderly.  My Minister had earlier announced the revisions to the Public Assistance rates.  At the same time, we recognise that although some needy elderly have working children, their children themselves live from hand to mouth while supporting their own families and children. They often do not have much left to give to their aged parents. Hence, we will revise the Public Assistance eligibility criteria to include needy Singaporeans whose children are unable to support them.  With the revision, needy elderly Singaporeans with children can still be eligible for PA as long as their children are supporting their own families and children with a household income of less than $1,000 a month.  They will receive the PA allowance as well as extensive support from the Government and the community. We expect about 600 households to benefit from this revision. 

     Mdm Halimah Yacob and Mr Liang Eng Hwa had previously called for more to be done to help those who are temporarily unable to work.  We currently help them on a case-by-case, short-term basis.  To give them more assurance, we will launch a new scheme, the ComCare Transitions, to provide medium-term assistance for them.  The help would be flexible and calibrated to their needs.  It could include a subsistence allowance, rental, utilities, services and conservancy subsidies as well as support for their medical expenses.  At the same time, case workers may be assigned to help them improve their family circumstances. They will be eligible for assistance of up to 12 months, and subsequent extensions may be granted, subject to a thorough review. We expect about 1,400 households to  benefit from ComCare Transitions.

     The CDCs and grassroots are flexible when helping the needy. We will work with these agencies to be even more flexible.

     We will be providing a further $10 million boost to the CCF, VWOs and Self Help Groups over the next four years.  In particular, the CCF will be topped up by $5 million.  This is on top of the $10 million injection which was given last year.  With this boost, there will be $6.25 million per year available in the CCF.  I trust that grassroots leaders should have more than enough resources to help their needy residents.

     Furthermore, a ComCare Review Committee for Financial Assistance, chaired by myself and involving all five Mayors, has been set up to ensure flexibility in implementation.  It will ensure that deserving cases do not slip through the net.  The Review Committee will provide a platform for valuable experience to be shared and guidelines to be standardised.

     To ensure that the needy know where to go for help, MCYS has launched ComCare Call – 1800 222 0000.  If you see someone needing assistance but do not know how to help, ask him or her to call ComCare Call or make the call for them.

     Mr Wee Siew Kim and Dr Magad have highlighted that some families urgently need a roof over their heads. MCYS' focus is on the destitute.  If a person is destitute, he can be admitted into a welfare home.  However, very often, individuals or families become homeless because of estranged relationships or repossession of their flats.  We try to help them resolve issues with their families.  The majority of them are eventually able to move in with family and friends or rent a room.  Nevertheless, sometimes such options are not feasible.  MCYS has therefore worked with HDB and a VWO to use a few HDB flats as temporary shelter for these displaced families.  We have helped 20 such families under this arrangement as of end January 2008.  But I still want to emphasise that MCYS' duty is to help the destitute.

    Together, these changes will enhance our social safety net, and provide greater assurance that needy Singaporeans do not fall behind.  We will continue to ensure needy families are able to get help.

     Nonetheless, we agree with Mr Sin Boon Ann that simply increasing the payouts from our social assistance schemes would not be sufficient to address the full effects of globalisation on all quarters of our society.  Our Many Helping Hands approach towards helping the needy has served us well over the years.  We agree with Mr Zaqy Mohamad that the community has a key role to play to help not just the needy, but also the sandwiched lower-middle class.  The Government will continue to empower the community to help the needy.

     Like Mr Sin Boon Ann and Miss Penny Low, we recognise the major role social enterprises can play to help the needy and disadvantaged.   In December last year, the Social Enterprise Committee submitted its recommendation on improving the social enterprise sector. We are accepting 25 of the 26 recommendations.  One is being studied further.   MCYS will continue to partner and support the social enterprise sector. We have committed about $4.5 million this year to implement the recommendations.  We will focus on building up the capacity of social enterprises, while continuing to seed-fund new social enterprises.

     A key recommendation is to form a Social Enterprise Association to provide leadership to the sector.  It will be set up by the middle of the year.

4.00 pm

     Last year,

a study by the Lien Foundation Centre for Social Innovation pointed out the need to improve the business competencies of social enterprises.  They must be able to compete on a level playing field with other commercial enterprises.  Hence, we will help strengthen social enterprises' business viability by setting up a social enterprise development centre.  There will be training opportunities to develop the skills of social entrepreneurs.  At the same time, we will revise the criteria of the $3 million a year ComCare Enterprise Fund to emphasise that social enterprises should have good business models.

     In addition to social enterprises, we want to encourage more socially responsible enterprises.  Therefore, the $1 million Caring Companies initiative will be a focused effort to encourage companies to employ the needy disadvantaged.  It will provide them with financial and operational support as well as recognition, when they hire the needy disadvantaged.

     Entrepreneurs can also choose to set up social enterprises as co-operatives.  Co-operatives can tap on the $30 million Central Co-operative Fund.  The Fund can be used to support part of the startup and operating cost of new co-operatives.  The CDCs are looking into setting up co-operatives to provide employment to the disadvantaged.  At the same time, we will promote the involvement of the business community in the social enterprise sector, by encouraging them to mentor social enterprises.  I think mentorships are very important, so we would like to encourage successful businessmen to volunteer their services to hold the hands of new social enterprises.

          The Chairman: Mdm Yu-Foo, sorry to interrupt, but there are three more replies after this.  Give them enough time.

     Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon: OK. Sir, now, let me just say a few words about bonding in the community.

     (In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] Minister Vivian Balakrishnan has clearly explained the importance of the social foundations of education.  It is to train our people and to enable everyone to go to school to receive training, education or retraining, so that everybody can find a job.

     Like what Mr Ong Ah Heng had said earlier, parents are so busy at work nowadays that there is lack of communication at home.  So, we must start from ourselves, just as the Chinese saying goes, “Hao Ren Hao Shi, Zhou Bian Zuo Qi  好人好事，周边做起”.  This  means that, to advocate good deeds, we must start with ourselves.  However, whenever we have a problem, we always point our fingers at the grassroots, the Government and the social workers.

     In today’s society, we have about one million families and only about 600 social workers.  Even if we were to increase the number of social workers to 1,000 or 2,000, we will still not be able to cope with the needs of our families, the households and the people.  I am happy to note that the People’s Association, the National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre and the clan associations have recently come together to build and promote stronger relationships within the community and the family.  In fact, they have come up with an initiative to input the residents’ contacts in their networks and database, so that every year, they can invite the residents for networking sessions, or maybe have tea and chit-chat with them, so as to foster greater bonding among residents.  Take, for example, one of our residents, a respectful Hainanese elderly, recently passed away, but his children were overseas when he passed away.  The Hainanese clan took on the responsibility to take care of his funeral arrangements.  Another example is the Nanyang Girls’ High alumni.  The students love and care for all their former teachers and, when some of the retired teachers passed away, it is the school’s alumni that helps to take care of the funeral arrangements.

     Recently, one of my retired friends told me that her mother is getting senile and her father is also suffering from dementia.  The rest of her siblings are overseas and she is worried that no one can look after the parents when she is away from home.  In this case, she turns to her neighbours for help to take care of them.  Just now,  the Minister and I have already announced a number of initiatives and we have said that there are enough funds.

     What we need is more people who work in the social sector, like Ms Denise Phua and Miss Penny Low.  We need them to work with the Government to further strengthen our social system.  A Japanese Professor once said that the Asian society has a strong social system.  Besides having a strong social system, we also have a strong legal system.  As our nation becomes more and more prosperous, we should not neglect the importance of family relationships.  We should strengthen family ties and promote stronger bonding with our friends, relatives, etc.  As Minister Khaw Boon Wan said yesterday, if we want the Government to pay for everything, then we will regress over time.

Elderly Abuse

     Dr Lily Neo: Sir, there are at least 100 cases of battered and neglected elders each year.  These helpless elderly for various reasons were just the tip of the iceberg as most cases were not reported.  Laws are enacted to regulate the behaviour between individuals, for example, laws to protect domestic workers.  Is it not our obligation to look after the people who had built Singapore of today?  Why can we not have elderly abuse laws for our elders who merit protection?  And lastly, Sir, what are the steps taken by MCYS to strengthen the social fabric of our society and to reinforce the virtue and the practice of social piety?

Caregivers' Support

     Dr Lam Pin Min (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, allow me to relate this story published in the Straits Times Forum page last year by a fellow Singaporean, Mr Raymond Anthony Fernando.  He wrote:

     "As a sole caregiver to my wife who was stricken with schizophrenia 17 years ago, my journey with her has been extremely painful.  With hardly any support from family members, I have been burnt out several times - physically, mentally and financially.  It is a very real struggle for me to provide a safe haven for her in a world that is filled with prejudice and discrimination against people with mental illness.  I am often helpless, laughing on the outside, crying on the inside.  There is no one to provide even a listening ear in my weakest moments." 

     He went on to say:

     "The structural support for caregivers in Singapore is very weak; many a time, it is just not there.  This is why I have been relentless in speaking up for both the mentally ill and their caregivers.  I raised the issue of a caregiver's allowance last year because caregiving is a full time job, especially with those stricken with mental disorders.  I urge the Government to help in our very difficult journey.  Do not neglect citizens who need support badly."

     This story is real and it is not unique.  There are many Singaporeans out there who are facing the same predicament, many not knowing where to turn to for help, suffering in silence.  It very much sums up what I have to say.  There are basically two fundamental issues at hand: Caregivers' support and allowance and social support for patients with mental disorders.  However, my cut will only touch on the former.

     Caregiving is a challenging task that can impact a caregiver emotionally and physically.  The caregiver's role for a family with persons with disability or mental disorders can be very demanding and could be a lifelong responsibility.  Without adequate support. caregivers are prone to exhaustion, emotional stress, financial and other care-related strains, resulting in burn-out of the caregivers and premature or unnecessary institutionalisation of persons who can otherwise benefit from home care.

    Yes, the Ministry would argue that there are already existing programmes, incentives and services, such as caregiver training grant, foreign domestic worker levy concession, family or caregiver support group, etc.  However, the common feedback from caregivers is that whilst they are appreciative of the efforts put in by the Ministries and the VWOs to support them, they felt that many of these efforts are ad-hoc and there was a need to ensure continuity.

     In Mandarin, Sir.

     (In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] With the high standard and cost of living in Singapore, most of us would require a regular paying job to support our families and ourselves.  However, there are many families among us with elderly sick or disabled family members who require special attention and care.  The care of a disabled family member and the elderly sick can be emotionally, physically and financially draining.  Often times, caregivers have to quit their job to care for their dependent loved ones at home.  Many countries have already embarked on providing caregivers with monetary allowances designed to compensate family caregivers for their unpaid effort and stress.

     In Singapore, our increasingly ageing population with one in five expected to be above the age of 65 in 2030, we will all be receivers or givers of care at some point in our lives.  In anticipation of such  demographic trends, I hope that MCYS will study how to better support caregivers, both financially and psychologically.

     (In English ):  Often times, caregivers have to quit their jobs to care for their loved ones at home.  Home-based care not only provides the ideal cost-effective long-term care of the elderly frail and disabled in the family, it also helps free up limited vacancies in daycare centres and old folks' homes for families who genuinely requires such services.  Having said that, it is ultimately the responsibility of  family members to provide the necessary love and care, and such fundamental values of filial piety should never be eroded with time.  I hope that MCYS and PA would also continue to inculcate and promote such family values and virtues among Singaporeans.

     I am not advocating that caregivers be given an exorbitant amount of allowances but rather token amounts to help alleviate the financial burden faced by such families.  Another alternative would be to register bona fide caregivers as part of the workforce, thus qualifying them for workfare bonuses under the Workfare Incentive Scheme.  One might argue about the practicality and difficulty in defining a bona fide caregiver.  But I believe such semantics and administrative hurdle should not be a road-block to providing the financial support such deserving caregivers so desperately need.

     I would therefore like to urge the Minister to consider providing allowance to caregivers in Singapore or even extending the Workfare Incentive Scheme to them so that their sacrifices and hard work will not be left unrecognised.

     Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah): Recently, Sir, the Government looked into schemes to assist the disabled.  For example, there is talk of a trust scheme to assist the disabled with their finances after their caregivers die.  There are also existing measures such as income tax relief for the families of disabled persons and a discount on the foreign workers levy for families who employ maids to look after disabled persons.  However, in addition to these schemes, I would like to propose along the same lines as what Dr Lam has proposed, that the Ministry reconsider the provision of a monthly allowance to the carers of disabled family members.  Let me give three reasons why.

     Firstly, roughly two-thirds of Singaporeans do not pay income tax, so the number of carers who can benefit from income tax relief is few.  Second, many carers do not have an income to begin with as they provide full-time care for their disabled relatives.  Thus, the income tax relief scheme is of little or no assistance to them.  Third, many carers providing full-time care do not employ helpers.  This may be because they are unable to afford a helper, or they prefer to care for the family members themselves.  So the levy concession is irrelevant to them.

     Similarly, carers who care for their disabled relatives at home do not benefit from the subsidies given to families of the disabled in institutional care.  Our current policies are geared towards getting family members – that is, the potential caregivers – out of the home to work, entrusting the care of the disabled to maids or institutions.  This seems to be at odds with our vision of building stronger, closer families with institutional care as a last resort.

     In other developed nations such as Australia, France, some Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands, the state provides caregivers with a regular allowance.  For reasons also listed by my Parliamentary colleague, Dr Lam, I hope that our Government could consider giving direct financial support to our army of invisible caregivers for their years of sacrifice and hard work.

Elderly Care

     Mdm Cynthia Phua (Aljunied): Sir, as a mother and a wife, I would like to thank the Minister for his politically-right statement.  There are many men now who are going overseas to do business and the opportunities to err and subject to temptations are high.

     Getting back to elderly care, based on the report of the Committee on Ageing Issues on 3rd February 2006, it gives the profile of the elderly population in the years to come.  As at 2005, we had about 300,000 elderly individuals over the age of 65 in Singapore and this number is expected to rise to 873,000 in 2030.

Seniors who are living alone or with spouse almost doubled, about 10% in 1995 to 20% in 2005.  Proportionately, more residents, males and females, have remained single.  Each successive cohort of older people will be increasingly more educated and fluent.

     On education and values of filial piety, our families are getting smaller and there are also more singles.  We must outreach to the families that the primary source of support for the elderly must rest primarily on the families and not the nation.  In schools, filial piety must be emphasised.  Relevant information and education, and educational materials, especially the use of new media by both MCYS and MOE, are critical to imbue these values into our children.  We are seeing more elderly parents who come and ask for rental flats, stating their children do not want them and they are getting older and older.  I have a couple of 80 years old coming to see me.  While we understand that some families may have difficulty to support their elderly parents, they must ask for help.  They would ask how and where to ask for help.  This is the situation now at the community.  There is a lack of coordinated information and no central venue to find the information  or services that they need.

     Here, I support the Government's call on the many-hands approach and encourage more voluntary service organisations to support the elderly in the community.  With this approach, the Ministry must then plan and put in place the relevant services suitable for the elderly in the community.  There must be a range of services from helping our elderly to be socially active and to daycare for the elderly.  Presently, the services are provided ad hoc and not coordinated.  Can the Ministry explain what are the planning parameters for elderly daycare and elderly homes in the community?

     Under the Eldercare Masterplan as well, it was shown that neighbourhood links (NLs) are part of the Ministry's plan in offering more services for active and ambulant seniors.  I urge that more of these entities should be developed for the benefit of the elderly, as it serves as a good way to promote integration of the elderly and decrease their loneliness.  I have supported one NL in the estate and it is politically managed, and I have seen the goodness of NL.  My appeal is that we should build more NLs now and not delay, because the ageing process does not wait.

    In addition, the NL should cover a smaller precinct not more than 20 blocks where accessibility is critical.  And we do not want a NL to serve precincts that is cut off by major networks of roads.  It must be accessible and convenient to drop by.

     On keeping track of the elderly, as stated earlier, there will be more and more single elderly living alone.  As of now, there is still no agency established to keep track of these individuals.  We have seen an increasing trend of elderly people who are limited in mobility and have frail health and spend their time cooped up in the flat.  Persistent approach does not open the doors.  When they eventually die, their death goes unnoticed like in the Lorong Ah Soo's case.  Such a scenario is indeed a pitiful one.  I suggest the Ministry look into a coordinated approach to handle these cases, where VWOs are unable to reach out to them and the Police are also unable to help because there is no known concern.

Active Ageing

     Mr Ong Ah Heng: (In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] Sir, it is very common for those Singaporeans who have stopped working actively to find retirement boring and they struggle to occupy their time.  They can only go to the neighbourhood coffeeshop to sit for a while and they are very afraid to stay at home because they are worried that they might become a burden to their family members.  So it is important that we occupy our senior citizens with interesting recreational activities.  We can consider setting up more Senior Citizens’ Centres and engaging volunteers to organise activities for them, enabling them to lead a more enriching and meaningful life.

            Many senior citizens have retired with no specific plans to spend their twilight days.  To them, retirement means coming close to sufferings of illness and gradually death.  Therefore, I urge MCYS to organise more programmes to engage these senior citizens so that we can help them overcome their anxiety and fear towards death.

     Mr Baey Yam Keng (Tanjong Pagar): Sir, my wife and I took a cruise holiday in Australia last year.  We happily and proudly shared with other passengers, mostly local Australians, that we were celebrating our 10th wedding anniversary.  But very soon, we were slightly embarrassed to realise that we were easily the least married among them!  Many fellow passengers are senior citizens.  A couple was celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary while a man was celebrating his 90th birthday with his wife and family on the cruise.

