MENU

MENU

Donate Now
Login

Author: AWARE Media

home

Singapore’s stressed singles

As we celebrate the International Day of Families on May 15, it is time to recognise the increasingly important role singles in Singapore play when it comes to caring for a rapidly greying population.

The annual International Day of Families on May 15 was established by the United Nations in 1993 to mark how changing social, economic and demographic processes impact families around the globe.

On this 19th anniversary, it is encouraging to note that recent Budget-related statements by Members of Parliament recognise that better support is needed for different forms of the Singaporean family, which include single parents, divorced parents, foreign spouses of Singapore citizens and fathers who want more care-giving opportunities.

Why do families exist? For care-giving, not just procreation. Indeed, procreation without adequate care-giving leads to many social problems.

Diverse forms of the family provide care. Apart from nuclear families, there are single-person-headed households, patchwork families (resulting from divorce and remarriage) and, increasingly, multi-generational families in which singles (unmarried and childless) look after elderly parents.

Population statistics show a steady rise in the rate of singlehood. In 2000, 33.3% of males and 21.9% of females aged 30-34 years were single. This increased to 43.1% of males and 30.6% for females in 2010. Meanwhile, “the proportion of residents aged 65 and above increased from 7.2% in 2000 to 9.3% in 2011” (Population in Brief 2011: 6).

These statistics are related. Increasingly, the elderly are cared for by unmarried children, mostly daughters. The 1995 National Survey of Senior Citizens in Singapore showed that singles constituted 24% of family care-givers caring for those aged 65 and above. This has increased to 26%, according to a Ministry of Health report (2011). Women constitute 74% of those caring for the elderly, according to an NUS Social Work Report of Singapore Family Caregiving (2006).

Describing single care-givers of the elderly, Dr Kalyani Mehta (Head of Gerontology Programme, UniSIM) said, “many of them are not ‘swinging’ singles but ‘stressed’ singles, who are juggling work and care-giving responsibilities.”

In shaping policies for Singapore’s rapidly greying population, we must ensure that single adults caring for elderly parents do not slip through the cracks. Recent Budget support for single care-givers – including subsidies for home-based care and domestic foreign helpers for elderly parents, and assistance through Medisave top-ups and GST vouchers – are laudable. But are these enough?

The 2006 NUS Report of Singapore Family Caregiving states that 25% of family care-givers express concern about their worsening financial situation. 55% of healthcare expenditure in Singapore is funded out of pocket, compared to only 30% in Taiwan, Japan, Hong Kong and South Korea, according to a 2012 paper on inequality and the new social compact, presented at the Institute of Policy Studies.

Are parents to rely largely on the income of working children for long-term care-giving? More effective approaches could include:

–       Universal Medishield and risk-pooling across all age groups to provide more affordable healthcare coverage for older persons

–       Waiving levies for hiring foreign domestic workers to assist low-income care-givers, especially singles who have to work to support elderly parents

–       Childcare leave becoming “care-giving leave” for all dependents, thereby enabling single care-givers – some without siblings – to care for or bring ill elderly dependents to see doctors.

Further, more retiring Singaporeans – including those who have made tremendous personal sacrifices to care for elderly parents – now live alone: from 6.6% in 2000 to 7.7% in 2005, according to a MCYS Report on the State of the Elderly in Singapore (2009).

Interviewing single women aged 35 and above, AWARE met respondents who experience difficulties in caring for dependent parents without sufficient state support. One respondent plans to migrate to a more “pro-elderly” country after the parents she cares for pass on. In her view, Singapore does not provide adequately for an ageing population and an increasingly single population. Indeed, eldercare facilities here are limited in quantity and quality, and very expensive to boot.

Among the elderly living in HDB estates, those living with friends or relatives (not immediate family) have almost doubled from 3.3% in 1998 to 6.4% in 2008. These, too, are families, bound by ties of care and compassion, rather than obligations of kinship. It is time to recognise that caring for one another is the basis of families. Family policies should not be premised solely on relationships of blood or marriage.

On this International Day of Families, it is worth reflecting on how such policies can better support singles – those who are care-givers, as well as those who receive care – and their families. Only then can we become a truly inclusive and caring society.

This commentary was co-authored by members of AWARE’s Singles In Singapore sub-committee, which comprises leaders Chew I-Jin and Mao Ailin, and members Raudah Abdul Rashid, Carolyn Lim Bee Bee, and Chu Hoi Yee. It was published in Today on May 15, 2012. Read the published version here.

Protecting younger members of our society

Children and teens have limited capacities for processing challenges to their identities. It is our responsibility to create conditions in which the costs of their choices are not excessively high.

By Dr Teo You Yenn

When my students embark on research projects, they are required to undergo ethics reviews. If their projects involve children or teenagers, they are required to ask for parental permission before interviewing their subjects. This can appear to students as a bureaucratic process; they do not always understand why children are special.

I explain to them that children deserve special treatment because their capacities to process questions and challenges to their identities are not as well developed as older people’s. Moreover, they have fewer resources for dealing with challenges to their sense of selves.

While interviews with adults will generally leave them unmoved in their sense of who they are and what they believe in, when we ask kids about what they think about femininity or masculinity, what social class their families belong to, et cetera, these questions can leave them feeling unsure about where they stand in the world.

Without access to the resources adults tend to have — adult friends who have
experiences to share, knowledge about how to seek counsel — kids can end up feeling isolated and helpless. 18 or 21 are somewhat arbitrary numbers; people obviously develop at different pace, but age limits guarantee kids at least that number of years of special consideration.

If children under 18 need to be protected from sociologists’ questions, they obviously need to be protected from pimps and johns. And indeed, we know that there are global and intensifying problems of sexual exploitation of children. These take the form of sexual grooming on the Internet, trafficking, and child prostitution.

Aside from these more obvious forms of exploitation, girls and young women are
living in environments where the sexuality of girls/women are for display or sale. We see this in multiple realms and forms: in television, films, and the merchandise that accompany them; in pop music and music videos; on billboards and shop windows; sometimes even in toys.

Our popular culture is saturated with images of girls and young women whose worth are narrowly defined through their youthful bodies. Boys and men, too, are living in environments where the objectification and use of certain girls/women for their bodies is seen as perfectly normal. These conditions can and have been negatively exploited.

We should respect young people’s desires to exercise agency; indeed, it is obvious adults do not have monopoly over good decisions. But we have the responsibility to create conditions in which younger members of society can safely make decisions, where they can reverse certain decisions and the costs of their choices aren’t excessively high.

We must not allow people to exploit young people’s limited capacity to protect
themselves and limited resources in finding alternatives. When our young are used as sex objects, we should remember why they need protection in the first place. We should take seriously our collective responsibility to protect them from those who use their vulnerability for profits and pleasures.

The writer is Assistant Professor in Sociology at Nanyang Technological
University and Board member at AWARE. This commentary was published in Today on May 10, 2012. Read the published version here.

Parliament Primer: Supporting non-traditional families

The following is an excerpt of the debate on single-parent families, paid paternity leave and the rights of foreign spouses, which took place during the Feb 29 and March 1, 2 and 5 sittings of Parliament.

PAID PATERNITY LEAVE

Seah Kian Peng
Member of Parliament for Marine Parade GRC

Let me declare my interest as a Board Member for the Centre for Fathering, a VWO. Today, I revisit a topic that I have been pushing for a few years – paid paternity leave.

We know the importance of the father’s involvement in a child’s growing up years. Research has shown that children do better mentally, socially, emotionally and academically when their fathers are involved in their lives.

The opposite is true as well – fathers’ absences are linked to higher rates of delinquency and psychological problems in the children. An AWARE-led survey conducted between October 2010 and January 2011 found that 91 per cent of over 1000 respondents wanted to have mandated paternity leave, ranging from at least six days to as many as 14 days. The survey also found that 75 per cent of the fathers would apply for paternity leave to spend time with their children, if there was that option.

Given that there is both reason and demand for paid paternity leave, I hope the Ministry can consider supporting my proposal for legally mandated paternity leave. In addition, the Ministry could grant the flexibility for parents to apportion their paternity and maternity leave according to their needs. In the 2010 COS debate, I had also suggested that the fourth month of maternity leave could be gender neutral that can be taken by either parent. This is something, I hope, the Government can consider; I know not this year but perhaps in future.

Many companies, including the Civil Service, have given fathers day off. We all agree that allowing fathers to spend more time and build stronger bonds with their children is an important step to take in promoting cohesive and harmonious families. So, I urge the Government to consider legislating paternity leave. We start small – two days will do. It is a symbolic but important move.

Gerald Giam
Non-Constituency Member of Parliament

Paternity leave of at least six days per new-born child should be introduced and legislated. Half of this should be funded by the Government and the rest by employers. This will allow families to bond together during the critical period after childbirth, and will also recognise the important role of fathers in sharing the responsibilities of infant care. All this could have a positive effect on birth rates.

Teo Chee Hean
Deputy Prime Minister, Coordinating Minister for National Security, Minister for Home Affairs, Member of Parliament for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC

For paternity leave, there are pluses and minuses. We would have to study the impact, and the experience of other countries. The experience of other countries on paternity leave has been mixed. For shared leave, most of the time, it is the mother who has taken the leave rather than the father. There are also implications like cost to businesses. So, we have to study this very carefully. And, if not for this year, maybe for later years.

HOUSING PROBLEMS FOR SINGLE-PARENT FAMILIES

Yeo Guat Kwang
Member of Parliament for Ang Mo Kio GRC

I would like to highlight the need to support less traditional families. With divorce rates going up, we are seeing more single-parent families. This is an unfortunate trend that is made all the more challenging due to the difficulties caused by high rents and difficulties applying for a new flat. Single mothers with young children especially are struggling.

Rental rates are going up. A check of the median rental rate shows that the average rate for a 3-room flat in the fourth quarter of 2010 was $1,888, up 33% from the same period in 2009 ($1,419). It is definitely much higher now. This makes renting a flat quite prohibitive but, at the same time, these families find it difficult to apply for a new flat as a second-time applicant.

I think HDB should review its policies concerning single-parent families and consider these mitigating circumstances. Can HDB consider giving them the same priority as the first-timer homeowners or priority above the second-timer homeowners? Their situation is desperate especially when there are children involved.

Lim Biow Chuan
Member of Parliament for Mountbatten SMC

I urge the Government to consider a more flexible policy to allow divorcees and singles to buy or rent flats directly from HDB.

In the case of divorcees, after the divorce, one parent would usually be granted care and control over their children. If the court also orders the matrimonial flat to be sold, this would mean that the parent and his or her child would be without a home unless they can rely on their relatives or friends.

Instead of the standard policy of asking the divorcee to wait the debarment period of 30 months, can HDB allow divorcees with children to rent a flat quickly? Alternatively, can they be allowed to buy a flat directly from HDB?

Based on a single divorced person’s income with children to support, it would be financially difficult for them to buy a resale flat. I think we can do more to help divorced persons adjust to their situation. And I also agree that for HDB to ask applicants to get a letter of no objection from a divorced spouse is not very sensitive. I mean, the acrimony is still there.

Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap
Member of Parliament for Aljunied GRC

The number of divorces and annulments has been inching up since 2005. In 2010 alone, there were over 7,000 divorces recorded under the Women’s Charter and AMLA. Most divorces end up with the sale of matrimonial homes. I have come across cases where spouses given custody of children were left staring at the prospect of becoming homeless in the process. While young divorcees may find it a little easier to pick up their lives again, older divorcees, especially those with children, may need some help to do so.

The largest group of divorcees in 2010 was aged 35 to 44 years. Some of these divorcees may have no option but to sell their matrimonial homes. If their homes are bought directly from HDB, they faced a debarment period of 30 months for a rental flat and a 5-year wait period if they want to buy another flat direct from HDB or be listed as an occupier. For older divorcees with custody of children, time is something they do not have on their side.

Take the case of a 35-year-old resident, a divorcee with the custody of three children and no alimony from her ex-husband. She earned less than $900 a month. The sales proceeds from the disposal of matrimonial home, if any, would be gone in 30 months if her family is forced to rent from the open market. And by the time she is eligible to buy another HDB flat, age would have caught up, the loan eligibility would have diminished and job security will be an issue.

My take on inclusive society means everyone will not left alone. That would include singles, divorcees, bankrupts and those who may have been overlooked in our society. I do understand that HDB will review applications for rental or purchase of new flats for divorcees on a case-by-case basis. The Government may want society to take a pro-family stand. There is nothing wrong with that. We are Asians, we are pro-family.

But how we look after the less fortunate, needy and vulnerable section of our society will set us apart from the rest of the pack. I urge the Ministry to look into releasing or to do away with the debarment period for rental flats for divorcees with children as a start in our resolve to build a truly inclusive society.

Khaw Boon Wan
Minister for National Development, Member of Parliament for Sembawang GRC

We are sympathetic to divorcees, especially when they have young children to support, face financial hardship and have no family support. We will always try to help them. As we free up, loosen the balloting for second-timers, many of them should be able to benefit from this initiative. Last year, we allocated 670 public rental flats to divorcees with children. This is more than 20 per cent of the rental flats allocated last year.

