CHILDREN DEVELOPMENT CO-SAVINGS (AMENDMENT) BILL

CHILDREN DEVELOPMENT CO-SAVINGS (AMENDMENT) BILL: Order for Second Reading read.

6.15 pm

The Minister of State for Community Development, Youth and Sports (Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Sir, this Bill provides greater flexibility for the Government-Paid Maternity Leave and Adoption Leave schemes.

Government-Paid Maternity Leave

Let me begin with Government-Paid Maternity Leave. In 2004, we extended maternity leave from eight weeks to 12 weeks. For the first and second confinement, employers continue to pay for the first eight weeks, while the

Column: 1048

Government reimburses the last four weeks. For the third and fourth confinement, the Government pays for the full 12 weeks. However, based on current legislation, the mother must be married to the child's father before the child's birth, and the child must be a Singapore citizen at birth. Otherwise, the mother does not qualify for Government-Paid Maternity Leave.

A few mothers who obtained citizenship for their child or who married their child's father, shortly after the child's birth have appealed to my Ministry asking that they too be eligible for Government-Paid Maternity Leave.

Government-Paid Maternity Leave is an incentive scheme for intact families to have children who are Singaporean citizens. Whether the child is a citizen immediately at birth or shortly thereafter is inconsequential. Therefore, we are proposing to be more flexible by opening up Government-Paid Maternity Leave to mothers whose child obtains citizenship shortly after birth.

The Government-Paid Maternity Leave scheme should reflect our current social mores and norms. That is why mothers who give birth out of wedlock are not entitled to Government-Paid Maternity Leave. Having said that, our desired outcome is that children are brought up in intact families. Consequently, the proposed amendment allows for mothers who give birth out of wedlock, but regularise their situation by marrying their child's father shortly after birth to also be eligible for Government-Paid Maternity Leave.

As maternity leave is meant for the mother's physical recuperation and for her to care for and bond with her baby, the leave must be consumed within six months from the child's birth. Where the mother is married to the child's father before the child's birth, and the child is a

Column: 1049

Singapore citizen at birth, the first eight weeks must begin no later than the day of confinement, but the last four weeks may be taken flexibly, subject to an agreement between the mother and her employer. This is in line with the Employment Act. A mother whose child is not a Singapore citizen at birth or who marries her child's father after the child's birth will also follow this leave structure, except that she will be eligible for Government-Paid Maternity Leave only from the day the child becomes a Singapore citizen or the day she marries the child's father, as the case may be.

This change will apply not just to employees, but to self-employed mothers as well.

Adoption Leave

Sir, now let me move on to Government-Paid Adoption Leave. An adoptive mother can consume four weeks of Adoption Leave in a continuous block or flexibly before the child turns six months, similar to the practice for maternity leave.

However, when we first introduced Adoption Leave in August 2004, adoptive mothers could only take the leave after the adoption order was granted. The whole adoption process can take four to eight months to complete. In the case of a foreign child, the child must also have obtained citizenship. Therefore, few mothers qualified for the leave.

During my Ministry's Committee of Supply Debate in 2005, my Minister announced that we will allow mothers to go on Adoption Leave at a much earlier point in the adoption process. A mother who has applied to adopt a Singaporean child may now take Adoption Leave from the time when the court appoints the Director of Social Welfare in MCYS as Guardian-in-Adoption of the child. In the

Column: 1050

case of a child who is not a Singapore citizen at the time the adoption application is made, the Adoption Leave may be taken from the time when a Dependant's Pass has been issued for the child. This is almost the starting point where the child is physically with the adoptive family.

The change took immediate effect administratively from the date of announcement on 10th March 2005. We are now making the legislative amendments to formalise the change.

Children Development Account and Post-Secondary Education Account

Other than the changes to Government-Paid Maternity Leave and Adoption Leave, this Bill also contains a general amendment to the Baby Bonus scheme. The amendment would allow unused Children Development Account funds to flow through to another account in the child's name, and not just strictly to his Edusave account. This is in preparation for the introduction of the Post-Secondary Education Account, which the Prime Minister announced during National Day Rally 2005.

Sir, let me take this opportunity to reiterate the point that making Singapore a great place for families cannot rely solely on the Government's efforts. While my Ministry will periodically review and refine our policies to ensure that they remain relevant and useful, employers and individuals have to play their part. More than just policies, programmes and infrastructure, moulding a family-friendly society requires values and mindset change. Let us all work together to realise our vision of making Singapore a great place for families.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Column: 1051

Mdm Halimah Yacob: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill.