     For many couples on the cruise, the cruise was part of a much longer and more physically demanding holiday where they spend three to six months driving a caravan around the country.  Many of the passengers were also not that agile, fit or healthy.  The 90-year old birthday boy is in a wheelchair and his wife uses a walking frame.  However, their physical conditions have not deterred them from venturing beyond their homes and enjoying their lives.

     On the other hand, we see a different picture in Singapore.  When statistics show that of those who are now 62 years old, half will live beyond 85 years old, many people do not believe it, as they say they do not see many old people around!

     The fact is there are indeed many old people around, just that they are mostly not very active and not seen.  They are confining themselves to their homes and void decks because of physical limitations.  Our senior citizens are indeed a lot less active compared to their counterparts in other countries.  I think there are three main reasons.

     Financial stability is one.  Hence, the call for us to do proper financial planning and save adequately for retirement needs is important.

     The environment also needs to be conducive for the elderly to go around.  As we get older, our physical attributes decline.  Hence, we need to continue our efforts to enhance barrier-free accessibility in Singapore.  There are also non-physical barriers, for example, many still have problems with our English-dominated society. 

     I think the most important factor, the third factor, is the mindset.  I met many elderly women who do not like to take pictures because they say, "lao chao bo already, not pretty anymore."  So in this image-conscious botox society where we always see young fresh faces on TV and advertisements, I think we need to remind ourselves that old age is beautiful too.  Wrinkles are lines of life and wisdom, nothing to be ashamed of.  We should laugh more to enjoy our age, not despair and frown.  Anyway, laughing and frowning both give us wrinkles.  So let us take a more positive outlook in life and laugh more, irregardless of age.

    The society at large, and everyone of us, can play a part, especially as children and grandchildren. Besides supporting our elderly family members financially, we need to spend more time with them, bring them out more often, expose them to new things and new experiences in life.

     The Government can also play a part.  Hence, I would like to ask the Minister on plans to promote active ageing in Singapore.  Besides helping people to be active after retirement, we should also not use age to discriminate.  We can have a minimum age for smoking, drinking and sex, but I would urge the Government to remove all maximum age limits in licensing requirements, where possible.

     I am glad that, in 2006, LTA raised the age limit for taxi drivers from 70 to 73 years.  However, I would like to see more of the likes of MOE's reply in the Forum last April, which said that there is no age limit to the Adjunct Teachers Programme "as long as they are medically and physically fit to contribute effectively as a teacher."  But there are still examples like the age limit of 70 for the application of driving licence, Classes 4, 4A and 5, with private driving instructors.  I hope the Traffic Police and other Government bodies will identify the specific requirements, whether physical, medical, intellectual or otherwise, and use them as qualifying criteria instead.  Not all old people are sick, unfit or weak.  Let us not use age as a convenient proxy.

     Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong (Tanjong Pagar): Sir,  apart from Dr Lily Neo, I think not many of us know about a block of old people in Chinatown, where they make death pacts among themselves:  If you go first, I will take care of your funeral.  If I go first, you take care of mine.

     Dying alone is a tragedy, something that is hard to imagine until we hear or read about it. 

     What touched me is a story I recently read.  It was written by Sylvia Toh Paik Choo.  She is a well-known comic writer, but in this case, her story was a touching and poignant one.  She wrote in a local newspaper about how an old neighbour, whom she called Auntie Hong Chee, now 80, was found in her flat.  The bodies of her husband and daughter were also inside the flat, badly decomposed.

     Sylvia Toh found out about them when she read of the death in the newspapers, and she remembers them in better time.  She wrote, and I quote:

     "Uncle Tong Seng and Auntie Hong Chee (his wife) were old family friends of my parents.  Every Chinese New Year, the couple and their young son and little daughter would visit us in Prinsep Street.  This was in the 1960s.  We more or less lost contact in the 1980s and I often wondered what became of the Wongs.  To my shock and despair, I read in the news two days ago of the sad circumstances of the deaths of Mr Wong Tong Seng and his daughter, and more painful still, the wife and mother Auntie Hong Chee's state, perhaps approaching senility, as she appeared unaware they had died, thinking they were sleeping."

     Sir, I hope we can create greater social awareness – about how we die, and how we can take care of those who may die alone.  No one needs to die alone is in the overall context of regarding the elderly with dignity and value.

     Sir, I would like to make three suggestions on behalf of our senior citizens.  First, I think the People's Association (PA) and VWOs could work together to create a social network that allows neighbours and friends to keep in touch with the immobile and the elderly.  The many RC (Residents' Committee) senior citizens committees, for example, can form friendship links among their members and senior citizens in their precincts, so that there is a network for them to rely on and to check on the well-being of each other.

     Second, we could create a social culture to eulogise those among our communities who have passed on.  There are many newspapers in the world which have obituaries, celebrating the lives of the great and the good.  But why should we do this only for the giants among us?  Even ordinary people have great stories – their lives can serve to illuminate and educate us in some way.  Remembering and celebrating ordinary lives is something that we should do for friends, neighbours and the forgotten in our community.

     My third and final point is about valuing the lives of old people.  All too often, we assume that old people are worth less. For example, the 10% cut in pay when you reach 60 or 62 years old is almost automatic in many companies.  I think Dr Lim Wee Kiat gave a vivid example of a case yesterday.

     Should this be the case?  I think we must remember that "worth less" is only one space from "worthless".  The argument has been made that the cut is a mere "catch up" to right the wrong of a seniority-based system.

      Sir, I understand the rationale behind this argument, but such an automatic approach inadvertently gives the wrong idea that old people are "worth less", or worse still, "worthless".  In my Radin Mas ward, I see the problem of old people losing their self-respect and dignity.  Some of them have very low sense of self-worth.  They are the generation for which the benefits of our CPF policies have come too late and too little.   They have depleted their CPF savings while they are still relatively healthy.  But due to their age, few employers would want to offer them jobs because of the thinking that they are unproductive and valueless.

     Feeling rejected by the society and running out of money, they can only turn to social welfare (such as Public Assistance), and in return, they see themselves as a burden to their family and the society.  It pains me whenever I meet old people with such thinking.

     Must our senior citizens be in this sorry state?  No, I do not think so.  In the Redhill area, there is a 91-year old lady who is fiercely independent and still working as a cleaner at a hawker centre.  She works, not because she needs to, but because she chooses to, since she is still healthy and active.  More importantly, she has a very enlightened employer who sees the value of senior citizens.  She and her employer are shining examples of how our senior citizens could and should live their lives actively and meaningfully.  So I think the Government, PA, VWOs and community agencies can collectively come together to do something to increase the value of our senior citizens.

      There are some initiatives of this sort but more can be done.  For example, the Chinese Development Assistance Council has started a project called Silver Talent Programme since January 2006.  The purpose of this programme is to help senior citizens by training them to acquire a marketable skill, helping them to look for a job,

creating voluntary opportunities for the better-off old folks to provide their service and time to help the less fortunate ones.

4.30 pm

     Similar programmes can be organised and scaled up by other VWOs, with the help and encouragement of the Government.  All these will give old people a second and a golden opportunity to live their old age meaningfully.

     Finally, if this collective initiative works and old people in Singapore do not feel worthless and useless when they are old and retired, we would have created a new dimension for the old people and Singapore.  Then, eulogies by family members need not be about mourning the sad passing of the old people, but about celebrating their full and meaningful lives.  Sir, when this day comes, we can then claim to be closer to a first-world country and a gracious society.

Needs of the Elderly

     Mr Wee Siew Kim: Sir, following Mr Sam Tan's topic on dying alone, let me deal with the topic of living together. 

     Here, I would like to raise for consideration the issue of inter-generational relationships.  We encourage multi-generational families to live together as we believe this builds stronger family bonds.  The elderly will be cared for by their nearest and dearest while the young develop close relationships with their grandparents.  In an ideal setting, the grandparents act as mentors, share cultural values and keep an eye on the young children while both parents work.

     However, in reality, there are many instances of friction and tension in multi-generational families living under one roof.  These come about from differing values, expectations, living styles, conflicting personalities, etc.  In such situations, the aged are often the ones with limited options.  I know of elderly residents who deliberately spend long hours out of their homes, eg, at void decks, to avoid family members and, in reality, to "escape".   In such instances, I see two needs arising.

     Firstly, these families need professional help.  They need intermediaries, counsellors to help sort through the home issues and come up with solutions that are acceptable to all parties.  Hence, we have to provide resources to beef up the capacity and capabilities of our Family Service Centres to meet such needs. 

     Secondly, we should provide affordable day activity centres for the elderly to spend a greater part of their daylight hours in an environment that is conducive to their needs.  It is what some would call active ageing.  This will go some way in resolving some of the tension at home. 

     I believe that, for such active ageing centres to succeed, affordability and location proximity are key.  I ask if the Minister would consider setting aside land next to town centres, or next to or right inside MRT stations for such active ageing centres.  Equip the centres with fitness equipment, recreational rooms, activity areas, audio-visual equipment and even small workshops so that the elderly can find a desirable place to socialise, keep fit and enjoy leisure with others in the same age-group.  As location and costs are key, without strong leadership and push from MCYS, it would be difficult for such centres to take root and succeed.  There is always an economic argument for such prime space to be allocated for other uses.  

     Further, if the MCYS could prescribe a criterion such that we see as many of these active ageing centres as Community Clubs today, then we would have achieved a desired level of societal commitment and recognition of our elderly worthy of our gracious society aspirations.

Community Development

     The Minister of State for Health (Mr Heng Chee How): Sir, our population profile is changing.  There are more older people.  Incomes have become more stretched out.  There are more foreigners working and living here, and new citizens are joining us.  Families are getting smaller, and some have become dysfunctional.  Neighbours do not always know one another and sometimes they are not friendly to one another.  So, the community as a whole is becoming more diverse and complex, and we will have to contend with more non-connection, more disconnection and more fraying of relationships.

     A strong community depends on both material as well as non-material well-being, in other words, money is important but money is not the only thing.  Non-monetary things, such as a shared sense of purpose and hope, good health, strong family and social relationships are equally important.  Therefore, it is not a selfish, lonely or ostentatious pursuit.  A happy community should be one where people bother and care.  On the ground, the grassroots organisations have been a positive force for organising activities for residents and for targeting help at their local needy. 

     Going forward, I believe that the role of grassroots organisations and their constituency officers to support them has to evolve and adapt further.  Engagement means outreach.  It also means encouraging people to rally around innate interests and to strengthen the sense of neighbourliness.  As Minister of  State Yu-Foo Yee Shoon mentioned just now, hao ren hao shi, cong zhou bian zhuo qi.  Community partnerships that bring more people as well as more groups closer together for mutual interest, care and support will therefore strengthen the social glue. 

     There is know-how for doing this well so that it does not become a numbers game.  I also believe that what gets measured gets done, and what is rewarded is repeated.  Hence, I would like to know if there are plans to further strengthen community outreach along the lines that I have described.  If so, I would like to know whether training and development would be offered in this area in order to enhance the ground capability.  I would like to know if performance indicators would then be adjusted to reflect, recognise and reward progress.

     The Minister, Prime Minister's Office (Mr Lim Boon Heng): Six years ago, a book titled “Authentic Happiness” was published in the US.  This is not a typical self-help book.  It was written by Dr Martin Seligman, who served as President of the American Psychological Association in the 1990s.  He was known then for his work on depression.  But when his young daughter accused him of being a grouch, he decided to focus on “what made life worth living”.  Today, his book has been translated into 20 languages. 

     Seligman defines “Happiness” in three ways: 

     First, enjoy a pleasurable life – shopping, eating out, travelling and other pursuits;

     Second, enjoy a good life – being totally absorbed in work or hobby, enjoying time with family and friends;

     Third, enjoy a meaningful life – to pursue a cause that goes beyond the self, such as community work, raising a family, teaching, and even politics.

     The pursuit of happiness is fundamental to our existence.  With an ageing society, our Government’s objective is to help seniors live a happy, healthy and active life.

[Mdm Deputy Speaker (Ms Indranee Rajah) in the Chair]

4.40 pm
            
     To do this, we need to be free from financial worry – food on the table, and maybe a little more to enjoy the finer things in life.  This is why the Government has devoted a lot of attention to financial security for seniors.  Last year, the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme was introduced to help lower-income workers save for old age.  We will help more Singaporeans, especially self-employed and informal workers, to contribute and benefit from the scheme.  And we have had a debate yesterday and today on this. 

     More recently, the CPF LIFE Scheme was introduced, providing CPF members with a steady, basic level of income for the rest of their lives.  Most important of all, we have encouraged people to work as long as they can, and for as long as they want.  With income, there will be more money to spend.  We target to raise the employment rate of those in the 55-64 age group to 65% by 2012, from around 56% today.  Public discussions have led people to realise, and accept, that they have to work longer.  Recently, a relative told me she hopes to retire at 50, but wistfully says she cannot afford to do so.  She is a typical Singaporean.  AXA, an insurer, has been conducting international retirement surveys for several years.  AXA’s most recent finding is that Singaporeans hope to retire earlier than in other developed countries.  However, AXA also found that three out of four working Singaporeans would like to hold a paid job after retirement.  What it suggests is that Singaporeans want control over what they do, such as doing a different job with flexible hours or fixed shorter hours.

     Several MPs have commented on the need to enhance the dignity of seniors through work.  I agree.  Apart from money, seniors find friends, meaning and purpose at their workplace.  These are essential ingredients of happiness. 

      Finding employment for those who are willing and able to work, especially the lower-educated, is vital.  Mr Sam Tan has spoken about the CDAC’s Silver Talent Programme.  I hope to see similar initiatives being launched this year.  This morning, I read that three job-related co-operatives are being set up, two by our CDCs.

     As important as having enough money, is having good health.  In recent years, the concept of a “rectangular” life has emerged.  The Okinawans prefer the balloon analogy, but let us stick to the rectangular life concept.  In the ideal world, we live a long and healthy life, followed by a swift and peaceful end.  One of my colleagues joked that a way to achieve a “rectangular” life is to live unhealthily – eat char kway teow everyday, smoke, drink, do not exercise – so that we can die quickly. 

     This seems an appealing thought.  But it does not always work out this way.  Thanks to good healthcare, many of us can survive a stroke, heart attack or cancer.  Instead of having a “rectangular” life, we may face a “triangular” life.  The good news is that, everywhere in the developed world, the number of years that a senior spends in illness and disability is falling.  This is called a “compression of morbidity”.  Good sanitation, modern medicine and healthy lifestyles are the identified key reasons.  We will do more to promote a healthy lifestyle in Singapore. 
    
     Science tells us that regular exercise is vital not only for physical health and to reduce the risks of chronic illnesses, but even mental health.  Many popular exercises involve social bonding.  Yet, three in four Singaporeans, including seniors - or maybe especially seniors – are not exercising regularly.       

     The Straits Times recently reported about Mr Kor Hong Fatt, who completed his ninth marathon at the age of 76.  Remarkably, he only started running at 70, after a heart attack.  If we have not started early to exercise, it is better late than never.  It will improve the quality of life.

     This year, Mr Heng Chee How will chair a committee to promote physical activity for seniors.  This is a public-people-private sector initiative to make recommendations, promote and set targets on physical activity for our seniors.  The committee will also look at ways to enhance the physical environment, so that seniors are motivated to exercise.    

     The Ministry of Health’s plans to introduce nationwide health screening and nurse educators will also empower seniors to look after their health.  Listening to Members who spoke just now about whether we have adequate support services for seniors, if we look at what has been announced by the various Ministries, including the Ministry of Health, in the COS debate, there are indeed elements that are being put in place.  This way, we can look forward not only to a happy life, but also a healthy and long one.

     We also need to ensure that healthcare and long-term care are accessible and affordable when they are needed.  Improvements to healthcare financing have been progressively introduced.  MediShield has been modified to return it to its original purpose, covering the insured for higher hospital bills.  Means-testing will be introduced so that more help can be given to the lower-income.  
 
     As a proportion of the elderly population will need varying degrees of long-term care, I led a team last year to study the comprehensive Japanese long-term care insurance system.  We came back strongly convinced that we cannot go down the same path.  And Mr Khaw Boon Wan mentioned that the demand was not according to plan and the claims simply ballooned.  So, five or six years after they have introduced it, I think there is a sense of crisis of that system.

4.45 pm

     Families have been, and should continue to be, the first line of support for the elderly.  This is what most seniors want.  This is what we will probably want for ourselves when we grow old.  Family ties are still strong in Singapore.  Although adult children are less likely to stay with their parents compared to 10 years ago, it is encouraging that the frequency and level of interaction are still strong.

     Instead of a comprehensive insurance system that pays for care for the elderly by for-profit private sector operators in nursing homes, we should study how we can improve our ElderShield plan to support the family to take care of the old.   The Ministry of Health has indeed enhanced ElderShield  payouts, in the event of severe disability, and is 60% higher now, with a slight increase in premiums.  The principles underlying ElderShield are sound: pooling of risks, self-reliance and choice by the individual and family on the type of care, preferably at home.

     Dr Lam Pin Min and Mr Christopher de Souza asked for the Government to provide a caregiver allowance.  As our population ages and family size becomes smaller, the burden of caregiving will indeed increase.  Caregivers contribute to society by caring for our elderly.  But putting a price tag on what is traditionally a family duty should be considered very carefully.  It monetises obligations and responsibilities within the family.  Both Members have spoken eloquently for caregiver allowance.  What is the solution?  Or should we say, “What are the solutions?”  We are studying the matter, including whether there could be further improvements to ElderShield.  So, sorry, this year, despite your pleas, there will be no caregiver allowance yet.  But we are looking at what we could do for the future.