Nevertheless, we must be mindful that divorcees do not form a homogenous group. In the West, many sympathetic rules designed to help divorcees get abused, with couples claiming such benefits even though their marriages are intact. We have to be discerning when claiming a case to be special. It must really be special. And that is why we have to deal with this on a case-by-case basis. I pay some attention to the comments written by the MPs when they write in. So, I am counting on you to do some due diligence. Do not just take their word for it. We need to do some probing.

FOREIGN SPOUSES

Indranee Rajah
Member of Parliament for Tanjong Pagar GRC

I was heartened by the Deputy Prime Minister’s announcement earlier today about the Long-term Visit Pass Plus scheme, but it is not clear what impact it will have on one particular group which I am concerned about, and that is Singaporeans with past criminal records who have foreign spouses.

I would like to ask the Minister if there is a specific policy that Singaporeans with criminal records would automatically have their applications for long-term visit passes for their spouses rejected. If rejection is not automatic based on past records but subject to ICA’s discretion, then what are the factors that ICA takes into account in exercising that discretion?

I ask because I have noticed, from my MPS cases, that some Singaporeans with past criminal records have had difficulty in getting Long-term Social Visit Passes for their foreign spouses. The applicants tend to be male, in their 30s or 40s. Typically, they do not have high educational levels. This question is actually prompted by three cases for which I have been sending repeated appeals to MHA.

One of them is a Chinese man. At first glance, when you look at him, you will know that he was once a “pai kia”. He is covered from head to toe in colourful tattoos; even his head is tattooed. But his record has been clean for many years. He has turned over a new leaf. He has found a stable job and is trying to make a new life for himself with his wife from China. He has been a applying for a Long-term Social Visit Pass for her but has been consistently rejected.

Another is also a Chinese man. He works for a VWO in the social service sector. He has a very elderly mother whom he looks after. He has a Vietnamese wife, and he, too, has had his applications rejected. The third one is an Indian man. His wife is from India. He works as a cook. He also has had his applications for a Long-term Social Visit Pass rejected.

In all three cases, their records were several years ago and they have kept clean records since. They have all obtained jobs. They may not be very well off, but they appear to be able to support themselves and their wives. Denying them Long-term Social Visit Passes denies them the chance for personal happiness and to start families of their own.

Having to send their wives back to their home countries every few months not only adds to their expenses, but also puts them under stress and anxiety. Rejecting their applications is really contrary to the Yellow Ribbon Movement. Not only that, the thing is that having their spouses here in Singapore actually helps to stabilise them and gives them a new purpose and direction in life.

I appreciate that Long-term Social Visit Passes should not be given indiscriminately and care should be exercised when there is a criminal record. But if they are genuine cases, I ask that they be examined on their merits and also that MHA and ICA will be more flexible in granting Long Term Social Visit Passes to spouses of Singaporeans with past criminal records.

Masagos Zulkifli Bin Masagos Mohamad
Minister of State for Home Affairs and Foreign Affairs, Member of Parliament for Tampines GRC

Regarding whether the Ministry will be more flexible in granting Long Term Visit Passes for foreign spouses of Singaporeans with past criminal records, we are cognisant of the latter’s needs, but we are mindful that should a marriage not work out or the husband reoffends, the spouse who is a foreigner will not have relatives in Singapore to turn to nor jobs to sustain herself or her children as many are generally low skilled.

ICA, therefore, evaluates every application for a Long Term Visit Pass carefully, based on a variety of factors, such as the sponsor’s ability to financially support the family and sustain the marriage, whether there are children from the marriage, and duration of the marriage.

Over the last five years, 11,500 foreign spouses of Singaporeans were granted LTVP annually. This represents a success rate of 85 per cent over the applications received, and includes applications from those who have had criminal records before, but had qualified.

But for ex-offenders who demonstrate a strong commitment to keep a clean record and remain in stable employment, we will review how we can better facilitate such applications and help these families.

Ang Hin Kee
Member of Parliament for Ang Mo Kio GRC

There are increasingly more cases of Singaporeans marrying foreign partners. Many of these couples find themselves faced with an uncertain future and frustration after marriage. Marriage to a Singapore citizen does not automatically qualify a foreigner for long-term stay or permanent residency upon marriage or even after they have children. Each application is evaluated based on its own merits and many of these foreign spouses do not get to enjoy medical benefits, childcare, housing subsidies, etc.

Many couples do come to their MPs and appeal for special waiver from the ICA to speed up applications for long-term stay or PR applications. In the long run, some of these marriages may break down. Does the Government have plans to provide greater support for these foreign spouses, given that there has been an increasing trend of Singaporeans marrying foreigners?

Secondly, I believe we need to tackle the frustration faced by these couples from the onset. Before they marry, it is imperative that they have a better understanding of the family support system, financial management and cultural differences here in Singapore. Let them learn about the various citizenship issues and what to expect for a long-term stay in Singapore.

With effect from September 2011, it is now mandatory for minor couples who wish to marry to attend marriage preparation programmes. The purpose is to help young couples better prepare for marriage. I believe such premarital counselling will be useful for Singaporeans and their foreign spouses. Can the Government consider extending options of premarital counselling services and marriage preparatory courses to them as well?

If need be, can the Government also fund the counselling sessions and courses to encourage couples who wish to make use of the services to do so? In this case, I believe we can better prepare such couples to take note of the potential challenges they may face as a married couple. In this way, we will have better and more stable marriages.

Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap

In a recent reply to a question on whether the Ministry would grant permanent residence more easily to the foreign spouses of Singaporeans, especially those who have children who are Singaporeans, the Prime Minister replied that there is no such automatic policy. The PM also said that the citizens who sponsored their foreign spouses for PR status may need to show that they are able to support them financially.

The length of stay and duration of marriage may be important factors to consider in the grant of PR status to foreign spouses, the condition that the citizen must first prove that they are able to support their partner is a bit unusual. This is because once their spouses become permanent residents, what is there to stop them from seeking employment? Even when these foreign spouses are on long-term visit passes, they are allowed to work, as highlighted by the Prime Minister, in this Chamber.

Perhaps, it is time to review this pre-condition. As long as these citizens are working and contributing to their CPF savings, the chances of their foreign spouses in getting a PR status should be based surely on the family nucleus, length of stay, duration of marriage and whatever undisclosed criteria that ICA may have.

It was reported on CNA that this Government has granted PR status to almost 168,000 foreigners from 2008 to 2010. It is anybody’s guess how many of these PRs will eventually stay on, take up citizenship and have children. But, unlike the many PRs who are here mainly for economic reasons, foreign spouses of Singaporeans have every reason to make this place their permanent home because their partners are already deeply rooted here, to begin with.

In my MPS, I have met a number of residents who are disappointed with the many rejection letters they received from ICA. Some citizens with foreign spouses and Singapore children have become disillusioned with the immigration policy. I can understand their frustration. On one hand, we want more babies and foreigners to grow our population; on the other hand, it is so hard for these Singaporeans to secure the PR status for their spouses even when they have children who are born Singaporeans.

It is hard for Singaporeans with foreign spouses to live with the separation anxiety all the time. I urge this Government to review the immigration policy on foreign spouses with a compassionate and forward looking yardstick.

Intan Azura Mokhtar
Member of Parliament for Ang Mo Kio GRC

Just based on the past nine months interacting with residents and helping them file appeals, I have seen consistent requests by Singaporeans to appeal for either permanent residence or long-term visit passes for their foreign spouses. For some of these applicants, they have made repeated applications and appeals over several years but to no avail.

What is of concern is that a substantial proportion of these couples have children who are Singaporeans. But because of the inability of the foreign spouses to get either a PR or long-term visit pass and hence the inability to stay in Singapore for longer durations, the family is spread apart, with the child or children usually living with their mothers who are more often than not foreign spouses.

It pains me to see such young children growing up in a family that is not intact because of a policy that we have instituted. We ought to look beyond the Singaporean applicant’s immediate financial contribution ability, and let us instead look at how his contribution can be realised through his Singaporean children who may not even have the opportunity to contribute to Singapore if we continue this policy the way we have.

I hope that the Prime Minister’s Office can review this policy and consider relaxing the criteria for applications of PRs on long-term visit passes for foreign spouses so that we can allow more of such families to stay as an intact family unit.

Hri Kumar Nair
Member of Parliament for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC

In 2010, there were a total of 24,363 marriages. Of these, 6,176 were between a citizen and a non-resident. This represents over a quarter of all marriages in Singapore. In most cases, the couple would naturally expect that the foreign spouse would be allowed to live in Singapore and later start a family here. But it does not always work out that way.

What happens in most cases is that the foreign spouse would be issued a social visit pass which can range from 30 days to a year. Some are even required to leave Singapore before their passes are renewed, or without assurance that it will be. Their applications for permanent residence will take a few years to be approved, if at all.

It is not a satisfactory situation. The problems are compounded because many of these marriages involve Singaporean men and women with low incomes. The new couples are uncertain about their future. Because ICA does not reveal the criteria for granting a visit pass or PR, the couple is never certain when it will be granted or at all. While foreign spouses can work on a long-term visit pass, they find it difficult to be employed because of their uncertain status. When the spouse is asked to leave Singapore and return to renew their passes, it adds to the family’s expenses.

The couple cannot buy a new flat from HDB because at least two people in the family nucleus must be citizens or permanent residents to qualify. As it will now take the foreign spouse longer to obtain PR, the situation will remain difficult for some time. If the foreign spouse is a lady, she will not enjoy subsidised medical care, and so it will be more expensive to plan and start a family.

Taken collectively, these factors create an imposing obstacle against such couples marrying, settling down and starting a family in Singapore. If we are encouraging Singaporeans to get married and have children, why make it difficult for them simply because they choose to marry a non-Singaporean?

Foreign spouses belong to a very different category from the foreign workers the Government is trying to reduce our dependence on. In fact, they are quite the opposite because they are here not for commercial reasons but for the long term. They are also part of a national agenda we want to advance. We want more Singaporeans to marry and have children and deepen their roots in Singapore.

Singaporeans who marry foreigners have the same hopes and dreams as other Singaporeans. The Government should help them make this dream come true, particularly those with low incomes and who likely have more limited options. It is in keeping with the “inclusive” theme of the Budget.

What are the reasons for our caution? Is it the fear of marriages of convenience? If so, this must be the minority of marriages, and surely this can be addressed differently. Our approach appears to be to flush out marriages of convenience by making it as inconvenient as possible for Singaporeans with foreign spouses. I hope the Government will do something to help.

I suggest that instead of issuing social visit passes, we institute a more permanent pass for foreign spouses. For convenience, I shall call this the “marriage pass”, not a pass of marriage. Under a marriage pass, the foreign spouse should be allowed to live and work in Singapore as long as the couple remains married. The marriage pass should allow the couple to purchase a new HDB flat, and entitle the spouse to subsidised medical care.

There are a number of advantages. It gives certainty to the couple. It makes it easier for them to own a home and start a family. And if administered properly, it will also enable the Government to grant fewer PR or citizenship and only to very deserving cases as the marriage pass is a viable alternative to foreign spouses in a genuine marriage.

The concerns about sham marriages will in fact be reduced as the spouse’s right to remain in Singapore will depend on the continuity of the marriage, and getting a PR is less assured. As a check against abuse, there could be various conditions placed on the marriage pass. For example, it could be mandatory that children born under the marriage would have to apply to become Singapore citizens.

Also, where the couple have purchased an HDB flat, they could be made to disgorge the profits from the sale should the marriage pass be terminated, and the flat sold within a certain period. I hope the Government will consider the suggestion to make it easier for Singaporeans to marry foreigners.

Teo Chee Hean

Several Members have asked if our immigration policy can be more accommodating towards foreigners who have lived in Singapore for many years. Our objective is to take in immigrants who can contribute and integrate well into our society. Applications for PR and citizenship are carefully evaluated on a set of comprehensive criteria which include the individual’s economic contributions, qualifications, age, and family ties.

For those who are married to Singaporeans, we consider the length of their marriage, whether they have Singaporean children, and whether their sponsor is able to support the family financially.

As we have tightened our immigration framework, it has become more difficult to qualify for PR or citizenship. There is however, still the option of applying for other immigration facilities such as work passes, social visit passes, dependant’s passes or long term visit passes.

Mr Ang is quite correct to say that more Singaporeans are marrying non-citizens. In 2010, 30 per cent of marriages involving citizens were between a citizen and a foreigner. This is up from 23 per cent in the year 2000.

We do not fully understand the sociology and stresses within these marriages but we will study them. We will also study suggestions of marriage counselling, but a number of these marriages are forged overseas, before we have any opportunity to step in to do counselling or give any form of advice.

While foreign spouses do not automatically qualify for citizenship or PR, most of those who do not, will qualify for a Long Term Visit Pass, or LTVP. Many of those on LTVP do eventually become PRs or naturalise as citizens after they have been married for some time, and their marriages are stable.

Several Members asked if the Government could do more to help foreign spouses of Singaporeans, especially those with Singaporean children. I do agree that we can do more to help such families build more stable and stronger foundations. We sympathise with these families.

But we have also seen the other side of the problem, where the foreign spouse who has received PR suddenly divorces and leaves the Singaporean citizen spouse. We have also seen Singapore citizens who have asked the immigration department to get the ex-foreign spouse to leave Singapore. We have seen instances of these, and so we would like to see that the marriages are stable and have been in existence for a substantial period of time before we give longer term immigration facilities, which place an obligation on Singapore and Singaporeans to support this person for the long term. But I do agree that we can do more.

