1ST APRIL, 2002 TO 31ST MARCH, 2003

Head Q - (cont.)

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, we have just heard that Singapore wants to be an infocomm hub and IDA has to ensure that we have a world-class standard of infocomm infrastructure and quality of service. However, there are complaints of mobile phone service standards.

Firstly, the issue is on mobile phone portability. The mobile phone is mobile but the phone number is not. When one switches to another service provider and wishes to retain the phone number, the operator will use call forwarding service to solve the problem. But this is not the complete solution, as is pointed out by many users who had complained to the press. I note that the IDA, in its reply to the complaint, has said that it recognises that with technology advancements and market developments, it is necessary to review the MMP solution regularly. I would like to know whether a review has been made and what is the position of IDA now on the issue.

Secondly, Sir, is regarding the issue of the service standard of SMS. There were complaints that SMS messages were not delivered even after days. I wonder - because the Senior Minister of State dislikes SMS - whether IDA is going to set mandated service standard for the SMS service providers. Or is it just going to deem it as not one of the functionalities not needed by most users, and thereby need not set any mandated standard? And I would advise the Senior Minister of State that if he had a problem in using his thumb, maybe he should try the PDA phone. You can write Chinese as well, using your hand.

Thirdly, Sir, it has also been brought to my attention that there are instances of dropped lines when mobile phone users enter MRT tunnels during train rides. There was also a complaint today from MPs that if one goes inside the lift, he would also experience dropped lines. What is the IDA going to do about it to ensure the service operators take the necessary action to prevent all this frequent problem of dropped lines?

Mr David Lim: Sir, Mr Low Thia Khiang has raised a number of issues concerning mobile phone services. Let me deal with them one by one.

On mobile number portability, or MNP, IDA mandated MNP since the start of mobile competition on 1st April 1997.

There are several technical ways to achieve portability. IDA decided at that time it was better to leave it to the mobile operators themselves to decide which was the best way. This is consistent with the regulatory practice in most other countries. However, the current solution adopted by the operators does not allow portability for mobile data services such as SMS. We recognise that this shortcoming can hamper competition and, likewise, innovation. IDA is working with the industry to review the existing technical solution, and it will ensure that the market remains competitive and able to deliver new services.

On the issue of inter-operator SMS, that is SMS across different mobile operators, IDA has mandated this since February 2000. Any mobile user can send and receive messages to and from the customers of other mobile operators. Singapore is one of the very few countries in the world to have actually mandated inter-operator SMS. IDA is currently working with the four mobile operators to examine whether the inter-operator SMS service can be improved, and will consider whether or not to set minimum Quality of Service standards for SMS.

Finally, on mobile coverage in MRT tunnels, IDA has mandated that all operators must provide coverage in MRT stations. But there is a problem here. We have not so far imposed minimum Quality of Service standards because of this problem, and that is, there is limited physical space in MRT tunnels. There is space for the trains but there is no space for a lot of other things. Mobile operators therefore have been required to share infrastructure in MRT tunnels. This limits their mobile capacity, and it makes it difficult to isolate problems to a particular operator. For these reasons, QOS standards have not so far been set. But IDA will continue to monitor the overall service levels closely, and work with the mobile operators to address and resolve the network congestion or quality of service problems when they arise.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, can I seek a clarification from the Minister?

The Chairman: Yes, a short clarification.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: He said that service standards were set for SMS. But is the standard for delivering messages set?

Mr David Lim: No, Sir, I said that service standards were not set. We have not set them because there is a competitive marketplace. If there is a competitive marketplace, you leave it to the operators how they want to achieve this. One of the problems, of course, with service standards in SMS today is because of people like Mr Khaw Boon Wan's daughter who sent out 700 messages a month, maybe a day! And there are many kids who find this a very fun technology, just to keep in touch with each other. But it puts a lot of traffic onto the system. One possible solution could be to differentiate service types, so that the business users could subscribe to more expensive service and therefore get better quality of service. But this is something for the market really to work out.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Further clarification, Sir. I wonder, where is the balance? On the one hand, IDA is supposed to provide the service standard and, on the other hand, it is saying that you leave it to the market. So, which is which?

Mr David Lim: IDA's responsibility is to ensure that we have a competitive marketplace, and we leave it to the market then to decide. Where there are restrictions to competition in the marketplace, then IDA will step in.

Mr Seng Han Thong: Sir, in view of the Minister's answers, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Seng Han Thong: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code QA 1500.

(In Mandarin): Sir, just now, the Acting Minister Mr David Lim asked us to look at this stereogram [indicating]. He said that the Government had a heart there. I looked at it, but I cannot see the heart there. Fortunately, Dr Lee Boon Yang who will be taking over as Minister for MITA, taught me how to look for the heart, and I finally saw it there.

So what you can see, you say you can see. What you cannot see, you must say you cannot see. However, I am reminded of the famous story of the Emperor's New Clothes. The Emperor's new clothes were not in existence, and nobody could actually see it, but everybody pretended that he saw it. Eventually, it was this little boy who exclaimed, "Hey, the Emperor is not wearing anything!"

Recently, we had a Singapore edition of the Emperor's New Clothes, that is the "Hungarian Ghost Festival". We know that this problem arose from a wrongly translated description in the Chinese version of a Singapore Tourism Board publication. This Hungarian Ghost Festival has turned our society into a nation of ghosts and our ancestors have become Hungarians. The Chinese community was naturally very unhappy with it. There are a lot of articles in the newspapers, and even the ordinary citizens are saying that this is disgusting. The Government saw it, but it said nothing about it.

Many people said that this was indeed a "national disgrace"! Why is it a national disgrace! Because the Hungarian Ghost Festival was not the only problem. In this Singapore Tourists' Guidebook which was distributed freely to incoming tourists at the airport, the Chinese translation stated that two former Prime Ministers of Singapore were buried at the Kranji War Memorial. We all know that there is only one former Prime Minister of Singapore, and he will be celebrating his 80th birthday. He is still very healthy, and he is flying all over the world. Our Prime Minister is in the pink of his health, and his face is shining with vitality. He can easily live to 100 years old. How could they say such inauspicious thing about them. This is indeed disgusting!

In the Lianhe Zaobao, many readers wrote to complain about it. Some commented that the Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew in two volumes which ran into some 2,000 pages were translated into Chinese, by our local translators, and there was no mistake in them. Why was there no mistake? The reason is very simple. It was because the publishers were very serious about it. On the other hand, although the Tourists' Guidebook was an official publication, the relevant Government agency did not take it seriously, and did not attach any importance to it.

That was the problem. Very often, when we write to a Government department about some issues, we inevitably receive a reply, "We will look into it." When we raise the issue face to face with the Government officials, they will say, "I see, I see". So, they look and they see. Look see, look see, and in the end nothing is done.

The STB said that the Guidebook was translated by some people in Shanghai, some foreign talents! No doubt, it is good to use foreign talents. But the question is: did our own people bother to vet and approve it? We want foreign talents, but we also need our own local talents to complement them. Foreign talents plus local talents, great things can be done. Foreign talents and no local talents to complement them, there will be full of problems. 4.30 pm

Sir, last year, we had problems with the wrong translations in Contact Singapore that made us a laughing stock within and outside Singapore. This year, we run into similar trouble again with this Singapore Tourists' Guidebook. The problem is the attitude of these Government departments remains unchanged. They do not take their Chinese publications seriously.

A lot of Singaporeans feel very hurt because of this. Mr Lee Seng Giap wrote an article in the Lianhe Zaobao entitled "Top straight but bottom crooked". The common expression is "Top not straight, hence the bottom is crooked". However, in the present case, the people at the bottom are doing well, but the people at the top could not be bothered.

Many readers have suggested that we should have a Central Translation Bureau. This is a long-term plan. I think the immediate plan is to have an official vetting panel to vet through all important official translation works. If the Government department cannot get enough people to do the job, it can make use of talents from the private sector. If this cannot be done, then it is not a question of not being able to do, but not wanting to do.

The Chairman: Mr Seng, you have only 5 minutes left, and it includes the Minister's reply.

Mr Seng Han Thong: (In Mandarin): DPM Lee said that, when we are remaking Singapore, we will leave no stone unturned. But the problem is that some stones are turned and then put back in the same place. In this case, nobody seems to want to remove this stone at all. Last year, we were tripped by this stone, this year this stone is obstructing us again. The various Government departments are reluctant to take on this responsibility. I feel MITA should take on the role of a coordinator.

In answer to my question, DPM Lee mentioned that when the Japanese Minister merely said, "Hm!", the civil servant took the cue and said a lot of things. I hope that DPM Lee will now say, "Hm!", and let the civil servants go and get things done.

Mr Khaw Boon Wan: Sir, I share the anguish and anger of Mr Seng Han Thong when our "Hungry Ghosts", in the hand of the Shanghainese translator, became naturalised "Hungarians". I was in MTI for seven years. So I know MTI corporate culture very well. In MTI, we are allergic to repeating mistakes. Each mistake leads to a thorough review of the operating procedure so that a similar mistake does not get repeated. So I have no doubt that, from now, in STB, there would not be double vetting, there will be triple, perhaps more.

This human error cropped up in STB. But it could have cropped up in other departments, as in Contact Singapore, two years ago. It could have also happened in the private sector. Mr Seng felt that a Central Translation Bureau, or, in the interim, some vetting panel, would prevent such problems in future, at least for the public sector. I am not so sure.

These incidents underline the importance of context and knowledge of cultural nuances. Hence, we cannot treat the language as purely technical. For Singapore to be cosmopolitan, we must develop a deeper knowledge of culture and context. And this must be achieved at every level, not just the translators, but the managers in charge must build that up too.

Every publication is a communication exercise. The manager in charge is finally responsible for the accuracy of the message. He must take ownership. Passing the buck to a central bureau, or a vetting panel, is more likely to result in a loss of accountability on the part of the manager. The language experts in the Central Bureau can, at best, do a technical translation job but they cannot fully appreciate the nuances of the content or the intricacies of the policy intent.

I have personal experience of this. Just two-three months ago, I have to give a couple of lectures to a largely Buddhist audience. So I prepared my speech in English, because I am more competent in English. Then I asked my colleague in MITA to do a translation for me. But I have to do the final vetting and, in fact, as it turned out, I had to make a few amendments because the translator, being non-Buddhist, cannot fully capture my intent accurately.

But I agree with Mr Seng that MITA, with its pool of language experts, is in a position to help. We can help train translators. We can help standardise the terminology to be used. We can help translate the important Government documents. And we do provide such a service for our colleagues in the other Ministries, but we have to be selective. For example, our service cannot extend to tourism promotion publications which should rightly remain the full responsibility of STB.

Language is an important part of our heritage. It can also be a competitive advantage. So we must all try to be better at it. It is therefore very good of Mr Seng to raise this very important point. Credit must also be given to the media for highlighting these incidents. If we do not exert high standard on ourselves, then we will never be able to make progress.

The Chairman: Mr Seng Han Thong, would you like to withdraw your amendment?

Mr Seng Han Thong: I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (3), Mr Arthur Fong is not moving. Amendment No. (4), Mr Zainudin.

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q of the Development Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code QH 5200.

Every major city of the world has its own historical and cultural landmark. The Esplanade's design and development have caused some stir in the architectural circle and among our citizens. Personally, I have to admit that I am an admirer of this national landmark. Say whatever you like, it sure stands out like a sore thumb on the bay.

For many years, we could only turn to several common sites for concerts and performances. Now, with the Esplanade, I am confident Singaporeans can benefit and enjoy a modern, hi-tech, world-class theatre and concert hall. The Esplanade will go a long way in promoting and elevating the art scene in Singapore. Sir, my only concern is regarding the status and role of the Esplanade, as a private entity, in the effort to promote arts.

I am for the investment in the arts and culture. It is important. With regard to this, I would like to highlight the major investment towards this project and ask the Minister how is the Esplanade going to balance its role to be economically viable and, yet, making the arts accessible and affordable to the masses.

Mr Arthur Fong (West Coast): Sir, for many Singaporeans driving past or gazing out of the SBS bus as he passes the Esplanade, one wonders how much he would appreciate what goes on inside and much less what went on inside the Victoria Theatre these past years.

Sir, I recognise that the Esplanade will truly be the pride and joy of Singaporeans in time. Like the arts circle in Singapore, I am anxiously awaiting for the opening of the Esplanade. It will play an important part in developing and encouraging a softer side and more holistic Singaporean through the appreciation of the arts.