     We are also developing a caregiving support framework that includes community-based care and home care.  This means that family as first line of care and support is not a mere slogan – we will help it remain a reality.

     I will speak next about our efforts to promote ageing-in-place.

     The elderly prefer to live in their own homes, within the community.  They want to be independent, not institutionalised.  They want to live among friends and family.   We have upgraded the environment to enable them to do so.  All our public housing estates are on target to achieve Barrier-Free Accessibility by 2011.  All new HDB housing will have Universal Design features, friendly to all ages.  Forty percent of the bus fleet will be wheelchair-accessible by 2010.

     Starting this year, all developments will also have to comply with the enhanced Code on Accessibility in the Built Environment.  It will cover facilities such as parks, open spaces, transport stations and bus shelters.  Connectivity between buildings and these facilities will be improved.

     Over the last few years, the HDB has also built studio apartments for seniors who want to monetise their property but still stay within the community.  The HDB has made it even easier for lower-income seniors to age-in-place, by introducing the Lease Buy-Back Scheme. 

     We will also encourage families to stay near each other.  HDB already provides a higher-tier CPF Housing Grant to a first-timer family buying a resale flat, if the family opts to live in the same flat or close to their parents.  The HDB will introduce a similar incentive to singles who buy a resale flat and live with their parents.  Eligible singles will now get an additional $9,000, or a total of $20,000, if they choose to buy a resale flat to live together with their parents.

     We will also improve the software to support ageing-in-place.  Together with the Ministry of Health, MCYS is looking to enhance the quality and integration of care in the community and home.  Therapists will be engaged to introduce "maintenance exercises" at daycare centres.  To make it easier for low-income seniors to visit these centres, a means-tested transport subsidy will be introduced this year.

     MCYS has also recently launched a Silver Community Test-bed Programme to encourage companies to develop products that help seniors age-in-place.  Themes being pursued include home monitoring and enhancing home safety.  The physical and even service aspects of ageing-in-place are relatively easy to achieve.  The social aspects, including community self-help, are harder to achieve.  I will take these matters under Active Ageing.

     Apart from good health, sufficient money and a familiar roof over their heads, happiness also requires our seniors to connect, care and contribute to others.  The most natural setting is within the community. Mdm Cynthia Phua and Mr Wee Siew Kim referred to it.  What matters is not how many people you know, but the quality of relationships that are formed.  This requires people to meet together regularly, more so in small groups than at large events.  Physical facilities may not be the solution.  The software for getting people to come together is far more important.  Mr Wee Siew Kim might want to know there is a Senior's Lounge in Ang Mo Kio Hub, his constituency.  But the problem of bringing people to that centre is not the centre itself, but the programmes and the software of bringing people there.  Likewise, for Mdm Cynthia Phua, neighbourhood links have been useful.  However, we take a pause to evaluate its effectiveness as compared to other programmes.  And there is, as far as I am aware, a daycare centre in her area in Lorong Ah Soo run by St Luke's.  So it is not for lack of physical facilities that the old seem to be left on their own.  It is how the community is organised.
 
     For the single elderly without family support, social bonds become even more important.  Neighbours and friends can look out for each other, and help one achieve a good life.  We are familiar with the Chinese saying, "yan chin bu ru gin ling".

    Mr Sam Tan's call is for the celebration of life.  To achieve it, we need a vibrant and connected neighbourhood.

     The one million dollar question then is how do we promote social bonds in the community?  Mr Heng Chee How asks: in our changing social environment, how does our grassroots morph to meet the current and future needs of the people?  Mr Wee Siew Kim asks for activity centres for the elderly in convenient locations.  Notwithstanding my remarks that the physical facilities may not be the answer, PA is studying both the physical infrastructure, such as community clubs of the future, and the organisational support for grassroots organisations.  So these will take sometime before we come up with concrete plans.

     Our grassroots organisations, especially the RCs, can and should play a key role in promoting social bonds.  PA has embarked on a recruitment campaign for volunteers, targeting the better educated.  This year, the People's Association has decided to focus on "Neighbourliness".  Over the next year, the PA will work with the RCs to establish a register of interest groups within their vicinity, not just those formed by the RCs, but also other casual groups.  This register will enable the RCs to support these groups and organise platforms for different groups to get together.  Collectively, they widen the resident's social networks.

      I would like to share three examples of social bonding in action.

      In Choa Chu Kang, Mr Ravindran Kathergamathamby, a PA staff, started out by organising parties involving families living on his floor.  This year, he decided to organise a bigger get-together for Chinese New Year cum the children's birthday.  Some 120 neighbours from eight floors and even their relatives attended the event.  They are now organising outings and overseas trips.  By tutoring each other's children, they save on tuition fees.

      In Sembawang, Dr Lim Wee Kiak challenged his grassroots organisations to host a 100 floor parties in order to reach out to his residents.  As an incentive, the residents get to take a group photograph with Dr Lim.  To date, a total of 55 floors from 30 different blocks have been covered by the five RCs in Canberra.  These floor parties help neighbours foster a "kampung spirit".  I understand Dr Lim Wee Kiak is hoping that this initiative will lead to people organising floor parties on their own, and not waiting for the RC to do so.  This is how we foster a community spirit.

    Seletar Hills is a private landed housing estate.  In late 2006, Mrs Chew Swee Liang, a grassroots leader, convinced 38 households to turn their pavements into a mini-garden.  She had support from the authorities.  From one street, three more streets have been added.  150 households are now involved.  From swapping gardening tips, they have gone on to having breakfast and potluck parties.  So another community that is reviving the old kampung spirit.

     HDB residents know on average 10 neighbours, according to a survey.  However, most of these are "Hello-Good Bye" relationships.  Interest groups and parties provide the platforms for neighbours to know each other.  When bonds strengthen, they will provide each other with mutual support, so essential for the care of the elderly.

     Like Mr Sam Tan, we are all saddened to hear about the Wong family in Lorong Ah Soo, where the mother has dementia.  Perhaps, a closer knit community of neighbors can help reduce such incidents in future.  We will train the grassroots volunteers to enable them to identify those who need help.  There is a programme called the Community Psychogeriatric Programme – a bit mouthful – which was launched last year, but VWO members and hopefully our grassroots leaders will also be trained to identify this kind of problems within the community.  Social services, including the Elder Protection Team under Transcentre, a VWO, also play an important role in providing assistance.

     Another VWO, the Alzheimer's Disease Association, will pilot an initiative to identify seniors with dementia, if they lose their way or are found wandering.  Called "Safe-Return", these seniors will be issued an identification card, which contains the contact information of their next-of-kin.

     To answer Mr Ong Ah Heng, the Seniors Helpline (1800-555-5555), managed by SAGE Counselling Centre,

provides counselling, information and referral services for older persons and their caregivers.  Very often, we say that people do not know where to go for help.  Earlier, Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon gave one call number; here is another one.

5.00 pm

     Dr Lily Neo and Mr Wee Siew Kim spoke on legislation to protect the elderly.  We believe that existing legislation is sufficient for now.  The Women's Charter and Penal Code protect the elderly against physical and emotional abuse.  The Maintenance of Parents Act protects against financial neglect.  The Mental Capacity Act, when passed in Parliament, makes ill treatment and wilful neglect of people with mental incapacity a criminal offence. 

     Real protection comes from preventing these cases from taking place, and if they do happen, to resolve them through mediation and counselling.  Applying the law should be the last resort.  It makes reconciliation almost impossible.  Social workers find that many family disputes can be resolved.  Frequently, the issues revolve around ignorance about care giving and relationship issues, financial hardships, and even neglect or unbecoming behaviour by the parents.  There is only a small minority of 'unfilial children', which should be swiftly dealt with by the law. 

     We will continue to make efforts to raise public awareness of elder abuse and maintenance of parents.  But as importantly, we must strengthen the help offered to the elderly, to reconcile with their family, where possible.  Very often, the one complained about is also the one providing the financial support. So we have to be very careful to treat this sensitively and delicately so as not to break that relationship forever. 

     But neighbours can play a part too, to help watch out for elderly neighbours and support those with care giving responsibilities, and this is why strong social bonds in the community are important.  

     Whilst the community can facilitate and support, the individual must also do their part to be active.  Our seniors lead very sedentary lives.  Hitherto, society's image of the elderly is that of frail men and women using walking aids or wheelchairs.  Typically, whenever we want a picture to depict the old, that is what comes up.  This is not true of our seniors above 75  –  eight out of 10 of them do not need walking aids to get around.  The emerging generation of seniors – post-war baby boomers – are even better educated, healthier and probably wealthier.  So we have to change the conventional image of the elderly.

     Mr Baey Yam Keng asked what we are doing to promote an active lifestyle for seniors.  Last May, the Council for Third Age was established to champion active ageing.  MCYS currently funds the Council.  On the Ministry's behalf, the Council also administers public education and the Golden Opportunities! (GO!) Fund.

     One of the first things the Council did was to re-brand Senior Citizens' Week to the Active Ageing Festival, which was held last November.  The Festival had a good start.  This year, the Council intends to promote active ageing more extensively.  It will work with the CDCs to bring this message to the community.

     Over the next two years, a Wellness Programme will be piloted in six sites all over the island.  Two have been launched at Jurong Central and Punggol South.  The key objective of the Wellness Programme is to support seniors in the community by identifying and meeting their needs, through information and referral, service coordination and development, as well as outreach efforts to promote active ageing and wellness.  Each site is expected to reach out to at least 1,000 seniors.  MCYS is allocating $4 million to this pilot.  One element of this is to help the seniors improve the quality of their life.  Health screening is one part of the programme, but to get them, from the results, to a healthier lifestyle is the difficult part.  KPIs will be established to see whether this Wellness Programme really makes a difference.

     Although each Wellness Programme will have at least two full-time staff, the support of the Advisor, grassroots leaders, Government agencies and the community-at-large is crucial to ensure it meets these objectives.  The objectives of the Wellness Programme are very much in line with the fundamental objectives of grassroots organisations – bonding the community.  So this Wellness Programme is not something we do separately; it is something we will have to do together with the grassroots organisations within the constituency.

     For now, the Wellness Programme is a pilot.  Each site is given the leeway to experiment with what works best for their  community.  As mentioned, outcome indicators will be monitored to closely track for effectiveness.  After two years, the Government will evaluate how the Wellness Programme can be rolled out nationwide.  Whilst a number of Members are very anxious that they have a similar programme within their own constituency, I think it is best for us to see what the pilot comes up with, what works and what we can do to bring the best practices together to make it a successful programme.

     So far, I have shared what the Government, in partnership with the people sector, is doing to help seniors achieve a happy, healthy and active life.  But there is no reason why the private sector cannot be involved.  The private sector can service the needs of our ageing population, while being profitable at the same time.  The Health Ministry's pilot scheme to open up subsidised nursing home beds to the private sector is an interesting experiment.       

     Two months ago, the Silver Industry Committee, under Mr Philip Yeo, successfully organised a silver industry conference and exhibition.  The public response has been very encouraging.  I understand that exhibitors are keen to participate next year.  

     Scaling up for the silver business is increasingly possible.  It is not just Singapore which is rapidly ageing, but also the rest of Asia.  By 2050, 1.2 billion people  will be above 60 years old, four times the number today.   This is as large as China's population today!

     This year, the EDB has made health and wellness a key growth theme.  It intends to work with partners, such as healthcare providers, to create development platforms, such as "Hospital of the Future" and Home and Community Care.  These platforms allow companies to develop products and services for an ageing population.    

    Last year, I shared that the Ministerial Committee on Ageing would pursue four strategic thrusts: Financial Security, Healthcare, Ageing-in-Place and Active Ageing.  We are making progress in all these areas.  These thrusts all lead to one vision of successful ageing - happy, healthy and active seniors.  The Government cannot do this alone.  The family and community provide the social bonds and care that make life worth living.   The individual must be committed to a long and happy life. 

     At 110 years old, Sister Teresa Hsu is probably the oldest active "Ager" in Singapore.  She has been serving the community most of her life.  I would like to share a quote on her philosophy of life: "I prefer to laugh than to weep. Those people who cry to me, I always tell them it is better to laugh than to use tissue paper. Laughing is free but tissue paper still costs five cents."

     Teresa Hsu is committed to a long and happy life, and may all Singaporeans emulate her.  

Youth Development and Values

     Mr Sin Boon Ann: Madam, enough has been said about the old, now we talk about the young.

     Like the Minister, I too worry about the next generation of youths in Singapore.  I say this because our youths do not have a deep sense of history and appreciation of who we are, and I wonder whether they know what we stand for as a nation and the challenges that confront us and our future.

     There is no doubt, as some say, an absence of us being able to pass our cultural DNA to our next generation.  Even then, without a doubt, the youths of today enjoy many more opportunities than their parents in fulfilling their potential.   They are, quite naturally, Internet savvy and are generally more comfortable with handling technology than perhaps their parents.  Yet, at the same time, there is anecdotal evidence that points to some weaknesses that warrant some concerns on our part.  There are many, but I will just point out a few.

     Firstly, there is a perception that we are raising a generation that is more preoccupied with the "what is in it for me" than "what more can I do for fellow Singaporeans" questions.  Indeed, we have been told that there are many bright Singaporeans who are turning away offers of Government scholarships, because they are not prepared to spend a part of their life in service to their country.  There are those that we hear of who, after having taken on Government scholarships, are prepared to break their bonds because of a better offer that has come up during their course of study.  It does not matter that the country needs them.  All that matters is that their self interest must come first, and it is legally acceptable if they just pay the contractual damages.  Worse, there are those who compete for scholarships purely because of the prestige of winning one, but without the serious intention of serving out one.

    Secondly, there is this mentality of "somebody is going to pick up the mess after me" attitude.  Sir, the fact of the matter is that a whole generation of Singaporeans has been raised on the back of foreign labour.  We have maids from the region to serve us, the workers from Bangladesh and elsewhere to do the sweeping and the cleaning of tables after us. Why is it that we always have to send in an army of foreign workers to clean up the place after an event, especially a public party?  Why can't Singaporeans - and, of course, older Singaporeans are guilty of this as well – take greater ownership of and pride in their environment?  If we are not prepared to take responsibility for this place, who is going to do it for us?  There is a joke making its rounds that some Singaporean males are so pampered that if they can help it, they would rather get their maids to do their area cleaning for them in National Service and even charge up Pengkang Hill for them.  Have we lost the sense of ethic of hard work?

    Thirdly, I do not see much evidence of our youths cultivating the deep sense of community service and sacrifice.  Yes, currently, we require our youths to spend some time doing community work in the hope that they will be sufficiently inspired to want to do this for life.  Sadly, in most of my encounters so far, children are doing community work only because they are asked to, as part of their co-curricular and not because they want to.  At the grassroots level, it is also a known fact that we are having difficulty getting younger Singaporeans to do community work  because they are so involved in their own lives that they find it difficult to sacrifice their time to serve the community.

     I would therefore like to ask the Minister what else is the Government doing to address the concerns of many Singaporeans about youth development.

     Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Madam, today, we see a changing trend in the youth and young adult landscape in terms of attitudes and value systems, eg, rising acceptance of divorces, views on marriage and sex, materialism, value of filial piety.  What is the Government doing today to ensure that our messaging reflects these changing values and attitudes of youths?  If I could cite Minister Vivian's example earlier on irresponsible men being at the core centre of all the social ills and dysfunctional families, I think many from my generation and those younger than me probably would say that women are equally as culpable.

     I think we are still grappling with messaging in terms of abstinence versus safe sex and contraception, and even minor marriages, particularly where parents are involved, and we face the challenge of being accountable to the entire community.  For certain youth issues, how does the Government balance its messaging to be sufficiently youth-relevant?

     This is important, especially in terms of nation building and future policy making.  The effectiveness of Government's messaging of its policies will reflect the interest of youths in them.  A simple example is CPF or CPF LIFE.  This is as much an issue for the youth community as the elderly, a scheme that many will join inevitably as they enter the workforce.  Yet, when we talk about the bridge between the young and Government policies, I think the bridge is still peppered with apathy.  So I think MCYS can do more as a whole-of-Government approach to youth engagement.

     On the demand side, I think MCYS has put forth more platforms and funding for youth activities. However, I think the outreach

and touchpoints can be improved, especially to make it easier for youths to step forward. For example, a group of NUS students fed back that they were looking to volunteer in the run-up to the Youth Olympic Games. However, they googled and went to MCYS' website and could not find any link to sign up. So it is one thing that Ms Denise Phua said that the elderly and the disabled could not find the site on MCYS but it is another thing when tech-savvies use Google and cannot find anything either.  I think we need to make it easier for our youths to reach the Government and navigate the maze of policies, services, websites and touchpoints.

5.15 pm

     MCYS' approach to create more platforms to be run by youths is definitely a good start. But I think MCYS can still play a bigger role to ensure that the Government at the core, remains more youth-relevant.

Sports Facilities

     Ms Eunice Elizabeth Olsen (Nominated Member): Madam, we have noted that the Government is committed to making Singapore an inclusive society and MCYS' goal for sports includes a vision of international sporting excellence in sports participation.  But if participation is the main objective, then it must include the disabled and the elderly as well.

     I recently visited some sports complexes to examine how disabled and elderly-friendly they are. At the Serangoon/Burghley Sports and Recreation Centre built in 1995, anyone wheelchair-bound is confined to the track or grass level at the stadium because anything beyond that is inaccessible. The ramp to the entrance of the swimming pool was too steep and my friend, a wheelchair user, experienced difficulty getting up.  The entire pool area is surrounded by footbaths and the only way to the pool is via a narrow steel bridge.  Shower facilities exist for the disabled but they are not well designed and the wash basins are also beyond reach.  Most ironically, there is a huge high step that leads to the pavement of the bus-stop that offers Service 147 (a wheelchair-accessible bus). In summary, there is no connectivity.