To provide more support to the family of a Singaporean with a foreign spouse who has not yet been given PR or citizenship, we will introduce a new scheme, known as the Long Term Visit Pass Plus or LTVP+ from 1 April 2012.

First, the scheme provides foreign spouses of citizens with greater certainty of stay. The LTVP+ will be for a duration of three years in the first instance and up to five years for each subsequent renewal, instead of the current shorter periods of typically one year.

Second, LTVP+ holders will receive healthcare subsidies for inpatient treatment at restructured hospitals, pegged at a level close to that for PRs, that is, about the same rates as PRs even though they have not yet been given PR.

Third, it will be easier for LTVP+ holders to work to supplement the family income. They will only require a Letter of Consent from MOM to work, which can be easily obtained through online application. To qualify for LTVP+, factors such as the length of marriage and whether there are citizen children in the family will be considered. More details will be announced by ICA later today.

Desmond Lee
Member of Parliament for Jurong GRC

HDB’s priority is to provide homes for Singapore families. Lower-income Singaporeans with foreign spouses who are not PRs cannot purchase BTO or balance flats from HDB. As a result, some of them face serious housing problems.

Currently, their options to buy a resale flat on the Non-citizen Spouse Scheme with CPF housing grant for singles; (b) rent a room or a flat from the private rental market; or (c) put up with friends or relatives. In many of these cases, these options are either unaffordable and out of reach, or sub-optimal.

I would like to ask if the Minister will at some stage consider allowing Singaporeans with non-PR foreign spouses to buy BTO or balance flats. As a safeguard, do not allow their spouses to be joint owners or have succession rights to these flats unless they attain more permanent residency status. This might even be an extension of the Long-term Visit Pass Plus scheme that was announced yesterday.

Yeo Guat Kwang

The foreign spouses of Singaporeans who are now on Long Term Visit Pass-Plus do not need to obtain a work permit if they want to work. Now, they only need a letter of consent from MOM that potential employers can obtain online. They are also not subject to levy and company’s dependency quota. I hope we can help them more by facilitating employers to employ them instead of foreign workers from abroad.

It would be an added benefit if we can support these Singaporean spouses, who have Singaporean children to support, with employability training and skill upgrading. For example, can we extend e2i employment assistance and WDA training support to them at the same level as other Singaporeans?

Tan Chuan-Jin
Minister of State for the Ministry of National Development and the Ministry of Manpower; Member of Parliament for Marine Parade GRC

Mr Yeo asked if we can help foreign spouses of Singaporeans on Long Term Social Visit Pass (LTVP) with training and job facilitation. In line with the Government’s intention to extend more assistance to families of Singapore citizens with foreign spouses, WDA will provide such services at its career centres to the new LTVP Plus (LTVP+) holders. They will be eligible for needs-based course subsidies, following an assessment at the career centre.

Read the full transcripts here, here, here, here, here, here and here.

Parliament Primer: Little red dot deals with global labour flow

The following is an excerpt of the debate on tackling human trafficking and protecting foreign domestic workers, which took place during the March 1 and March 5 sittings of Parliament.

HUMAN TRAFFICKING

Christopher de Souza
Member of Parliament for Holland-Bukit Timah GRC

Last year marked the start of a serious discourse on the state of human trafficking in Singapore and the adequacy of our legal framework and enforcement activities to tackle the very serious issue.

The Singapore Inter-agency Taskforce on Trafficking in Persons to intensify the coordination of anti-trafficking initiatives between Government agencies here is a positive start. A National Plan of Action to tackle both sex and labour trafficking is currently in the process of being developed, and will detail strategies to reduce the incidence of human trafficking in Singapore, minimise exploitation opportunities by traffickers, and heighten our national response to trafficking cases.

Even as the Government works on prevention by strict border enforcement and thorough immigration checks as well as the prosecution of human traffickers, much more can be done with respect to the protection of victims.

At present, MCYS and MOM fund shelters and dormitories that offer accommodation, medical care and counselling services. I would like to ask the Ministry what other concrete plans they have in mind to improve these victim care and support programmes.

Taiwan, for example, has set up 19 shelters to look after victims under the administration of various government agencies, and the government has worked with NGOs to manage the shelters and provide victim support services. Perhaps our Government could look into partnering local NGOs or enhancing support for existing schemes as a means of managing the needs of the victims.

But, in a way, helping victims is already too late an intervention. We need to ensure that traffickers are extremely deterred from trying to place women and children in Singapore, which brings me to the issue of legislation.

The Ministry has said that it will consider whether increased enforcement powers, enhanced victim care provisions and harsher sentences will do the trick. By doing so, it is an acknowledgement, and rightly so, that new legislation indeed plays a pivotal role in enhancing our ability to fight human trafficking at the borders. How will the MHA ensure that traffickers are deterred and, if caught, punished harshly?

Also, given the very cross-border nature of human trafficking – which was acknowledged by the Minister, Mr S Iswaran, in a previous debate we had in this House – how will MHA work with other ASEAN countries to ensure the incidence of human trafficking within ASEAN is significantly reduced?

S Iswaran
Minister for Prime Minister’s Office, Second Minister for Home Affairs and Trade and Industry, Member of Parliament for West Coast GRC

We sought public feedback, starting about three weeks ago, on our National Plan of Action. In particular, the plan of action covers prevention, prosecution of perpetrators, protection of victims, partnerships, and enablers to enhance Singapore capabilities to fight trafficking in persons. We want to thank all who have contributed their ideas, and we will be incorporating some of this feedback into the National Plan of Action before it is launched later this year.

We will review existing laws to ensure that Singapore’s legislation adequately addresses the complexity of TIP crimes and that penalties are commensurate with the gravity of the crimes committed. This is an on-going process and more details will be revealed in due course.

On a related note, Deputy Prime Minister Teo spoke about the introduction of the Organised Crime Act later this year. This Act will complement our review of TIP legislation to ensure that both enforcement powers and penalties are adequate to deter and punish trafficking syndicates.

On the enforcement front, we have close working relationships with our regional counterparts. There is also active dialogue and cooperation at various ASEAN regional platforms which cover both TIP and the broader scope of organised crime.

MCYS works with NGOs to provide shelters for victims and potential victims. As part of the process going forward, we will review the adequacy of these facilities and we will also take reference from international best practices. But as these are early days yet in the process, it would be premature for me to comment on specifics, but it will again be a part of the process going forward.

FOREIGN DOMESTIC WORKERS

Christopher de Souza

Everyone deserves rest. Maids are no different. Some have said that we should leave it to agencies and the maids to work out contractually whether they will have a rest day. However, the maid is inevitably in an unequal bargaining position with many if not most unable to comprehend contractual terms written in English.

Therefore, any analysis on the topic of rest days must be viewed through that reality. In this House, I had previously raised the issue of rest days for Foreign Domestic Workers (FDWs), with the MOM saying it is analysing this. Is the Ministry of Manpower in a position to provide an update on this? After all, everyone deserves rest. We are all human.

Another issue has to do with the controversial Maid Review section of a blog that allows employers to post and view alleged misdeeds of maids. VWOs have complained that the site violated the rights and privacy of maids by revealing details such as their names, photographs, work permit and passport numbers.

Although the Maid Review section has now been made private, the problem is not totally resolved from the domestic workers’ point of view as employers may still have access to their particulars and any uncomplimentary remarks made about them. If something untrue is said of them, this could ruin any prospect of re-employment with a subsequent employer.

This is extremely unfair. Would we want that to happen to ourselves? Surely not. So, whoever it is running that blog, have more compassion. What more can MOM do, to ensure that maids have at least some recourse to action or a channel for complaints to be made? Would the Ministry consider exploring legislation which prevents users from uploading personal profile data such as those in identity cards and work permits?

Tan Chuan-Jin
Minister of State for the Ministry of National Development and the Ministry of Manpower; Member of Parliament for Marine Parade GRC

As we uphold laws to ensure the decent treatment of our foreign labour force, we must not forget that it also includes our foreign domestic workers. One of the issues raised is related to a blog with a controversial Maid Review section, and many like Mr de Souza find this distasteful. We would like to highlight that there are civil routes for redress for the aggrieved party if the comments are defamatory or in breach of a duty of confidence.

The second issue which Mr de Souza raised, also echoed by Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, is related to the specific provisions for rest days for foreign domestic workers. Let us be quite honest here. This debate on whether to implement a weekly rest day for FDWs has been long standing and contentious. Based on a survey conducted by MOM in 2010, the majority of our employers currently provide at least one rest day a month, but many do not.

Since Madam Halimah Yacob raised the issue in June 2011, we have consulted stakeholders, including FDW employers and FDWs themselves, extensively and considered their feedback carefully. And we received a broad spectrum of views.

I would like to share with Members a sample of what some of these views are. A number of these views have been edited and not included here because they are fairly extreme but this would give you a sense. Some employers felt that their needs should not supersede the needs of their FDW to rest and recharge, and that they appreciated their FDW more after taking over her chores on her rest day.

Other employers felt that their FDWs do not need a rest day because they have enough rest on a daily basis, or that giving FDWs weekly rest day will make it difficult for employers to cope when they themselves need a break during their own days off. Fears were raised about forming relationships or potential comparison of employment terms with other FDWs when the FDWs have their days off.

One oft-repeated concern is the fear that FDWs will misbehave or become less compliant as a result. Some have claimed that married couples’ relationships would be negatively affected if the FDW took time off, and that this would lead to a rise in divorce rates or reluctance to have children. There are many other emails that we have not talked about here.

It is very clear from the robust debate that FDWs play an important role in the lives of many families in Singapore. Improving FDWs’ well-being has a direct impact on the quality of care that their loved ones receive. We need to ask ourselves: How should foreign domestic workers, who make significant contributions to many of our households, be treated? How does this reflect on us as a society?

A weekly rest day is regarded internationally as a basic labour right. More than physical rest, it is an important mental and emotional break from work. We all can attest to that. Local workers and non-domestic foreign workers already enjoy this right under the Employment Act.

We are currently one of the very few foreign domestic worker destination countries worldwide lacking in provisions for weekly rest days. This has led to us becoming less attractive to FDWs compared to other destinations in the region that provide weekly rest days, such as Hong Kong and Taiwan. Malaysia, too, has recently included this provision in a MOU signed with Indonesia.

While accredited employment agencies currently use a standard employment contract that stipulates the number of days in a month that the worker wishes to take off and compensation for that, not all employers use the standard contract as it is not legally mandated to do so.

Employers may also find that actually improving FDWs’ well-being by giving them regular rest days will have a positive impact on the quality of care that they and their loved ones receive. Increasing Singapore’s attractiveness as an FDW destination will improve the supply of FDW for employers.

Happier FDWs will lead to better care for employers, fewer management problems and greater peace of mind. MOM’s records and feedback from non-government organisations (NGOs) that provide assistance to FDWs in distress indicates that the majority of foreign domestic workers with management problems do not have rest days.

Between 2007 and 2010, a significant majority of foreign domestic workers who suffered work-related injuries or committed suicide did not receive rest days. Places that shelter foreign domestic workers reported that those who run away from their employers generally do not have rest days.

While most employers do ensure their FDWs have adequate rest on a daily basis, this is not the same as providing a weekly rest day for a proper emotional and mental break and rest. In fact, in-depth interviews with FDWs revealed that a rest day provides them a much needed emotional and mental break from work and time apart from their employers.

We should move forward now, but in a balanced and pragmatic fashion. Therefore, we will legislate a weekly rest day for foreign domestic workers. However, we will also introduce flexibility in the regulations to respond to the needs and preferences of foreign domestic workers themselves and their employers.

The family circumstances of some FDW employers may make it genuinely difficult for them to cope without a FDW for one day every week. These employers may have elderly or disabled dependants to care for. We also understand that some FDWs actually, from their feedback as well, prefer to work on their rest days for extra pay.

Employers and FDWs will have the option of providing compensation in lieu of a rest day, as long as this is agreed upon in writing by both parties. The employer and the FDW should mutually agree on the number of rest days she will take each month, and the amount that the FDW will be compensated for the rest days that she does not take. The compensation for each rest day must at least be the worker’s daily wage, and be paid on top of her monthly wage. Assuming that the FDW’s wage is $400, and she chooses to take two days off, the amount the employer will have to pay is at least $31 to compensate for the remaining two days.

Employers, who have frail elderly and are therefore most likely to offer compensation in lieu, will be eligible for the new $120 grant each month to hire an FDW. Announced by the Finance Minister in his Budget speech, this grant comes on top of the existing $95 levy concession for households with elderly, young children or disabled members, and this is more than adequate to cover the rise in costs from having to compensate a FDW for working on her rest days.

For employers and FDWs who agree on taking regular rest days, there will also be flexibility for both to agree on which day of the week this rest day should fall on. Instead of monetary compensation, employers can also give FDWs a replacement rest day within the month.

To give employers time to adjust to the new regulations, we plan for them to take effect for all Work Permits issued or renewed from 1 January 2013. FDWs with Work Permits issued or renewed before 1 January 2013 will not be covered by this regulation until their Work Permits expire and are renewed after 1 January 2013.

One of the key concerns that employers have cited is about FDWs’ activities on their days off. I think this is a very common concern, and it has got to do with the security bond. I would like to emphasise very clearly that MOM does not forfeit employer’s security bonds if the FDW violates her own Work Permit conditions, for instance, if she moonlights on a rest day and gets caught, or if she gets pregnant.