The mission of the Esplanade is simple - to entertain, engage, educate and inspire. To entertain who? To engage who? To educate who? To inspire what? The answer is simple. To entertain art lovers, engage and interact with people who can appreciate and even identify with the performances and performers, educate people who have yet to experience the various art forms and finally to inspire a quest for more artistic exposure once entertained, engaged and educated. Simple.

But it is, however, not as simple when we ask who are these people that we want to entertain, engage, educate and inspire. Sir, how many affluent Asian art lovers will consistently fly in, cruise in, drive in to support the programmes that are obviously going to be of a wide spectrum. How many Singaporeans will take up all the other seats night after night? This must be difficult for a few years.

So to increase a healthy mass of art lovers, MITA has instituted many initiatives. Some good examples are the Arts Central on our TV, Arts on the Move series, that is brought to the HDB heartlands, Cross Talk events in community centres, Music Box - performances by young talented musicians and many more. We even have a Theatre Management course study at the university. There is also a concerted effort to bring in ASEAN artists and also to entice the regional arts companies to take root here.

The bottom-line is we want to be prominent on the international arts calendar. Before that happens, we ask ourselves, will the range of activities that the Esplanade will stage be able to sustain its momentum? Surely, performers and artistes want to play to audiences and not just to experience performing in the newest performing Arts Centre with the latest that acoustic and theatre design has to offer at this time.

As I have asked earlier, is the regional pool of theatre goers enough? Is our own Singaporean pool of theatre goers developed? Well, maybe after 12th October this year, foreign talents will find Singapore the least stressed place in Asia to work and play will also say that there is the Theatre on the Bay and there is much at play! But as much as we would like, the foreign talent pool cannot help us too much in the area of filling the seats night after night. Many average Singaporeans will tell you, this is for the atas sikit, the artsy and even for the ang moh foreign talent that we are wooing, and not for the average Singaporean.

Sir, I know that there are, today, in our heartlands, Singaporeans who have in the past few years developed an interest in the arts, but this group is small. Will the many programmes, as I have acknowledged earlier, to "culturise" our people, result in a short time, help build enough cultural ballast for all that the Esplanade has the potential and will to stage? I do not think so.

Meanwhile, large Government grants will be necessary to keep the curtains up for these two honeycomb architectural icons, or for the average Singaporeans it is nan sat du lian, the glass skin. Sir, for the year 2001, the Esplanade company ran a deficit of $3.8 million. A Government grant of $4 1/2 million was necessary.

The Chairman: Mr Fong, we are in deficit of time now.

Mr Arthur Fong: I am finishing. Assuming that the learning curve and the reputation of the Esplanade as the performing Arts Centre is on the world stage in, say, five years, I would like to ask the Minister the estimated yearly Government grant for the next five years and beyond which is needed to keep the curtains up.

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Sir, I am happy that MITA is developing the Old Parliament House. This historical and important heritage of our country must be given due importance and accorded the right place in our society. With respect to this, can the Minister update the House on the progress of the development and the future plans for the Old Parliament House? May I also ask what is the difference in the model of development compared to the old SJI? I had the opportunity to accompany the Minister on his visit to Reflections at Bukit Chandu recently, and it was really an exciting and interesting experience. I would like to encourage the House to pay a visit to this new museum at Bukit Chandu. If this is an example of the kind of future development that we can get for our museums, I have to really say that it is a commendable effort, and I would encourage MITA to work on the same model for the Old Parliament House. 4.45 pm

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (Encik Yatiman Yusof): Sir, both Mr Zainudin Nordin and Mr Arthur Fong wanted to know what programmes the Explanade has to enable the public to identify with, enjoy and be proud of it. Mr Zainudin also wanted to know whether the Esplanade would be managed as a business entity or as an entity of public character, and how the Esplanade's viability would be maintained while allowing Singaporeans to enjoy it and feel ownership.

Mr Zainudin mentioned the success of the Pepys Road programme and also asked whether the Old Parliament House would be modelled along that line or with the SJI.

Sir, the Esplanade's mission is to be a performing arts centre for everyone. To fulfill this vision, the Esplanade hopes to resonate and connect with both the local and international audience by presenting an extensive and diverse range of programmes. It will strive to present activities that everyone can participate in and enjoy. To fulfill this mission, the arts centre will start with three weeks of fun and exciting programmes immediately after its official opening by the President on 12th October this year. There will be local and international performances and activities reaching out to families, teenagers, adults and the international audience. All her state-of-the-art facilities - the 1,600-seat concert hall, the 2,000-seat theatres, two smaller studios and three outdoor performing spaces - will be utilised to their fullest, to enable Singaporeans to soak in the festivities and fun. In addition, within the Esplanade compound, a performing arts library and a 3-level mall consisting of unique restaurants and shops will be opened for the public to explore and enjoy.

Beyond the opening programme, the Esplanade has allocated more than 50% of its annual programming budget for family and community-based activities, such as cultural festivals, public education programmes, free outdoor events every weekend, and annual open-house days. The public can look forward to enjoying programmes, such as ethnic festivals, Children's Festival and an International Music series throughout the year.

Sir, the distinctive architecture of the Esplanade has made it a talking point among Singaporeans. It has even been featured in cartoon strips in our local newspapers. I believe that some Members of this House have seen this cartoon in the Sunday Times. Mr Fong is correct too when he said that the Esplanade is iconic to Singapore. But, beyond being an icon of our nation's support for the arts, the Esplanade hopes to nurture and strengthen our social bonds and ties through a shared interest in the arts. And, with the support of the promotional agencies, such as STB, NAC and EDB, it will strive to enhance both her image and Singapore's overseas. In short, the Esplanade will have a heart close to its community but it will be known throughout the world.

Sir, the Esplanade is an entity of public character. Similar to many performing arts centres around the world, the Esplanade will not make direct profits from the very broad and diverse arts programming it will undertake. But the benefits and viability of the Esplanade should not be measured solely on direct economic terms as it brings many indirect and intangible benefits. The Esplanade will increase the vibrancy and creativity of our local environment, enhance our attractiveness to global talent, encourage more creative and imaginative thoughts, and help to strengthen our relationships and ties, both locally and overseas. The corporate world can also integrate performances at the Esplanade into their client relationship development programmes. This, in turn, sharpens our competitive edge. The Esplanade should be viewed as a competitive tool for Singapore therefore, and it is important that we support the growth.

As to the question by Mr Fong whether we can sustain this effort, I say it would be a big challenge to the management of the Esplanade as well as ourselves, Singaporeans. How much will it cost? It will cost a lot. But this is something that we can be proud of.

Sir, on the question of the Old Parliament House, Mr Zainudin Nordin felt that the conversion of the Singapore Arts Museum should bear its value to the community. I totally agree with him. We should also value the fact that the Old Parliament House is an important historical building to Singaporeans. So far, the model that we build will be based on the museums that we have earlier developed, eg, the SJI, which have been successful in drawing in both local and tourist visitors. He may be glad to know that the annual visitorship to the SAM between 1996 and 2001 was about 151,541 and that 30% of the total visitors were tourists to the Singapore Arts Museum. So, because of the attraction that Singapore Arts Museum has, the model that we plan to have for the Old Parliament House will also be along that line.

The historical significance of the former Parliament House would indeed be preserved. This will be done through the conversion of the building into a multi-disciplinary arts and heritage centre. A display along the walls of the corridors of the constitutional history of Singapore would highlight the building's significance in our history. Artefacts and plaques indicating important rooms of the Old Parliament House will also be displayed throughout the building. The draw of allowing Singaporeans a peek into the building where Parliament was once held will attract both local and foreign visitors.

Sir, Members of the House will be interested to know that the Parliament Chamber will now be reused as a Concert Chamber. The former library will be converted into a blackbox theatre meant for use as a performing venue, while the Committee Room will be used as an art gallery. Other proposed facilities include a film theatrette, rehearsal and meeting rooms, restaurants with riverview and alfresco dining facilities. These will transform the Old Parliament House into an arts venue with events all year round. Together with Victoria Theatre, Victoria Concert Hall, the new Asian Civilisations Museum at Empress Place and this new Parliament Building, the Old Parliament House development will help make the entire area an arts and cultural hub that speaks for Singapore's present and past.

Sir, a Straits Times report yesterday mentioned the discovery of four ---

The Chairman: Mr Yatiman, we have five minutes to "guillotine" time actually.

Encik Yatiman Yusof: Let me conclude by saying that while we put the former Parliament House to new use, we will also highlight its past role in relation to our nationhood and constitutional history, and also the ancient history of its vicinity as revealed from the archaelogical exploration, as carried in the Straits Times a few days ago.

Mr Zainudin Nordin: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Mr Loh Meng See, we have five minutes before "guillotine" time.

Mr Loh Meng See: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head Q of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code QI 5200.

Sir, I am raising the subject of the Malay Heritage Centre because I believe it should not be just a centre for the Malay community. It should be a national project. I recall the failure of the Malay Village in Geylang Serai some years ago. It is important that we make it a success this time. If we are ambitious enough, we should make it a regional centre for Malay heritage. So I just want to ask the Minister what plans we have to make it lively not only for the centre but also the surrounding areas, the programmes and activities, and for public education as well.

Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed: Sir, heritage should be everyone's hub, especially for a country as economically successful, global and cosmopolitan as Singapore. Singapore should be proud to have a Malay Heritage Centre to complement that of the Indian and Chinese. It is after all a national heritage.

I will just go to the question, Sir. Could MITA share its thinking on the project and explain how it assesses the progress made and its direction? How will a National Heritage Board and other related agencies under MITA and Government agencies like URA, Land Office and STB help the MHFC make the project viable and a success?

Mr Seng Han Thong: (In Mandarin): Sir, in the development of museums, MITA has done well. We have now 15 heritage and arts museums. To create museum going culture among Singaporeans, MITA has even gone further by organising a MuseumFest at Suntec city to attract the shoppers.

As we know, Singaporeans prefer shopping than visiting museums. Thus, MITA has moved the museums to the shopping centre. This is a right strategy. Sad to say, if we ask Singaporeans to name 10 shopping centres, many can name them without much difficulty whereas many could not name even a few museums.

Besides focusing on local Singaporeans, I felt that we should also focus on the 7 million tourists who visit Singapore annually now that we treat Arts spending as investment which could also create economic growth.

I propose that we categorise the 15 museums into a few groups and actively promote the different groups of museum among different target audience: certain kind of museums may be of interest to the Japanese tourists, others to the interest of the Europeans and some to the Chinese tourists. The pamphlets can be printed in the languages of the target groups and be distributed at MRT stations, hotels and tourist resorts. Many other countries have done this and have seen the results.

If we can be creative, innovative and flexible in the promotion and operation of museums, I believe, in the longer term, we can attract more Singaporeans as well as tourists to our museums.

Encik Yatiman Yusof: Sir, time is running short. I would like to thank Mr Zainul Abidin and Mr Loh for raising the important issue of the Malay Heritage Centre at Kampong Glam. I would like to report that it is progressing well and that it is expected to be completed in the year 2003.

As to what is being done to enhance the Centre, I would say that an urban planning consultant was appointed, with financial support from the Singapore Tourism Board, to conduct a consultancy study and development, and there have been some recommendations and some ideas have been thrown up. First, they are talking about pedestrianisation of Sultan Gate leading to the Malay Heritage Centre; second, they are drawing a demarcation line in Kampong Glam into a cross-section, the Green Fingers, Commercial Spine, etc; third, to close Kandahar Street temporarily on weekends and turn it into a food centre. With these measures, we will be able to make Kampong Glam Malay Heritage Centre a very attractive place for people to visit, shop and participate in the activities.

Mr Seng Han Thong suggested that we should open the museums on Mondays. Currently, the museums are closed on Mondays to enable the maintenance of gallery items on display and to ensure that the museums are clean and well kept for visitors in the week ahead. At present, our National Museum stays open until 9.00 pm on Fridays, and if a public holiday falls on a Monday, with the exception of May Day, they would be open to the public. Mr Seng suggested that we should also open on Mondays. Even though it is an international practice for the museums to be closed on Mondays, I am happy to say that MITA is glad to accept Mr Seng's challenge for us to dare to be different, and we will try to open the museums on Mondays on a trial basis and we will assess public reaction.

The Chairman: "Guillotine" time. Mr Loh Meng See, would you like to withdraw your amendment?

Mr Loh Meng See: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $268,262,600 for Head Q ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $221,945,800 for Head Q ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head I -

The Chairman: Head I - Ministry of Community Development and Sports. Amendment No. (1), Mr Charles Chong.

[Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Chew Heng Ching) in the Chair]

5.00 pm

Mr Charles Chong (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Sir, I beg to move,

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

Meritocracy is a principle embraced by Singaporeans. It is a principle that has served us well and is often attributed as the underlying reason for our competitiveness and rapid progress.

Sir, it is true that every Singaporean, regardless of how humble his or her family background, can succeed, and we often read of students from poor families doing brilliantly in their studies and succeeding in life. There are several common examples here in this House. It is also true that low-skilled workers can get ahead if they were to work hard, upgrade their skills and are prepared to undergo life-long learning. We must continue to encourage and motivate all Singaporeans to give of their best, and not to look to welfarism as a viable alternative. But our policy-makers must realise that there will always be the bottom 5-7%, who despite their best efforts, will not be able to keep up with the rest. If Singaporeans are to bond as a cohesive society, meritocracy and competitiveness alone will not enable us to achieve this objective. It has to be tempered with compassion for others, other than ourselves and our immediate family members.

Whilst Singaporeans have to be personally responsible for their own welfare, the aged, the disabled and those less-gifted must never be made to feel disenfranchised and neglected. In a society built on meritocracy, equal opportunities lead to unequal outcomes. Those who lag behind may feel demoralised and resent the success of others. Those who succeed may feel less obligated to help anyone. After all, did we not, wittingly or unwittingly, imbibe in them that in meritocracy whatever success that is achieved is based entirely on one's own effort and merit? Could we always depend on the more able in the community to support the less fortunate?

Singapore's social welfare system has largely been based on the family and extended family support. This has served us well in the past, when families were large and extended families living together quite common. But times have changed. Families are smaller, nuclear families common, and being single is no longer unusual. There are also prominent examples in this House.

The Government, working with the community, must find ways to create adequate social safety nets for those who are unable to keep up, despite their best efforts, but in a manner not to destroy the sense of self-worth, or the incentive for them to give of their best, however humble that may be.

Could the Minister tell the House what social safety nets have been put in place and the strategies adopted by MCDS to assist low-income families, the disabled and the disadvantaged to cope with the changed social and economic environment, and the measures to assist them and their children to improve the situation?

Mr Sin Boon Ann: Sir, the recent recessionary effect of the economy is affecting the lives of many Singaporeans in more ways than one. To begin with, there are now more Singaporeans who are unemployed, and who may not be employable since for many of them, the restructuring of our economy has resulted in many of the lower-skilled jobs being made permanently redundant. Unemployment is more than 4% and rising.

I know that for the unemployed and the needy families in Singapore, we have many public assistance schemes to help them. To mention a few, the CDCs provide financial assistance, utility grants and food allowances for a period of time. There are also a number of those who are given public assistance that is worked out based on the number of persons in the family. The question really is, and which has always been the subject of much debate in this House, how much help should we give before one can in true conscience say that enough has been given.

I know we are not a welfare state and that the underlying concern about welfare assistance is a loss of the work ethic if public assistance is so readily available. Sir, I agree that we must not provide help to such an extent that people lose their willingness and desire to work. Yet, we cannot say, at the same time, that those who are unemployed are not willing to work. There are many in our society, who through no fault of their own, are without a job, or are without a job because they are either single parents or are medically unfit. And for many of them, they often have young families. Sadly, Sir, it is often the children who suffer.

Sir, we talk about building a compassionate society and asking Singaporeans to give up their lives for the country, if necessary. For many Singaporeans who are desperately struggling, the call to put the country before self, somehow rings hollow if the perception exists that the Government is not prepared to do more if it is able to.

Can we and should we do more to help these people? Yes, I say we should. My point is, just because there are people who may potentially abuse the system, does not mean that we should not do more to help the genuine poor. For a start, I think we should ensure that all Singaporeans should at least be assured of a minimum standard of living, and this standard should move with the changing standards over time.

Secondly, we should set up some kind of unemployment insurance or fund to help families ease into unemployment slowly and cope with the trauma that comes with unemployment. Of course, such assistance should not be given at a level that is a substitute for the full income.

Thirdly, families of public assistance should not be made to feel like they are beggars in our society. They should be counselled regularly by social workers to ensure that every cent that will be given will be usefully spent for the benefit of the family.

I hope the Minister will comment on the above proposals.

Mr Gan Kim Yong (Holland-Bukit Panjang): Sir, when our economy went into recession last year, the Government introduced the Economic Downturn Relief Scheme (EDRS) to provide short-term help to those affected by the recession. Now the economy is showing signs of recovery. I assume that at some point in time, when the Government is certain that the economy is out of the woods, the EDRS will be suspended or terminated.

While I agree that the EDRS should not be a permanent feature, I would like to highlight three areas of possible problems in the future.

Firstly, improvement in the job market usually lags behind economic recovery. Even when our economy recovers, it will take time for employers to regain confidence and start recruiting again. It will also take time for new investments to come in to create new jobs. Therefore, we need to be prepared that the job market will take a longer time to improve.

Secondly, while the economy may have recovered and the job market improved, there may still be segments of residents who are unable to find a suitable job, or may need more time to find one because of skills mismatch. They may remain unemployed for a while more.

Thirdly, economic restructuring is likely to be a permanent feature in our economy. This is because of the fast-changing world we are in today. People are expected to be in and out of jobs as the industries they are working in restructure themselves. This is unavoidable, but it does mean that there will always be a good number of workers who may be temporarily out of job. Some of them may be financially stretched, especially those who have heavy commitments.

Sir, as we phase out the EDRS when the economy recovers, I would like to appeal to the Ministry to consider introducing some kind of Economic Restructuring Assistance Scheme (ERAS) to help these three categories of people. The ERAS can be similar to the EDRS in that it is short-term and limited in dollar value, so as not to create a dependency mentality. But it is discretionary and simple to operate, therefore, we can respond rapidly. It has a specific objective of helping those who lost their job as a result of economic restructuring, and yet unable to qualify under the usual public assistance schemes. The Ministry could perhaps consider expanding the Interim Financial Assistance Scheme for this purpose.

Alternatively, the ERAS may even take the form of a short-term interest free loan which the recipient has to pay back over time after he has found a job. Under normal circumstances, he would find it difficult to take a commercial loan as he is unemployed. With a short-term loan provided by the Government, he can avoid having to sell his house and risk breaking up the family just because of a short-term cash flow problem. As the loan needs to be repaid, the temptation for abuse is drastically reduced and those who apply for it are likely to be those who are genuinely in need.

Sir, I would like to appeal to the Minister to consider my suggestion to put in place an Economic Restructuring Assistance Scheme, either as a form of short-term grant or a short-term loan, to help those affected by economic restructuring in future.

Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman (Sembawang): The current economic downtown has seen many Singaporeans affected either directly or indirectly. I have spoken earlier during the general debate of an increasing number of Singaporeans who are financially trapped with mountains of bills to settle.

Sir, our approach to welfare has been guarded and indeed cautious. It should continue to stay that way. We have to ensure that any financial assistance scheme implemented does not create a disincentive to work.

Sir, the role of administering financial assistance programmes has now been delegated to the CDCs. It has been a year since the CDCs took over this role and somehow, it coincides with the onset of the economic crisis. I would like to ask the Minister to give an update on two groups of people who have come to the CDCs for financial assistance.

The first group are the retrenched workers. Sir, the EDRS was introduced as part of the off-Budget package to assist Singaporeans who were retrenched. Can the Minister share with the House how many families have been assisted through the EDRS scheme? How long has assistance been provided? What proportion of these recipients return to the CDCs for further assistance? That is, what is the proportion of those who are still in need of assistance at this time?

The second group are the non-retrenched workers. These are the people who are not eligible under the EDRS. Can the CDCs also administer the other financial assistance schemes to assist their respective residents? Since taking over the role from MCDS over the past one year, can the Minister share with the House the effectiveness of CDCs in administering these programmes? What is the turnaround time for each of the case, that is from the time the case comes to the attention of the CDC to the time that the case receives the financial assistance? How has this differed from the time these schemes were administered centrally by MCDS?

Can the Minister also share with the House how many individuals have come to seek financial help, other than EDRS, at the CDCs in the last one year? How many of these cases were successful in their applications, and how many were not successful? What are the social demographic profiles of these families who have come to seek help? What is the proportion of those who have returned for more assistance?

We all know that providing financial assistance to these families will only address the symptom. There are other underlying problems that often accompany the financial problems. The provision of financial assistance should be a means to an end rather than an end in itself. To do this, however, requires closer caseload management and intervention. In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister what is the average caseload of each worker in the CDCs with regard to financial assistance cases?

Anecdotal evidence indicates that the caseload for each CDC's staff is very high. If this is so, how can the CDCs ensure that their staff are effective in doing caseload management and intervention, thus ensuring that the underlying problems are addressed?

CDCs are not the only organisations who provide financial assistance to needy Singaporeans. Indeed, there are many VWOs out there who provide financial assistance to these families also. While we pride ourselves in ensuring that our financial assistance programmes do not create a disincentive to work, the availability of many financial support providers may create a buffet syndrome, resulting in what social workers call the "professional cryer", one who is able to move from one organisation to another in seeking help. May I ask the Minister what efforts are being done to ensure that this does not happen?

Sir, during the general debate on the Budget Statement, I shared observations that many families are feeling financially trapped with arrears quickly accumulating as the days go by. My understanding is that the financial assistance provided by the CDCs will only assist these families in the short-term, and will not be sufficient in helping them settle their arrears. I would like to ask if MCDS shares this same observation and, if so, how does MCDS hope to assist these families overcome their financial predicament.

Mr Ahmad Mohd Magad (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Sir, what I wanted to say have been succinctly put forth by those who have spoken before me.

The Chairman: Mdm Ho Geok Choo is not here. Mrs Yu-Foo. 5.15 pm

Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon (Jurong): Sir, I think the best safety net is the family. Families are the building blocks of society. The families act as the first line of care and support for an individual, especially during uncertain times. There are signs that the family values may slowly be eroded. For example, divorce rates have been rising, singlehood rates have been rising too, while fertility rates have fallen.

While we focus our attention on economic uncertainties and restructuring, we should not lose sight of the value of the family. Our Prime Minister has identified declining fertility as one of the key challenges for our future. Despite generous tax incentives, the Baby Bonus and other measures, the number of births has remained low.

Sir, some of the young professionals, men and women, told me that they are so busy with their work that they do not have the time to socialise, meet new friends and find a partner. And they are giving up the search for a life partner even when they are in their early 30s. Perhaps it is time for MCDS to consider privatising the SDU and SDS and allow the private sector to manage these functions. Maybe they are more imaginative in this.

The Public Education Committee (PEC) on the Family, after consultation with people from all sectors of society, have come up with 70 recommendations, which include balancing the work life and family life, family support services, narrowing the gap between men and women in their expectations of life and marriage, and fostering a family-friendly society. Can the Minister comment on how MCDS will implement the 70 recommendations?

Sir, there might be a need to review the slogan of procreation "Have three or more if you can afford it", the reason being that it looks like no one can afford it. The rich cannot afford the time, the poor cannot afford the money.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister when the Ministerial Committee on Marriage and Procreation is going to release its report. Is it at the courtship stage, pregnancy stage, or going to be delivered soon?

I understand that in Denmark and Norway, the fertility rate is quite good. This is because of extensive support from the Government, such as childcare, nanny-care, financial support, and so on. Would the Government look into implementing some of these schemes?

Sir, I wish to touch on abortion. There are about 14,000 abortions here a year, and about 60% of them are by married women. Sir, I am not against abortion. There are many reasons for abortion. According to feedback, women opt for abortion because of medical reasons, forced pregnancies, financial difficulties, alternative contraception, immaturity, fear of losing out on promotion, out-station postings, studies, or the inability to get a flat. Abortion, however, is a highly personal decision and it is difficult for the Government to interfere. But, in some cases, the mother might want to keep the baby for adoption.

Sir, abortion counselling would need to be strengthened. Mandatory counselling should be done by independent counsellors and not by the clinic itself, as there is a conflict of interest. Mandatory conselling should be extended to the family as well. There should also be more joint efforts by MCDS and VWOs to support distress cases. Sir, a life saved is one more Singaporean.

There is an important question I wish to ask. Procreation is the responsibility of the individual and the family. How far should the state share in this responsibility?

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs (Encik Mohamad Maidin B P M): Sir, as Mrs Yu-Foo had mentioned, family is the basic building block of our society, and I think many people know that it is also one of our five shared values. On this, I believe, there is no disagreement. However, not everyone found family life to be a job. Some said that it is becoming more stressful, and there are many reasons why some families felt stressed, and some failed, resulting in abuses and divorce, and we all know that the children also suffer.