     I thought something constructed more recently in 2000, like the Jurong East Sports Complex, would better cater to the disabled and the elderly, but I was mistaken. A lifeguard whom we spoke to noted that the only way for a disabled person to enjoy the lovely wave pool is to be carried in over a flight of stairs as there is no ramp available.  Also, half of the disabled toilet cubicle is occupied by grab bars and does not permit a wheelchair to make a turn.  Moreover, there are no disabled showering facilities.

    It appears that these complexes have accessibility on a level that merely complies with the code on barrier-free access but does not adhere to the spirit of what accessibility means. And, inconsistently, only some pools or sports complexes are accessible.  There is much we can learn from England and Japan where public pools have ramps into the pool made of non-slip tiles and hand rails for the elderly, compared to our pools that only have steps-in.  Wheelchairs that can enter the water should also be made available.  Hydraulic lifts or ramps can be installed in stadiums to allow the disabled or the elderly access to other levels so that they can sit with their friends in the spectator seats.

     As Singapore has won the bid for the YOG, I would like to ask the Minister: how usable are the new facilities for the disabled and elderly that the Ministry intends to build?  Are there plans to upgrade all sports facilities to make it not only accessible, but usable and allow for participation?  Will the new facilities allow everyone to freely participate in all activities from being a spectator to an athlete with consideration for safety?  Accessibility does not seem to be part of our city state's primary infrastructure.  As my friend who is a wheelchair user says, "access seems to be an afterthought".  My dream for Singapore is to be a country where the disabled and the elderly can join in with dignity and without apprehension about physical restrictions.  It is only when we have achieved this that we can truly call ourselves an inclusive society.

     Mr Michael Palmer (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Singapore's recent victory in our bid to host the first ever Youth Olympic Games bodes well with our plans to make Singapore a Sports Hub in the region and ultimately the world.  I congratulate the Minister and his team. 

     Now that the victory party is over, there is much work to be done.  The Government has embarked on a massive project in partnership with the private sector to provide physical infrastructure for a Sports Hub and the events to fill in.  The total cost for this is $1.87 billion to be paid over 25 years.  In order to make Singapore a true Sports Hub, developing hardware alone is not enough.  We also need the software.  We need the right people in each National Sports Association (or NSA) to ensure that sports is given every opportunity to develop.  We need to provide the right environment and devote a sufficient amount of resources to ensure that each NSA is given opportunities to grow.

     In 2007, a total amount of about $31.9 million was made available to NSAs for FY2007 in direct grants.  Even if we annualise the $1.87 billion being spent on the Sports Hub over 25 years, that works out to more than $74 million a year.  Are we putting enough into the software?  Further, the sum of $31.9 million is given to the NSAs on an outcome-based funding model. This supposedly encourages NSAs to be more disciplined and purposeful.  However, an outcome-based funding model favours those NSAs and athletes who are more successful in terms of medal tallies at four Major Games.  The less successful NSAs and athletes find their funding reduced.  It is also important that we realise that money is not the only solution to the difficulties faced by many NSAs.  I believe that we need to assist our NSAs to learn how to organise and professionalise so that they can stand on their own, thereby reducing their reliance on the Government for funding.  This must be our long-term goal.

    May I ask: is the outcome-based funding model the best model to apply to every NSA and athlete?  Why is it that funding of NSAs and athletes is determined by their performance in only the four Major Games, and not other internationally recognised tournaments?  What steps are being taken to develop our NSAs so that they become more independent and less reliant on Government funding?  What steps are being taken to improve our NSAs so that they are run more professionally, transparently and independently?

     Aside from physical infrastructural development, what plans have been made to ensure that the Sports Hub will be used regularly for regional and international events, so as to boost Singapore's efforts to become a Sports Hub?  How can we be certain that the winning consortium can deliver the events that we have been promised?  What guarantees do we have and what if they do not deliver?  What steps are being taken to encourage local companies to take part in the Sports Hub by way of sponsorships, naming rights and the like?  Will we end up with a national stadium that bears a foreign company's name?

Athlete Development

     Mrs Jessie Phua (Nominated Member): Madam, we hear in this House that luncheon meat has gone from $1 to $3,  a tin of Milo now costs over $11, or Singaporeans struggling to cope with the effects of GST increases, spiralling cost of living and inflation. Against this backdrop, there seems to exist in Singapore a group of Singaporeans who suffer no such fate.  Who are they?  They are none other than our national athletes.  How did I come to this conclusion?  Well, the funding by the Singapore Sports Council to athletes suggests so.  Take, for example, the training assistance grant spexTAG.  In 1999, an A1 carded athlete can get financial aid up to $8,000 a year.  Fast forward to 2008, this has been reduced to $7,200.  Support for athletes winning gold at the SEA Games has been reduced from $6,000 to $4,200.  The GLOW (Grant for Loss Of Wages) quantum remains unchanged from the year 2000 to the present time.  What has changed is the qualifying criteria from a SEA Games Gold to an Asian Games or world-level medal for an A1 carding.  Is it not amazing how, on the one hand, the bar has been raised for qualification but, on the other hand, the funding for training has remained constant or even been reduced?

    So what is my point?  My point is this: the Singapore Sports Council (SSC), the key and crucial people who are tasked with driving our sporting initiatives, is either very detached from reality or, worse, know but choose not to do anything.  Either way, it does not augur well.  Can we really in good faith entrust the SSC with the development of our athletes?  Obviously not.  The launch of Project 0812 and its war chest of $7 million certainly attests to this.  This joint project by MCYS, SNOC, SSC aims to supplement or complement the existing high performance programme of SSC to help athletes with a potential win at the Olympics, which leads one to ask: is the money allocated out of the MCYS budget for High Performance being put to good use?  To be fair, SSC has improved over the years, at least from my first encounter in the early 90's to what it is today.  But, like everything else, the demographics have changed and so must SSC.  It is time for us to reassess SSC and explore areas where improvements can be made. 

     People – as with any organisation, the key to success is always its people. Whilst I am not privy to the full inside information, I can tell you that the attrition rate at SSC is very high.  Why is this so?  Is the pay compensation scale also not realistically pegged to current market rate?  What about career advancement prospects?  What about job satisfaction?  My understanding is that this is a very major reason for concern.  Many get disillusioned by over-sized portfolios, multi-layered decision-making process and little empowerment.  Do they have enough of the right people?  They say a picture paints a thousand words.  Please let me try to paint this picture for you.

    On SSC's payroll, one sports psychologist.  On SSC's list of National Sporting Associations (NSAs), a total of 60, of which High Performance funds 44.  Say, conservatively, each NSA with 30 athletes; thus the ratio of 1 to 1,320.  Need I say more?  Let us get the house of SSC into order.

     Sporting foreign talents (SFT) – in recent months, we learn of FST athletes going AWOL, of NSAs having problems monitoring their training programmes, of them quitting their sports and returning to their native homes.  Last month, this House was updated that of the 97 athletes brought in, 54 were granted citizenships, of which 37 are still in active training.  That is a dropout rate of over 30%.  It is certainly not a case of a few bad apples. There are some real issues to be addressed.

     Madam, along with my fellow citizens, I rate my Singapore citizenship as my most prized possession.  It should not be given out lightly.  I believe it is time we relooked at how effective our evaluation and assessment process of potential FST athletes.  We hear that the FST Scheme is here to stay.  That being the case, let us do a good job and make sure that the support infrastructure is right for these uprooted athletes to succeed.  The professional and responsible thing to do is to ensure that quality training facilities and manpower are in place.  But we hear of athletes going back to their native homes for training because facilities or coaches are lacking in Singapore, of NSAs' nightmares in maintaining a decent level of communication with these athletes, of the inability to effectively monitor their training progress.

     This is wrong on all counts on the part of the deliverables by the NSA: first, in fulfilling their professional obligations; and second, what happened to what was supposed to be the most important reason for bringing in these athletes that besides winning, the presence of these athletes training alongside with our Singaporean athletes is to inspire them and help build up our pool of local talents.  Next, is our moral obligations.  What have we done to ensure that a welfare unit is in place to help these athletes to adapt to life in Singapore?  As some of them are brought over at a very tender age, what protection is in place to ensure that they are given a decent education or vocational training for life after sports?  It is not only the right thing to do; it is a moral thing to ensure.  All too often, there is the ugly talk that these athletes are money-grabbing, that  there is no sincere loyalty to Singapore.  As our DPM, Mr Wong Kan Seng, rightly pointed out in this House, integration is a two-way traffic. Can you really blame them for being mercenary when we ourselves treat the whole exchange as strictly business only?

     Sports incentives – the Multi-Million Dollar Award Programme (or MAP) is the single most publicised sports incentive scheme we have in Singapore to reward outstanding athletes for success at the SEA Games, Commonwealth Games, Asian Games, and the Olympics.  Very little changes have been made to this scheme.  And the individual winning for the first Olympic Gold for Singapore is still being offered $1 million, same as it was in 1996, some 12 years ago.  The sporting landscape has changed.  The bar has been raised, and our MAP award should also be reviewed and updated too.  Reviewing the cash quantum is not the only aspect we should consider.  For years, the Korean athletes are the envy of the athletes across the globe for a win at the Olympics or the Asian Games not only results in immediate monetary awards, they are also assured of housing assistance plus a lifelong pension.  Even our immediate neighbour, Indonesia, has upped its incentive package to include housing and monetary components.  In addition to this, it is timely to also consider the addition of world championships into this scheme.  Winning at the world's stage is no small feat, and Singapore athletes who succeed at this level should also be given due recognition.

     The development of a world-class athlete extends beyond the training grounds.  Putting in place a total support and care package helps give our athletes a better chance to win on the world stage.  Winning the Olympic Gold for Singapore is not a pipe-dream.  Let us put all the pieces together to help our athletes win for Singapore.

Foreign Sports Talent Scheme

5.30 pm

     Mr Seah Kian Peng: Madam, we are all proud when we achieved our best SEA Games result last year, with a total medal haul of 127 - 43 were gold medals.

     Our athletes, both local and those under the Foreign Sports Talent Scheme (FSTS) deserve a good pat on their backs for their hard work and commitment to attain these results.

     Something piques my curiosity though - it remains that various National Sports Associations (NSAs) have different takes on FSTS, and consequently have experienced varying degrees of success. 

  
     Some NSAs did groom local talents to world-class standards, and some justified their reliance on foreign talents to reap results for the sports and our country.  For instance, bowling and sailing are dedicated in developing a 100% Singaporean-born talent pipeline.  In contrast, NSAs such as table tennis and badminton believe in continuously sourcing for foreign talent – in addition to their younger pool of local talents because of our small population – to help achieve their goals, to inspire and attract more youth to the sports.  Swimming seems to be adopting a moderate approach by deploying foreign talent sparingly in the squad.  Ask the Singapore Amateur Athletics Association and they will have many interesting experiences to share.  I might add that all is not so pleasant.

     I would like to ask the Minister:

    (1) Has any assessment been done on the cost-effectiveness of FSTS since its inception, following these recent sporting events on the regional and international levels?  In other words, what are the returns on the investment that NSAs or the Sports Council adopt to measure the tangibles and intangibles of this scheme?  If an assessment has been done, are the results up to expectation?  Can the Ministry share these results?

     (2) If the same amount of resources on FSTS had been diverted to develop the local talent pool, do you think Singapore's competitiveness can be raised?  In some ways, this is a speculative question but it would be beneficial to study the experience of the NSAs, who have adopted different approaches towards talent development.  Indeed, I believe that if adequate and the right resources and attention are poured into the development and nurturing of our young local talent, we do have a realistic chance of winning a gold medal, maybe more at the inaugural Youth Olympic Games when it is held here in two years' time.

     Madam, I celebrate gold medals as enthusiastically as the next man.  But it makes a very great difference whether it is a relatively universal jubilation, like cheering for Manchester United or Arsenal when one of them wins the English Premier League this year, or a peculiar and unique joy of a Singapore victory, like Mardan Mamat winning the Singapore Open two years back or Remy Ong almost winning the World Cup recently.  In this crucial difference lies the need for a judicial management of local and foreign talents.

     The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (Mr Teo Ser Luck): Madam, let me first thank Members Mr Sin Boon Ann, Mr Zaqy, Ms Eunice Olsen, Mr Michael Palmer, Mrs Jessie Phua and Mr Seah Kian Peng - for their questions, because I think they must be passionate individuals to raise such questions, and also for highlighting the problems that we face everyday in the Ministry, and to help resolve some of the issues.

     Let me touch on both youth and sports.  I will start with youth.  We certainly need inspired and committed young Singaporeans.  We also face a challenge that we continue to try to build an environment where youth will always feel they have a place in Singapore, that they know they own a stake, and that they know we support them.  We would also like to promote sports, and that is why we will continue to build on the Sporting Singapore vision to develop a strong sporting culture that celebrates a healthy and spirited lifestyle, ignites passion, builds character in Singaporeans and unifies all of us as one people.

     Our youth policies are responsive to the evolving values and attitudes of today's young people.  National surveys show that our youth are highly committed to Singapore and, more importantly, to the family, which is heartening because the family unit  is the foundation of a good individual and a good youth.  Our youth also enjoy healthy family relationships.  For example, 85% of the respondents from the National Youth Survey in 2005 said that they enjoy having dinner with their families.  We will continue to promote these family values and create a conducive environment for families.

      Much has also been done by the Ministry of Education (MOE) and MCYS within the schools, but our youth engagement has gone beyond the school gates.  Outside schools, we have many good opportunities for youth, like Young ChangeMakers (YCM).  Young ChangeMakers allows individuals or informal groups to come forward and propose the projects they want to do.  We will provide the funding for them.  In 2007, we have about 160 projects that were approved and that is a 20% increase over 2006.

     We also have the Youth Expedition Project (YEP) which supports youth going on self-led community projects.  We have about close to 2,000 participants every year since 2006.  I would like to single out the good work of three Ngee Ann Polytechnic students - Marian Gan, See Yun Reei and Sharon Lim.  They were so inspired by their experience in Phnom Penh with the orphans during their first trip in 2006 that they now raise their own funds by selling key-chains and collecting old clothing, basically karang guni work, so that they can make another trip there.  This time they will lay the flooring inside the orphanage.  So we see that the YEP experience is teaching them to be selfless.

     The YEP and exchange programmes, where our youth can interact with youth from other countries, help them understand the cultures of different countries and also appreciate what we have in Singapore.

     For the youth-at-risk, this sector faces many challenges.  We believe every youth should have the opportunity to maximise his or her potential.  There is a Committee called the National Committee on Youth Guidance and Rehabilitation.  It coordinates inter-agency efforts such as Youth Link, the Alternative Learning Centre and STEP-UP, as some Members have already mentioned.

     I will give an example.  Youth Link is a one-year pilot that was started last year.  It has now reached over 260 out-of-school youth and truants, helping them to return to mainstream education, find employment or attend vocational training.  This pilot will continue for another year.  All these programmes have contributed to a decrease in our school drop-out rates, juvenile delinquency and youth recidivism rate; in particular, the school drop-out rate has fallen from 3.6% in 2002 to 1.6% in 2007.

     In helping these youth at risk, we will frequently hold dialogue sessions with our partners to refine the various programmes.  The newly-formed Inter-Ministry Committee on Dysfunctional Families will also be looking at ways to identify these at-risk youth as early in the process as possible.  I have faith that Singaporean youth will adapt to the changing world, and have the strength to overcome challenges and succeed.

     Looking forward, the Government will seek to better understand all the values and attitudes of our youth.  We intend to reach out beyond the 15-24 age group to young adults of  25-35 years old as well.  We will do this through the Youth Network.  This Network focuses on the three main areas of Interest, Career and Family.  The Network seeks to achieve synergies among its different partners to reach out to these young adults, and we have partners such as the Singapore Business Federation for career, we also have the Young NTUC which are also involved in engaging the young adults.  The Youth Network has held its inaugural Industry Networking Session last October, and we are looking to hold more sessions this year.

      All these initiatives facilitate communication between the Government and youth.  So far, I have seen our youth coming forward as well, especially in the recent bid for the first ever Youth Olympic Games.

     Let me devote some time on the Youth Olympic Games, or YOG in short.  Many have tried to speculate why we won –  safe, clean environment; excellent track record and strong governance; world-class facilities.  I want to credit it to Singaporeans, especially young Singaporeans.  They believe in the true values of the Olympics, which are Excellence, Friendship and Respect.  We must now be good hosts and that means we must have good social graces as well.  It is not just winning a Gold in Olympics, in sports, but winning it in our social graces.  In the words of the former Foreign Minister of China, Mr Li Zhaoxing, the Olympic Games is also about nations competing on social graces.  He said in Mandarin, and let me quote him: 

     (In Mandarin ):  "Regarding the Olympic Games, we need to have a common understanding because it also shows us the cohesiveness of a nation."

     (In English):  I was heartened to see that on top of social graces, EQ and IQ, we must also have the YQ, or "Youth Quotient", to succeed.  Everybody can have Youth Quotient, as it is not based on age.  It is based on whether you are young at heart or not.  I think a lot of Members of this House have high YQ.

     Our youth have shown that they are willing to take the initiative for a good cause they consider important.  That is why I salute them.  I am delighted to read about a 19-year-old blogger Pearlyn's excitement in Singapore winning the YOG bid.  Because Pearlyn said that that was the day, 21st February, she felt most proud to be a Singaporean in all her 19 years, and that the YOG is certainly something that she would look forward to in 2010.