Even in extreme cases where the foreign domestic worker absconds and cannot be located, only half the security bond will be forfeited if the employer has made reasonable effort to locate the foreign domestic worker. In reality, MOM forfeits very few security bonds each year. Last year, 22 security bonds were partially forfeited for missing FDWs. This is not large considering that we have over 200,000 FDWs in Singapore.

The Ministry is also reviewing employers’ obligations for medical costs and the cost of sending FDWs home for exceptional circumstances that employers have little or no control over. This is part of the second phase of the review on EFMA which I mentioned earlier.

The fear and concern over the security bond does shape the behaviour of employers. I would suggest that these concerns are misplaced and I think we should free ourselves of those concerns, and with that managed, the foreign domestic workers are looked after appropriately.

With the provision of a weekly rest day and flexibility for compensation in lieu, I believe we will be taking the correct step. It will be a balanced and pragmatic step forward to improve the employment conditions for our FDWs. While some employers may respond to this decision with apprehension, we really have to ask ourselves what is the right thing to do.

In the course of our consultation, we have spoken to many employers with pressing needs for a FDW to care for their children, elderly or disabled dependents. Some have managed to provide rest days for their FDW.

For example, Mr Sulaiman Abdullah who stays in Jurong. His FDW, Ms Siti Mufidah, has been a big help to his family, caring for four children with two younger ones in pre-school. He recognised that Siti needed a day to herself for her own personal needs. He has better peace of mind knowing that she has a proper break and would be more motivated to continue caring for his children for the rest of the week. Mr Sulaiman told us that Siti has been using her rest days to attend courses and she can even teach his son English now.

Not everyone is ready to do this; so our regulations will provide the flexibility for employers to negotiate different arrangements with their FDW. But as our country develops economically – I think we have developed quite incredibly on that front – we should not cease to ask ourselves about the kind of society we want to build, about the kind of society that we want to live in. How would we ourselves want to be treated as employees, as workers?

We should strive to embody and uphold the right values to our children. Because I am not sure whether we are always aware that our children at home observe our behaviour every day, and they observe the way we talk to and the way we treat our foreign domestic workers. This will have an impact on their own value system and in the way they look at life, the way they look at people and the way they treat people. And we need to help our children learn how to treat our fellow men correctly. This is important because as a society, these are issues we need to address.

Eugene Tan
Nominated Member of Parliament

I would like to ask the Minister of State what are the plans to ensure that employers do observe the contractual arrangements. I think it will take some time for employers to internalise the value of the day-off for foreign domestic workers and the values that underline this treatment. But more importantly, in the meantime, we could expect some employers to not observe the contractual arrangements and the mandatory weekly day-off.

Tan Chuan-Jin

We have decided that we will kick this off in 2013. So effectively, we have nine months to get ourselves ready. What we would expect following this announcement are reactions and responses from society and various groups, and we would start raising awareness, to talk this through.

There will be employers, as we can see from the emails and feedback I have shared, that some employers will find it difficult and awkward because for the longest time they have been operating on a certain basis. But it is a mindset shift that we need to see happen.

It is probably a good thing to start discussing this because it is about how we ought to treat others, and how we should look after the people who are working for us and working with us, living with us. And while nine months, I agree, is not a very long time, but I think we expect to see good conversations taking place and hopefully, that in itself would help employers socialise themselves to get ready. But this is mandated by law.

Read the full transcripts here and here.

Parliament Primer: Should housewives get pensions and free MediShield?

The following is an excerpt of the debate on how to better support the needs of elderly women and healthcare concerns for Singaporean women, which took place during the Feb 28 and March 5-7 sittings of Parliament.

ELDERCARE

Grace Fu
Senior Minister of State for the Ministry of Information Communications and the Arts, and the Ministry of Environment and Water Resources; Member of Parliament for Yuhua; Chairman of the PAP Women’s Wing executive committee

For women who are caring for the elderly, the Budget to enhance the healthcare sector and additional subsidy for the healthcare of the elderly is welcomed by many. The significant increase in subsidy for nursing homecare, home-based care and monthly grant for foreign domestic helper provide assurance and relief to many Singaporeans who have elderly parents. It provides much emotional and physical support to the caregivers, many of whom are women.

For the older women, financial security is their biggest concern. The issue is that women tend to live longer, but have less savings for their retirement.

In general, Singapore women have a longer life expectancy than men. At age of 65 years, the retirement age, women can expect to live another 22 years (to 87 years old), four more years longer than men. In Singapore today, among the more elderly aged 85 years above, 7 out of 10 are women.

More elderly women live alone, as more remained unmarried, divorced or out-lived their spouses. The number of widows in Singapore is more than five times of widowers. Without the support of their spouses, the elderly women have to cope with their physical and financial needs on their own, especially those who do not have children to depend on.

Women have much lower average CPF balance. This is not surprising as women in the past tend to take up lower-paid jobs, had to leave for work to raise their families or may be full-time homemakers since their marriage.

I laud the budget for setting out a comprehensive package to support the elderly. It will benefit especially elderly women who do not have a safety net to fall back on. The increased healthcare subsidies and top-up to their Medisave accounts may not completely remove their financial burden. But with the enhancement in our social policies, such as a top-up to Medifund, it provides them with some assurance that they will not be left in a lurch when illness strikes.

The GST Voucher comprising cash, Medisave and U-save will give the older Singaporeans a peace of mind, knowing that the help will be permanently there and they can be assured that the Government and the society will give them the necessary assistance.

Lina Chiam
Singapore People’s Party’s Non-Constituency Member of Parliament

Older women in Singapore are a vulnerable group that needs more of our attention. Income security is a key concern for them. The economic development of Singapore was achieved in an incredibly short time – it means that older women today are less likely than their counterparts in the developed world to have gone to university. This has implications for their late-life employment.

Women are often the caregivers, not just of infants, but also of the elderly and the sick. Sometimes they are forced by circumstances to stop work in formal employment to devote themselves entirely to care-giving. Our retirement policies for this group of women seem to imply they are to depend on their husbands and children to support them in old age. But if they are unmarried, widowed, or have no children, there will be no one to care for them. Furthermore, women have longer life expectancies than men.

That is why I proposed the idea of pension credits in Singapore as an example of an instrument that may be more effective in protecting older women financially compared to labour market policies.

In countries like Sweden and Germany, pension credits or care-giver credits may be earned during time taken off from work for maternity leave or for the care of the elderly and the sick. These would be used to help women qualify for full pension and retirement benefits. There are various formulae to work out the exact benefits, but they usually take the woman’s last drawn salary and compute a supplement based on it for their pension accounts.

In Singapore, we may not want to adopt the idea of pension credits for women care-givers on a full scale. But currently no semblance of such scheme exists at all, and this is not sustainable. Otherwise, it is a contradiction that the Government encourages women to have more babies, but also expect them to remain in the workforce.

Other issues affecting older women also affect retirees in general, including men. Again, when compared to our counterparts in the developed world, the raising of our official retirement age has taken place at a faster pace.

The CPF should offer a higher contribution rates and interest rates at an earlier age, so that the effect of interest rates compounding will have a much larger impact on the individual retirement fund. If the concern is to better prepare Singaporeans for retirement, increasing CPF contribution when one reaches 50 may be too late.

If the aim is to increase contribution at all, the earlier the better. Increasing CPF contribution only at the age of 50 makes little policy or financial sense, especially at a time of their life when their salaries may actually start to dip. This leaves the older worker with less disposable income, at a vulnerable point of their lives in terms of health and for other potential costs.

Tharman Shanmugaratnam
Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Finance and Manpower, and Member of Parliament for Jurong GRC

The Silver Housing Bonus, in fact, will help older women significantly. For retiree couples where the husband had worked and the wife was either a homemaker or worked for short periods, moving from a 3- or 4-room flat to a studio apartment will provide a significant boost to their CPF LIFE payouts.

If the husband was a median income earner, let us say, which if you look at the wage profile of median income earners in the past, it was not very high. If the husband is a median income earner, his RA balances would typically have been slightly above half of the Minimum Sum. Therefore, when they take advantage of the Silver Housing Bonus Scheme, because his RA balances already above half of the Minimum Sum, he would be able to take substantial cash proceeds out, besides getting higher CPF LIFE payouts.

So they move to a smaller flat, put some money into the CPF to reach the Minimum Sum, but still a substantial amount of cash comes out, and they get significantly higher CPF LIFE payouts for the rest of their lives. So the husband and wife benefit.

The CPF also encourages – this is an important point – family support, particularly within the immediate family. For instance, the Minimum Sum Topping-Up scheme provides tax incentives for members who top up the CPF of their wives and mothers. The number of top-ups today is not large, but we are thinking of ways to improve and simplify the current schemes to encourage more top-ups.

However, this does not solve the problem for widowed homemakers with little savings, or poor elderly couples who do not own a home. For these groups, we must help them in other ways. Through ComCare, which we have expanded by providing rental flats, which MND is building more of; and by partnership with the community, which we are also doing more of and also finding more ways of supporting the community as it gets involved.

So that is a very important area of work for those whom the CPF scheme cannot serve their needs – widowed homemakers or those who are very poor and cannot afford a home, not a large group, but an important group – we have to find other ways to help them, and we will.

HEALTHCARE FOR WOMEN

David Ong
Member of Parliament for Jurong GRC

I would like to ask the MOH to help promote and encourage MediShield coverage for women aged 65 and above.

The number of working women in Singapore lags behind many countries. We have about 65 per cent women working here versus about 80 per cent in Norway. Hence, the number of women having little or no CPF is estimated to be easily about 30 per cent. Correspondingly, a majority of the 170,000 women aged 65 and above will have no MediShield coverage.

Sir, I would like to ask MOH if our current MediShield coverage is adequate, given the rise in medical and healthcare costs. Can the Ministry do more with its MediShield coverage for our Elite Seniors and senior women?

Gan Thiam Poh
Member of Parliament for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC

I would like to request that the Ministry considers providing free MediShield coverage to the lowest 20th percentile of Singapore citizens whose per capita income is about $750 and below, and to all homemakers looking after children up to the age of 17.

A serious illness can wipe out one’s Medisave and cash savings. Yet many poor families do not have any catastrophic medical insurance as they are struggling to meet more urgent daily expenses. Homemakers, children and the elderly are particularly vulnerable as they do not have incomes. Housewives sacrifice their earning opportunities to care for their children and the elderly at home. Yet, day in day out, they are doing work which, if monetised, is worth thousands of dollars a year.

In many single-income families, housewives tend to scrimp and save and overlook their own medical insurance. Senior citizens in the lowest income groups have to face many issues. If they are working, their pay may have already been cut as their job responsibilities are reduced. If they are already retired, they worry about making their savings stretch. Either way, insurance premiums would be higher and less affordable to them. Currently, the annual premiums for MediShield start from $33. I hope the Ministry would consider assisting them by helping to pay for their coverage.

I would like to seek a clarification pertaining to my suggestion on free MediShield coverage for the low-income group and homemakers. 92 per cent of Singaporeans are covered under MediShield. May I ask the Minister, what about the remaining 8 per cent? I suppose out of this 8 per cent, there will be those that come from the low-income group and this also includes the homemakers from this group. How will the Ministry ensure that it reaches out to these Singaporeans so as to encourage them to get insured, though there is a Medisave top-up?

Gan Kim Yong
Minister for Health, Government Whip, and Member of Parliament for Chua Chu Kang GRC

I am not sure free MediShield coverage is the best approach. Low-wage workers who qualify for the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme (WIS), can get an average of $1,000 in payouts, which is paid partly in cash and partly into their CPF accounts, including Medisave.

The total of the WIS payout into Medisave and the worker’s own Medisave contribution from his salary, is more than sufficient to pay for the MediShield premiums for himself, his non-working spouse and two children. For a 51-year old earning $1,500 per month, he would have a total Medisave contribution of $1,700 per year, compared to the total premiums of $516 for his whole family. This approach encourages self-sufficiency while supporting their basic healthcare needs, including premium payments for MediShield.

Out of the 8 per cent (ie, Singaporeans not covered under MediShield), a significant number of them may have good reasons why they opted out. We do not know the exact numbers because they do not tell us the reasons for opting out. Some of them would already have insurance coverage by their employers; some would have bought their own health insurance, so they do not see the need to continue with the MediShield. Not all the 8 per cent are from the low-income group.

But for the really low income and those with no income at all, rather than giving them free MediShield insurance, we have many other ways to help them. One way is through our Medifund, through subsidies directly from our health institutions, which can support them. Because for this low-income group, or if the whole family has no income or on public assistance, joining an insurance scheme may not be the most sensible thing for them. So it is better for us to provide direct intervention and subsidise them, and support them when they really need healthcare services.

Lily Neo
Member of Parliament for Tanjong Pagar GRC

I have always been an advocate of preventive healthcare, and I hope that we can do more on this area. For example, the chronic diseases which can prevent renal failures and stroke and early detection of breast cancer or pre-cancerous stage of the cervix that can prevent eventual death. Breast cancer is the commonest cancer for women and, in view of rising expectancy of age, could MOH step up the promotion in getting better participation of women in cancer screening in order to save lives?

Ellen Lee
Member of Parliament for Sembawang GRC

In the case of mammogram screening, there are conflicting views whether it does help to detect breast cancer. The current state of mammography is just too painful for women to bear, even for those who have the highest threshold of pain.