Whatever the reasons are, I believe one way to handle the situation is to see how the problems could be reduced. In this respect, Sir, I think our people need to be assisted, and be better prepared for the role in the family. In this respect, Sir, I must stress that we should not assume that every child will grow up and will automatically be able to know how to become a husband or a wife one day, and maybe later on a father and a mother. They need something. They need to be prepared. They need to know. And, even if many people claim that they are able to cope without anyone's guidance, or on their own through reading and all that, I think more should be done to help our people. And, with some help, I believe those who can cope can manage even better. Those who are facing problems would at least be in the know of how to manage and to minimise their problems.

Sir, starting a family and managing it is not a new human enterprise. We have been doing it for thousands of years. And after being in this for so long, I think we should have grown smarter from all our past experiences. And this is why, and this is also where, I believe, we could do more. We need to share more information on family life with our young. I am not just referring to the importance of the family, but also to increase their appreciation of starting one, and managing it as well as they could. For in the end, how well one manages his or her own family has a lot to do with the future of our people and our country.

I could see that the Ministry of Community Development and Sports has drawn up many programmes pertaining to marriage and the family. However, Sir, I notice that they are almost entirely targeted at our adults. My question is: is it not a little too late to target grown-ups in trying to achieve the Ministry's desired outcome of cultivating positive attitudes about marriage, about family and about parenthood? In this respect I would like to see more efforts being done to target our youths, even as early as when they are in school.

Sir, if we can reach them younger and help more of them to be better informed on family matters, I think by the time they grow up they could be in a better position to set up a strong and stable family. And this is one of the Ministry's mission statements.

I think the best is for MCDS to work with the Ministry of Education and try to come up with a programme that could assist our young to better understand and appreciate family life. In our schools today, for example, there are programmes like Home Economics and Sexuality. I think these programmes, combined with many other family life activities currently promoted by the MCDS separately, could be put together to become something new, something like a non-examinable subject that could be taught at the upper secondary level.

Sir, the idea is to have our young people understand and appreciate the core areas of family values. In this way, they are more likely to grow up with greater awareness. Anyway, with such knowledge the children could also be a more positive helping hand in their own families while they are still growing up.

Sir, everyone, for example, needs to study English, Mathematics and Science, and other subjects from a very young age in order to prepare them for their working life. And once they have a good job, they can continue to improve and upgrade their skills, and in these areas, I believe we have done a good job. But, I think there is a case to consider teaching our young, or at least sharing with them, the core values about family life, so that they are also better prepared for it when the time comes. And in this way we would stand a better chance to have a good career and a joyful family life. And they could upgrade their knowledge on both aspects, from time to time. But, by then they should have a good basic understanding about family life. And even for those who did not do well in their career, they could at least try to achieve a good and happy family life by making good use of the lessons about family life that they have learned while they were still young, or from a young age.

Another way to be of help is to try to get every aspiring couple to attend some marriage preparatory course. I think not everyone has the time and the ability to think of all potential challenges that one is likely to face in a marriage, or to think of so many ways to make the marriage work even better for the family. Sir, such courses could assist many people to be able to think and look ahead, to foresee the challenges and to be prepared when it comes. And they could even use the knowledge to avoid certain pitfalls. This is where I believe past experiences that many others have gone through could be of help to new couples.

Finally, Sir, may I add that the more happy families that we can help to create the better it is for our society and our future. Sir, I sincerely hope that the Minister could look into some of my concerns and to find ways to get family life education included in a more comprehensive and digestible way in our schools or to have some programmes for those who plan to get married.

Dr Mohamad Maliki bin Osman: Mr Chairman, one of the tenets of S21 is strong families. We have often heard that the family is the building block of our society. As the key social institution, we will continue to strive to keep our family strong. It is this importance that has been placed on the family that I am raising this cut.

I am not clear, if we do indeed have a family policy. My understanding is that we do have policies that affect the family, in the form of housing, healthcare, employment and, even perhaps education. But, do we actually have a family policy that systematically attempts to put forth the interest of the Singapore family? I would appreciate it if the Minister can enlighten the House on this.

Sir, the marriage and divorce statistics, as mentioned by Mrs Yu-Foo, do not reflect a healthy trend for the Singapore family. In 1999, there were 14 divorces for every 100 marriages. In the year 2000, there were 23 divorces for every 100 marriages. In terms of actual numbers, Sir, between 1999 and the year 2000, the number of marriages dropped by 7%, but the number of divorces increased by 57%. These statistics, compared with the much talked about decreasing birthrate and ageing society, raise questions on the strength of the Singapore family.

Why are there fewer marriages, but more divorces? Other indicators of our families being stressed include the incidences of domestic violence and juvenile delinquency. I would like to ask the Minister the following questions: What are the programmes that MCDS has developed in strengthening the family? What are the outcome indicators of these programmes, ie, are these programmes effective? How does the Ministry define a strong family? Are our families getting stronger or weaker? How do we know that we are indeed strengthening our families?

Sir, I have argued elsewhere that to understand the developments of families, we need to appreciate the changing societal trends. The increase in the educational qualification of women, in my opinion, has a significant influence in understanding the state of the Singapore family. I believe that the role within the family must change, from one that is clearly defined along gender lines, to one that is complementary in nature.

Sir, with women making up half of the workforce, and dual income families being the norm rather than the exception, it is imperative that we recognise the need for complementarity of roles between men and women in families. Sir, while we do not deny the Asian value that men are seen as being the head of the household, we also cannot deny the contribution of women in the family's economy. It is impractical to expect women to go out to work, to supplement the income of her husband, and contribute to the country's economy but, at the same time, to expect them to continue to perform their traditional roles of mother and homemakers. While the women are doing their part to supplement the men's role in the economic sphere, men must also reciprocate and do their part in supplementing the women's role in the domestic sphere.

Sir, I believe strongly that MCDS should focus its programmes on promoting strong families, on the complementarity of roles between men and women in the family. Men can, and should be encouraged, to be nurturing fathers and domesticated husbands. Their roles should not be confined to merely being the breadwinner and disciplinarian. The wives will certainly appreciate their partners sharing the responsibility of building this strong family. 5.30 pm

Sir, I have always believed that dual career couples share three jobs between two people, that is, two careers and the maintenance of a home. Indeed, we should continue to promote this and, I am sure, it will contribute towards increasing our fertility rates.

I am glad to note MCDS' support on the role of fathers. But, Sir, I think we need to do more. We need to address the issues that men face in families. As we encourage them to perform non-traditional roles, I encourage MCDS to develop more programmes that will focus on the issues that men face as husband, father, employee, and even son. This in itself is deviating from the norm - that men do not talk about their issues. Sir, I have worked with men in different groups, and I am confident that men do need to talk about their issues, and these issues are directly related to their ability to strengthen their families.

Sir, I would encourage MCDS to also focus its efforts on the issues of socialising our children in preparing them for adult roles in families. While we are socialising our girls to be independent, educated and career women, we are not socialising our boys to be domesticated husbands and nurturing fathers. Unless they are prepared, and we deal with this at this juncture, we will continue to see stresses in marriages as roles are not performed to expectations. It is not a role reversal but a complementarity of roles. In this regard, I would encourage MCDS to develop a coordinated programme at addressing the socialisation issues of our children in our families.

Mdm Cynthia Phua (Aljunied): Sir, we are living in a fast-paced society, from third world to first world's living standards in one generation. Now, with the economic downturn, families are subject to a lot of pressure at all times. Some of the problems are stress-related, like job losses, retrenchments, relationship problems, harassment, especially now from creditors and relatives, divorces, separations, family difficulties, grief, bereavement, problems with addictions such as alcohol,, smoking or other drugs, gambling, unwanted pregnancies and other personal worries or life stresses, and so forth.

Two statistics reflect some of the problems of our families. The number of juvenile delinquents is high (31 per 100,000 children). The number of persons divorced or separated, as what Dr Maliki has said, within the 10 years, increases from 1.3% in 1990 to 2.5% in 2000, that is, double. Most of these problems are found in dysfunctional families and normal healthy families too. With the smaller families, family support is much reduced. Some of these problems must be solved as quickly as possible.

I would like to propose a one-stop support centre in every constituency. The Ministry of Community Development and Sports should make residents aware of such centres, so that they are accessible to them. We should educate the people that these are the centres that they can go to for help in times of need, especially now with the economic downturn, coupled with massive job losses. I propose that trained and professional counsellors be allocated to each constituency centre too. Retrenched workers can also be trained to assist the counsellors and run the day-to-day operations of these centres. This creates job openings for retrenched workers too. These centres should also have a 24-hour telephone counselling service, trained to listen first and counsel later. Presently, there are too many telephone numbers for people to remember when they are in trouble, and these are not reaching the ground. These centres could also work closely with schools within the constituency.

The CDCs are well placed to provide these support centres. However, Mayors have told me that they do not have enough finances. Presently, there are only 12 CDC service centres, which are too little, ie, one centre for about 300,000 people. Therefore, I urge the Ministry to support this one-stop support centre, which will help Singaporeans cope with all these problems derived from dysfunctional families as well as normal families in this economic downturn. As the saying goes, you shall reap what you sow. And I would like to support my argument one more time that, Sir, even our court is adopting this one-stop approach in handling family cases now.

Mr Charles Chong: Sir, children from low-income households who do not have strong family support home environment benefit the most from attending good childcare and before-and-after school care centres. Unfortunately, many low income families may not be able to afford to send their children to childcare centres. During last year's Committee of Supply's debate, I asked the then Minister for Community Development and Sports to consider introducing schemes to make it more affordable to these families to send their children to good childcare centres. I would now like to ask the new Minister for Community Development and Sports to give this House an update of the additional measures and initiatives that were implemented since then, to make childcare services more affordable to low-income families.

Could the Minister tell us what are the measures to increase the number of childcare centres in Singapore and the plans to upgrade the quality standards of childcare givers? Does MCDS have plans to facilitate and improve informal childcare arrangements where parents can receive assistance personalised childcare arrangements, especially for young infants too young for admission into normal childcare centres?

Dr Lily Neo: Sir, the total fertility rate in Singapore is on the decline. Childcare provision constitutes an important influencing factor for many parents to have children.

We are still short of childcare centres and I know MCDS' plans to increase childcare centres further. A majority of our young parents are from the more educated group who want professional care for their children. Better childcare centres, with increased numbers of certified professionals and dedicated staff, should, therefore, be planned for our centres.

MCDS should provide childcare facilities to both the HDB as well as the private housing estates. There is a need for childcare centres to be located in areas where there is more demand, such as the new densely built areas with many young families.

Childcare centres at the workplace are convenient for many parents. This calls for more assistance from the Government to encourage employers to consider providing childcare centres at the workplace.

Although there are more childcare centres that cater to children below 18 months of age now, the fees for such centres are very high, with the cheapest one charging $650 after subsidy. Will MCDS please look into the affordability issue and consider providing higher subsidies for such childcare centres?

Sir, studies have shown that very young children fare better with family-based childcare. MCDS should, therefore, encourage family-based childcare, especially for infants. The ideal caregivers for infants are, of course, the parents themselves. However, in the context of Singapore, immediate family members, relatives, neighbours and even friends can be reasonably good parent-substitutes. The question is whether MCDS could subsidise such family-based childcare in lieu of care at childcare centres. Granting subsidy here may encourage suitable housewives and retirees to work and to have income while "staying home". These caregivers can be accredited or monitored and registered under MCDS' supervision.

Whilst on the subject of childcare subsidy, will MCDS consider giving full childcare subsidy for special-circumstance lower-income families? The parents in these families need to go out to work but do not earn enough to cover childcare.

Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Sir, our childcare policy has been in place for many years. The primary purpose is to facilitate women to continue to remain in the workforce following childbirth. This policy has served us well. Childcare centres are excellent grounds for the total development of a child physically, emotionally, socially, psychologically and, of course, intellectually. Indeed, it is a stimulating environment for the children. I can attest to this as my children have benefited well from the exposure to a childcare environment.

Sir, I am concerned about the children of low-income families, just like my colleague, Mr Charles Chong. I am seeing many of these families lately, with heads of households who are not working and with minimal income coming into the family. The mothers do not work because often times, they have more than one to three children. To the mother, the decision to work is weighed against the cost that she would have to incur in placing her children in a childcare facility. This is a practical consideration as what they can possibly earn may actually end up going to the childcare fees; thus, the decision to stay at home and look after their children themselves. While this is a practical and viable option for them, I am concerned with the development of their children.