     I myself saw first-hand the passion of Singaporeans for the YOG, and this is not only coming from individuals, but from groups as well.  One of the most vivid examples was the Boys' Town 60th Anniversary celebrations.  We had  a piggyback exercise.  573 people gave piggyback rides and that broke the world record.  I was there and participated as well.  They were kind and gave me a student that was very light.  But I also give credit to Pathlight School as well - thanks to Ms Denise Phua - the students there with special needs came together to support the YOG.  That was indeed touching how people of all sectors supported our bid.  I think this demonstrates our inclusiveness.

     I received many emails about the YOG, one of which was from Mr Dick Chew.  He is a father.  He rushed home to be with his family on the day of the results.  After the announcement was made, he taught his children why Singapore won, and that even though Singapore is a small nation, we have a big heart and big dream and it trickles down to all segments of society.

     I also have to thank all our corporate citizens like 77th Street who came up with T-shirts; Mr Bean who came up with the packaging; CapitaLand, thanks to Yam Keng's support; CityNeon with all the landscape art pieces; Old Chang Kee and McDonald's, who have all joined us in our bid.  My heartfelt thanks to all of them, as well as the various Ministries and statutory boards, and the National University of Singapore, who have clocked in long hours to put together the bid.

     Singapore made history with YOG, by proving to the world that although we are a small nation, we can achieve big dreams.  There were many columns and articles written about our success.  One that I read, by Li Shu Fen, really explains it simply.  Again, it is written in Chinese:

     (In Mandarin ):  "Our nation is small.  It is not necessarily a bad thing.  If we have good leadership, we can succeed.  Furthermore we have support from the Government and people to organise the Youth Olympic Games.  That is good news."

     (In English ):  This means that as long as we have good leadership, a unified purpose and common resolve, there is no hurdle that we cannot overcome together.  This is how we as a small country can succeed.  I am confident that we can count on our citizens, especially our youth, to continue to do us proud when we host the Games, both on and off the field.

     Let me now move on to sports.  We have achieved many goals stated in the Committee on Sporting Singapore's (CoSS) report.  I am glad that this Committee has provided and set a path for later committees that we set up.  As we gear up for the YOG, other world-class sports events like the Formula One and Volvo Ocean Race will be held here over the next few years.  So the sports sector will be extremely busy and our resources will be stretched.

5.45 pm

     As you know, for the Sports Hub project, we have selected the preferred bidder, the Singapore Sports Hub Consortium (SSHC).  As mentioned by Mr Michael Palmer, the Net Present Value (NPV) of the total payment from Government to the successful consortium is about $1.87 billion over 25 years.  What do we get out of that?  4,000 jobs will be created during the construction phase and 400 full-time positions during the operations phase.  And we are just talking about the Sports Hub.  Of course, there are many other economic spin-offs.  What about events?

     When major events come about, we estimate about 3,000 part-time staff will be required to help out as well.  So, there are a lot of opportunities.  But we have to ensure the vibrancy and commercial viability of the Sports Hub through contractual incentives and other mechanisms with the consortium.  World Sport Group and Global Spectrum are the companies responsible for the programmes.  They are very experienced.  They have done many other events in the world – in Europe and the US.  And they will drive the Sports Hub's programming strategy.  The consortium has guaranteed 136 event days at the National Stadium and Singapore Indoor Stadium, and a stream of regular programmes and activities for the different target groups – from youth to families, from working adults to seniors.  These major events will provide opportunities for Singaporeans to enjoy – as an individual, family and organisations.  It will also attract tourists and business activities, boosting the local sports industry.  The Singapore Sports Council, MCYS and the different organisations will work with the consortium to make sure it is successful.  And for the National Stadium itself, we are not prepared to give the naming rights to any companies.

     Local companies will also not be left out of the action.  DP Architects and United Premas are part of the preferred bidder and they will be involved in construction, operational and other aspects of the Sports Hub project.  There will also be outsourcing, naming rights, sub-contracting opportunities for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs).  There are many different small sub-facilities within the Sports Hub.  For naming rights and all, these small ones might have the possibility to bear the names of companies, but not for our National Stadium.  The main stadium will remain as the National Stadium.

      We now have a solid foundation for sports in terms of the hardware, systems and processes.  Looking ahead, we will focus on the software and developing a strong sporting culture.  Last month, the Sporting Culture Committee (SCC) released its report proposing 23 recommendations hoping to bring our sporting culture to the next level.  I am pleased to announce that MCYS accepts all recommendations in principle.  We are working with the Singapore Sports Council (SSC) and other agencies to study the recommendations in detail.  Let me highlight a few.

     The SCC highlighted the need to make better use of media channels to inspire the nation so that we can capture more mindshare of individuals for sports.  In the next three months, the Singapore Sports Council and MOE will increase coverage of school sports using multiple media platforms, such as IPTV, websites and so on.  We can expect to see greater focus on community activities and interaction through a soon-to-be-launched one-stop information sports portal for local sporting activities, events and programmes.

     Next, the Committee also believes in creating more sporting opportunities for all Singaporeans.  Our public hardware and infrastructure guidelines will be planned with this in mind.  Ms Eunice Olsen mentioned about accessibility to sports facilities.  MCYS and SSC will work closely with agencies, such as MOE and Singapore Land Authority, to create more playing spaces, and open up more sports facilities for general public use.

     An example is the Dual Use Scheme.  Seventy full-sized school fields were opened for community use in 2007.  SLA has also opened up more than 280 pieces of State Land for free casual play by the community.  I believe FAS and Prof. Ho Peng Kee's constituency have adopted one.  Where possible, more sports facilities will be open for public use in the future.  This includes fields and newly-constructed indoor sports halls in schools.

     We will also try to make public sporting facilities more user-friendly for all, including the disabled and elderly.  This would involve installing ramps, lifts, clear signages and where possible, shower facilities.  So we need expertise as well.  We need to discuss with different stakeholders from the people sector to understand what is really needed.  It cannot be a top-down approach, but a bottoms-up one.  All SSC sports facilities will be retrofitted to meet Barrier-Free Accessibility (BFA) requirements by 2009, that is, next year.

     Thirdly, I spoke in COS 2007 about the importance of having a vibrant sports club scene.  Currently we have sports clubs and informal groups like Sneakers Netball Club and Parents of ACS United.  These are informal groups.  I believe in a community and bottoms-up approach in order to create this culture.  So maybe we should lead by example.  I know some MPs run, while some play soccer.  Maybe we should also form a MP running and soccer club.

     All these groups share a common passion for sports, the ability to be enterprising in securing funds, and in attracting committed volunteers to sustain their activities.  MCYS and SSC will be rolling out a framework to encourage the growth of these sports clubs and we will provide some incentives.

     I agree with Mr Michael Palmer, Mr Seah Kian Peng and Mrs Jessie Phua who brought up that our National Sports Associations (NSAs) play a crucial role in the sports ecosystem.  We have to continue to strengthen their management capabilities through SSC's Organisational Excellence Framework and training courses for NSA personnel.  There is no doubt that we have to continue to upgrade these programmes and encourage the NSAs to come forward and take up these programmes and get their skills upgraded.  These initiatives will encourage NSAs to focus on developing effective programmes, and strengthening their organisational capabilities and governance standards.  The point is that they are volunteers.

     As Mrs Jessie Phua mentioned, we need passionate individuals.  We need to identify these passionate individuals to run these NSAs and they must be willing to come forward.  Once they are willing to come forward, things will change and many things can happen.  So we are proposing that an NSA Advisory Council be formed.  That is one of the recommendations of the SCC as an avenue for NSAs to access external expertise, share best practices and devise collaboration plans.  The Sports Council will discuss with the NSAs on the feasibility of this Advisory Council.  Ultimately, NSAs should aim to be more enterprising and innovative, and grow their capability and branding.  They must always try to attract good people and generate income on top of whatever funding they have been given.

     We hope to build on our athletes' improved performances and nurture a steady stream of champions on the regional and international stage.  This will be achieved by enhancing the sports excellence systems and strategies in place.

     I hope Mrs Jessie Phua would agree that sports excellence is a high investment venture globally.  The investment of additional resources does not imply that there are problems with our current system.  I would like to look at it this way.  Project 0812 places a lot more focus.  SSC, as you know, has to look at the three thrusts of the sports system, ie, sports excellence, high participation sports industry.  Project 0812 focuses on bringing glory to the nation at the apex of all the games – the Olympics.  This is an add-on.  So our athletes will now have a good chance to do well at the 2008 Olympics, partly because of the system we have built so far and partly also because Project 0812 is giving additional funding and support.  For instance, we have qualified to compete in Men's 470 for sailing and our table tennis team are medal contenders in the Women's Team and Singles events.

     I agree that we will continue to need passionate individuals and SSC to work with NSAs very closely and also to be able to identify the problems and gaps within the organisation.  All companies and agencies have their own problems.  SSC also has its problems.  There is still room for improvement, and these are how organisations are run.  They have day-to-day challenges, but we should not give up.  We should continue to give support.  We need strong sports leaders, individuals, like the Members of this House, in order to support the sports system to flourish and to continue to produce champions. 

     Mr Seah Kian Peng has asked about the Foreign Sports Talent (FST) programme.  FSTs comprise 5.6% of the total number of carded athletes.  Out of the total amount SSC spends on direct athlete support grants, 23.8% goes towards support for FSTs.  They get proportionately more support, as most of them are in the higher carding categories because of their performance, and our sports excellence policy is to focus limited resources on the top athletes.

     Many of Singapore's recent sporting successes at the international stage have been achieved with the help of FSTs.  Our FSTs accounted for 34.9% of the gold medals at the 2007 SEA Games, even though they only formed 7.6% of the entire contingent.  Examples of these FSTs are swimmer Tao Li (four gold medals) and table-tennis player Gao Ning (three gold medals).  They have put us on the world map for several key sports, and this has created opportunities for local-born athletes to be exposed to playing at the highest levels.  FSTs are part of the system in order to do well internationally.  But the FST scheme is not the system.  And we are not prepared for Singapore or any NSA to be the trading hub of foreign athletes.

     Mr Seah would be pleased to know that SSC regularly monitors the athletes' performance through the carding mechanism, which determines the amount of assistance and level of support to the athletes.  This ensures that the assistance provided to the athletes is money well spent.  And we, being a small country with a limited talent pool, have to be resourceful in ensuring a pipeline of world-class talents.  So we will continue to welcome FSTs, but we will have to adopt a very balanced approach in our sports development strategy so that the FSTs complement our local talents.  And for that we have to build a pipeline and training system for the local talents. 

     The Multi-Million Dollar Award Programme (MAP) is part of the comprehensive support and recognition framework for our athletes.  It has been successful in motivating our athletes and improving their performances.  To answer Mrs Jessie Phua's query, the Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC), of which Mrs Jessie Phua is also a member, will continually review and refine the MAP scheme to recognise and reward our best athletes who perform at the Major Games.

      Going forward, the successful elements of our sports excellence system and strategies will have to be integrated, and we hope that it can be integrated within the Singapore Sports Institute (SSI) that we have proposed to set up.  But the SSI will only be successful with the buy-in and collaboration of all the NSAs and all stakeholders in Singapore.

     The SSI will offer support services to aid elite performance, including world-class coaching, cutting-edge sports medicine and sports science (SMSS) support, athlete career and education.  These services will be customised to cater to the needs of individual sports and athletes.  A working committee will be formed to work out the details and next steps for the SSI.

     To help national athletes prepare for life after sports, we have several career, education and integration programmes in place.  The idea is basically to teach them how to fish for life, and they learn how to fish for life.  To date, over 100 national athletes have benefited from SSC's job profiling and career counselling.  We have triathletes, netball players, swimmers, and so on, who have benefited from these and we will look at more enhancements to the programmes by the middle of the year.

      Let me touch a little bit on sports safety.  With all the sports development, there is going to be more participation and more elite training and performance among Singaporeans.  In response to that, we also have to make sure that all athletes are safe.  In response to the recommendations by the Sports Safety Committee that was chaired by Dr Ben Tan, SSC is launching a sports safety plan in three phases:

     (1)  Public Education and Awareness;

     (2)  Surveillance, Evaluation and Follow-up; and

     (3)  Monitoring of Programmes and Review of Incentives.

We will release more details later.

     Madam, the recent developments and pipeline projects I mentioned earlier mark the beginning of a new era in youth and sports development.  This is testament to the ideal that our dreams and aspirations can come true as long as we have the passion and commitment to succeed.  We will continue to sow the seeds for a future Singapore that will be anchored by an inspired and committed youth, and also strengthened by a strong sporting culture.

Progress of the Malay/Muslim Community

     Mr Hawazi Daipi: (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] Madam, the Malay community in Singapore has achieved much progress in many fields – education, employment, income and quality of life.

      In education, with better O-level results, more Malay students now, about 80%, continue their education to post-secondary – to the Institute of Technical Education (ITE), polytechnics and universities.  Those entering polytechnics and universities have increased to 34% in 2005 compared to only 1.3% in 1980.  The cohort of Malay students entering local universities increased to 5%, a 10-fold increase between 1980 and 2005.

     All this gives satisfaction and increases the pride of the Malay community.  This progress is achieved due to the many opportunities that are open to all the races and Singaporeans at the national level, and also the desire of the Malay community to move forward. No less important is the fact that it was achieved due to the spirit of progressiveness and competition that blossoms in the Malay families, as well as a determined self-help network in the community. The community and the political leadership join forces to improve this progress and overcome the social problems that affect some in the community.

     Financial sources are consolidated through charity bodies like the Hari Raya Charity Fund to help the poor and the destitute.  The self-help Malay-Muslim bodies increase their cooperation through the Community Leaders' Forum that is coordinated by Mendaki.  However, this has been stemmed by social problems that need to be solved.

     Firstly, the rate of divorce among the Malays has been increasing – from 6.9 per 1,000 Singaporean females who are married to 16 in 2005.  Secondly, there has been an increase of single parent families, from 47 per 1,000 Singaporean families in 1990 to 70 per 1,000 Singaporean families in 2005. Thirdly, there is an increase in births registered by single mothers.

    My interest in these issues is focused on two aspects.  First, I would like to ask the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs on the progress made by the various organisations to help dysfunctional families.  These programmes include efforts to help young families on the verge of divorce in order to prevent families breaking up.  I would also like to know how many young couples have been assisted under the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) scheme which, among others, aims to help young couples with low education not to have more than two children, so that they can focus their attention towards family development through their children’s education, and increasing their income through skills training.

     This is related to my second focus, that is, for such families to bear a bigger responsibility for their own and their children’s well-being, in other words, to reduce their own problems.  If not, their children’s future will be uncertain and their problem will worsen.  Even worse if the problems they face now and in the future are inherited by their children.  Any help they enjoy from the Government or Malay-Muslim organisations’ schemes will not solve all their problems, if they themselves do not overcome it.  The vicious cycle will continue and will be carried on by their children.

      A young mother, who I first met 10 years ago while she was 25 years old and had one child, now has five children.  She lives in a HDB rental flat, is still jobless, and the husband is in and out of prison until now.  Recently, Berita Harian revealed some families who are homeless and live by the beach.  One of them had 10 children, of whom two are school dropouts.

     As a compassionate community, we would like to help this group so that their children have an opportunity to change their family’s fate.  The important thing is that we prevent this problem from spreading.  The solution is to help young couples in this group not to marry early, not to have many children, not to be divorced, but to give more focus to their children’s education as well as to stay employable in order to increase their income, and then enjoy handouts from national schemes like the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme, home ownership, funding for their children's education, and so on.  These efforts need the support of the whole community, including the religious leaders, to stress that having more children beyond their ability to raise and educate them, is not considered a good thing.  This is something hard to say, but the community must have a clear and firm stand on it, so that we can prevent these issues from spreading.

      Madam, in conclusion, I would like to return to my earlier focus: how much has the programme directed towards these dysfunctional families been useful and effective?

Help to Low Income Malay/Muslim Families

     Mdm Halimah Yacob: (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] Madam, according to the report card during Mendaki's 25th Anniversary, the percentage of Malays without secondary school qualifications and working in low-income jobs is still high.  It is worrying because if we cannot help low-income families escape the vicious cycle of poverty, this problem will most likely spill over to their future generations.

     Poor families need various help because their problems are complex and many are also dysfunctional families. At the same time, it is important for us to ensure that any help given can increase their resilience and help them to be self-reliant.  It will be a problem if our efforts instead make them continue to depend on assistance forever. We must also ensure that the programmes created are sustainable and coordinated, since some may not know where to get help, while others get help from multiple sources.

     With increasing cost of living and inflation, this group will be affected even more.  In last year's COS debates, the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs announced that MUIS will allocate more funds for programmes that will empower low-income families. What is the progress of these programmes?  How many families have been helped?  What are the new initiatives planned to help low-income families?

Divorce amongst Malay-Muslim Teenagers/Minimum Marriage Age

     Dr Fatimah Lateef: (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] The number of divorces among young Malay/Muslim couples is still high even though there was much effort to overcome the problem.  This is due to several factors and those trapped are in the vicious cycle of dysfunctional families.  Usually, this problem is linked to many other issues like single mothers, individuals with multiple partners and teenage pregnancies.  Furthermore, Malay teenagers form 55.1% of all births by teenage mothers in 2006.

  
     As a follow up to my question in the previous COS debates, are there any plans, and if so, what is the development in terms of increasing the minimum age limit for Muslim marriages, from 16 years old currently to 18 years old?

Dysfunctional Families in the Malay/Muslim Community

     Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] The problem of dysfunctional families is not a new issue for our community.  Much has been done. Even though many who were helped have shown progress, we still face further challenges.  What is worrying is the trend when we now begin to witness the process of inter-generational transfer of dysfunctionality. For example, we are seeing divorce among young couples and if we observe, they come from families where the parents had separated, remarried other partners and then separate again.  These young divorced couples face the same risks if they are not helped and guided immediately and comprehensively.