I believe that the Ministry is already having an uphill task persuading women to go for screening for all types of cancer. I ran a heavily subsidised mammogram screening project with eight other organisations for the past two years. The efforts we have put in have also not yielded the desired outcome. Fewer than 20,000 women in the age group of 50 to 69 who had not done screening before or were not screened for three years responded to our roadshows and mailers. Of these, a few were tested positive and sought treatment.

The Ministry launched the Integrated Screening Programme in 2008 to encourage and support screening for early detection and management of disease. How many women have responded positively to this programme? What were the rates of detection? Was there funding or subsidy for women who took part in this Programme? Is the programme ongoing and how could one enrol for it? If persuasion does not work, can the Ministry consider working out a scheme whereby women who reached 55 and have gone for certain screening would be allowed to buy medical insurance at half the premium payable?

Amy Khor
Minister of State for Health; Mayor of South West District; Deputy Government Whip; Member of Parliament for Hong Kah North SMC

I have asked HPB to convene a Women’s Health Advisory Committee, which I will chair, to improve screening and follow-up rates amongst women.

This Committee will help HPB plan and implement a holistic Women’s Health Programme, which will adopt a life-stage approach and seek to equip women of all ages with the necessary knowledge and skills to improve their health. In addition, we will build up a pool of women Health Ambassadors who focus on women’s health issues. We plan to launch this on Mother’s Day this year, and we target to reach out to one million women in Singapore, over three years.

Read the full transcripts here, here, here, and here.

Parliament Primer: Helping women find and keep jobs

The following is an excerpt of the debate on how to support women who want to re-enter or remain in the workforce, which took place during the Feb 28-29 and March 5 sittings of Parliament.

Ang Wei Neng
Member of Parliament for Jurong GRC

Many women who stopped work to take care of their families, would like to go back to work. The employment rate for women aged 25 years to 54 years old rose from 71.7 per cent in 2010 to 73 per cent last year. Apart from providing childcare support and flexi-work arrangements, we can certainly do more to help back-to-work women return to the workforce.

I would like to propose that the same Special Employment Credit (SEC) scheme be extended to employers who hire back-to-work women or ex-offenders. Companies can receive SEC for up to one year if the new hires are back-to-work women or ex-offenders.

Of course, the scheme needs only to cover those who are 50 years old and below. With this revision, we can tap on our latent pool of back-to-work women and ex-offenders to cover any shortfall in foreign workers that we currently need.

Lina Chiam
Singapore People’s Party’s Non-Constituency Member of Parliament

Compared to their counterparts in developed countries in the West, the labour participation of Singaporean women tends to fall much earlier in the course of their lifespan. And since the economic development of Singapore was achieved within a shorter and at a later point of time in history than most developed countries, it also means that older Singaporean women today are less likely than their counterparts to have gone to university. This has crucial implications for late-life employment.

All these point to the problem of income inadequacy for older women, especially when they are physically unable to work. They have longer life expectancies than men, but the assumption of our CPF policies is still that men are the main breadwinners in these families, and that CPF payouts for older women largely assume that they depend on their husbands – if they are even married in the first place.

Sadly, some of our younger women today may also face these concerns when they grow old. We still hear many complaints of wrongful dismissal of women from work when they are pregnant. This may be more an issue of employment practices, but CPF policy is integral here too. In developed countries like Sweden, for instance, women can get pension credits when they are on maternity leave, in recognition of their role as caregivers. This calls for a substantial re-think of the CPF model, to build a better social safety net for older women.

Grace Fu
Senior Minister of State for the Ministry of Information Communications and the Arts, and the Ministry of Environment and Water Resources; Member of Parliament for Yuhua; Chairman of the PAP Women’s Wing executive committee

Many of us here are familiar with house visits. We visit our constituents, from house to house, checking on their state of affair. Very often, we are greeted by a woman at the door. Typically, we greet each other and ask, “How are you?” For most of them, we get the standard reply, “I am fine.” “Ho bo?” “Ho!” After conducting house visits for several years, I have learnt not to take the reply for granted. I would look for non-verbal clues from the resident. Does she look at ease? Is she in good physical and mental health? Is her household reasonably furnished and maintained?

After these few years of doing house visits, there are several faces that had left a deep imprint in my mind.

The first, a young woman, not much older than a child herself, with a young child in toll. With a maturity far exceeding her age, she tells you of her desire to recover from her mistake in life choices made when she was younger. Having dropped out of school prematurely, she can only take on low-skilled jobs and therefore low-paying jobs. She is a tenant in the flat, paying a substantial part of her income as rent, as her father was not prepared to accommodate her. Her mother and siblings help from time to time but she relies largely on her pride to take life one day at a time.

The second face belongs to a woman in her 40s, timid and tentative. She tried to appear strong in front of her visitors but her sense of insecurity and unease was palpable. Her husband was retrenched recently and the family financial situation has been affected. She has not worked for many years. Her sister has been helping out but determined not to rely on her for much longer, she wants to support her two daughters who are studying in the polytechnic and secondary school. She is looking for a job that is near her home and allows her to get back early in the evening to cook for her children.

The third and final one belongs to a woman in her 50s. She is single, staying with her mother. Being the unmarried child, she assumes the caregiver role for her elderly mother who needs regular medical care. Her mother is ageing and increasingly unwilling to get out of the house for fear of falling. She has to assume most of the household chores, cook for the two of them, and accompany her mother to her medical appointments, which are getting more frequent and complex with multiple specialists in multiple hospitals.

Her face showed her fatigue and her worry. Her worry is not just one of short-term nature. Her worry is also for herself 20 years from now − who will look after her like she has done for her mother? With very little savings left for herself after her late father’s medical expenses and her mother’s expenses, she has very little left in her Medisave and her savings. Who will pay for her medical and retirement needs when she needs them most?

This year’s Budget will help the women that I have just described. Allow me to explain.

I am delighted that this Budget made specific mention about helping companies attract local workers and doing more to tap the latent pool of local manpower which is still available, including the homemakers. The Minister recognised that attracting these Singaporeans require a few changes. Jobs will have to be re-designed with the worker in mind. These jobs will also have to pay enough for the workers to join the company and stay with the company. In addition, companies will need to put in place more flexible working hours, shift system and work arrangements, including working from home.

This will be challenging to companies which do not now have the administrative capabilities to manage a more complex HR and payroll function. The Budget recognises these challenges. It has put forward SME Cash Grants and Productivity and Innovation Credit as schemes to help companies restructure. I hope that the schemes will be accessible to the SMEs and there will be help from the Government agencies to improve the HR capabilities across employers, across the entire system, including those in the people sector.

Single mothers will benefit from these changes in particular. Since they have to shoulder both work and family responsibilities on their own, many need a workplace that provides flexible work arrangements while bringing home a regular income.

For single working mothers with young children, their children will need affordable childcare service. Childcare support was enhanced in 2011 with the income ceiling raised from $1,800 to $3,500 per month. This Budget will provide further financial support for children from less well-off families. Baby Bonus, however, remained inaccessible to single mothers. As I was told by one single mother just last night: “Baby Bonus should be for the education and healthcare of the baby, and not to reward the parents for getting married”. A child-centric policy will help to level the starting point for her child.

Even as a more flexible working arrangement makes it more attractive for homemakers to return to work, their concerns will be the need for a conducive care environment for their children after school, and supporting their children’s development needs outside school. The best way to allay these fears and help women return to work is to support the after-school care system and to provide more opportunities for affordable enrichment programmes.

This Budget has proposed raising the income criteria for subsidies and financial assistance for pre-school centres, MOE schools and student care centres. While we encourage families to find employment to improve their family income, families sometimes find their financial assistance reduced as the mother returns to work. The move to raise qualifying household income criteria will cushion the impact and reduce the disincentive for the homemaker to return to work.

The young single mother would be pleased to know that she will get more financial support for the childcare arrangement of her child, more training opportunities and therefore better career options for herself. She will still have to cope with high rental as housing options remain limited for her. Baby Bonus continued to be inaccessible. The mother of two teenage girls will have a better chance of getting a job that meets her needs, more financial help in GST Voucher, and better financial and social support for her family, including better education and more opportunities for her children.

The single older woman will be pleased with the additional options of home-based care and domestic foreign helper for her elderly mother so that she can continue working and build up her retirement savings. She will also get additional financial help in the form of Medisave Top-up and GST voucher for her mother and herself with the peace of mind that the help will be there for many years.

What is noteworthy is that while this Budget has introduced many changes – permanent GST Vouchers, per capita income criteria, subsidy for home-based care, and so on – some basic principles remained unchanged. This Budget put in place a more robust framework to redistribute income so that the lower income segments of the society benefit more.

But it goes beyond redistribution. It is about helping people to help themselves, achieving self-reliance in the long run. Childcare for the single mom so that she can work and training opportunities for better paid jobs over time; improved employability and more flexible work arrangements, for the middle-aged mother and opportunities for her teenage children to better their lives through education; support to care for her elderly mother so that the older single woman can remain gainfully employed with peace of mind. Give them a leg-up, so that they can get back on their feet and be self-reliant again.

Family support remained the other important tenet of our social policies. It would be better for the single mother to stay with her family and for the elderly women to continue to be cared for at home with her other children chipping in to support her.

These basic tenets are important distinction between Singapore and other developed countries – that we, as families, assume the primary responsibility of caring for ourselves; that we retain a strong work ethic and desire to be self-reliant. Women in Singapore believe in these principles. They take pride in themselves, want to live independent lives, and take good care of their family. They will be reassured knowing that the Government and the society will provide support if and when they are unable to cope with life’s demands on their own.

Patrick Tay
Member of Parliament for Nee Soon GRC

TODAY carried a report of a lady being terminated after she discovered she was pregnant and informed her bosses. On wrongful dismissal complaints filed by pregnant women which had increased by 33% to 112 cases in 2011, more than nine in 10 of the women who filed complaints last year were sacked during pregnancy.

Furthermore, women, particularly PMEs, who leave the workforce for extended periods to look after their child or children also find it extremely difficult to return to their previous occupations.

My final area of concern is with regard to strengthening measures to help female PMEs cope better with the challenges of managing their careers and raising their families. The lack of family-friendly work practices and flexible work arrangements is forcing many women to delay starting their families or even worse give up their careers.

May I ask the Minister what more could be done to introduce a more conducive working environment for back-to-work women, in particular, female PMEs who wish to re-join the workforce after an extended period away from work? Without flexible work arrangements, it would be difficult to encourage our families to have more children. I am aware MCYS is aggressively developing our childcare services and providing support from various angles. However, we also need to get employers to provide better work-life balance as this is critical to support women with families.

Halimah Yacob
Minister of State for the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports; Member of Parliament for Jurong GRC

More mothers could now go to work or remain in the workforce knowing that their children will be taken care of. This continued focus on education and children’s development are important to ensure that social mobility continues to be, not only a hope but an achievable reality for our low-income Singaporeans. I dare say that many of us are here today in this Chamber because of social mobility. Although an MCYS survey shows that social mobility is still alive today, it also warned that we cannot expect the same level of mobility for subsequent cohorts.

Many women from our low-income and needy families want to work to earn an income to support their family or to supplement the family income. Quite a number are also single mothers and may be the sole breadwinners. They want to be self-reliant and avoid having to depend on the Government for social assistance. Despite our enhanced childcare subsidies, many of these women cannot work outside their home because they may not only have young children to take care of but also frail elderly parents. Some are also suffering from disabilities or other illnesses, which make it difficult for them to secure outside employment.

One way in which many of these women could earn an income is through running a home-based food-catering business. They love cooking, something which they have been doing for years for their own families. However, recently many had received warning letters from the NEA and they are worried and confused, and their source of income has been disrupted.

A couple of weeks ago, I was invited by Dewi, the women’s arm of the Singapore Malay Chamber of Commerce, which held a dialogue jointly organised with Berita Harian. This was a dialogue session which was attended by more than 300 women. The women strongly appealed to the Government to relax its rules prohibiting home kitchens. They were told to cook at central kitchens, which are commercial cooking facilities. But many cannot afford the rent and other related costs, and because of their caregiving responsibilities they cannot work outside their homes. So using a central kitchen is not a viable option for them.

The women understand and are mindful of NEA’s concerns over hygiene, safety and neighbours’ complaints. Therefore in their proposal, they had suggested various measures to address these concerns including even devising a contraption to absorb smoke, grease and smell from their cooking.

I would like to urge NEA to look into this proposal. The spirit of this Budget is to build an inclusive society and a stronger Singapore. It is in this context then that we should view the appeal from our needy women to allow them to operate home-based kitchens. Their main desire is to be self-reliant and to enjoy a steady stream of income doing something which they are really good at, which is cooking. Through this, many of them aspire and hope to build a better future for themselves and their children.

Still on the issue of women, Sir, I note our efforts to attract more women back to work through the Flexi Works! scheme and the WOW! Fund. Thousands of women have gone back to work under the NTUC’s Back to Work programme since it started in 2007. But these two schemes have been in place for a few years now, so it is timely to review and reassess how to make them even more effective and relevant to the needs of businesses and our women as feedback suggests that an overhaul is needed. Also, with the cutback on foreign manpower, non-working mothers will become a very valuable resource for employers to tap on and we could do more to facilitate their employment.