Sir, we have just completed the debate on the budget for MOE, and one of the issues raised by many Members of the House is the stress that children face in school. Indeed, today's child may not have a bright future if he or she enters primary school without a good foundation during the pre-school years. I am concerned that children from low-income families do not have access to strong foundations, and they may be disadvantaged for life. Yes, there are the kindergartens that provide pre-school education. I think these children will benefit more from structured developmental programmes that are available in childcare centres. They need a headstart to ensure that they will be on the same footing as the other children when they reach primary school.

Sir, MCDS has put in place the Centre-based Financial Assistance Scheme for Child Care (CFAC) to assist these families. Subsidies of up to 90% of the childcare fees, subject to a cap of $250 per child, are provided to assist these families to place their children in childcare centres. I think MCDS recognises that CFAC not only facilitates improvement of family income but provides a headstart for children of low-income families. I would like to ask the Minister what is the take-up rate of the CFAC programme to-date, that is, how many children are currently enjoying the subsidy from CFAC. My understanding is that the take-up rate is rather low. If this is so, what are the Ministry's plans to improve the take-up rate? Can the Minister also compare this figure to the number of families with young children, who are receiving financial assistance from CDCs, to determine the extent of children from low-income families who can benefit from the CFAC programme?

Sir, my suspicion is that the low take-up rate is due, firstly, to the lack of motivation for private childcare operators to facilitate this process. For at the end of the day, if these parents are not able to pay the fees due after the subsidies, they become a liability to the childcare operators. The administrative process must be made as simple as possible for the operators, to ensure that the scheme reaches out to the deserving families. Perhaps MCDS can encourage more voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) to operate childcare centres. As often times, the fees charged by VWO-run childcare centres are more manageable for the low-income families after receiving the subsidy.

Sir, the issue of childcare and related to it, the welfare and development of children, is indeed important for us to address. Children coming from disadvantaged backgrounds are likely to continue to be disadvantaged, unless they are given an alternative environment that will stimulate their intellectual and social development. Access to formalised childcare services not only benefits the children, it will also facilitate upgrading opportunities for their mothers. The children are our future, regardless of their socio-economic status that their families are in. Those who come from disadvantaged backgrounds, indeed, deserve special attention. We need to invest in their development for us to prevent another generation of low-income families to emerge.

I hope MCDS will look into the criteria and administrative processes of administering the CFAC to ensure the access to the scheme for children of low-income families is further enhanced.

The Chairman: Ms Indranee Rajah is not here. Ms Irene Ng.

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong (Tampines): Sir, many parents in dual career families find it increasingly hard to combine work and family life as the pace and complexity of life increase.

Women continue to bear the main responsibility of childcare at home, and often need support if they are able to have productive and satisfying careers. Indeed, one reason couples are not having more babies is because they do not feel they can cope with their family duties, on top of their careers.

Sir, flexible work arrangements are the most common way to help employees balance their work and family responsibilities. The experience of other countries is that such work-life programmes do help in recruitment, increase staff productivity and morale, and actually save cost, as they reduce absenteeism.

Yet, in Singapore, companies have been slow to offer flexible work arrangements. Today, only about 3% of Singaporeans are on flexible work arrangements. There is also little progress in the provision of childcare facilities or childcare leave for both men and women at the workplace. A survey two years ago by the Singapore National Employers' Federation found that three in four companies do not give their staff paid time-off to care for their sick children. And this is despite all the work and effort by the Work-Life Unit set up under the Ministry. I am sure that the Ministry has studied the experience of other developed countries with more success in this area. 5.45 pm

I would like to ask the Minister if the Ministry has any more plans to encourage Singapore companies to adopt flexible work arrangements and work-life programmes. And as the biggest employer in Singapore, I would urge the Government to take the lead in adopting work-life strategies and flexible work arrangements. In so doing, it should also take a realistic account of women's increased participation in the labour force - women make up 54% of the public sector workforce as in the national workforce. It should also recognise the trend towards a greater sharing of family responsibilities between the men and women.

Against this background, I would urge the Government to remove the contradictions in its system. If I may cite an example, married women officers are allowed paid child leave to look after their sick children below six years old, but not the male officers. It is as if the Government believes that it is not the responsibility of the fathers to care for the children when they are sick. I am sure many fathers will disagree with this. Another contradiction, while married women officers are entitled to take child leave, their children are not entitled to medical benefits, while those of their male counterparts do. I would urge the Government to develop measures to enable parents, both women and men, to discharge effectively their working and family responsibilities equally.

Mdm Halimah Yacob (Jurong): Sir, like the previous speakers before me, I agree that the family is an important institution that must be cherished and protected. The fact of the matter though is that Singaporean families are undergoing tremendous stress. This is due to many factors, such as the pace of change, rising expectations, ageing population and the increasing number of dual income households. As jobs become more insecure, the role of men as the sole breadwinners will change and more women will have to work to support the family and ensure a continuous flow of income.

Hence, pro-family policies are important to help people balance work and family. If we do not put more serious effort into this, then I am afraid that something will have to give, and it will be the family. The demarcation between home and work is artificial, as one affects the other. An unhappy worker is likely to be an unhappy family man. Likewise, an unhappy family man is likely to be an unhappy worker.

Companies that have implemented work-life programmes have found that their employees perform better and produce higher quality work. Work-life programmes are common in many developed countries. Many of them have also adopted legislation to promote work-life balance. Our male parliamentarians may be heartened to note that many countries in Europe today mandate the provision of paternity leave. Paid paternity leave ranging from three days to four weeks are provided in Denmark, Finland, Belgium, France, Norway, Portugal and Sweden. I do not know whether our male parliamentarians and other male workers outside will be so fortunate, but at least these are some of the developments in other countries.

I also note that the Ministry has embarked on many efforts to promote and strengthen the family and help the workers balance work and family. Unfortunately, employers here have been sluggish and slow to respond. Flexible work arrangements for women who cannot work full time, or fixed work patterns, are uncommon. Despite the fact that we have one of the highest percentage of Internet users in Asia, telework has not caught on.

Many working people continue to struggle between caring for the needs of children and aged parents and keeping their jobs. Often when they have to tend to family needs, it will be at the expense of their jobs as employers view them as unproductive. I recall the case of a worker, a man, who told me that, every morning, before he comes to work, he has to help his wife bathe his bedridden mother. As a result, he often ends up late for work and he receives warning letters. So people are caught in this kind of situation because of their family needs.

Sir, I would therefore like to ask the Minister the following questions: How effective is the Ministry in its efforts to promote work-life programmes? What more can be done to educate and change employers' attitudes towards workers with family responsibilities? And finally, will the Minister consider recommending changes to our law to provide for big family care leave which can be used by the worker to take care of a sick or disabled family member?

Mr Ahmad Mohd Magad: Sir, juvenile delinquency continues to be a prevalent problem and I note that an increasing number of young delinquents are placed in institutions for rehabilitation. Solving this will require multi-partite involvement, such as stronger family and school support, the Police and community organisations working together. But my concern right now is what is being done to ensure that these young offenders are not being influenced and emotionally damaged by more seasoned and hardcore delinquents.

It is a recognised fact that there is a need to implement rehabilitation. But we must ensure that the situation with these young offenders are not made worse and that they be given a second chance to redeem themselves and become normal individuals when they are discharged. I would appreciate it if the Minister could provide an insight as to what measures are taken to shield young offenders from incorrigible ones, and what his Ministry is also doing in post-rehabilitative measures to prevent the relapse of these individuals.

Mr Charles Chong: Sir, Singapore's population will age rapidly over the next 30 years. From just 7% of the population aged 65 years and above in 1999 to 19% of the population by 2030, that is, almost one in five Singaporeans will be 65 years, or above, by then. The sheer increase in the number of elderly will create added challenges on society and more stress on families. The support through services for the elderly will therefore become more and more critical.

An Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) on the Ageing Population was formed in 1998 to lead a coordinated national response to address the challenges of the elderly. The IMC has finalised its recommendations after receiving reports from the six committees in November 1999. And in June 1999, a Services Review Committee was set up to review existing elder care provision and delivery and to develop a blueprint for elder care services. The blueprint also includes strategies and plans designed to achieve the desired outcomes formulated by the IMC. Could the Minister give the House an update on the progress made in the implementation of the IMC recommendations, details of the recommendations that have yet to be implemented and those that have been found not feasible? And are there any plans to expand elder care services to enable families to continue taking care of their elderly members, rather than to depend solely on institutionalised care?

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong: Sir, the elderly have the highest rate of suicide among all age groups in Singapore. The rate of suicide is increasing, as more people live past the age of 75. Singles are the most vulnerable.

Sir, the elderly in Singapore face the prospect of isolation and loneliness in this fast moving society. First, there is the trend of the younger generation wanting greater independence and privacy. They prefer to live on their own, away from their aged parents. Indeed, in the last decade, the fastest growing type of living arrangement for old people was that of living alone, or with their spouse only, away from their children.

And second, the increasing number of singles means that Singapore will see more elderly singles living alone in the future. Already, we can see the trend towards one-person households. The percentage of one-person households rose from 5.2% in 1990 to 8.2% in 2000, with singles who have never been married before making up more than half of such households.

At the same time, we have a whole generation of young people who are growing up without much contact with the elderly in their daily lives. Often, their caregivers are foreign maids. This is a society that celebrates youth, the creators of today's fast-changing technology and who are plugged into the globalised world. They have little regard for the wisdom passed down through generations. In such a society, the elderly face the risk of feeling useless to this society and that life is meaningless.

Put these trends together and you will see a society suffering from the effects of an age divide. It also points to a fraying social compact, with the expectations and obligations of the different generations to support and nurture each other becoming more and more unclear. If we do not bridge this age divide, but instead enlarge it by policies and approaches which encourage age segregation and bias against the elderly, we will only breed a younger generation who has little understanding and value for the experience and wisdom that comes with age.

There is a pressing need to bring the generations together, through inter-generational strategies. This means engaging the young and old in cross-age activities where both are valued as active and contributing members. The more common approach in Singapore today is to cater to the different groups separately, with programmes organised for senior citizens as a group and the young as another group. This will segregate them further.

I would urge the Ministry to take a more inter-generational approach in framing public policy for the youth and the elderly. Today, more than ever, there is a need to take an inter-generational perspective to create policies that unite, and not separate the generations.

Dr Lily Neo: Sir, as we figure how to best prepare for the demands of our fast ageing population, half the battle would have been won if we could influence Singaporeans with the correct mindset. Positive attitudes towards ageing and the aged should be actively promoted. A mindset change needs time and a lot of effort to nurture, and I would like MCDS to prioritise and enable us to achieve the desired outcome.

Older people should be regarded as useful citizens whose wisdom, skill and talent are valuable resources. The society will benefit if we tap these resources for as long as possible. The elderly should not be perceived merely as potential socio-economic problems. Not all old people are senile, moody and weak. We need to have our citizens move away from wrong impressions and treat growing old with dread. We need to show our people that ageing is not always associated with disability, and that disability in old age is often due to disease, which, if treated early, may not give rise to disability. An ageing society can still be active and vibrant. Octogenarians will be common and, in no time at all, many of us in this House will join their ranks. I would not like to think then that all octogenarians are decrepit, depressed or demented.

Let us promote "A time to begin a new chapter in life by being active and involved: starting new activities and setting new goals" as our mindset towards ageing and retirement. Sir, older people can indeed approach ageing and retirement in new and exciting ways and MCDS can do much to help them realise that.

A new survey of 803 American men and women aged 50 to 75 has found that 40% are working or plan to work after they retire, while an equal percentage do or plan to do volunteer work. MCDS should be encouraging and facilitating this type of attitude by increasing the avenues for Singaporeans to remain at work and to do volunteer work. Although we have a higher unemployment rate now because of our recent economic recession, we should have a long-term view and not be deterred. Matching the seniors to further training or to job placements can also be enhanced. People are tending to be healthier and are going to live longer. As we plan, we may need to turn full circle and adopt policies and programmes, provide retraining opportunities, offer flexible work hours and encourage those who want to stay on the job to do so.

Sir, we have a large and increasing pool of volunteers to tap from among the older Singaporeans. Training them to be competent in different areas of our needs will give them recognition and worth. The volunteers should be recognised for their work and it would be good if they can get some privileged or subsidised care when, in turn, they themselves need community services. They should also be reimbursed for transportation and minor costs of incidentals. 6.00 pm

Mr Ang Mong Seng: (In Mandarin): Sir, the aging population in Singapore is one of the matters that is of most concern to Singapore. By 2030, about 25% of our population will be 65 and above. That will give rise to a lot of social and national problems. This very important problem must be jointly resolved by the Government, the family and society, and we should prepare well in advance and reduce all the impact that may be brought about by the aging population.