     Madam, the main question that we have to deal with is why does this problem still exist, even though much has been done by our community for the past two decades.  One important challenge is our ability to understand the complex background of such families and the skilled workforce needed to help them.

      The Malay/Muslim community is always ready to give donations to help those in need.  From the Hari Raya Charity Fund (TAA) to welfare funds or mosques and Muslim organisations, a significant amount has been donated.  I feel that we must understand that financial problems form only the surface part of their problems. Usually, they have deeper problems that must be dealt with in order to help them escape this vicious cycle.

     Our community lacks skilled manpower to help such families comprehensively and holistically.  This means more resources are needed to solve this dysfunctional family problem.  Our community must also be prepared to allow their donations to be channelled towards employing accredited social workers, who are very much needed.  We also need a paradigm shift, as our community often feels that donations must be given directly to the recipients who are the needy families, but this is only a short-term solution.  Intervention by accredited social workers will help these families to bring about a bigger long-term positive change.

     Also important is the consolidation of present efforts and resources to ensure that we achieve the desired effect.  What is being done to consolidate various initiatives and efforts by Malay/Muslim organisations in order to reduce duplication and maximise usage of limited resources?  How can we link our community's response with national initiatives and resources available in order to take better advantage of present resources?

Joint Madrasah Scheme

     Mr Zaqy Mohamad: (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] Madam, some changes regarding the full-time madrasahs was announced by MUIS and the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs last year.  One key change is the formation of the Joint Madrasah System (JMS).  Under the system, the Aljunied, Irsyad and Al-Arabiah madrasahs were integrated to share resources, with each having their own specialisation.

  
     This is a timely move and further updates the religious education.  By combining their efforts, the madrasahs can better utilise limited resources and create better and more stable programmes for madrasah students.  However, three other full-time madrasahs chose not to join the JMS.

  
     I would like to know, since the JMS was formed, what is the progress of the integration efforts.  What is MUIS' stand of the three madrasahs that did not join the JMS?  Can they still join the JMS?  In this matter, are there steps or financial support to the three madrasahs should they decide to join the JMS in the near future?

     Moving on, under the Compulsory Education Act, Primary 6 students from full-time madrasahs must take the PSLE later this year.  Last year, the Minister said that some steps are taken to help affected madrasahs.  MUIS even offered a special assistance package worth $700,000 a year to help local madrasahs prepare for PSLE.

     Can the Minister give the latest update on the madrasahs' progress in preparing for the PSLE?

     With regard to the JMS, I believe MUIS has allocated a substantial fund to the three madrasahs that took part.  What is the amount allocated to run the JMS?  This is because the madrasahs have to go through a big change, since some need to specialise on secondary education, as compared to their current focus on primary education.  These madrasahs have to retrain their teachers or get new ones.

  
     So I would like to know what are the performance indicators and performance standards used by MUIS to ensure that the madrasahs fully utilise the financial grant that was given for their school administration and to improve their students' PSLE performance.

Self-Radicalisation of Muslims

     The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M): (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] In the heightened situation since Mas Selamat's recent escape, may I ask to be updated by the Minister on what we are doing to counter radical ideology.

      Recently, two youths were arrested for trying to plot terrorist acts.  According to MHA, they were attracted to radical ideologies that they picked up from the Internet.  MHA has identified more than 6,000 radical websites on the Internet.  Sometimes, I wonder why people are easily fooled by radical, yet dubious doctrines on the Internet.

      I was reminded of this while watching the animation movie, Ratatouille, with my children.  In a very poignant scene, Remy, the rat, who dreams of being a chef in the world of men, was dragged by his father, Django, to the window of a shop that displayed dead rats hung in traps.  As Remy looked on in shock at his kind, dying in that horrifying state, his father said, "The world we live in belongs to the enemy, we must live cautiously.  We look out for our own kind, Remy.  When all is said and done, only we can look after our own kind.”

      Madam, how similar is this situation to when Muslim youths view images of women and children who are war victims in Palestine, Afghanistan and Iraq, when surfing the Internet.  It is heart-wrenching, especially since these are innocent victims.  With such evidence, radical ideologists can easily persuade many young Muslims to believe that this is the Muslim world that is oppressed by the rest, and can be liberated only if Muslims take care of their own interest, do not mix with other communities, or even destroy other communities.

     In the movie, however, Remy chose to look at things differently, even though he can see his kind being hamstrung in front of him.  The scene ended with Remy saying, "No, dad, I don't believe it.  You are telling me that this is the future, and only this, nothing more than this."

  
     His father said, "This is the way things are, you can't change nature."  But Remy replied, "Change is nature, dad, especially the parts that we can influence.  It will begin when we have the determination."  When Remy turned to leave, his father asked, "Where are you going?"  Remy said, "With luck, only forward."

      Can I ask the Minister, what are the ways and means for our youths to get proper guidance from our religious teachers in this matter?  What measures have MUIS put in place to counter radical ideologies?  What are the early signs that we can identify among those who have been influenced by such ideologies?

     Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim (Marine Parade): (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] Madam, terrorism today continues to be at the forefront of both national and international agendas and threatens our security.  Youths today, most of whom are exposed to the Internet, face greater challenges. 

     Information on deviant teachings is widely available from the Internet and new modes of communication and this poses a growing concern.  If they are not well supervised and guided, such information may influence the individual to become self-radicalised. 

     The case of Abdul Bashir and the recent arrest of three more self-radicalised youths show that this problem will continue.  This presents a danger and huge challenge for us.  As such, we must inculcate and demonstrate shared values that had long been imbued in us during our nation building process.  I believe that by internalising our shared values, such as respect and harmony, this will play an important part in fostering understanding and promote harmonious relations as a defence mechanism against the threat of all forms of terrorism.

      As the Internet continues to be part of our lives, our Internet savvy youths will still be confronting issues that will shape their ideologies with regard to terrorism.  Therefore, as we move ahead, I like to ask MUIS what are its plans to manage the issue of self-radicalisation among youths.

      With regard to MUIS also, during the COS debate last year, Minister Dr Yaacob Ibrahim mentioned that MUIS will be organising more inter-faith seminars and workshops through international link ups.  Can the Minister share with the House whether there are any plans to expand our Community Engagement Programme, by playing a more active role in building our country's social capital?

      Of late, a few mosques and Malay/Muslim bodies have been organising events or implementing initiatives that benefit all Singaporeans, irrespective of race or religion, such as the event organised by the An-Nur Mosque in Marsiling.

     Madam, I feel that such events can help strengthen the already strong bonds between the Malay community and other communities here.  It will contribute towards a better understanding of Islam by our non-Muslim friends. In the longer term, will MUIS consider supervising a more coordinated approach to highlight the humanitarian aspects of Islam, through events like those which I have mentioned just now, in order to foster greater understanding and rapport among the people?

MUIS's Asatizah Development Programme

     Dr Fatimah Lateef: (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] The Islamic Religious Council of Singapore has done an excellent job by providing the innovative Religious Teachers Development Programme.  In 2006, more than $100,000 was channelled towards this effort.

      I would like to ask the Minister: firstly, what aspects of training are the focus of this programme, taking into account the fact that religious teachers come from various backgrounds, and their qualifications are obtained from various educational and training institutes?  Secondly, what are the KPIs and targets set for this programme?  Thirdly, does MUIS consider making the programme as part of a continuing and sustainable professional development plan?  And, fourthly, due to many challenges, will MUIS consider publishing the names of religious teachers that have undergone this programme or training?

          The Chairman:  Order.  The Leader of the House wishes to move a motion.

     Thereupon Mdm Deputy Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY

     Head I (cont.) –

     The Minister for the Environment and Water Resources and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim): Madam, the Malay/Muslim community continues to progress.  Primary 1 school enrolment is almost 100%.  At least one out of every three students from a P1 cohort enters local tertiary institutions.

     The Malay workforce is better educated.  At least 20% of Malays are in professional and higher skilled jobs, three times the proportion in 1980.  The median monthly income for Malays has also more than tripled over the same period.  More than nine in 10 Malays, or about 93% in 2005, own their own homes.

     Madam, we are also beginning to see the results of our efforts to address the social challenges faced by the community.  First, the number of divorces among Muslims dropped by 11% –  from 1,944 cases in 2006 to 1,747 cases last year.  The number of minor marriages – where either the bride or groom, or both, are below the age of 21 – also dropped by 7% from 440 in 2006 to 410 in 2007.  And I hope this trend will continue.

     We have also not shied away from tackling difficult issues.  In fact, the community has come together, in the spirit of consultation or musyawarah.  We have openly discussed issues such as dysfunctional families, the inclusion of Muslims in the Human Organ Transplant Act or HOTA, and the changes to the full-time madrasah education system.  It is through this spirit of musyawarah we have been able to address key issues affecting our community and our nation.  Let me take this opportunity, Madam, to thank everyone in our community – community and religious leaders, our parents, asatizah, our workers and students – for our unity and joint efforts to help our community move forward.

     Mr Hawazi Daipi and Mdm Halimah Yacob have raised concerns about the low income group and about the effects of rising cost of living on all Singaporeans, especially the economically vulnerable in our community and low-skilled and low-wage workers.  Both Members have also asked what the community and the Government will be doing to help the low-income families.

     From the recent data that we gathered from the Department of Statistics, it shows that among employed households, all income groups, including the bottom 20% of households, experienced increases in household income from work per household member in real terms for 2007.  Nevertheless, we are aware that many low-income families still need help to meet rising costs.  So we have adopted a two pronged approach.  First, we leverage on Government's initiatives and, second, we develop programmes for specific vulnerable groups within the community.

     The recently announced Growth Dividends and last year's GST offset package, which are weighted in favour of low-income families, provide relief to needy and disadvantaged families.  Assistance schemes, such as the Kindergarten Financial Assistance Scheme (KiFAS) and the Centre-Based Financial Assistance Scheme for Childcare (CFAC), help their young children attend pre-school, while programmes like the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) scheme provides incentives for them to improve their lives and their financial situation.  The Healthy Start Programme also provides a holistic intervention for at- risk families.  Other ComCare and Workfare Income Schemes provide financial assistance while developing self-reliance.

     Last year, MUIS disbursed $4.2 million of zakat funds to help the poor and needy Muslim families.  Of this, $3.5 million was disbursed as direct monthly assistance and $700,000 on empowerment and capacity building programmes.

     So to answer the question by Mdm Halimah, what is being done, let me give a summary.  Between 2004 and 2007, 400 families with young children participated in the Empowerment Partnership Scheme (EPS) to help needy families become self-reliant.  209 families have successfully graduated from the EPS and are no longer reliant on MUIS financial aid. Mr Imran Tukijoe's family is a good example.  Mr Imran, who has four school-going children, approached MUIS in 2004 for financial assistance as both he and his wife are unable to find work.  Under EPS, Mr Imran took various courses to enhance his job prospects while his wife completed a professional beautician course.  Both of them are now gainfully employed and have a combined household income of more than $3,000 per month.  200 new families joined the EPS last December, giving us a total of 600 families that have either benefited or benefiting from the scheme.

     Sir I am happy to announce that for 2008, MUIS has set aside a sum of $6.5 million for low-income families and empowerment programmes.  This is a 55% increase over last year's budget.  So we will do more to help low-income families.  This increased budget will allow us to better help the needy and disadvantaged Malay/Muslim families in Singapore.

     To address the needs of specific vulnerable groups, Mendaki started its Dedicated Programme for Single-Mother Families (or DPSM) in February 2007.  Under this scheme, single mothers and youths from single-parent families will be referred to social service agencies based on their needs to improve their employability.  Response to the programme, Madam, has been very encouraging.  A total of 438 single mothers and their older children joined this programme between February last year and December 2007.  Of the 438 participants, 217 or close to half were placed in jobs, and one in three participants stayed on in their jobs for more than three months.  One of the success stories involved Mdm Mislinah Bte Bakar. 

Mdm Mislinah wanted to return to work after leaving the workforce for more than 10 years.  She had lost her breadwinner husband to lung cancer.  Taking into account her need to care for her four school-going children and her health, DPSM helped Mdm Mislinah upgrade her skills and find a job with a research company, earning $600 a month.

6.30 pm

     Sir, let me know turn to the issue of minor marriages raised by several Members. 

     We have intensified efforts to help minor couples as well as their parents make informed decisions about marrying young.  Last year, two centres dedicated to this effort were established.  Known as INSPIRASI Hubs, the centres are run by the Association of Muslim Professionals (AMP) and the PPIS-Jurong Family Service Centre.  Their efforts are also beginning to show results.  Last year, among the 443 couples who attended pre-marital counselling, 141 couples, or one in three, dropped their plans to get married early.

     For young couples who decided to proceed with the marriage, the INSPIRASI Hubs had formed Club INSPIRASI in December last year to equip married minor couples with skills and knowledge to deal with marital challenges and to strengthen their families.  Since its launch in December last year, 83 couples have joined the Club.

     We have not spared efforts to educate the community on strong family values and the need to keep marriages intact.  An eight-episode TV programme, entitled Kpak Bing Bing which is the sound of the kompang was launched early this year.  Its key message was "a happy marriage requires effort, and sometimes assistance".  Such programmes have proved to be very useful in reaching out to the public. According to Suria, Kpak Bing Bing has been the channel's top weekly programme since its first telecast. 

     Several Members, including Dr Fatimah Lateef, commented that despite our efforts, the number of Malay-Muslim teenage divorces remains significant.  Minor divorces – be it either husband or wife, or both were minors at the point of marriage – make up 30% of total Muslim divorces each year.  Marriages involving minors are twice as likely to result in divorce during the first 10 years of marriage compared to marriages involving adult persons, probably because their young age and lower educational levels do not give them a stable start to married life.  

     The Government has studied this issue and I have quietly consulted many community leaders, including the Malay MPs.  One upstream measure that we are planning to introduce is to raise the minimum age of marriage for Muslims from 16 to 18, in line with the Women's Charter.  This will signal the Muslim community's resolve to tackle the divorce rates by curbing minor marriages.  We are targeting to raise the minimum age later this year, when the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA) is amended.

     Dr Maliki and Mdm Halimah also suggested that efforts and initiatives to help low income and disadvantaged families should be better coordinated, so as to maximise our resources, reduce duplication, enhance outreach and ensure holistic intervention.  I agree with both Members.  Let me highlight two coordinating platforms which have been set up by MUIS and Mendaki.

     The first coordinating platform is the Enhanced Mosque Cluster, or EMC, under MUIS.  Under the EMC, mosques will take over the social assistance function previously centred at MUIS headquarters. Mosques will directly disburse financial aid from zakat funds to the needy within their respective communities.  This is similar to the CDCs when they took over the financial assistance schemes from the then MCDS.  With this scheme, mosques should also collaborate with other agencies to come up with specific programmes and customise services according to local needs.  Being closer to the ground, they can address the needs a lot  quicker and customise programmes to help the low income and disadvantaged families. 

     MUIS piloted the EMC in the Southeast Cluster in December last year.  This pilot involved 13 mosques, with the Al-Ansar Mosque in Chai Chee as the operations centre.  We will review this programme in June this year, before extending it step-by-step to the other clusters.

     The second coordinating platform is spearheaded by Mendaki under the Community Leaders Forum (CLF).  The Action Plan for Strengthening Malay/Muslim families is a wrap-around approach to help families facing multiple problems.  This platform will improve the coordination of intervention efforts across national and community agencies.  This is the point that was raised by Dr Maliki on how we should coordinate among the various players within the Malay/Muslim voluntary sector to ensure that there is greater impact.  With this platform, we should be able to achieve that.

     To date, five project managers for five zones island-wide have been appointed to build up partnerships with the agencies, the Malay/Muslim organisations within the districts, coordinate case conferences, advocate for families through the agencies as well as consolidate and analyse data on the community.  Both the Enhanced Mosque Cluster and the Action Plan for Strengthening Malay/Muslim families will augment the national efforts to support and strengthen low-income and disadvantaged families.  Dr Maliki also touched on the complexity of the problems of dysfunctional families.  I would like to inform him that Mendaki is conducting a research to understand further what are the challenges faced by these families.  And I agree with him that finances may not be the real problem and that the roots of the problems are a lot more deeper.  We hope to tap on the expertise of the social workers to gain a better understanding.

  
     Madam, let me move on to the question raised by Mr Zaqy Mohamad.  He has asked for an update on the progress to help the madrasahs prepare for the PSLE this year.  There are three key initiatives – Training for Madrasah Administrators, Enrichment Programmes for Students and the PSLE-ready package:

     (i)  For the training of madrasah staff, MUIS has invested $2.27 million since 2003 to sponsor the training of key madrasah staff such as Heads of Department and Principals;

     (ii)  On Enrichment Programmes for Students, MUIS spent $120,000 in 2007 to develop and implement enrichment programmes to help Primary 5 and Primary 6 madrasah students prepare for PSLE; in fact, some of the students are also enrolled in the Mendaki Tuition Programme; and

     (iii)  MUIS will provide a further $700,000 from 2008 to help the madrasahs meet the PSLE requirements under the PSLE Ready Package.  The money will be used to provide training for academic subject teachers and will fund a teacher mentor scheme, where qualified teachers with experience teaching in national schools will provide guidance to our madrasah teachers.  MUIS will review this package annually.

     Mr Zaqy had also asked how we will ensure that the madrasahs maximise the financial grants given to them.  For one, MUIS will be tracking the madrasahs' performances in two areas: the participation rate and performance of teachers who have undergone such programmes; and, finally, of course, the students' performance in subjects like English, Mathematics and Science.