The amendments provide greater clarity and remove some of the restrictions found in the existing law and are beneficial to women. Under the current law, entitlement to the paid maternity benefit will depend on the status of the mother or child at the time a woman gives birth. The amendment has modified this for the better. For example, with the amendment, a Singaporean woman whose baby is a non-citizen at birth can now enjoy the paid maternity benefit so long as the child becomes a citizen within the stipulated period. This is less onerous compared to the existing law, which denies the mother of the benefit if the child is not a citizen at birth.

Sir, I also support the amendment to section 2 which allows for the transfer of moneys standing in a member's bank account under the scheme to the Edusave Account or any other account as may be prescribed by the Minister. This provides for greater flexibility in the event that other uses are allowed for the moneys in view of recent suggestions on how continuing education can be supported by the Government.

Sir, there are a couple of points which I wish to raise on the proposed amendments. Under the existing law, which is further refined by the amendment, the Government will reimburse an employer who has granted paid adoption leave to a female employee who has applied to adopt a child. This is an important benefit as it provides support to childless couples or those who want more children but cannot have more of their own. However, there are practical difficulties that affect the effectiveness of this benefit. Paid adoption leave is not a common benefit in Singapore, as many employers do not provide such a benefit.

Column: 1052

For this benefit to be truly effective, more should be done to encourage employers to provide paid adoption leave. One enlightened employer that provides such a leave is the public sector. Under the public sector paid adoption leave scheme, a female employee who adopts a child is given four weeks of paid leave, subject to mutual agreement between the Ministry and the officer concerned. In the private sector, two good employers come to mind - UBSAG and Microsoft. These are two examples of companies in the private sector that I know of that provide paid adoption leave to their employees. UBSAG provides up to 15 weeks of paid adoption leave, while Microsoft offers one month of this benefit to their employees. I wish to urge more employers to follow the public sector and the example of UBSAG and Microsoft, so that more women can benefit from the scheme provided in our law. There is little cost to employers as the Government reimburses up to a certain number of days. But this could be an additional incentive for employers to recruit and retain talents.

Sir, my next comment relates to section 9(3)(A) of the amendment as well as the existing section 3 of the Act. Both these sections provide that a pregnant female employee will not be entitled to the benefit if her employment is terminated due to whatever reasons. I feel that these provisions are harsh as they do not differentiate between situations where a woman loses her job because of her own fault, such as misconduct or when she voluntarily decides to leave the company during the benefit period, as against situations where she has no control, such as retrenchment, unfair dismissal or even upon expiry of her contract of employment in the event that she is on a short-term contract. I agree that when there is misconduct involved, then she should forfeit her entitlement. But in a situation such as retrenchment or unfair dismissal, for example, the job loss

Column: 1053

is not due to the woman's fault, so she should not be penalised. This is one area which the law should provide greater flexibility and I hope that the Ministry could look into this, instead of a blanket prohibition, and assess it on its own merits. Otherwise, what happens is a perpetuation of two wrongs. First, a female employee is denied of the benefit under the Employment Act, which is then followed by a denial of the additional benefit under this Act. This is painful for a female employee as the income loss is significant at the time when she needs it most and she has an additional mouth to feed and is no longer employed. It also runs counter to the very purpose of this Act which is to encourage women to have more babies.

Finally, Sir, this law has already been in place for a couple of years but we do not have a sense as to its effectiveness and whether or not it has reached its objective of promoting procreation among women and families. Are the measures adequate or do we need to do more to help women to have more children and, if so, in what areas? Perhaps, it is time that the Ministry conducted a survey to assess the impact of this legislation, which is an important piece of social legislation and make refinements, where necessary.

On this note, I support the Bill.

6.27 pm

Mr Zaqy Mohamad (Hong Kah): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the amendments put forth in the Children Development Co-Savings (Amendment) Bill.

I am in support of this Bill as we focus on the importance of parent-child bonding and create the right environment to address our low birth rates. I have a couple of points I would like to add on the Bill in general. But please allow me to

Column: 1054

take the first point in Malay and complete the rest of my speech in English.

( In Malay ): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A.] Generally, I am in support of the amendments proposed in the Children Development Co-Savings (Amendment) Bill. It is the Government's policy that emphasises the importance of forming a family and children's development through the amendments to the adoption leave scheme, Government-paid maternity leave and Baby Bonus. Having a family is an important investment in Singapore because people are an important asset to the country. Therefore, assistance and incentive to the people are an investment by the Government for the future of the country. However, I suggest that we should take a more progressive approach to ensure that no one is left behind or neglected.