Over the years, the Government has introduced a lot of new measures to look after our senior citizens and it has been praised by many senior citizens. What I am concerned with is how to give more care and concern to these senior citizens. In Singapore, most families are small and, most of the time, only an aged mother or father is staying at home. If they cannot do any work, at the most they will go to the void deck to kill time. They feel very lonely and isolated.

I have a suggestion. Maybe, in our community centres or in the old schools in our constituencies, we can set up a Community Senior Citizens' Institute so that we can make use of the facilities at our community centres to provide some leisure and training for them. We encourage lifelong training. We can open from 8.00 am to 5.00 pm. In the morning, we can encourage these senior citizens to do some qicong or exercise, and do something that is good for their health. We can also provide some educational programmes, eg, explain to them some of the important policies of the nation, and they can have lunch. In the afternoon, we can allow them to use some of the facilities, such as karaoke or let them learn computer or some language. Malays can learn Chinese, and Chinese can learn Malay, and they can exchange and build up a better cohesiveness among themselves.

Sir, the most important point is that many of these senior citizens are still active and they can still work. We also have healthy senior citizens who can take up the job of looking after the old people at home. Some factories may need part-time workers. They can come to the CCs to employ these senior citizens. It is also good for the senior citizens because they can earn some extra income.

I have spoken to the Mayor of our Southwest CDC, and we wish that we could set up this Community Senior Citizens' Institute as a pilot project in the Bukit Gombak Community Club. If this is successful, it will be extended to all the other constituencies in Singapore. So I would like to ask the Minister for Community Development and Sports whether he will support this suggestion or to give us his support and perhaps give us some financial support as well.

Encik Mohamad Maidin B P M: Sir, one of the MCDS' stated desired outcomes is to bring about an elderly community that is well prepared for old age. As we know, the number of elderly in Singapore will continue to grow from around 250,000 today to about 800,000 by the year 2030.

With the trend of our young having fewer children and some staying happily unmarried, the proportion of the elderly, ie, those 65 and above, against the young and the whole population, is also set to grow. This is added by the fact that more people are enjoying a longer life expectancy.

I am happy to note that the Report of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on the Aging Population has made many good proposals. Among others, it touches on health care, financial security, employment, as well as housing.

In view of the current situation in the job market, the question of financial security and employment of our senior citizens has become a matter of great concern. Last week, for example, I was visited by a senior citizen who retired more than a decade ago, but continues to work today. At the age of 66, he still finds it necessary to find a job and continue to work to sustain himself. He is 66. He is still healthy and is keen to work because he needs to get some money to get by.

But, at the same time, we have heard many reports of people who complain of difficulty in getting jobs even when they are only in their 40s. They are still young, yet they are not treated as young anymore. Many of them have young children in school. This trend could affect their ability to pay for their flats and to save enough for their old age. But can they have financial security?

Sir, it is my hope that this year's budget and other measures taken by the Government to increase employment opportunities could help to solve the problem. At the same time, more workers should undertake skills upgrading courses so as to improve their employability. For, at the end of the day, I believe the elderly may be divided into two groups of people. One, those who would be in need of help and, two, those who are more fortunate and can help others. Between the two, we should have programmes that could match them.

While efforts are being done by the various social and community agencies to assist those in need of help, I hope more efforts are also put in place to help the majority of our elderly to enjoy their old age meaningfully. One way is to capitalise on their experiences and skills. Many elderly are still able to remain active, given a chance. For example, there are retired teachers, nurses, police officers and people from various other professions. I have met many - and I believe Members too have met many of them - who are still able to contribute and want to remain active and be engaged with the community.

Sir, I hope there is a way to assist as many of them as possible to remain employed or be involved in programmes that could keep them to remain partly employed and partly contributing to the betterment of society. Self-help groups and Community Development Councils, for example, can always tap on the expertise of retired teachers for their educational programmes. Similarly, I believe we should tap on the resources of retirees from other professions. They have wide experiences, and I believe these can still be put to good use for the rest of our society, especially the younger generation.

There are also those who will find it more fulfilling to spend much more time with their families, especially with their grandchildren. As long as our elderly can spend their time happily and meaningfully, feeling secure financially, etc, I think they are fine. And I always believe that the best is left for those who care to plan early for their retirement years. In fact, I believe it is the only way to be well prepared for senior citizenship.

The Chairman: Mr Ong Ah Heng is not here. Mr Zainul Abidin.

Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed: Sir, after 10 days of Committee of Supply debates, one does feel that he ages a little! But in order not to give you more stress, I will try to keep my speech brief.

Sir, when I reached 40, I thought it was the prime of my life. I thought I had a whole life in front of me. But before we knew it, we have reached 50. And, now, at 54, if it were 10 years ago, I would have been thinking about retirement at 55. But, alas, no. We now have to worry about what we have to do for maybe the next 10, if not 15 or 20 years. The point I would like to make is that there is a definite change in profile of aging. The people who are aging today are different from those who aged before. And there are certain policies which we have carried out earlier on, eg, 2-child family, may have an impact on the parents of today, with smaller families. Thus, many parents who are aging now are also facing a kind of loneliness. This shifting of retirement age from 50 to 55, to 62 and to 67, will also have an impact in the kind of programmes that we will need to prepare our society for the greying era.

I was in Japan 20 years ago and I remember that, in fact, the Japanese had very extensive programmes - surveys and programmes were carried out. I am sure that Singapore can also learn from such more established communities and societies. I would like the Minister to share with us what approach the Ministry has taken in terms of learning from others' experiences, which are the countries that we have been to, so as to look at their profiles of aging, and what kind of programmes would be relevant to our needs.

On the question of the changing profile of the aged, we should also realise that they are better educated, the point mentioned by Mr Maidin earlier on. I think we should find ways to tap their expertise and make them feel more useful. Although they may have reached retirement age, they can still contribute to society in various ways to make them more productive in part-time work, or in terms of helping out in community service.

The final point I would like to make is this question of preparing for the aged should not be done when people are already retired. I think they should start early. And one way to achieve that is to have this blend of the not-so-old with those who are aging. In that way, we can make the younger people realise the need to prepare for aging and also to understand the problems faced by those who are already aging. This blending or bonding between the not-so-old and those who are aging would provide a very important learning curve for both age groups, and that will help us in preparing for our greying era.

The Acting Minister for Community Development and Sports (Assoc. Prof. Yaacob Ibrahim): Sir, first, I would like to thank all Members who have, in one way or another, supported the work of MCDS and its related agencies. Let me address some of the key issues first before I take some of the specific issues.

Mr Charles Chong has raised some very thoughtful concerns about the ability of our current social safety net to help our low-income families cope with the changing social and economic realities. Sir, if the House allows me, let me explain how my Ministry is strengthening the social safety net in order for us to help needy Singaporeans.

Sir, a net that was designed to hold a light weight needs to be strengthened to bear a heavier load. Our social safety net was designed for a full-employment economy. It is now coming under increasing strain, and two major forces are at play. First, economic restructuring and our move towards a knowledge-based economy will certainly put more workers at risk of structural unemployment or under-employment. Second, as has been mentioned by some speakers, demographic and social trends, such as smaller families, nuclear families and, of course, an aging population, will test the tenet of family as the first line of support. There is no doubt that with the economic downturn and restructuring, more Singaporeans, particularly our older and less-skilled workers, are in need of short-term financial assistance while they look for work. Last year alone, the Community Development Councils approved about 4,200 applications for short-term assistance, a 7-fold increase over the previous year. We need to ensure that those in genuine need receive effective and timely assistance, without creating an entitlement mentality and eroding the work ethics. 6.15 pm

Sir, to address these challenges, my Ministry will put in place a three-prong strategy to strengthen the social safety net.

First, we will review the policy design of the social safety net to ensure a right level and kind of help is given.

Second, we will put in place programmes to help children from lower-income families access educational and development opportunities.

Third, we will continue to build up the capability of the social service sector to deliver effective services to help those in need.

Allow me, first, to explain the policy design of the social safety net. Our social assistance schemes are meant to help the most vulnerable or weakest in society. This is in line with our philosophy of self-reliance. Those who can help themselves and their families should do so. But my Ministry recognises that many lower-income Singaporeans are also lowly skilled and hence more vulnerable to losing their jobs as a result of economic restructuring. They also have little savings and limited assets to fall back on when a family crisis such as retrenchment strikes.

Mr Gan has raised concerns over the adequacy of the Economic Downturn Relief Scheme. He has made some suggestions. I will address that later. Some Members also asked if more can be done to help individuals in need, be they older or less skilled workers, or even some displaced mid-level executives.

Sir, work is still the best form of welfare. The longer a worker remains unemployed, the more difficult it will be for him to find work subsequently. We need to help him get back to work as quickly as possible.

Today, the Interim Financial Assistance Scheme (IFAS) helps distressed Singaporeans with a short-term grant of three months in the first instance. There are no explicit conditions attached.

To ensure that the help being given is effective, the grants will now be packaged with job counselling, job search and skills training plans. Recipients will be helped with IFAS grants for the first three months, and extendable by another three months if they are still unable to find work. MCDS will work with the Ministry of Manpower and the five CDCs to help cases in need transit as quickly back to work as possible.

Sir, the above approach highlights a key principle of our social safety net, that is of "mutual obligation". While the community and the Government will try their best to help those in need, Singaporeans who have landed on the safety net must also recognise that their welfare and families' well-being are best secured through gainful employment, and they need to help themselves climb out. This may mean adapting to a new job, or a job that does not pay quite as well as the old job.

Sir, there will always be needy Singaporeans who have no means of subsistence and are unable to support themselves due to old age, illness or some other adverse circumstances. They will need long-term care and support from the Government and the community. The Public Assistance Scheme (PA) is their main source of financial support.

The Ministry last reviewed the Public Assistance rates in January last year, and in the light of higher costs that may arise from the GST increase, we are revising the rates again. The new rates will be announced towards the end of this year.

Members would be aware that the CDCs also supplement the Government's schemes with their own local schemes to assist those at the margins who need help, but who may not qualify for the Government's assistance schemes. Mr Sin Boon Ann has mentioned a few examples of Singaporeans who would like to work but are unable to do so and yet, still need to support their families. My Ministry will look into the needs of these families at the margins, and how the appropriate group can be identified and reached without creating an entitlement mentality.

Sir, I would like to re-emphasise that the family is still the first line of care and support for its members. In assessing applications for financial assistance, whether it be Public Assistance or the short-term Interim Financial Assistance Scheme (IFAS), case workers in the CDCs will look at the merits of each case as a whole. The CDC case workers have some flexibility in helping deserving cases, particularly those affected by job loss and those requiring short-term aid.

Sir, my Ministry's second thrust is to help the next generation stay out of the social safety net.

Mr Charles Chong has rightly pointed out the need for access to good child care. Poor early development is indeed a high risk factor in disadvantaged children faring worse in later life, and perpetuating the poverty cycle. Many who apply for short-term financial assistance now have young dependants.

As far as possible, we should try to prevent these children from becoming the structurally unemployed of the future. Our challenge, therefore, is to help children from lower-income families access and benefit from educational opportunities available in Singapore.

Several Members have also mentioned that studies show that early childhood education, especially for children from low-income families, is crucial to giving them a good foundation for learning and overall development, so that they can be prepared for school and, in the future, employment.

Sir, for the past two years, my Ministry has been collaborating with Ang Mo Kio Family Service Centre to pilot an early intervention case management programme to detect and strengthen these families. The programme, called Healthy Start, initially focused on families with infants and young children up to two years old. The programme provides good grounding for the family to uplift itself by helping parents improve their skills and knowledge of child development, linking them to relevant community resources and services and extended family networks, and enhancing their family functioning through casework and counselling. So we catch them early, give them assistance, build up self-reliance within the parents so that they can run programmes at home on their own, and where they need assistance, they know where to turn to. We close the information gap. We provide skills for the parents.

The pilot has shown some very promising results. My Ministry plans to extend the pilot to cover "at risk" children up to six years old, and to more Family Service Centres. This initial phase will be evaluated before new plans are developed.

Last year, my Ministry enhanced the Centre-based Financial Assistance for Childcare (CAFC) Scheme to make childcare programmes more affordable for low-income families.

We enhanced the subsidy levels in the CFAC Scheme to provide between $170-250 for children from low-income families. Families from the lowest-income bracket are eligible to receive the highest amount of subsidy and need only pay as little as $20 a month in childcare fee. This year, the Community Assistance Fund will set aside $2 million to subsidise childcare under the Centre-based Financial Assistance for Childcare Scheme.