    Last October, I announced that three of the six full-time madrasahs will link up for the Joint Madrasah System, or JMS, to be implemented in 2009.  

     The three madrasahs – Irsyad, Aljunied and Arabiah – together with MUIS are developing a blueprint for the JMS – covering the philosophy, educational policies, desired outcomes, approaches and broad curriculum guidelines.  A sum of $2 million has been allocated to start up the JMS.  This will be used mainly for recruiting key personnel for the madrasahs.  They need new teachers and new staff to implement some of these programmes.  As the success of the JMS is critical, MUIS, with the agreement of the three JMS madrasahs, has decided to second several senior MUIS officers to the madrasahs to assist in the set-up of JMS during the transition phase.  So we will lose some good officers.  But we think this is important because we want to make sure that the JMS succeeds.  The two-year secondment will help the three madrasahs build up their management capacity.  Our long-term goal is for the three madrasahs within the JMS to be managed independently, albeit with MUIS assistance.  

     The remaining three madrasahs are welcome to be part of the JMS at any time, and any time they join they can benefit from all the additional programmes and initiatives lined up for JMS.  So if they join early, they can get a lot of resources.

     Madam, let me now move on to the issues raised by Mr Masagos and Dr Faishal.  The recent detention of two 26-year olds who became radicalised after being exposed to radical teachings over the Internet again highlights the importance of proper religious guidance.  Even though we cannot be 100% sure that we can keep out external radical influences, MUIS will endeavour through various measures to ensure that Singaporean Muslims have the knowledge and resources to understand and appreciate Islam, so that they are able to identify and keep away from what is not right.  Mr Masagos Zulkifli had asked about the profile of the people who had been detained for radical activities.  The detainees, according to our security agencies, do not have a specific profile.  However, there are warning signs that friends or relatives could watch out for, which could include an increased interest in extremist or radical literature and websites, or expressing support for violence and confrontation in areas of conflict.

     Both Mr Masagos and Dr Faishal asked what measures we have taken to counter self-radicalisation.  In September last year, MUIS launched the INvoKE.SG website targeted at youths and working adults between the age of 15 and 35.  INvoKE.SG provides information and runs discussions on issues of interest to our young.  The website also helps the young to have a better understanding of the Singaporean Muslim identity that we have built up over more than 40 years.  In addition to this, MUIS also launched a website, www.radical.mosque.sg, that provides a useful guide to help Internet users tell radical ideology websites from the legitimate ones.

    While all these efforts will empower Internet users with the skills to sieve out inaccurate teachings or misinterpretations of Islam, I think we all agree it is always better to get religious guidance from qualified religious teachers.  Hence, I would urge parents and community leaders to continue to emphasise the need for our young to gain and deepen their knowledge through the guidance of our accredited asatizah and to contact MUIS for assistance whenever necessary. 

     Dr Fatimah Lateef had asked for an update on the Asatizah Development Programme.   Asatizah can opt to participate in different programmes.  We have, first, the Executive Development Programme which is intended for all asatizah and it develops participants' understanding of the different religions, as well as national issues.  Of the 950 asatizah, more than 120 have completed this programme.  Dr Fatimah asked me to publish their names.  I am not sure whether it is necessary.  More importantly, we want them to continue to participate in this programme.  MUIS targets to train a total of 420 asatizah by end 2009. There are now the Professional Development courses which will equip our asatizah for additional roles, such as marriage counsellors, and for interfaith work.  Some 70 asatizah completed the course in 2007 and by 2009, 170 asatizah will be exposed to this programme.

     Finally, the Leadership Development Programme, which is modelled after the leadership programme for senior civil servants, will be offered to 30 senior asatizah.  It will provide participants with a holistic perspective of public sector governance, and help develop strategic thinking and leadership.  Sixty asatizah will be trained under this programme by 2009.  The Asatizah Development Programme is progressing well, and I urge the asatizah to participate actively in all of these programmes.

     Dr Muhammad Faishal asked for an update on our community engagement programmes.  Madam, over the last year, MUIS invited eminent speakers such as the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams and, the eminent historian, Ms Karen Armstrong, for MUIS's lecture series.  Both lectures – just like the earlier lecture by the Sheikh Tantawi of Al-Azhar – attracted Singaporeans of all faiths who were keen to find out more about topics such as the role of religion in the modern world and inter-religious dialogue.  The lecture by the Archbishop of Canterbury was the first collaboration between MUIS and the Anglican Diocese of Singapore.  We hope to do more with other religious bodies in Singapore.

     At the community level, our mosques are active in reaching out as important nodes in the neighbourhoods, leading and involving themselves in activities and projects with like-minded community and grassroots organisations.  You may have read that I was at Al-Khair Mosque last weekend with hon. Members Mr Zaqy and Minister of State Gan Kim Yong to celebrate a Care and Share carnival conducted by one of our local mosques which has been actively involved with students and the community within the constituency of Hong Kah GRC.  They have reached out and helped all students, irrespective of backgrounds, who are in need of financial assistance.  So, we should encourage more of our institutions to do likewise.  At the same time, our Harmony Centre at An-Nahdhah Mosque in Bishan continues to serve visitors of all faiths and nationalities.

     This year, going forward, our mosques will also get together to organise a signature event in July, which is called a 'Rahmatan Lil Alamin' or 'Blessings To All' Day.  This event will include a mass blood donation exercise and a reception for 1,000 needy families and elderly of all races.

    Madam, before I end, allow me now to summarise my speech in Malay.

    (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to  Appendix A *. ] Madam, the Malay/Muslim local community continues to move forward to climb the ladder of progress and reach the vision of a Community of Excellence.  In education, our students’ achievements are getting more visible.  Unlike before, we now often hear news of our students’ excellent achievements in national examinations, such as the PSLE, GCE 'O' level, 'A' level and also examinations in the institutions of higher learning.

     A number of Members, such as Dr Mohd Maliki, Mr Zainudin and Mdm Halimah, have expressed their concern about social issues that are impeding our community.  I agree that we must continue to enhance our efforts to assist and guide the dysfunctional families, single mothers and the low-income families.

     Madam, I am also heartened by the willingness and cooperation that was offered by all levels of the community in overcoming a number of difficult issues in the past year.  For example, the whole community worked together to ensure that we are able to take care of and resolve the issue of organ transplant and the full-time madrasah education system.  We are also willing to openly discuss the issue of dysfunctional families.  The spirit of musyawarah (consultation) displayed by the community, ensures that we can continue to progress in line with the passage of time and current demands.

     I would like to take this opportunity to express my deepest appreciation to all sectors of our community – students, parents, workers, community leaders and also the Malay Members of Parliament for rolling up their sleeves for the benefit of the whole community.

     I acknowledge that more efforts must be made to further improve the community’s level of achievement.  We should be grateful for our progress so far which we have gained through hard work, determination and commitment.  I am sure we will be further encouraged to improve our achievements so that we can stand tall together with our fellow countrymen.

     We hope our noble efforts will create a brighter future, not just for ourselves but also, more importantly, for our dear children.

          The Chairman:  Clarifications.  Any Member wishes to clarify?  Dr Lam.

     Dr Lam Pin Min: I would like to thank Minister Lim for his response to our call for a caregiver's allowance.  In fact, I was quite heartened by his response when he said that the Government is not ready to provide the allowance yet, compared to what the response was last year when I brought this up.  It was a flat no.  I agree with the Minister that we must not monetise the duty and responsibility of providing care for our loved ones.  In fact, we should not place a price tag to filial piety because it is priceless.  However, for the low income family, this additional financial assistance goes a long way in alleviating the financial burden faced by them and many of these families are actually living from hand to mouth.  Therefore, I would like to urge the Ministry to study this closely and hopefully, next year, we will have a positive reply.

     Mr Lim Boon Heng: We will study the matter.

     Ms Sylvia Lim: Clarifications for the Minister on the topic of juvenile homes.  Earlier on the recidivism rate, the Minister mentioned the rate of about one-third recidivism within two years.  But according to the estimates given to us, in page 63 of the Budget book, the latest recidivism rate for FY06 (actual) was put at 48%.  Is it not closer to one is to two relapsing into crime within two years? 

     Second clarification is that the Minister did not address my query on the additional expenditure which is spending on security services to reinforce supervision and security in the MCYS homes.  My question was: is this recognition that the homes have indeed been too lax and that there is a need to increase security provision?  And last of all, has the Ministry actually done anything so far to try to arrest the increasing recidivism rate in juvenile homes?

     Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: I will double check the recidivism rate for her.  Whatever it is, as far as I am concerned, it is too high.  Yes, we are spending more money on security services, and I think this is money well worth investing in.  Because, as I said earlier in my speech, we need to provide discipline and we need to provide security.  Without that sense of discipline and security, rehabilitation will not work.  So, yes, we are spending more money, and we will do so.

     Having said all that, I also want to caution us against over reacting in a knee-jerk fashion to this rate.  Let me give the Member an example.  The easiest way for my staff in the Boys' Home and Girls' Home to lower their rate is to be more picky as to who gets admitted to the Home.  If we work with more hardcore and more challenging cases, which I believe we need to, it will also mean our recidivism rate may go up.  I think there is a balance.

     I am not obsessively focused on just that rate, although I have said that the current rate, as far as I am concerned, is too high and I want it to come down.  But I am not going to lower it simply by placing more barriers and saying, "Why not you go to Prison instead of the Boys' Home so that you don't affect my statistics?"  I think she has raised a valid concern.  It is a figure we should watch.  I am giving her the commitment that we will continue to invest in whatever it takes to bring that rate down.  And we need to do so because these are young boys and young girls.  If we cannot get them back on the straight and narrow at this early age, they are condemned to a life of misery for themselves, their families and the community, and ultimately, it means a higher cost to us as a society.  So we will work on this problem.

     Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Madam, two clarifications.  In relation to juvenile delinquency and recidivism, I also raised the issue of the juvenile homes run by VWOs.  I seek the Minister's response to the extent to which MCYS monitors these homes because I think there are a lot of homes that exist out there, and we do not know the extent to which the effectiveness of those programmes and homes.  I wonder if the Minister can comment on MCYS' role in ensuring the effective running as well as the effectiveness of these programmes.  The second point is in relation to community involvement in working with multi-pronged families.  I applaud MCYS' position on involving the community, neighbours and friends to have a many-helping-hands approach.  So I would like to ask if the Ministry has any plans to facilitate this process of greater community involvement in working with families.

     Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: I announced just now that we are going to amend the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA), basically to allow us to regulate and to get more involved in working with the VWOs running all juvenile homes, or all homes with children and young persons in order to improve standards, maintain quality assurance and to achieve better outcomes.  Yes, we are working on this.  This is work in progress. 

     The role for the community in dysfunctional families is something which we all instinctively know is the right answer.  But it is very easy to say, yes, it is very easy to describe it in this Chamber, but it is very difficult.  The Inter-Ministerial Committee is still at work on this and we have no illusions that this is not something which Government can do alone.  We need the voluntary welfare organisations.  We need the grassroots.  We need everyone who is engaged in the community to play a part.

     Dr Lily Neo has previously raised in her intervention earlier that we need an integrated system, and she is absolutely right.  Because if we think what we have now, we have all the different pieces of the jigsaw there. Let me give Members an example.  We have learning support programmes in schools for kids who may not be academically inclined.  We know who are the kids who have dropped out or are at the verge of dropping out.  We know who are the kids who have got disciplinary problems.  That is one slice of it.  On the other hand, from the Ministry of Home Affairs, we know who are the kids who have been caught shoplifting or the delinquents.  By the time they end up in our Boys' Home and Girls' Home, they have actually crossed many rivers of crimes to have reached our shores.  So the point is that MCYS also is involved. 

    When a child is dysfunctional, it is almost always, not just that child who is at risk, but there is another child, another sibling or family at risk.  And this family would, in all likelihood, if they are in financial need, have approached the CDC or one of our grassroots organisations or even see us at the MPS.  So the different pieces of the jigsaw are there in the sense that we all know different elements of this elephant.  What we are trying to do now is to put these pieces together so that we achieve, what Dr Neo said, an integrated platform, information gets shared when we start thinking about solutions, we start thinking about the family, rather than just fixing an individual delinquent, a dropout or a drug addict, or fixing a financial problem on the part of the father or mother.  I am putting all these knowing full well that there is a lot more work to be done.  And that is why we form this Inter-Ministerial Committee because we realise that we need a common platform.  In fact, this Committee will have to go on to engage the community organisations on the ground because, in the end, the hands and feet and the hearts and mind that will be brought to bear will be the people on the ground.  They will not be policy makers or even MPs sitting in the Chamber, but they will be MPs on the ground at the meet-the-people sessions.  So there is a lot of work to be done.  Again, all I can do is to give her that assurance that we recognise, I agree with what she is saying, and we have to work on implementing it.

     Assoc. Prof. Kalyani K Mehta: Madam, I would heartily thank the Minister for his announcement of the establishment of the accreditation framework for social workers in mid-2008.  This has been a long awaited change for the social work procession.  Thank you.  One point of clarification.  When will the benchmarking of social workers' salaries and VWOs with the medical social workers be implemented?  Can I have a rough gauge?

     Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: My staff have already started work getting the data.  So we should have some comparative scales out soon, meaning within the next few months.  But I also want to caution that these social workers are not employees of the MCYS.  They are employees of voluntary welfare organisations who have their own challenges, including funding  challenges.  They also have to manage their expenses.  So I think it will take time.  Even though we benchmark, even though we put in more funds, do not forget that on the ground, the VWOs are also raising 50% of their operational expenditure based on their own funding sources.  I know it will take some time.  But, nevertheless, I believe by a combination of factors, accreditation and licensing, benchmarking of salaries, MCYS putting more funds in, the public recognises that social workers and counsellors are professions and deserve respect and additional support.  I am hoping that we will arrive at a situation where these professions get the recognition and remuneration that they so richly deserve.

     Mr Seah Kian Peng: Madam, I want to ask the Parliamentary Secretary one question.  He mentioned earlier that the Sports Council will be setting up an NSA Advisory Committee.  I hope that, amongst other things, this Advisory Committee will look into my earlier point about the experiences of NSAs who adopt different approaches towards talent development and to make the recommendations accordingly.  In the area of track and field, specifically the Singapore Athletic Association (SAA), I know many schools are very active on this front.  But somehow, once they finish school, all these talents just seem to drop off from the scene.  I want to ask the Parliamentary Secretary if there are some gaps in the development and nurturing of these young local talents by SAA.

     Mr Teo Ser Luck: I thank Mr Seah Kian Peng for the question.  The NSA's governance and management is always a challenge because we are dealing with more than 50 NSAs in Singapore.  So everyone has different standards of management and different qualities of volunteers as well.  This is a constant challenge.  So we are going to attempt to set up a NSA Advisory Committee. Why?  Because we want to share the best practices.  A good example is sailing.  Sailing has a very good youth development programme over eight or nine years.  The programme has been successful in producing champions.  We hope that they can share

these best practices with the other NSAs.  Of course, there will always be NSAs that have spent a fair amount of investments, and yet the results do not equate to the investments that they have actually put in.  So this is something that we have to work very hard on.

7.00 pm 

     I hope, through the Youth Olympic Games, that we can put in more resources and focus on youth development and build up a pipeline of young athletes and champions so that, in future, even after 2010, we will have a stream of successful athletes that are able to represent Singapore in international games.

     Mr Zainudin Nordin: Madam, two points of clarification. 

     (1)  Can the Minister consider relooking at the funding model for the VWOs with respect to the social workers' profession since the professionalisation of these workers was mentioned?  We need to also moderate their expectations and understand the difficulties faced on the ground by VWOs.  Can the Minister comment on this?

     (2)  How many social workers are we expecting to produce within the next five to 10 years to meet these challenges which we are going to face more and more in the coming years?  Are we considering to produce also the para-social workers at the diploma level, not necessarily the degree-level type?

     Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: I said just now that we will have to increase the funding for VWOs.  But having said that, the principles on which we fund VWOs, ie, we fund 90% of development costs and 50% of operational expenditures for approved programmes, those are long-established principles which I am reluctant to abandon at this point.  So I am prepared to pump in more money, but I still want to work within those principles.  At this point in time, it is worth reminding this House that, if you look at funding at the national level, we are actually not short of funds.  I cannot remember if I said it just now, but Singaporeans donate more than $1.2 billion a year.  This includes what they give to IPCs and charities.  Frankly, for a lot of charities, including churches, mosques and temples, it is a bit hard for us to really keep track of every single cent that is placed on the altar.  But I think that there is probably even more than $1.2 billion available.  So when we talk about difficulty in fund-raising, I think we also need to be more innovative.  The VWOs also need to show results and to convince donors that their programmes are worth supporting.

     There is also another bit of public education that we need.  People say, "I want to donate but I want to make sure every single cent goes to the beneficiary."  Unfortunately, a lot of people still think that the social workers are volunteers, that they are working for free or expect them to be working practically for free.  We need to educate Singaporeans that, yes, we know there is a voluntary welfare organisation at the top, and the board consists of volunteers who are unpaid.  But there is a whole lot of professionals underneath that, including teachers in special schools who are professionals and should be recognised and remunerated as professionals.  As Singaporeans, we must be willing to donate and, when we donate, accept that a significant proportion of our donations will flow to these professionals who are doing good work. 

     So it is a combination of things which I need to do.  It is not just a matter of putting in more money, but education, persuasion and really trying to elevate the sector in a sustainable way.  Again, I have no illusions that this is going to be difficult, but I think it can be done and should be done, and we will have, in the long run, a more sustainable and high-quality sector.  And that is what so many people have been asking for.  Many, many times, Ms Denise Phua will come here and say, we want higher standards, we want qualified people, we want to do all the things that we want to do in our heart.  Sometimes, they are limited.  Sometimes, it is funding but, as I said just now, I do not think funding is the key limiting factor.  I hope that by better organisation, we can achieve all this.