Fatimah Lateef
Member of Parliament for Marine Parade GRC

Surveys in Singapore have shown that gender ratio equality in workplaces is maintained at only the entry level. As we move up the corporate hierarchy, there are significantly lesser females than males. Women hold about 7 to 8 per cent of boardroom positions in listed companies in Singapore and we have only about 20 per cent women in Parliament.

Women continue to make much sacrifices − they drop out or go part-time in the workforce much earlier than men, what with their share of family responsibilities, child and aged parental care activities. They are the ones usually making career adjustments in a marriage and, in today’s context, may even have to delay marriage and parenthood over socio-economic considerations.

Women need flexibility in work timing, more home-based work and part-time work with childcare arrangements. In Singapore, there are now some 40 per cent of untapped women labour power. How can we make it attractive for them to come and join the workforce? How can we train them? When are our work places going to all be pro-children and child-centric? They can be the answer to our challenge to increase the productivity by 2 to 3 per cent per annum and to 30 per cent in a decade. We need to think out of the box in order to reap the benefit from this.

There are also the single-parent families, divorced and widowed women who need even more time and support and more help. What about women with children born out of wedlock who do not qualify for pro-family policies, baby bonuses, Child Development Account rebates, housing, and so no, and are frowned upon in society? So perhaps we need some tweaking to be done.

Even from the Fourth Periodic State report for Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) on 22 July 2011, there were recommendations for Singapore from CEDAW human rights experts to enhance our inclusivity in society. And some examples include: to incorporate the CEDAW Convention into Singapore’s domestic laws; to ratify the UN Protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children; and, to adopt legislation on sexual harassment at the workplace and schools, including sanctions, civil remedies and compensation for victims. There are quite a few others.

Tan Su Shan
Nominated Member of Parliament

In 2010, the numbers showed that 71.2 per cent of the women aged between 25 and 64 are working, up from 69.4 per cent in 2009. But for older women, aged 55 to 64, the figure is still very low at 43.4%. The good news – there is plenty of help available to help younger working women get back to work. From the Back To Work and Flexi-Work programmes started by government agencies, to websites like Careermums.com to Mums@work to the newly formed WEWAM, (it is a nice name! It stands for Women Empowered for Work and Mothering), there seems to be plenty of outreach programmes.

What this House and the Ministry perhaps should know is that there are also many women’s groups and associations who have stepped up to help. These groups tend to be sector based, and one such example, if I may, is the Financial Women’s Association, which have helped women in finance who lost their jobs during the Lehman crisis, find new jobs, and who are still championing the networking of women who wish to return back to work in the financial sector.

The Singapore Council of Women’s Association has also successfully pioneered the Women’s Register to mentor women needing help in the workplace. However, these many outreach programmes need support in order to succeed, especially to reaching out to the women who need help, and especially for older women who may not be that Internet savvy. These women’s groups are run by full-time working mothers like me who have limited time and resources and, hence, in order for them to be more effective, they need funding, administrative and execution support for their various initiatives.

They will also need some time and some help in advertising some of their good work that they can do, in order to reach out to a wider audience and in order to place more women in the right sector and in the right jobs. So, my suggestion is – may the Ministry provide some umbrella support to these various women’s groups and to help link women looking for job with the right association and the right channels that are already available?

Mary Liew
Nominated Member of Parliament

We still have a large proportion of women who are not working but are contributing meaningfully to their families. We noted that women with young children aged between 0 and 12 years old are more likely to quit the workforce to focus on the development of their children.

Unlike the developed countries like Sweden, Finland and Norway, we do not have a double hump for women’s participation in the labour force. Our women leave their jobs to take care of their children and many never return to the workplace and thus resulted in a single hump. The longer the women stay out of the workforce, the more challenging it will be for them to return. Most employers also become more reluctant to employ them. I think we should take the approach of prevention is better than cure.

As women become more educated and more are carving a niche for themselves in their careers, they find themselves hard pressed because of the lack of flexibility in how work is being done. If we are going to call ourselves an inclusive society, then women should be given the opportunity to work, have a family and be able to take care of their loved ones while still having a career with progression and decent pay. And the only way to do so is to ensure that we have a culture that supports flexi-work in our workplace.

Getting women back to work is not just providing a lactation room but also requires the support and the change of mindset of employers and fellow workers to provide the conducive and supportive environment so that our women can return to work and juggle their responsibilities, to have a work life balance without having to feel guilty that they could not perform their multiple roles well and ultimately they have no alternative but to quit their jobs.

We would like to see more support from the employers who are willing to offer flexi-work arrangements and are willing to do job re-design. Given that there is a tightening of foreign labour, I think this is the best time for us to really look at tapping on this available pool of women to encourage them to come back to the labour force.

Allow me to share the case of Joanne that the NTUC’s Women Back to Work Programme has helped. She is 40 years old and she has one eight-year-old child and a sickly father. She is a graduate working as a bank officer earning some $3,000 a month. Joanne quit her banking job in 2005 when she found that she had to juggle between her young daughter, who was 1 year old then, and her father who suffered a stroke.

In 2007, after nursing her father back to health, she decided to return to the workforce. After trying for a year, she was very disheartened that no employer was willing to consider her at all. Subsequently for Joanne, she came across the NTUC Women’s Development Secretariat (WDS) who worked with enlightened employers who were mindful of the gap. In October 2008, they finally secured a job for her with a financial company as a deals executive. Today, I am glad to say that she is still employed as a senior executive.

I believe that for every Joanne that we helped, there are many more out there needing support, especially our female PMEs. Besides the existing efforts that the Government has made, I would like to ask the Ministry to consider the following:
(i) being the largest employer to take the lead by creating more flexi-work for women in the public sector;
(ii) to consider some forms of incentive or tax relief to help women who do not rely on domestic help but very much dependent on nannies or their relatives for child care help and support. And I think this will also continue to encourage women to return to the workforce;
(iii) I support the call by Mr Ang Hin Kee to extend the Special Employment Credit to employers to recruit back-to-work women in the workforce.
(iv) to launch annually a nationwide Flexible Work Arrangement (FWA) Campaign to generate more awareness as well as to encourage companies to implement FWA in a more concerted way;
(v) besides offering flexi-works funding to companies, try to make it fit the process of claim user-friendly and also make it more attractive to tap on, with minimal restrictions and administrative procedures;
(vi) to adopt additional measures to support back-to-work PMEs who face greater obstacles compared to the rank and file women as opportunities are even more limited for them, including developing a database of both the employers and the back-to-work PMEs to support job matching efforts.

Last but not least, I would like to ask the Government to make every attempt to encourage our women to return to the workforce. They have gone through the different challenges in life and are mature and responsible. I am confident that most will be resilient to stand by their employers. Especially during the tough time when the company is facing crisis, you will see that women are like tea leaves — you will never know their strength until they are in hot water. We will be there for you.

Tan Chuan-Jin
Minister of State for the Ministry of National Development and the Ministry of Manpower; Member of Parliament for Marine Parade GRC

Mr Teo Siong Seng proposed waiving CPF contributions for employers who recruit home-makers for part-time work. Now, while this may lower the cost of hiring these workers, it will be, in their case, at the expense of their retirement adequacy because many of them would have very little CPF to begin with, because they have been out of work for a long time. Many home-makers actually choose not to rejoin the workforce largely because of a lack in suitable flexible working arrangements, or because they lack the confidence and skills to go back to work.

Hence, our approach is to both tackle the barriers to them re-entering the workforce as well as to give them the opportunity for skills upgrading through CET. As Members Mr Low Thia Khiang and Ms Mary Liew pointed out one of the first things that needs to be done is to promote flexible work arrangements. Flexi-Works! scheme and the Work-Life Works! (WoW!) Fund help companies do this. In 2010, 35 per cent of establishments offered at least one form of work-life arrangement to their employees, up from 25 per cent in 2007.

Despite the progress, there is still much that the Government and tripartite partners can do. During the Budget debate, Madam Halimah called for the review of our assistance schemes. Ms Mary Liew also asked if we could make these schemes more user-friendly and less restrictive.

So, together with our tripartite partners, we will review and improve Flexi-works!

Home-Fix is one company that has tapped on the Flexi-works! Scheme. They offer flexible work timings and permanent part-time arrangements which allows them to hire economically inactive persons such as housewives, who are then able to then balance work and care-giving responsibilities.

Ms Georgiana Francis is one such employee who managed to re-enter the workforce, even while she had a young child to care for, due to the permanent part-time arrangement offered by Home-Fix. Clearly, providing flexibility in working arrangements can attract economically inactive persons back to the workforce and allow workers to better manage both work and family responsibilities.

And as we begin to tighten the workforce in terms of the availability of the foreign workforce, I think this is one area which companies should seriously consider expanding so that we can look at bringing more of these people into the workforce.

Get the full transcripts here, here, here and here.

A lively debate at AWARE’s Budget Roundtable

Following AWARE’s call for an inclusive budget to support a caring society, we organised a Roundtable event on March 24 to discuss Budget 2012 in greater detail.

The discussion was attended by more than 60 members of the public, and featured the following speakers:

 

  • Economist Yeoh Lam Keong
  • Judy Wee, an advocate for rights for persons with disabilities
  • Teo You Yenn, sociologist and AWARE board member
  • Vivienne Wee, anthropologist and AWARE’s Research & Advocacy Director

The following are some excerpts of the topics that were discussed during this session.

HEALTHCARE  AND SOCIAL SAFETY NETS

Mr Yeoh Lam Keong pointed out that while Budget 2012 did a good job of improving on social policies, the initiatives announced remained “underwhelming” if assessed by the degree to which they begin to meet the needs of underprivileged people on a structured, ongoing basis.

For instance, healthcare expenditure is slated to increase from 1.4 percent of Singapore’s GDP to 2.1 percent. Mr Yeoh compared this figure to that of public healthcare expenditure in Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan, where healthcare took up 3 to 4 per cent of the GDP – six years ago. “That is more like what Singapore needs. We need to be more aggressive in this area.”

Another area of concern is the out-of-pocket expenditure taken on by individual citizens for their healthcare costs. In Singapore, this amounts to 55 per cent – again, a much higher figure than what citizens in many similar economies pay.

This can severely limit one’s access to the healthcare system, particularly for big-ticket items like recurring treatments for long-term chronic conditions. The Budget’s emphasis on infrastructure – increasing the number of hospital beds, for instance – does not satisfactorily address the problem of access.

Mr Yeoh urged the need to think beyond the current 3M (MediSave, MediShield, and MediFund) system.

“In the 1980s and ’90s, Singapore’s healthcare model shifted to a more market-based system, rather than one based on social needs. The burden shifted to individual savings and family responsibility,” he said.

This system is problematic. For example, MediSave contributions are based on income, which puts people like the self-employed and entrepreneurs at a disadvantage. To qualify for MediFund aid, applicants have to first exhaust their own assets and the assets of their immediate family, and the success rate of MediFund applications is not currently publicly available data.

Fundamentally, Mr Yeoh asserted, “access has to be universal. If you need care, you need care, whether you can afford it or not. Healthcare is a universal human right. Few democratic societies will tolerate a non-universal system when they can afford it.”

He pointed out that this universal financial access needed both higher state spending on healthcare as well as a more complete and compulsory risk pooling system to bring the private out-of-pocket share of health expenditure down to the 20 to 30 per cent range that is common in most advanced Asian countries today.

Mr Yeoh also commended the budget for making inclusive growth an important theme and for widening the social safety net with a raft of individually modest but collectively significant measures. However, here again the prime need of the underprivileged was not suffciently addresed in his view.

In particular,  the needs of the working poor remain unresolved. The bottom 10 per cent of working-age  households earned around $800 to $900 a month, compared to a bare subsistence need of around $1,200 to $1,500 estimated by the Department of Statistics or the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports for a 4-person household.

The main social support programme, the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS), only gives them $50 to $100 cash a month each employed person. This needs to be at least trebled to make a serious reduction in poverty in Singapore. While they received some help from programmes like ComCare, these were more designed for helping the unemployed rather than working families whose wages are just too low to support a decent living, and thus reaches only about 20 per cent of the roughly 100,000 households who need help.

EMPLOYMENT & CARE-GIVING

Dr Teo You Yenn noted that Budget 2012 contained several family-related initiatives. These include:

  • The formal introduction of a per-capita income ceiling for childcare subsidies, which makes more households eligible for these subsidies.
  • General orientation toward expanding the possibilities for women from low-income families to enter employment.

ComCare subsides for childcare, kindergarten and student care, Dr Teo stated, show a strong emphasis on work as a pre-condition. In general, the 2012 Budget is focused on enhancing the capacity and incentives for work. The desired objective is to increase the number of two-wage families.

Why might this a problem? If the current conditions of lack of flexible work and highly gendered and unequal division of labour are not addressed, then “housework and caregiving, already heavily entrenched as women’s work, are likely to be further devalued as peripheral parts of being parents” when care is further commodified.

It is also likely that women will take on a ‘second shift’ of caregiving and housework after coming home from work,” she said. “Women may be given greater access to work, but the valiant efforts directed at incentivizing work are not accompanied by similarly valiant efforts to alter the conditions of work, such as more flexible working hours. Public resources are devoted primarily to supporting women only insofar as they work.”