Dr Maliki has asked some questions about the utilisation rates of the Centre-based Financial Assistance for Childcare Scheme and what efforts will be taken to encourage more from the low-income families to take up the Scheme. Dr Maliki might like to know that in FY2001, the CDCs, who are administering the scheme, received nearly 1,000 applications. Of these, about 85% were approved. In terms of applications and approvals, this has been the highest attained thus far. Last year, MCDS officers targeted publicity at the service providers - the childcare operators, CDCs, Family Service Centres and self-help groups, as they are in touch with low-income families. We will try to extend this network as much as possible.

My Ministry will continue to find ways to step up publicity efforts and our partners, whether childcare operators, social service agencies, Community Development Councils, Members of Parliament and families themselves - all have an important role to play in ensuring that low-income families utilise available childcare services to better their children's development.

Mr Charles Chong has also asked about help for student care. With MCDS' subsidies, families earning at or below $1,500 per month need only pay between $42-$60 per month, depending on whether the centre is school-based or located away from the school. My Ministry will periodically review these rates.

Sir, the third prong of our strategy to strengthen the social safety net is to upgrade the social service sector, to improve the effectiveness and the range of social services. We need to develop the capabilities of the social services sector.

The voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) are a linchpin of the social service sector. Many of them run programmes for the community. To help upgrade their services, my Ministry will provide more financial support to VWOs. This amount will be channelled into two directions.

First, MCDS will increase the recurrent funding to programmes run by VWOs by $7 million each year. This will certainly improve the depth and the breadth of the services provided by our VWOs.

Second, my Ministry will set up a VWO Capability Fund with $30 million over five years to support areas such as training, development of new services, organisational development and the adoption of info-communications technology. These are some of the things that we will do in terms of funding to help our social service sector build up capabilities to deal with the current problems that we are facing.

Given greater public funding and increased public expectations about accountability, as well as service quality, VWOs will need to improve their governance, as well as service delivery structures.

To this end, especially for clearer accountability, my Ministry will spell out service standards and other requirements in service agreements between MCDS and the voluntary welfare organisations this year.

Furthermore, to assist the voluntary welfare organisations on their journey towards greater professionalism and enhanced service to their clients, my Ministry and the National Council of Social Service will provide extensive support to them through training, consultancy and other initiatives.

MCDS is also working with the Ministry of Manpower and the National Council of Social Service on a pilot Strategic Manpower Conversion Programme to provide the necessary training for mid-career people to move into the social service sector, initially as social workers and social work aides. This will help to address the current shortage of skilled social service personnel and, at the same time, provide employment opportunities in the social service.

Sir, I would like to take this opportunity again to re-affirm the fundamental principles underlying our social safety net.

First, the family remains the first line of care and support for its members. As many Members have spoken, we acknowledge that the family is under pressure, and I will be addressing this later. But the "family first" principle still holds, and any assistance given should not supplement the family's care-giving role.

The Many Helping Hands principle remains just as relevant, if not, more so, given the challenges ahead and the widening range of needs. The local community, the private sector, the people sector and the Government will need to work together to expand the network of resources to help families and individuals in need. Long-term Government assistance is directly extended where the individual is unable to work, and the family is unable to provide adequate support.

Sir, within this social safety net, every individual and family in genuine need will be helped, either financially or by other means.

Sir, Dr Maliki has asked about how CDCs have been coping with the administration of the various financial assistance schemes and about the profile of the people seeking assistance. The CDCs have seen an increase in the number of applications for financial assistance since they took over the administration of social assistance functions from the Ministry of Community Development and Sports. Prior to that delegation, each social assistance officer used to handle on average about 15 cases per month. Now, each officer handles as many as 45 cases per month. This was mainly due to the economic downturn as many retrenched Singaporeans are coming to the CDCs for the Interim Financial Assistance and job placement services.

There has also been greater awareness of the availability of the social assistance schemes due to extensive media publicity. As the CDCs are on the ground and thus more accessible, this has also resulted in more people coming forward to apply for the assistance.

The CDCs have helped almost 15,000 beneficiaries with financial assistance amounting to $9.5 million between April 2001 and March 2002 through the Government's social assistance schemes. In addition, the CDCs also disburse another $670,000 through their local financial assistance schemes. About 76% of the beneficiaries are HDB dwellers. The CDCs are also receiving requests from non-rental dwellings, mostly the smaller HDB purchased flats because of the recession and retrenchments. About 65% of the recipients under the Public Assistance Scheme are aged 70 years and above. On the other hand, 67% of those receiving help under the Interim Financial Assistance Scheme (IFAS) are below 50 years old, and about 34% of the IFAS recipients have below secondary qualifications. 6.30 pm

Finally, Sir, in terms of processing time, the CDCs took an average of four weeks for straightforward cases, while complicated cases took about 8-10 weeks.

Dr Maliki also raised the concern about whether CDCs will have enough resources to basically deal with these cases. I just like to assure Dr Maliki that we are in constant contact with the CDCs, especially with the Mayors, who understand better what are their needs, and how best we can assist in terms of meeting some of these demands. In fact, this morning I had a meeting with the Mayors for one particular project, and most of the Mayors informed me that most of their workers are out in the field, talking to parents and families, in order to assist them directly and quickly.

Mr Sin Boon Ann has made some other suggestions, eg, we should do more to help the genuine needy who are unable to work, single mothers and the elderly; for MCDS to set a minimum standard of living, some form of unemployment insurance; and families on PA should be regularly counselled and not made to feel like beggars. I assure Mr Sin that the last thing we want to do is to make Singaporeans feel that they are like beggars. In fact, more often than not, we have difficulty reaching out to some of these people. Secondly, when we do contact them, and we offer assistance, we try to follow up with some programmes. It is always difficult to get in touch with them. So I would like to assure you, Sir, that we will continue to reach out to those at the bottom, because they need more help.

Sir, public assistance rates are pegged to the minimum household expenditure. So, we must ensure that whatever that we do, Singaporeans continue to be able to at least enjoy that level of standard of living.

Mr Gan has a proposal, ERAS, as a loan scheme to replace the EDRS. Sir, MCDS used to have a loan scheme to help needy cases set up small personal business efforts, such as school canteen operations, and the like. The scheme, however, was unsuccessful. For one reason or another, the businesses did not take off, and the loans were never returned. We are of the view that loans will be better administered by financial institutions who can assess and advise on the setting up of these small businesses. But I assure the Member that even after the economy has recovered, there will be assistance schemes in place, either at the CDCs or at the CCCs. As Members may know, every week MPs will receive requests from residents, and I know from my own experience in Jalan Besar GRC, we will activate a network of grassroots leaders to go out and assess what are the needs of this particular person, be it school children's education, utilities and what have you. The assurance that I would like to give to the Member is that, even after EDRS has been stopped, and I am not saying that it will be stopped, because PA will have to review this as we look at how the economy recovers, and I accept his point that there could be a lag between economic recovery and job creation, the schemes which are in place - welfare schemes run by the CCs and the Interim Financial Assistance Scheme by the CDCs - could be tweaked to fit the new economic conditions, in order to help those who may still need help.

Dr Maliki also asked about the number of families who have received EDRS and what proportion who returned for more help. So far, about 10,300 cases have been approved. This is, of course, smaller than the number of cases who have applied. As you know, many people think that EDRS is an entitlement, so people who have been out of job, or the elderly, have come forward and demanded their $200. But we have approved only 10,300 cases so far, and it has cost Government $4.13 million. We are not able to provide the proportion of numbers who came back for help. As you know the EDRS cycle is now moving only into its 2nd cycle. We will continue to monitor the number of cases. If the cases do jump up, I think we will have to do something about it.

With job-matching, Sir, as I have suggested earlier, IFAS, which is now without any condition, but once we link it to job matching and job counselling, this will help them to tide over their crisis and solve their key problem, which is being out of a job.

In terms of the IFAS cases that Dr Maliki enquired about the turn-around time, roughly, we are talking about an average of four weeks for a straightforward case, but complicated cases can take 8-10 weeks. Some of the problems that CDC case workers have communicated back to us, through the Mayors and the general managers, are that, as I mentioned earlier, sometimes they are not at home, they are not contactable. More recently, we have written to all MPs that whoever may want to ask the Government to assist some of these families, to provide contact numbers so that we can reach them much faster.

In terms of the percentage of cases approved, as I mentioned earlier, for IFAS we have about 46% for FY 2001. This is about 4,238 cases approved out of 9,216 applicants. I mentioned earlier about the case load in the CDCs. This is about 45 cases per month. More often than not, the kind of work that they deal with the families, I am sure Dr Maliki too will appreciate, is complicated and complex. It is not just a simple financial problem. There could be other related cases. So what the case workers have done is to intervene and refer some of these cases to Family Service Centres and VWOs. We assist where we can in terms of financial assistance, and we do a lot of referral cases downwards, towards the VWOs and the other agencies.

Mr Sin Boon Ann has talked about unemployment insurance as a possible suggestion. I think we will all agree that if we have unemployment insurance, it will perhaps go against the interest of workers. Now, with companies paying retrenchment benefit, based on the number of years the worker has been with the company, companies will think twice about retrenching workers. Also, at the end of the day, like all support systems, it can be subject to abuse and lead to an erosion of work ethics. Some of the experiences that we have gathered from overseas, when we studied some of these social safety net programme, show what we called "bunching" in terms of many workers all of a sudden becoming unemployed when they meet the minimum criteria to be eligible for the insurance. So, they try and play the system in that sense, because they know there is a supporting network. Just like the EDRS, some came forward because they feel they are entitled, because they want to get the $200. Our view is that an unemployment insurance system may not be sustainable, especially in times of a prolonged economic downturn.

I will go back to the first prong of the social safety net, which is to link all of the assistance programmes that we have to job matching and job counselling. We know that some of the CDCs have started this work, but we hope we will be able to make this as a formal arrangement, where possible, to bring the person back to work as quickly as possible. At the same time, Members will appreciate that there have been reports in the papers, and even in this House, about some families who are not willing to take up the job, because that is not the kind of work that they are used to, or not the pay that they want to enjoy. So adjustments will have to be made, and we will continue to do our best to ensure that the matching is done optimally and families are being helped.

Sir, if I can move on to the next section, which is the Singapore Family. Many have spoken about the need to strengthen the family, and I think we could not agree more with all the Members who have spoken up. Sir, all of us recognise that the family is operating in a more complex environment. Globalisation and technology have changed the way we work and live. For many, material life goals take priority. In a more competitive environment, parents face work-life tensions, as they strive to fulfil their work and familial responsibilities. Often, it is the kids or children who feel the brunt of their stress. Sometimes people even decide not to have children because of this. Hence, I would like to thank Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon for her passionate appeal for us to help families, Mr Maidin for his well-thought views, and Dr Maliki for raising a number of key issues on the family. I think, like them, I believe we should never lose sight of the value of the family as one of the key building blocks of our Singapore society.

Sir, many family problems could perhaps have been avoided if only the families had been aware of the problems earlier and acted on them. This is why my Ministry believes in equipping families with the skills and knowledge to strengthen their family life. Our approach is both developmental and preventive.

A key developmental strategy is the promotion of family life education. Families can pick up family life education materials in public libraries, resource corners, such as the `Family Connections' set up in December last year at NTUC Downtown East Resort. Early intervention is the crux of the preventive strategy. This is especially important for families that are at risk. A good example is the Healthy Start Programme which I mentioned earlier, which helps to identify families with babies and young children who may need help. As I said earlier, the programme has shown some promising results. We are expanding it, but we will study it very carefully, because we want to make sure that by helping early we can prevent future problems. Therefore, I agree with Mr Maidin that we should expend more efforts on family life education for our young and couples intending to marry.

Sir, I am pleased to inform Mr Maidin that MCDS and the Ministry of Education have recently launched the School Family Education Programme. This programme is my Ministry's latest initiative to make family life education resources available in schools for the benefit of parents, students and teachers. Students will be taught core values about family life. So they are exposed to what family life is all about, and their parents and teachers can pick up skills for parenting and maintaining work-life effectiveness.

Since January this year, the School Family Education programme has been piloted at four schools, with financial support by three Community Development Councils and MCDS. The programme has so far attracted a total of 9,000 participants, including 3,000 parents from varied income backgrounds. My Ministry expects to extend the programme to more schools next year.

The importance of involving children in family education is highlighted in our National Family Week this year. Children, as we know, play a key role in reaching out to their parents, and encouraging them to attend parenting programmes and bringing family life materials from school to home. Activities involving parents and children will be emphasised.