*Cols. 1103-1104.

I feel that the assistance given must reach more than the first four children. True, this scheme is not a social assistance but it is more of providing a good headstart for the children. So I feel that we should not be concerned that, by extending this scheme, it would be seen as a social assistance to the lower-income families because there are already a number of specific assistance packages for them, like HOPE. In a family, there is a likely occurrence that children who are born later would not receive attention and benefits as good as their elder siblings and this is especially in the case of the middle and lower-income families. It is true that for families in this group, it is better for them to have a smaller family and do not burden the parents. However, if it happens that the family has more children, the children will be affected in the long-term. This may be detrimental to the country later because we are already having a low birth rate. Every child is important and they are our capital for our future. Every child has to be assisted to

Column: 1055

become useful citizens and we should not limit what they could benefit from.

( In English ): The second point which I think should be considered is to extend the Government-paid Maternity Leave (GPML) Scheme to include fathers as well. Recently, The Straits Times featured France's turnaround in its birthrate on 18th January 2007. One of the success factors is that incentives were granted to either the father or mother, regardless of gender. In fact, certain studies in Europe have also shown that in some highly industrialised countries, women are choosing to have more children because of the support they get from family members, particularly their husbands. In these countries, we also notice that fathers have benefits too.

In Singapore's context, such a move is certainly very much in line to allow greater bonding between both parents and child. The role of the father is as important, particularly today, when both parents are working is commonplace. A father's role should not be seen as restricted mainly to one, ie, supporting the family financially. The Government should be more flexible in allowing either parent to be eligible for the leave scheme, particularly for the Government-paid component. Broadening the coverage of the GPML and adoption leave also sends the message that the role of the child's upbringing and bonding belongs to both parents, and this should apply, whether it is for adoptive or biological parents.

Lastly, I think that the Government can also make provisions, should the mother pass on at delivery. Though not very common, I believe that fathers should then be able to benefit from these leave schemes. I am aware that I have also been pushing for a bit more flexibility in the implementation of this Bill, with the child's welfare at the centre of focus. But

Column: 1056

I have also received feedback from the ground that on the extension of the Government-paid Maternity Leave Scheme to mothers who marry after the child is born could send the wrong signal to certain conservative parts of our society. Hence, I would like to pose a question to the Minister of State, because I am aware of MCYS' position on children out of wedlock and I would like to know how MCYS would plan to handle this sensitivity.

With that, Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Bill.

6.33 pm

Ms Ellen Lee (Sembawang): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, clause 12A of the Children Development Co-Savings (Amendment) Bill states that the Government would reimburse any employer who has granted a married, widowed or divorced female employee paid leave of up to 24 days in connection with her adoption of a child below six months of age.

Sir, I applaud the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports for initiating paid adoption leave, as this is an official recognition that women who adopt children are helping to contribute more citizens to Singapore. These women are responding to the Government's procreation and pro-family policies in a different way, and their efforts should be saluted. This Ministry initiative will also send a strong signal that adopted children are treasured. It would go a long way to remove a stigma long associated with adopted children that they are second-class children within their own family as they are not born in it but adopted.

However, I note that the proposed adoption leave could only be taken if the woman's employer agrees. I feel that leaving the discretion to the employer is as good as not having the leave in the first place, as I fear that many employers

Column: 1057

would never agree. I would therefore urge the Government to consider making the 24 days' adoption leave mandatory and, at the same time, consider granting leave to the male employee as well because parenting is a joint responsibility of the husband as well as the wife.

The current amendments grant any female employee, married, widowed or divorced, adoption leave only if she proactively seeks and obtains her employer's agreement. Should the employer disagree and disapprove of the request, the female employee will not be able to enjoy this benefit. Unlike mandatory maternity leave, adoption leave in this case is not compulsory and largely dependent on the organisation the female employee works in, ie, whether the organisation adopts pro-family policies.

Sir, many married employees choose to consider child adoption as their option primarily because they are unable to conceive after years of trying, and the decision whether to adopt is also not an easy one to make, and the consensus between spouses and their families is even harder to reach. The employees often expend much effort to try to adopt a child. In most cases, it does not come easy and, sometimes, it takes years before the adoption is finalised. When the adopted baby finally arrives at the adopted family's home, it is understandable that these employees, particularly the mothers, who are filled with joy, just like how first-time parents feel after the wives' delivery, would need much uninterrupted time to reorganise their lives.