Instead of a “dual-income-and-second-shift” model, she urged the consideration of a dual-worker dual-caregiver model. “Parents have the right to give care and the right to meaningful family lives. We need public policy that allows for a meaningful range of behaviours and norms.”

Further, “access to childcare support should not be predicated on work. All children have the right to care”, she asserted. This is particularly important for addressing class inequalities and social mobility of children.

“The state has the capacity to alter behavior. It is important to change the conditions of work and home, and not be focused solely and narrowly on getting women into the workforce.

SUPPORT FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

Ms Judy Wee lauded Budget 2012’s aim to enhance Special Education (SPED) schools, but pointed out that it was even more important to help integrate students with disabilities into mainstream schools.

“Society does not behave like SPED schools, and it is currently very difficult for SPED students to go into mainstream employment,” she said. “In most SPED schools, students often do not complete their education like everyone else. This makes it harder to compete in employment and in society thereafter.” Whereever possible, students with special needs should be encouraged and supported to attend mainstream education.

In addition, ensuring the close proximity of SPED schools to mainstream schools will help facilitate the interaction of students from both types of schools. This will help SPED students to better integrate into society and abled students will have the opportunity to be familiar with others in society, she believed.

Ensuring that all primary and secondary schools are fully accessible  was also important – not only to students with disabilities but also for parents and grand-parents who may have limited mobility to be able to  participate in the schools’ events as well as teachers and students who may become sick or injured and who may have to rely on a wheelchair to move around .

Another urgently-needed measure: A database that clearly tracks the number of disabled persons in Singapore.  The current official estimate states that about 3 per cent of population are disabled persons. “How about the elderly who become disabled?,” asked Ms Wee. “Who are the disabled people in Singapore? If you can’t find them, you can’t help them.”

The most important thing that should underpin all the initiatives aimed at helping the disabled: Ask people with disabilities  what they need. “We need to participate in the decision-making, whether it relates to education, employment or quality of life. Empower  people with disabilities and get them involved .”

COMPARING AWARE’s RECOMMENDATIONS WITH ALLOCATIONS IN BUDGET 2012

Dr Vivienne Wee compared AWARE’s recommendations with allocations in Budget 2012. A matrix aligning AWARE’s recommendations with budgetary allocations, with citations of comments of Ministers and MPs, was distributed to all participants. (See the matrix and AWARE’s Budget recommendations here and here.)

Dr Wee raised questions about the people excluded in a budget that was supposed to be inclusive, such as the following:

  • Why is no attention paid to the fact that many women do not have enough Medisave?
  • How will women who stop paid employment or who take part-time jobs to care for the elderly be supported, if they cannot even afford to hire domestic workers in the first place? The monthly subsidy of $120 to help with the maid levy for families caring for an elderly member at home assumes that all carers are able to afford to hire domestic workers in the first place.
  • Why is financial assistance for those with low income targeted only at families with children of school-going ages? This excludes low-income singles, single mothers, couples without children and families without children of school-going ages.

The most noticeable gap relates to AWARE’s nine recommendations for widened access to subsidies for infant care and childcare, on which Budget 2012 was totally silent. “Why? What is implied by the silence?,” Dr Wee asked. What this silence means on a practical level is the continuing discrimination against certain groups in Singapore:

  1. Unwed mothers and stay-at-home mothers will still be discriminated against.
  2. Working mothers are favoured because they contribute to economic growth.
  3. Married mothers are favoured because they reinforce family ideology.
  4. Families have to provide infant care as their private solution to a private problem – too bad if they can’t afford alternatives other than staying at home.
  5. Whether employers establish childcare places or flexible working arrangements is up to them.
  6. Fathers do not need any leave to care for babies – neither two weeks nor one month. They do not / should be active parents.
  7. Childcare is women’s responsibility. Maternity leave must remain maternal.
  8. Single fathers with dependent children should not get same tax relief on the levy given to female employers of foreign domestic workers because these single fathers should be encouraged to remarry.

Dr Wee also questioned why we continue to lack reliable statistics on vulnerable groups in Singapore that are sufficiently detailed, consistent, regularly updated and disaggregated by sex, age and citizenship. For example, why was the Central Registry of Disabled Persons closed in 1987? This was, in any case, only a register of users of disability services. Why is there no full register of persons with disabilities? How can we be inclusive if we don’t even know who has to be included?

DISCUSSION

The animated discussion that followed raised many important points, including the following:

  • The dominant paradigm underlying healthcare financing in Singapore is, first, that health is a personal responsibility and, second, the family is the first line of support. But this is a flawed paradigm because it does not take into consideration the health implications of ageing, which cannot be consigned simply to the personal responsibility of elderly people, especially elderly women, who many not have the financial resources to pay for their healthcare.
  • Moreover, the paradigm assumes that the family is always able to pay for the healthcare needs of the elderly. Caregivers are in fact depleting their savings and earnings to care for elderly family members. A fundamental paradigm shift is needed if healthcare needs of the vulnerable are to be addressed.
  • There is a need to think about the 3M system because MediSave is derived from one’s own CPF (which is tied to employment, thereby leaving stay-at-home wives and other unemployed persons vulnerable) and MediShield premiums have to be paid by oneself, while MediFund is accessible only to the destitute.
  • It was noted that MediFund is designed to be difficult to access, as it is assumed that people would otherwise cheat the system. As a result, MediFund has become very inaccessible, especially to the vulnerable who tend to have lower education and no financial resources to speak of.
  • The question was raised about why Singapore cannot have compulsory health insurance. In response, it was noted that the dominant paradigm of making healthcare the responsibility of self and family implies that it is not the responsibility of the government. There is thus no compulsory health insurance as the government does not want to pay the premiums of those who cannot afford such insurance.
  • It was noted that in the healthcare system was more universal in the past. From the mid-1980s onwards, this was replaced by a more market-oriented system. However the healthcare market is highly asymmetric and cannot provide universal healthcare as a public good. This has to change so that there is universal access to healthcare.
  • But there is a lack of awareness of healthcare rights in society. As a result, instead of asking for a better public healthcare system, some people are asking for euthanasia – the right to die, because they cannot afford to stay alive.
  • There was a suggestion that there should be risk-pooling of the amounts that individuals have in Medisave. The total is sizeable yet individuals may not have enough in their separate accounts. Risk-pooling would enable probability distribution.
  • There is currently much anxiety among Singaporeans about not having enough financial resources for their old age and for their healthcare.
  • Hospitals are involved in debt collections of insolvent patients, instead of focusing on the provision of caring for their health.
  • The point was raised that a paradigm shift is also needed for social welfare, because the Many Helping Hands policy has led to the duplication of services and competition between them. But a blind spot prevents the MCYS from seeing these flaws of the system. Instead of seeing the ineffective redundancy, the eco-mapping approach that is used rates positively the high ratio of helpers to the needy person, without questioning whether this is the most appropriate and cost-effective response.
  • It was noted that in the 1960s and ’70s, the PAP legitimised itself as a provider of social security. But its more recent adoption of the economics of privatisation has caused it to abdicate its role of caring for the less fortunate. In the context of a world polarised by globalising forces, there is a need for governments to play a corrective role by helping to level an uneven playing field. Leaving the less fortunate to sink or swim by themselves carries the risk of letting society splinter apart of its own accord.
  • There was discussion about the various sources of income available to the Government that enable it to play a more supportive role for the vulnerable members of society.
  • With regards to persons with disabilities, it was suggested that research should be done on what wages they are getting.
  • A medical practitioner who has many patients who are elderly and disabled noted that lift upgrading is still not a priority in many HDB blocks.
  • It was noted that instead of trying to provide a supportive environment for persons with disabilities – for example, by enabling all schools to accept disabled pupils – the Government was taking a particularistic approach by over-investing in Special Education (SPED) schools.
  • On the other hand, the Singapore School For The Deaf in Mountbatten, which has been an established institution for almost five decades and which has long served as a centre for deaf culture, is going to be closed in 2016 by the Government with no reasons given to the deaf community.

The discussion made it clear that there is a need for sustained advocacy by civil society groups and greater responsiveness on the part of the state for building a truly inclusive Singapore.

Ultimately, participating in the decision-making process requires all under-represented and marginalized communities to take a more pro-active approach. As Dr Teo put it: “People who have the relevant expertise need to exert more consistent pressure on the government, and not just once every four years.”

The privilege of care and the right to rights

The following commentary was published in Today on March 16. Read the published version here.

By Dr Teo You Yenn & Dr Vivienne Wee

Since the announcement of mandatory weekly days-off for foreign domestic workers, the media have been abuzz with debate. Many have applauded the decision, but there have also been complaints that reveal a prejudice that domestic workers are different from “us.”

These negative reactions indicate an over-reliance on domestic workers to do the work that “we” are in fact responsible for. Second, they expose a fundamental lack of appreciation for international norms and indeed signed agreements between our state and other states regarding human/workers’ rights, and how these matter to “us.”

In a letter to the Straits Times, published online on March 9, 2011 (“Maid may have to do double the work the next day”), the writer asks without irony: “Who will do the chores and look after the children and the elderly when the maids are enjoying their days off?”

What does it take to pose this question? It takes a mindset that regards care of one’s own offspring as tedious, beneath oneself, and rightfully the responsibility of a hired woman. It misconstrues filial piety as a burden that has little to do with care as expressed in physical contact, and everything to do with contracting out what one doesn’t want to do.

The over-reliance on domestic workers has serious consequences for how we think about the care of those we love. First, when workers are too easily exploitable, they end up doing all the bathing, feeding, and other daily “chores.”

It is easy to mistake such activities as peripheral to love and relationships rather than seeing these as integral. As a result, the love of parents for children and the love of sons and daughters for elderly parents are truncated into intermittent acts of having family meals, shopping expeditions, visits to the doctor, with their daily needs reduced to matters fit only for the attention of “the maid.”

Caregiving requires knowledge. What annoys or upsets an old person, which foods are easier for them to swallow, what clothes they prefer to wear on what occasions—these are things we have to learn. How to get a child to sit still at mealtimes, how they like their hair washed, how to convince them to do their homework before going out to play—these require experience. These knowledge and experiences accumulate when we give care in ways beyond sitting down to that much-lauded family dinner.

Caregiving is work: that is true. But it is also a privilege, and we should not give it up so willingly just because we do not enjoy wiping our children’s bottoms or pushing wheelchairs around the block.

Beyond the issue of caregiving as privilege and the problematic eagerness to give it up, there are also international norms and conventions. We should be glad that Singapore society is mature enough to adhere to globally recognized norms about the rights of workers and human beings. These are rights that our state has signed up to uphold as a member of the international community, including the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

In July 2011, in their Concluding Comments, the CEDAW Committee at the United Nations urged the Singapore Government to “review and amend the existing labour legislation in order to apply to foreign domestic workers, or adopt new legislation ensuring that foreign domestic workers are entitled to adequate wages, decent working conditions, including a day off, benefits, and access to complaint and redress mechanisms.”

We talk a great deal about being “global” and standing by “international standards.” Integral to being member to the global community is to play by a set of ethical rules. In recent years, Singaporeans have made claims that we deserve expanded freedoms, equality and access to social goods. These are claims rendered legible and legitimate by human rights frameworks. We cannot make these claims selectively, without respect for other rights that are part of the package of ethical norms.

We should applaud the state’s actions in taking one step in recognizing the rights of foreign domestic workers. We should applaud it as proud members of a global community with shared norms about fairness and justice. When we do, we are recognizing that the compromised rights of various members of society are not just “their” problem but “ours.” The rights that protect them come from the same body of rights that protect us.

We should not give up our privileges, responsibilities, and hard-earned rights, for a few more hours of leisure on Sundays.

Teo You Yenn is a sociologist and Board member at AWARE. Vivienne Wee is an anthropologist and Research and Advocacy Director at AWARE.

Tackling human trafficking in Singapore

In February, the Inter-agency Taskforce on Trafficking in Persons sought public feedback on the proposed National Plan of Action, which will guide Singapore’s response to trafficking in persons (also known as TIP) from 2012-2015.
AWARE submitted our recommendations for tackling TIP, a significant transnational crime which exploits vulnerable victims. Singapore is an attractive hub of economic activity with high people flows, and seen as an attractive destination country by human trafficking syndicates.

 The following are some of our submitted recommendations. Read our full report here.

Produce an annual self-assessment report of Singapore’s efforts to combat TIP

This report should use international indicators on trafficking, so that Singapore’s national report will stand up to international scrutiny as a fair and balanced report.

Enhance data collection, statistical reporting and monitoring of TIP offences through developing of dashboard

  • This is fundamental for developing indicators, reporting mechanisms and documentation.
  • This portal of information should  be made transparent, and data should be disaggregated by various indicators useful for prevention work.

 Request for funding of TIP initiatives

  • AWARE proposes that the State set up a compensatory trust fund to aid victims of trafficking.
  • As trafficking is a cross-cutting issues which intersects both vertically and horizontally on other areas, it is best if each Ministry allocates at least 0.5 percent of its Total Budget to the trafficking cause for the next five years.
  • AWARE also proposes that the inter-agency task force on TIP be developed into a fully-functioning unit in due course.
  • Many needs will require funding from the Government if an effective National Action Plan on TIP is to be set up. These include supporting the direct service work of NGOs, to enhance trans-border collaborations, for intensive capacity building of many stakeholders, to conduct research and invest in rehabilitation schemes.
  • At the ASEAN level, State should initiate an ASEAN initiate towards trafficking. This can include the sharing of information on trafficking cases, especially to combat trafficking syndicates.