I also agree with Mr Maidin on the importance of marriage preparation. The importance of preparing for marriage and equipping oneself with skills to stay married is frequently reinforced in the various public communication platforms that MCDS uses. These include TV programmes, advertisements, press coverage and other similar platforms. This is also one of the reasons why we set up the Public Education Committee on the Family, which was chaired by former Senior Parliamentary Secretary, Mdm Yu-Foo Yee Shoon, and now currently chaired by Minister of State, Mr Chan Soo Sen.

Mrs Yu-Foo has asked about the 70 recommendations of the Public Education Committee on the Family. The recommendations are categorised under four thrusts. Let me remind her:

(1) Imbuing the young with positive values towards the

family; (2) Reinforcing marriage as a lifelong commitment; (3) Promoting family life and Family Life Education for all; and (4) Creating a Family Friendly Environment.

Sir, as you can see, the recommendations cover the entire spectrum, from the young to those who are married, to those who are getting married, and also to creating an environment which is conducive for family.

My Ministry will prioritise these recommendations according to whether they are impactful, and can be institutionalised over the next ten years; can be integrated into the lifestyle of Singaporeans; and can be sustained by community partners and other service providers in the long run.

In other words, Sir, we are not just going to run the programmes, and then after that stop. But we want to find ways in which the programmes can be integrated, first, with some of our partners and, second, how we can make this as part of the lifestyle of Singaporeans.

Sir, I now want to turn to the topic that is of concern to us all, and that is of marriage and procreation. I am glad that Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon has given me the opportunity to raise this subject. She mentioned that despite generous financial assistance, the number of births has remained low. Let me make two points here, Sir.

First, our package of measures go beyond the Baby Bonus. I hope Members can recall what the Baby Bonus scheme is all about. For the 2nd child, we give the parents some money, and if they have a 3rd child we give them a bit more money for the next 6 years, because we want to help them. We are committed to creating a total environment conducive to raising a family. So we do not merely throw money at the problem of declining fertility. Our efforts include promoting family-friendly work practices, developing more and better quality childcare centres, public education, among other support services. My Ministry will continue to try and reduce the obstacles to marriage and having children. The Government, however, Sir, can only do so much. Ultimately, it has to be a community effort involving employers, religious leaders, people sector groups, the media, parents, grandparents, friends, MPs, and an individual effort. Employers, for example, must understand that their employees are not just units of production. Numerous studies have shown that an employee who can balance his work and family well will be a loyal, highly energised and productive employee who can contribute significantly to the company's bottom-line. 6.45 pm

However, at the end of the day, individuals must want to marry and have children, and be prepared to make compromises. One cannot expect to be compensated by the Government for every sacrifice made for his or her family. The gratification and joy that come with marriage and family are what make these sacrifices worth it.

Mrs Yu-Foo has asked about the work of the Ministerial Committee on Marriage and Procreation. The Committee, as Members know, is a standing one. It will give periodic reports and updates at appropriate forums. I would like to remind her that the Ministerial Committee delivered once in August 2000. It is now trying to conceive again, so that it can deliver again.

Sir, she also mentioned about the social policies of Denmark, Norway and other countries. I agree with her that their benefits are indeed generous. Denmark, for example, spends heavily on day-care facilities for children and different types of family and child allowances. But, we must remember that in Denmark, total public expenditure represents about 60% of their GDP, and the social sector alone accounts for about 15% of GDP. We do not have such a budget. How do they finance this? Although their personal tax on income is not high, their value-added tax is as high as 25%. So, can one imagine if we were to raise GST in Singapore to 25%?

Mrs Yu-Foo also mentioned that it could be timely to review the "Have three or more, if you can afford it" policy. I believe that the intent behind the policy is still valid, ie, couples who have large families must be willing and must be able to take care of their children. So we have to signal to families that there is a cost involved in having children and, if you can afford it, why not?

The problem, I agree, is to convince the middle income and the well-to-do that they need not stop at two. I think it boils down primarily to values and expectations, which changing a slogan simply would not help. If our Singaporeans have a more holistic and balanced definition of success, they might welcome more children.

Mrs Yu-Foo may also like to know that we are currently reviewing the Social Development Unit (SDU), and privatisation is one of the possibilities. I do not necessarily agree that the private sector can do a better job than the Government. But, nonetheless, one idea being studied, as Mrs Yu-Foo has suggested, is to privatise or let the private or people sector do direct services. SDU will then have a promotional and policy role. We will study in what way we can basically work better with the private sector or even other bodies, who are not necessarily from the private sector but from the people sector, to carry out SDU and SDS' work. Just to add, for example, in the Malay-Muslim community, part of the work is being done by the Muslim Religious Council where they take a slightly different approach - they work through informal networks and partners. So, we will try whatever that is needed in order to make sure that our efforts at encouraging people to get married remain successful.

Mrs Yu-Foo has also raised the issue of abortion. I agree with her that abortion is a highly personal decision. Let me assure the Member that there are sufficient resources and measures in place to assist families who want to and are able, with a little bit of help, to care adequately for a child. They can seek assistance at community and voluntary welfare organisations, such as the Family Service Centres.

As for abortion counselling, we, together with the Ministry of Health, can look into the issues raised.

Dr Maliki has asked how our families are faring. A benchmark Study on the Singapore Family, conducted in 1999, showed that families in Singapore are still generally healthy. We probably have to update the study. But, at least, in 1999, the data showed that things are still all right with the Singapore family.

Dr Maliki has also asked about outcome indicators. As a Ministry, MCDS is guided by macro indicators such as Total Fertility Rate, General Marriage Rate, General Divorce Rate. MCDS also uses attitudinal surveys and studies to supplement the "hard" numbers.

Dr Maliki also asked about the remedial programmes for families that inadvertently break up. No matter how effective our preventive and development programmes can be, there would be families needing additional support. Hence, remedial programmes, targeted at families already in distress, are another priority for MCDS.

Violence and marital problems are two major reasons why families break up. My Ministry drives and administers the mandatory counselling programme for family violence cases referred by the Family Court. We also work with the community to implement programmes to help couples consider alternatives before resorting to divorce proceedings. Family Service Centres and specialised counselling centres are our key partners.

Some questions have been asked as to whether our programmes are effective. I would like to assure Members of the House that my Ministry puts in a lot of efforts to ensure that the programmes remain relevant and effective. For example, we have been working with the National Council of Social Service and Voluntary Welfare Organisations to put in place a Programme Evaluation System (PES) to help us evaluate and ensure the effectiveness of the programmes. This is a programme that we are working with the VWOs. It is being rolled out now, so that at the end of the day, the VWOs who are the social deliverers of such programmes can assess as to whether or not their programmes are effective.

Before I move on to the next point, let me just address questions raised by Mr Ahmad Magad in relation to rehabilitation.

Mr Ahmad Magad has asked about the well-being of young offenders in the juvenile homes. First, I would like to clarify that juvenile delinquency has been on the decline in the last five years. The number of juveniles who were arrested and charged fell by 30% in the period of 1997 to 2001. We also see a decline of 37% in the number of juvenile offenders admitted to the homes in the same period. A continuum of treatment options is available for different types of juvenile offenders. Those who have committed less serious offences are placed in voluntary welfare homes. Those who have committed more serious offences and need more intensive supervision and discipline are placed in MCDS' juvenile homes, and these are the Boys' Home and the Toa Payoh Girls' Home. Within the MCDS' juvenile homes, we segregate residents who are more vulnerable from those who are older and higher-risk offenders. So there is some form of segregation.

My Ministry adopts a multi-discipline approach in rehabilitating juvenile offenders. Upon admission, a juvenile offender is assessed to identify his strengths, weaknesses and his propensity to re-offend. My officers then work with the juvenile and his family to draw up individualised care plan. The plan maps out the rehabilitation needs of the juvenile to enhance his success in rehabilitation.

Sir, I would like to assure Mr Ahmad Magad that my Ministry takes every step to ensure that each resident in our Homes is given the appropriate rehabilitative treatment to develop him or her into a socially responsible individual. Like Mr Ahmad Magad, we are concerned about recidivism.

Sir, let me now turn to how else my Ministry intends to support the Singapore family. Many speakers have talked about balancing work and life. Let me address this.

As the Singapore economy restructures, work patterns will change. The family's position, as the primary provider of care and support to members, will come increasingly under stress. Sir, the Government recognises this dilemma. There is a need to balance the demands of life and work on Singaporeans. Our challenge is to facilitate Singaporeans in the pursuit of their aspirations, with regard to work and family, of preserving the quality of family life and maintaining Singapore's economic and social fabric.

Work-life practices enable working parents to spend more time with their children. Also, singles will have more opportunities for personal aspirations, socialising and attending to the needs of their family members.

Sir, Ms Irene Ng has asked what more can be done to push companies in the direction of work-life programmes. This requires a multi-pronged approach. In the first place, companies must be convinced that adopting work-life programmes, such as flexible work arrangements and employee support programmes, are aligned with their business objectives.

My Ministry has taken a proactive approach by setting up the Work Life Unit (WLU) in September 2000 to promote a work-life friendly culture in Singapore. We partner MOM, SNEF and NTUC to organise the biennial Family Friendly Firm Award (FFFA), which is aimed at recognising companies for their pro-family efforts. This year will be the third run of the Award.

The Unit networks and collaborates with partners such as the Employer Alliance on Work and Family, which is a group of Family Friendly Firm Awardees, the Health Promotion Board, the Economic Development Board, business associations and MNCs to champion the work-life issue. In addition, the Unit produces resource materials to guide organisations on how to implement work-life strategies and flexible work arrangements.

Changing mindsets of both employers and employees takes time. We need to build the local business case to convince employers about the benefits of being work-life friendly.

My Ministry will continue to work with new champions and explore new channels to reach out to more CEOs and HR practitioners.

Ms Irene Ng has suggested that the public sector take the lead in pushing for work-life practices. Let me address some of the things that she has raised.

The public service has already allowed Ministries and Departments to adopt flexible work arrangements provided there is no drop in service levels or increase in manpower cost. Depending on the nature of work, applications for telecommuting are also considered. So we have, for example, in my Ministry and some other Ministries, alternate Saturday off. Some people have come back and do part-time work. Since 1987, married female officers with children may apply to work part-time, up to a period of three years, subject to a yearly review. So we can make those adjustments.

Other work-life friendly provisions include maternity and paternity leave and full-pay unrecorded child sick leave. In addition, married female officers are eligible for up to four years of no-pay leave if their children are below four years of age.

Sir, I would like to add also that many companies have come on board. Personally, I think this is a very good programme. Those who are here, who are from the private sector, may want to consider this as an alternative, and they could discuss with their HR professionals on how work-life initiatives can be adopted. I would like to add also that ever since I took over the Chairmanship of MENDAKI, I have asked MENDAKI to examine how work-life initiatives can be introduced, because over 90% of the staff in MENDAKI are females.

As regards Mdm Halimah's question about legislation, the Ministry of Manpower is reviewing the Employment Act and related labour legislation with a view to providing greater flexibility to employers to implement flexible work arrangements.

We are, however, mindful that legislation could introduce market rigidities. The success of work-life strategies, such as flexible work arrangements, flexible benefits and various employee support programmes, is best ensured when companies are convinced that such programmes are aligned with their business objectives. We are examining this matter in consultation with our tripartite partners.

Currently, organisations adopt work-life friendly practices as a business imperative. I am pleased that for this year's Family Friendly Firms Award, 435 organisations, compared to 344 in 2000, responded to Phase 1 of the process, which is to assess the extent of family friendliness. Of these, two-thirds have less than 200 employees. So, even the smaller companies are coming forward, realising that work-family arrangements are actually ideal and suitable for the modern economy, and will help them in terms of their bottom-line and productivity.

The encouraging response shows their recognition of the importance of work-life effectiveness on the bottom-line. As aptly put by a US work-life expert, who was here last week and I had a chance to meet her, I quote her, with her permission, "When work is effective, life benefits. When life is working, work benefits."

Sir, I think it is 7 o'clock.

The Chairman: We have half a minute left.

Assoc. Prof. Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, at the end of the day, I think we have to continue to reach out to the companies and convince them on the benefits of work-life initiatives. The Work Life Unit in MCDS is very active in this regard. We have had a seminar recently by an American expert for the past three weeks, meeting with HR professionals, talking to them about the benefits of work-life arrangements.

The Chairman: Order. It is 7.00 pm.

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

Assoc. Prof. Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2002/2003, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.