     Dr Fatimah Lateef: Madam, I am glad to hear the Minister of State mention that we will go all out to help the destitute in our community.  I am wondering whether we have any estimates of the number of destitutes we have in Singapore. 

     As a follow-up to last year's debate where I brought up the fact that the destitute hotline was not responded to throughout the whole weekend, I would like to update the Ministry that the response is extremely good now and they will come and pick up your destitute within one to two hours at any location upon calling the hotline, which is very well-manned today.

     Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon: Thank you for the compliment.  My staff should be quite happy.  They have all worked very hard.  The Minister asked them to work 24/7 on the phone. 

   Coming to destitutes, we mentioned that the Ministry will emphasise on the lower 20th percentile, who are the low-income group.  For the low-income group, we have a few schemes, not just for the destitute but also the marginal cases.  We have made changes to various schemes to help them.  With these revisions and new schemes, they will be covered under one of them.

     Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Madam, just a number of clarifications and to complete my cut.

          The Chairman:  It will be a clarification, Ms Phua.

     Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: I want to thank the Minister, his MOS, PS and team really for this thankless task of adjusting to the needs of so many people, different types of clientele.  Thank you very much.

     Madam, the public would like to know if the Public Assistance quantum would be pegged to an inflation index.  Can the Minister also consider having a focused team that eyeballs the Enabling Master Plan and probably give a more regular update on the progress since many people were consulted in crafting it?

     Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: Madam, the cash quantum of the Public Assistance scheme will remain under review.  We will have to adjust and respond to the prevailing situation.  Will we index it to inflation?  I am not keen to take a categorical position on this because, when we say inflation, the first question we have to ask is: which index are we using?  Are we sure our index is relevant to the population that we are dealing with?  The inflation rate generally is different for people at the top 20% versus the lower 20% and, even within the lower 20%, it is different for the people on Public Assistance. 

     So I would prefer my current approach, which is to know who we are dealing with.  We have 3,000 families, understand what their actual needs are, ie, what food, accommodation, utilities, rental, etc, keep watching the costs from the bottom up, and then do a reality check.  That is how I am approaching it.  That is why, like I said, I made my staff go shopping at FairPrice and show me a basket of food.  They almost wanted to bring it to Parliament.  But I thought that would be too gimmicky.  But the point is that I am doing a ground-up approach to making sure that our people do not go hungry.  And those of you who know me will know that that is something I feel very, very deeply about.  So, I will give her that assurance.

     Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Madam, I would like to thank the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs for outlining MUIS' outreach programmes to counter self-radicalisation and our inter-faith efforts.  Could the Minister comment if MUIS or the Malay community has been over-reacting, given the recent self-radicalisation in the Mas Selamat's case?  I personally would have loved that the security issues of self-radicalisation be addressed as part of the MHA's cuts.  But, in this case, would it seem as though we are making the national security issue a Malay/Muslim issue?  Some of those I spoke to, eg, religious and Malay community leaders, feel that it may put the Malay community on the defensive if we over-react.

     Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Madam, I am not sure whether we are over-reacting.  But I agree with him that, in the case of Mas Selamat Kastari, it is a national security issue.  DPM Wong is on top of the situation, together with the security agencies.  But, as he has mentioned, he welcomes all efforts by all sectors of the community, of all races, to try and help out, in terms of disseminating the information.

     In terms of radicalisation, we recognise that there are roles in which the Malay community can play because, this phenomenon, unfortunate though it may be, is happening within the Malay/Muslim community and, therefore, we have a certain amount of responsibility to ensure that our young are not led astray.  So, in terms of encouraging our young to go to the right sources to make sure they are not misled, I think we have a very important role to play. 

     But in terms of dealing with the direct security threat, it has to be a national effort, and we play our role as Singaporeans.

     Dr Lily Neo: Madam, could I seek the Minister's elaboration on my question earlier on the safety net for the most disadvantaged families of our society, especially their children, for the opportunity of levelling up?  Could these families be given a package for the purpose of human capital development?  The other issue is on the better MCYS delivery systems of the various schemes.

     Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: Madam, that is a big question!  If Members do not mind, I forgot to respond to Ms Denise Phua's second question, which is on the Enabling Master Plan.  We have actually accepted all the recommendations, except for one, which we will have to modify a bit but which we are working on now.  So, the Member will see there is progress on the Enabling Master Plan, and I will get my staff to update her.  If at any time the Member feels that the progress is unnecessarily tardy, please let me know.  But we are fully committed to making it happen.

     Let me now move on to children.  I said it is a big question because it was actually meant to be a key theme of this year's COS.  I started off with the story of my grandmother being a widow with three kids and about how, through family support, hard work and education, the family made good.  This has always been on my mind when I deal with a low-income family, when I see a single parent or a disadvantaged kid.  If he studies and works hard, will he become a doctor or a teacher?  What will happen to the grandchildren of this widow or low-income family?  These are real questions, and many Members have also referred to the question of social mobility. 

     So, let us exercise our minds on this issue.  How do we make sure that these kids can escape the poverty trap?  The first thing, I would say, is that we have to start working with the families.  Are there two parents?  Are the parents committed?  So, where both parents are available and the marriage has got problems, we need to have counselling and provide services and facilities so that the couple can work at it.  Because the most important thing a parent can do for a child is to love the mother or the father.  There is a whole slew of services which Mdm Yu-Foo Yee Shoon mentioned on marriage counselling, etc.  If we think about it, that actually is also directed at children.

     Next, they need to have food on the table, a roof over their heads and a safe environment.  And that means providing rental, housing, making sure the lights are on, that they do not get disconnected unless the parents are really playing games with Singapore Power.  But, nowadays, because of the pay-as-you-use meter scheme, there is actually no reason for any house to be disconnected.  So, that is another example of the things that we need to do, ie, the physical environment in the home. 

     Then, we need the kids to go to school or, if they are younger, we need them to go to kindergartens, and those younger than that, to the childcare centres.  And that is where we see our whole host of schemes – Healthy Start, the Centre-based Financial Assistance scheme for Childcare (CFAC), KiFAS, and the universal childcare subsidy.

I can honestly tell you, a low-income family can get a child put into childcare for a negligible sum of money because all these schemes are available to kick in.

7.15 pm

     But there are two reasons why we want the child to go into institutional childcare.  First, is that we want to give the child better and, hopefully, more stimulating environment for his or her cognitive, emotional and social development.  The other equally important reason is we want to enable the mother to go out to work because we believe an independent woman earning money and able to go out to work without having to worry about her children at home will be in a more stable and secure position - for herself, for her sake as well as to look after the children. 

     Having got the children into school, we then also recognise that not all families have the same starting line as far as school readiness is concerned.  That is where MOE comes in.  That is where learning support programmes can come in.  That is actually where streaming should come in.  I know streaming has been a controversial topic and people have lamented the problems with implementation of streaming.  But actually streaming, if we go back to its original intent which is to customise and tailor-make the programmes to fit the interests and abilities of the child,  if that is done correctly and properly, we again enable children to level up.  Then we need to make sure that throughout the school system, scholarships, bursaries and the rest are in place so that the lack of money will never be a limiting factor to the academic advancement of the child. 

     Beyond that, in the workplace, we have got to make sure the economy grows. We have got to make sure jobs are available. That is why MOM has been all these years making sure that there are both economic growth and job growth, and what NTUC is doing to making sure that those jobs are high value-added jobs, jobs worth doing so that people can get jobs.  Fortunately for us, one problem which we do not have is significant youth unemployment. If you go to Europe, if you go to other countries with rigid labour laws, you will see significant youth unemployment, and we do not have that in Singapore.

     Going on, the rest of the stuff that we have done now, CPF LIFE and preparing for retirement, all that is, again if you stop to think about it, something which benefits young people because it means the young people of Singapore today will not be saddled with a high tax bill later on because we have ensured that every generation earns and saves enough for itself. 

     So, I will give Members the assurance that there is no quick fix.  But if you stop to look at the complete picture of what Singapore has achieved, I believe we do have a good and secure, fair and equitable social safety net which will enable these children to fulfil their potential and lead full and dignified lives.

     Mr Sin Boon Ann: Madam, I am heartened to know that there are so many schemes available to help the poor and needy families, in particular the children.  I think what is of concern at this moment is: are these families and children slipping through the net? We have the family service centres, the VWOs, we have CDCs doing their good work. And very often in our MPS cases, when we write to family service centres, we get replies that say, "We know this family, they need financial assistance.  We referred them to the CDCs and we provided them with temporary pocket money from the Straits Times Pocket Money Fund."  Perhaps the Minister can enlighten me whether there is any particular agency that can take ownership of a particular case and see through this family from A to Z, be it in the form of getting the father a job, getting the child placed in school and ensuring that the child stays in school, and providing the proper counselling so that on a holistic basis we can provide a more comprehensive and thorough assistance, and eye-balling the family as it were, to see the family through.  I think this is the critical issue that we are confronted with.

     Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: I agree with the Member that we need to make sure nobody slips through the net.  But one point I want to emphasise, which is a point I said before, many people have asked us who owns the problem.  That is the point at which I want to put up a barrier.  I believe we must own our own problems, and I believe families must take ownership.  So I am not willing to have a system in which the State and all the VWOs become a surrogate husband or surrogate father. 

     But having said that, there is still a lot more that we can do.  I will give a few examples.  We have established the ComCare database so that all the different agencies who are involved in the family will be able to assess and share data.  And we know, how many children are there, which schools they are in, what they are short of, what is the situation – the socio-economic and job status of the parents, and how they can be helped.

     That is also why we are looking, and some of you have asked, for case managers.  We are gingerly and carefully looking at that.  To be honest with you, for most families who are at greatest risks, we do have case managers.  But I do not want to make that the norm, that every family with any type of problem will require case management and, worse, be in a position to relinquish ownership of the problem.  So I prefer to take this position: where it is your problem, yes, we will help, but you must do something about it.  You must ask and you must do your bit as opposed to the other situation where we say, "Don't worry, we will look after everything for you – do it all!"  And, unwittingly, you become the surrogate father, the surrogate husband, the surrogate family.  And that may work in a quick fix and that may salve our guilty complex initially but I strongly fear that is the wrong road to take.

     So we will have to take this balance of keeping some pressure on families, on individuals to exercise responsibility whilst, at the same time, making sure that the aspects of our social safety net that should respond should react.  For instance, when Dr Fatimah Lateef says, "Why didn't your destitute hotline work?", I have no excuse.  I  have got to make sure it works because it is supposed to work.  When a VWO says they need to know whether the children have dropped out of school, my system now must work so that I can tell them straightaway.

     Similarly, the assessment of needs done at the CDCs.  We have been on the CDCs' back to say that we want them to complete the evaluation as quickly as possible.  And we track their KPIs for that instance.  So what I am saying is that, yes, we do have all these different pieces of the net.  We want to make sure they are responsive but I do not want to take ownership and say that the CDC owns the problem, the Mayor owns the problem, or the Chairman of the VWO owns the problem.  Let us not go down that road. 

     But for really the most destitute and most hopeless cases, we will intervene and we will take them in.  Let me share an email I received.  This was a person – I think he is middle-age – who ran into some financial problem, having difficulties paying the mortgage, went to see his MP.  The MP wrote to MCYS.  Of course, in MCYS, our approach is – are you destitute?  If you are destitute, we put you in Pelangi Home.  The guy wrote back to me very angrily, "How dare you label me a destitute and offer me a place in your Pelangi Village?"

     I stopped to think about it.  What has happened to our expectations and our ownership of the problem? He expects us to provide accommodation compatible with what he is accustomed to.  By the way, Pelangi Village still has vacancies, so I have no problems housing the destitutes.  But every single family or almost every single family who has put up in a beach or in a park, when my officers go there and say, "Oh! You have a problem? We'll bring you in," they usually find some other alternatives with relatives and friends.  So the truth of the matter is that people, unfortunately, sometimes would choose the path of least resistance.  My job, unfortunately, is to put some resistors in the entire machinery so that people do not go down that path of least resistance and lead to abdication of responsibilities and abuse of resources.  

     We all start off with the best of intentions. Once we let our guard down, we end up in the road that we do not really want to travel.  So there is always going to be for MCYS, this is our current mark.  There will always be this push and shove between expectations and needs. I remember a point which Minister Mr Khaw Boon Wan said the other day: distinguish between needs and demand.  The same principle in healthcare applies even to a greater extent in the social service sector. 

     Miss Penny Low: I agree with the Minister that the individual and family own the problem, but does the Minister also agree that sometimes it is the systemic failure of the system that cripples a person's ability and responsibility to function as a full contributing citizen of Singapore, and instead turning them into a social burden of some sort?

     I mentioned an example during the main Budget speech, the story of Miss Judy Wee who is wheelchair bound and is otherwise intellectually as capable as any one of us. But unfortunately, every time she asks for a full contributing job, a meaningful job, she gets a marginalised job at a marginalised pay because of her physical condition.  And recently, she has styled herself into a social entrepreneur as a barrier-free access consultant which, obviously, she is turning her disability into a special premium ability which I thought was laudable. Unfortunately, in my recent conversation with her, she mentioned that people, when they look at her, expect her to still perform it on a charitable basis or at very low fees because, they are doing it out of pity or not seeing her as full functioning as someone who looks mainstream, as someone who looks normal.

     So my question is whether the Minister feels that there is a lot of room for us to highlight the abilities and to showcase the ability of some of the disabled population, the elderly population or even the stay-at-home mums who have got potential to become a full contributing citizen.  And perhaps we should look into a systemic revamp of the legal and tax infrastructure to encourage the funding, the operation and kick-starting the social enterprise sector.

     Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: I know Miss Judy Wee and she is right, she is as capable as any one of us except for her physical handicap.  On a larger scale, we do want every disabled person to try to do a job which he or she is capable of, to fulfil her or his potential.  But like she said, there are additional hurdles in their path.  One scheme which my Ministry has worked on is what we call the Open Door Scheme and we have actually provided funds for them to modify their environment so that a person who is wheelchair bound or disabled will be able to work in that office.  I visited a few companies with some intelligent planning and judicious use of these funds, they can create a situation in which the workplace enables people, even if they are disabled, to function fully or at least function as highly as their potential allows them to do so. 

     But having said that, this requires enlightened employers.  I can provide the funds to say, "Yes, I will help subsidise your workplace renovations."  But will the employers be bothered?  We, as a matter of policy, have resisted passing labour laws and there are countries which put quotas – quotas on race, quotas on gender, quotas on disability, on companies.  

In Singapore, and this is not just MCYS speaking, but as a Government, we have said that we need to keep our economy as agile, as flexible and as competitive as possible, and we will not have labour force rigidities.  So we are not going to legislate quotas for the old, for the disabled, for gender or for race.  But we will work on the much harder course of action, which is education, persuasion and helping create a situation which enlightens employers.  Can we help to create open workplaces for people of all kinds?

7.30 pm

     In the long run, this question of ageism, where people are unwilling to employ older workers, is something that we also have to resolve – it will work its way through the system.  Because in a Singapore in which so many people are old, if we truly want talent, we are going to have to look beyond gender, beyond race, beyond physical handicap and beyond age.  But it takes time.  We have to keep pushing it.  Again, what I am appealing, however, is – do not go for the short cut, which is to put quotas and assume that that will solve everything.  I do not think that will work. 

          The Chairman: We have time for one or, at the very most, two more clarifications.  Dr Maliki.

     Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Madam, as a trained social worker and on behalf of the social fraternity, I would like to thank the Minister for really recognising the contribution of social workers in Singapore, and the need to educate Singaporeans on the role and contribution of social workers in Singapore.  I assure the Minister and Members of the House that social workers will continue to serve with passion but, of course, a better remuneration package will be an added motivator.

     My second point is that some Members have alluded to the importance of creating a caring culture in our Singapore society.  I would like to ask MOS Yu-Foo whether the Ministry has any plans to facilitate such a development of a caring culture in our society.

     Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon: Madam, I would like to inform Dr Maliki that this initiative is by the people sector – the VWOs, the People's Association and also some MPs, like Dr Lim Wee Kiak, Mr Hawazi and others.  I think we should develop it in that way.  It is more the people themselves who feel that besides Government and CDCs' efforts, they should do something.  Therefore, in Chinese, I say, hao ren hao shi, cong zhou bian zuo qi, which means good things or a little kindness starts from your surroundings.  Having said that, my Minister has just approved a million dollars, as a gesture, to support this movement.  But I would like to say that this is at a very early stage.  The Ministry also needs to discuss this with the various agencies on how we can move together.

          The Chairman: Mr Sin, do you wish to withdraw your amendment?

     Mr Sin Boon Ann: Madam, I would like to thank the Ministers, MOS and the Parliamentary Secretary for their very comprehensive replies.  Certainly, if we look at the efforts of the Government and, in particular MCYS, over the years, it would be very difficult to say that the Government does not have a heart.  If I were poor, an elderly or a young Singaporean, I will be gratified to know that the Government is there to help us, and for the young to know that there is a great future ahead of us.  I agree that the road to the future Singapore is challenging, and there are many more issues that we have to iron out, many more things that we have to do.  But looking at the commitment of this present Government and the country as a whole, there is great hope for us.  And I would like to congratulate the Government on the work well done and I believe that the Government will continue to press on to make Singapore an even better place for all Singaporeans.

     On that note, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

     Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

     The sum of $1,177,933,100 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

     The sum of $154,199,900 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.