Study feasibility of accession to UN Palermo Protocol on TIP

  • AWARE urges the Government to play a bigger role, internationally, by ratifying the Palermo Protocol in its entirety.
  • We advocate for a committee – comprising lawyers from the AGC, private practice and NGOs – to be formed to review all laws that have some bearing on trafficking issues and to study how other countries amended existing laws to be in compliance with the Palermo Protocol.

Define sex and labour trafficking offences and indicators

  • AWARE is of the view that the definition of Trafficking as set out in the Palermo United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons (2000) should be wholly adopted by the Singapore Government in any legislation adopted in his country. This definition as stated at Article 3 of the Protocol is as follows:

“Trafficking in persons” shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs…”

Embark on comprehensive training curriculum for Government officials


  • This training is crucial and must be provided on a regular basis and continue indefinitely on an updated basis. We urge that the training programmes include gender, class, and the dynamics of the power relation between traffickers and victims.
  •  AWARE suggests that this training be provided for all government and non-government officials, including front-line officers across all departments; social workers; health workers; police; immigration officials; court officials; airline carriers; corporate members of the transport industries; media personnel; and airport staff.
  • AWARE envisages that such training should be specifically provided to foreign workers. This could be achieved by inserting a component on labour and sex trafficking in orientation workshops.

Conduct joint research studies

  • A commissioned study to investigate the management of front-line immigration services would be highly beneficial.
  • Research with other countries would be of considerable value, especially in the areas of training to identify good programmes and the efficacy of victim assistance programmes by various agencies.
  • Inter-governmental knowledge-sharing can be utilised particularly for the prevention of labour and sex trafficking purposes. For example, inter-departmental research could be undertaken into cross-border match-making agencies, re-entry schemes, and the interviewing mechanisms of victims.

Conduct TIP campaigns

  • Campaigns should be directed towards the education of trafficking issues, including detection, for members of the general public. Campaigns should work towards dissipating a culture of blame against victims of trafficking.

Strengthen case referral mechanism for potential victims and members of public


  • Trafficking is a trans-border issue. Case referral mechanisms will need to include an intelligence system that operates at both regional (ASEAN) and international levels. Such an intelligence system will function as an early detection system of potential TIP cases.
  • A well-coordinated, robust, tried and tested inter-government referral system should also include NGOs.
  • Education is key in a system of early detection and this should be directed at members of the general public, students, and workers in specific industries where there are higher chances of persons being trafficked, such as the construction and  entertainment industries.

Set up TIP national hotline

  • The training of the front-line staff is crucial for this, as their role would be to empathise and be also the early detectors.
  • We ask that this hotline be toll-free and widely advertised in Singapore and in neighbouring countries.
Strengthen investigation and prosecution processes

  • Without accepting the Palermo Protocol’s definition on trafficking as  the principle on which to develop investigation processes across  various ministries, any effort to strengthen investigation and prosecution processes will fall short as syndicates can easily remain free of prosecution.
  • There needs to be robust monitoring of all crime syndicates, recruiters and other guises for trafficking such as matchmaking agencies and labour recruitment agencies in Singapore and their counterparts in other countries.
  • Any investigation process can be subverted if there is no immunity programme to support the victim for her/his cooperation with investigations.
  • AWARE also urges that investigation processes can cover reduced prosecution charges if any accused person can cooperate well enough resulting in syndicate leaders and others further up the supply chain being caught for trafficking offences.
  • AWARE believes in the next five years it is important for police officers, immigration officers and NGOs to have constant dialogues in a safe environment of sharing and monitoring cases to seek systemic improvements in the following key areas – case management, case investigation, case prosecution, case protection for witness, case re-integration.

Fast track TIP cases

  • We presume that the fast tracking relates to both  expediting prosecution before the courts and urgent investigation of TIP cases in order to bring sufficient charges against a trafficker or a person in the trafficking chain. AWARE agrees with this approach for the following reasons:
    • The longer it takes to investigate, the harder it will to locate trafficker and those in the trafficking chain, since the traffickers will have begun to take precautions following the escape of the victim.
    • Accelerated efforts in advancing prosecution means that the victim does not have to contend with the stresses and anxiety of a long prosecution.
  • AWARE asks for additional resources to be set up specialized enforcement teams for sex and labour trafficking. It is also important to establish meaningful liaisons with the NGO community.
  • For processes to be efficient and sensitive, prosecutors and judges must be appropriately trained to avoid delays and unnecessary adjournments and to list the case in priority to other cases.

Set up specialized enforcement teams for sex and labour trafficking


  • There should be specially trained dedicated and cross-sectorial enforcement teams for sex and labour trafficking who are appropriately trained to investigate all possible fronts for trafficking ( including syndicates which operate under the guise of matchmaking agencies and maid recruitment agencies). This will lead to speedier intelligence gathering and prosecution.

Study setting up of joint databases across enforcement agencies



  •  Such a database should be used to generate meaningful and investigative research, and to link up with databases in other countries, in concerted investigative efforts of tracking syndicates.

Review legislations related to TIP



  • For the Palermo Protocol to be ratified, there are many local laws that need amendments. These include the Immigration Act, Women’s Charter, Penal Code, Children and Young Persons Act, Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, Employment Act and others.
  • We urge for a thorough review of existing laws for coherence and ask for a standalone Anti-Trafficking Act to be put in place. We draw attention to the UN Model Law Document on TIP to be used as a benchmark as it is a thorough piece of legislation from which local anti-trafficking laws can be adapted for adoption.
  • Cognizant of the challenges ahead in amending laws well enough for effective prosecution, AWARE would like to suggest that the accused can be charged cumulatively under the different Acts and bear the deterrent sentences consecutively.
  • We would also like to see civil redress being incorporated into the standalone Anti-Trafficking Act or into the amended laws. This money can then be used to help victims re-enter their countries and/or for re-integration programmes.
  • We would also like to see deterrent penalties for trafficking offences be substantially increased, in severity.
  • AWARE would also like to see a provision to freeze assets of suspects as investigations are ongoing so that movement of assets is severely limited.
Engage judiciary and prosecutors on severity of TIP offences and need for commensurate penalties and deterrent sentencing.
  • 


The Judiciary and prosecution should be trained on the economic model of trafficking, the pathway that trafficked victims take and the threats against victims. Training with such background will go a long way to help the judiciary and the prosecution understand the nature of trafficking, both for migrant workers and trafficked persons, as defined by the Palermo Protocol.
  • We also propose that the victim has access to compensatory relief from the perpetrator’s (trafficker’s) gains.
  • AWARE would also like to see the recovery of wealth and fines from traffickers be used to bolster access to legal aid for the victims.

Train enforcement officers in victim identification management

  • AWARE asks for consistency in the indicators to be used. These indicators must be used by all front-line officers whether they are from enforcement, immigration, social agencies.  We highlight that there are plenty of materials on this subject and AWARE will be happy to be of help, if needed, in this area. Since the indicators have to evolve into a common set and be based on the definition of the Palermo Protocol it is imperative that all stakeholders are involved in a dialogue process to negotiate on the indicators.
  • AWARE would also like to point out that a clear process based on an approach of being non-judgmental and compassionate towards victims need to be effected. This process must also lead into witness protection progamme where it applies in a manner that maintains the confidentiality of the victim, his/her narrative and the whereabouts.
  • As this is a complex business AWARE would like to urge that there is transparency wherever possible, without putting into jeopardy the delicate nature of these investigations and the safety of the victims.

Enhance victim care services including medical care, counselling services and translation services

  • Only when judgment is suspended and a greater sensitization is developed to the ‘push’ factors that bring many to our shores in hope, will there be seamlessness in the care programmes that we put in place between the Government and NGOs.
  • AWARE asks for resource support for NGOs to help victims. We also ask that Government funding comes with reasonable and sensible KPIs that take into account time for reflection – a key component in the rehabilitation of traumatised victims.
  • We also ask for government funds to be instituted to support victims in allowances for everyday living as they stay in the shelter and to sustain their families back home, if they turn into witnesses.
  • We call upon the Government urgently to bring in specialists to train counsellors, social workers and specialist staff from a special team within the Government, to be trained in handing victims of trafficking to reduce as much as possible the re-entry into the trade as sex workers or to leave as embittered individuals when they have been so violated.
  • AWARE asserts that the Witness Protection programme ought to offer opportunities for re-skilling of victims into new trades which will become a cost to the Government. We urge that the Government see this as a humanitarian gesture and our contribution to the global effort to prevent trafficking.

Facilitate re-entry and return of victims to home countries



  • For effective re-entry to take place, Singapore needs to enter into bilateral arrangements with countries. NGOs can execute in facilitating the re-entry of a victim into the country of origin. This call for a comprehensive partnership is preventive as many victims re-enter the trade when their families are threatened over debts or when they are threatened again. An approach through Crime offices of two countries can at least increase the responsibility for law enforcement officers on the ground.
  • A follow-up on the ‘returnee’ should be done once every six months over a course of two years, to track the pattern of re-integration and to check re-entry into countries of destination.
  • We urge the Government to support NGOs that run longer term rehabilitation and re-integration programmes so that we, in Singapore, are known for re-building people’s lives as we also send them home.

Review adequacy of shelters for TIP victims



  • We need to have a dedicated shelter for each type of victim under the Palermo Protocol –  victims of sex trafficking,  victims who were exploited as forced labour and yet another, in due course, for organ trafficking. Dedicated shelters means supporting resources with specialist skills, approaches that are rights-based and processes that emphasise the dignity of the victim.
  • Adequate funding and resources are needed for the shelters, rehabilitation centres, crisis centres and also to fund regular workshops to deepen understanding on trafficking for service providers and Government officials.
  • We also ask that guidelines be drawn up at State level in the following areas:
    •  maintaining the shelters as secular spaces – important as it is a multi-faith foreign community;
    • maintaining a credible  staff-victim ratio for impact work;
    • maintaining a level of  proficiency needed to be employed in shelter work of this nature
  • As the Palermo Protocol is ratified, Singapore also needs to set up a dedicated Council that functions as a coordinating unit, a governance centre, a training centre and one that sets direction together with all the stakeholders on trafficking matters.

Review provisions of legal assistance

  • There must a pool of dedicated and well-trained lawyers who will take up this work and be compensated for it to a certain extent. This can happen only when lawyers are incentivized to come into this field as a regular pool. Currently the same very small pool of lawyers is stretched in handling cases on a pro bono basis and it is not too fair on them.
  • We assert that training programmes are needed for the lawyers and trafficking and legislative matters must become part of the curriculum at the law faculties of the two Universities – NUS and SMU.

Review access to work facilitation and training for victims



  • There is potential for organisations and individuals in Singapore to conduct training in various skills for many of the women and men who have been trafficked.
  • We urge that a database be formed with the help of NGOs to identify the kind of jobs that victims can return to and we conduct training at the rehabilitation facility to equip victims with those relevant skills.

Engage enforcement agencies of source countries for joint-investigation and sharing of information


  • Regular regional and international dialogues are crucial as a platform to share knowledge.

Engage foreign countries in their experiences to combat TIP



  • We ask that stakeholders who need to get involved in trafficking include the AICHR and ACWC reps as well as key personnel from the trade unions and private sector.
  • We also suggest that lessons can be drawn from drug trafficking is combated as a trans-border issue to structure dialogues on TIP.
  • It will be important to have at least some mission visit to other countries to see how they handle trafficking.

Formalise engagement of stakeholders including NGOs, relevant organisations and other elements of civil  society

  •  AWARE welcomes a formal arrangement with an open door policy to include relevant stakeholders who will surface. We suggest that this be done in a collaborative way with NGOs for the Terms of Reference to be drawn up.
  • AWARE agrees with the Government in widening this network to also include non-direct service providers.
  • It is important to set up a Council for TIP and have a mix of Government and NGOs personnel staff this unit.

Work with NGOs in identifying TIP cases and victims

  • We urge restraint on the part of law enforcement officers if the direct service provider makes a call that the victim is not ready for police investigations. We appreciate the timeliness in gathering data but we support the need to also have the victim make his/her own choices.
Partner NGOs on outreach initiatives


  • AWARE believes that outreach programmes done both by government and NGOs will make a bigger impact on public psyche rather than one run by just NGOs.
  • Public outreach needs to take place also at country of origin with the help of our diplomatic missions and we need the information in many languages.
  • TIP needs to become a core curriculum topic in many disciplines at the university.

Engage businesses on corporate social responsibility for the prevention of TIP in supply chains



  • This is the most challenging area and that it cannot be adequately addressed without direct Government influence.  Corporates need to get engaged in this area and most are involved in foreign labour issues. We believe that it can be done with a campaign highlighting the best practices of certain countries and to also create a shame list of companies that have shown bad behaviour.

Participate actively in meetings, discussions and initiatives on TIP in UN, ASEAN and other international/regional

  •  AWARE has placed TIP in its Shadow CEDAW report for two years. MARUAH has also raised this issue through its Universal Periodic Review. Other NGOs working on migrant workers have also participated in both processes. So it is inevitable that both the Government and the NGOs will have to participate actively in a few multi-lateral platforms both at the regional and international level. We ask that these proceedings be made transparent and that there are consultations pre- and post such meetings.