Sir, it is reasonable to expect these employees' desires to want to be with their newly-adopted infants for the purpose of bonding and taking care of this new family member. Like any newborn babies, these adopted infants too need lots of assurance and love when they first arrive at the adopted family's home.

Column: 1058

Therefore, it is logical for these employees, particularly the female employees, to want to spend time with the adopted child for reassurance, especially the initial crucial months. Unfortunately, and realistically speaking, these female employees know that it is difficult to get the employers to agree because, to the employers, it is but an adoption of somebody else's child.

Sir, making the leave mandatory would be a step forward in our modern and mature state with low fertility rates and consistent with the Government's drive towards a pro-family environment in Singapore.

Sir, allow me at this stage to say a few words in Mandarin.

( In Mandarin ): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A.] Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I fully support the initiative by the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports to provide female employees desiring to adopt a child to be given paid leave. This will send a strong signal that the Government supports parents to adopt children when they cannot give birth to their own children, so that they can fulfil the dream of having a full family. Such a move can send a very strong signal, ie, that the adopted child will enjoy a certain status, particularly when we realise that an adopted child may sometimes not enjoy the kind of esteem as natural children.

*Cols. 1105-1106.

Although we have such a legislation, I feel that, unfortunately, the Government should not leave the discretion of granting paid leave to the employers. In other words, the employers can decide whether or not to award such paid leave to the employee because, generally, the employers may not think that the adopted child would be as good as their own children. They can say they are only adopting other people's children, so there is no necessity for the employee to be given this paid leave to look after the child.

Column: 1059

I feel that the Government should make it compulsory. Unless it is mandatory, the employee will never enjoy such paid leave, except for a small minority of companies which are very rational and sympathetic in granting such paid leave to their employees. To adopt a child for parents who are unable to conceive, it is a very important decision. They must have thought through this very thoroughly and have made all sorts of considerations before they decide to adopt, and they have to pay a big price for it because, once a child comes to the family, the child will also need some time to build up bonding with their adopted parents so that they can actually enjoy the fun of being members of a family. If after spending a lot of time and money and the parents could not enjoy such paid leave to be with the child, it is very regrettable.

I hope that the Government will consider making it mandatory so that, by law, employers should provide such paid leave to the employees.

(In English) : Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I will now continue in English, on what other countries have done in this respect.

Sir, we are aware that more and more societies have adopted pro-adoption policies in view of declining birth rates in most developed countries. For example, in Norway, the total amount of parental and adoption leave has been increased from 52 to 53 weeks at 80% of full pay, or from 42 to 43 weeks at full pay. In the UK, under the Paternity and Adoption Leave Regulations 2002, an employee, regardless of gender, enjoys ordinary adoption leave period of 26 weeks. In the USA, the federal government allows leave and work scheduling flexibilities for employees who adopt children. Under the Family and Medical Leave Act, each parent is also entitled to use a total of up

Column: 1060

to 12 weeks of leave without pay for adoption and care of a newly-adopted child.

Sir, as we can see from these overseas examples, there is an ever-growing trend in these societies to seek a balance between work and family commitments. I urge the Government to seriously consider making adoption leave mandatory, if not for the whole 24 days, then at least for 14 days as a start, and also to grant the fathers some leave as well so that, together, the family can truly experience the joy of parenthood. I am glad to know that the Government has actually provided for four weeks of paid maternity leave for adoption cases and I would urge the private sector employers to do likewise as well.

Sir, adoption leave is intended for married employees, widowed, divorced or those who have fewer than four other living children. In considering the mandatory adoption leave, I would suggest that, for the single females who never married for various reasons but would want to adopt a child to form their own family

to enjoy the benefits as well for the same reasons that I have stated.

Sir, with that, I support the Bill.

6.46 pm

Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the proposed amendments in the Bill.

In fact, I want to echo what both of my colleagues, Ms Ellen Lee and Mr Zaqy Mohamad, have said, which is that, too often, we keep saying that parenting is a shared responsibility but the proposed changes always seem to be skewed only towards the mothers. I would fully support what both Ms Ellen Lee and Mr Zaqy have said. In fact, one of the enlightened companies that Mdm Halimah Yacob has highlighted earlier, UBS, is one

Column: 1061

of them. I believe that for fathers who adopt children, they extend the same benefits to them as well. We highlight such enlightened companies in the private sector. I sincerely hope that the public sector should take the lead in many of these things. If the public sector does not set the lead, I think it is very difficult to expect the private sector to do likewise.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.

Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank all my colleagues for all the very well-said arguments and I also sympathise with some of the arguments. I agree with some, but for the others, we cannot implement them for the time being.

Sir, I want to put the whole Bill in correct perspective. The objective of the Children Development Co-Savings Act is to encourage procreation and parenthood in the context of marriage, as the Government's view is that a two-parent family provides the best environment for our children to grow up in and to fulfil their potential. I would like to assure Mr Zaqy Mohamad that the Government still believes in promoting marriages and promoting procreation within intact families. Therefore, for single mothers, we have not extended some of the benefits to them. However, single mothers still enjoy the 12-week maternity leave under the Employment Act and their children also enjoy equal treatment under KiFAS, CFAC, Edusave and also enrolment in schools. The mother can benefit from the Foreign Domestic Worker levy concession as well as child care leave and so on. Even for housing, the mother can also apply to buy or rent a flat from HDB jointly with her parents. Therefore, we have other assistance schemes to help them. Government-Paid Maternity Leave is not an assistance scheme. It is an incentive scheme to encourage intact

Column: 1062

families to have children, and to have more children.

Sir, let me address Members' comments and some of the questions that they have raised. I would like to thank Mdm Halimah for supporting the Bill. Mdm Halimah has also encouraged employers to follow the public sector’s lead to provide paid Adoption Leave. I am sure the public sector will take the lead. On Ms Ellen Lee's suggestion to make Adoption Leave mandatory, I would like to say that the paid maternity leave by the Government is primarily to allow the mother to recover from child birth. So the objective is actually recovery from delivery. But the Government is very kind and has extended this benefit to mothers who adopt as well. This only started in 2004. Let us try to implement this Bill first because, so far, according to my Ministry, there has been no complaint or appeal to make Adoption Leave mandatory. We will also work through our partners - NTUC, the Singapore National Employers Federation, MOM, the National Family Council, Centre for Fathering and so on - to encourage employers to grant the leave. I think the employers are quite receptive. MOM has also assured me that if there is any complaint, they will try their best to help convince the employer to give this leave to the adoptive mother. I am sure Singaporean employers or even MNCs are good community citizens. We call upon them to support the adoptive mother. Let us try this voluntary way to encourage employers.

On the extension of Government-paid leave to fathers, I am very pleased that both of my male colleagues have called for fathers to play a more important role in bringing up their children. This is a good sign. In 2004, the Government allowed working fathers to have two days of Childcare Leave per year if the child is below seven years of age. And together

Column: 1063

with the mother, they enjoy four days of Childcare Leave per year. This is only the beginning. I am sure that the National Population Committee, headed by DPM Wong, can look into the ways in which fathers can play a greater role in child raising.

On extending the Baby Bonus to beyond the fourth child, I would like to say that when we introduced the Act in 2001, we only extended the benefit to the second and third child. In 2004, we amended it to include the first and fourth child. The Government's stand is that, by doing so, we cover 98% of Singaporean families with children. Those families with a fifth child are in the minority. I should also say that most of them are from lower-income families. We do not encourage lower-income families to have more than four children because we hope that they can spend their limited resources on the three or four children and make sure that these children can really develop their potential. And if they cannot manage, they should not have more. Having said this, ComCare, Family Service Centres, CDCs and other schemes do help these families if they have more than four children. Those are assistance schemes. This is an incentive scheme and we do not encourage the lower-income families to have more than four children.

Mdm Halimah is also concerned about the effectiveness of this incentive scheme and whether it has been working well. The Ministry carried out a survey last year. I think DPM Wong also announced the results in 2006. We have seen some encouraging signs. In the recent survey of 3,000 married respondents by MCYS, 83% of them indicated that the parenthood package has created a

Column: 1064

friendlier environment for having and raising children in Singapore. In particular, the younger and higher income respondents were more likely to respond positively. 56% of the respondents also said that the parenthood package has influenced them to have or consider having more children, or have children earlier.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to conclude by saying that it looks like the birth rate has presently stopped declining, and I hope that, maybe this year, we can see an upward trend. I thank the MPs for their suggestions and hope to further consider some of the points, especially getting fathers to share more parenting responsibilities.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon].

Bill considered in Committee.

Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon:

The Chairman: The citation year "2006" will be changed to "2007", as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement.

Clauses 1 to 7 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.