Child Development Co-Savings (Amendment) Bill

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Madam, this Bill is a step in the right direction. It expands support to a wider group of working parents and promotes a more family-friendly working environment. The roles of working parents are already challenging in the best of times. Any support is even more welcomed in challenging times like the present pandemic. 

While I am supportive of the measures of this Bill, I sincerely hope we can amend this piece of legislation further and provide more support to more parents. I have three suggestions. 

My first suggestion is about leave benefits where to-be parents suffer a miscarriage. I am supportive of the move in this Bill to provide birth-linked leave and benefits to parents of stillborn children. This is a compassionate policy which recognises the need for these parents to recover both physically and emotionally.

Will the Ministry consider going further and reviewing its leave policies where a mother miscarries before the 28th week of pregnancy? 

While a stillborn child is defined as a child who is birthed after the 28th week of pregnancy, the event is no less traumatic for parents where a mother miscarries in the 27th week of pregnancy. 

Currently, these mothers are not eligible for maternity leave. MOM's guidance instead states that these others may take sick leave to recover. However, suffering a miscarriage is very different from coming down with the flu. It is also the mother who is entitled to sick leave to recover physically. The reality is that these parents, both mother and father, may require time to recover together. 

Will the Ministry consider taking a first step by providing partial reimbursements to employers who provide leave benefits to parents where a mother miscarries before the 28th week of pregnancy?  

Madam, I would also like to take this opportunity to ask the Ministry to look into two other important issues, which I will cover in my second and third suggestions.  

My second suggestion is on providing the cash component of the Baby Bonus for single unwed parents. I have spoken up about this many times over the years and it is time that we allow single unwed parents to qualify for the cash component of the Baby Bonus. 

This Bill extends support to parents, including working fathers, adoptive mothers on short-term employment contracts, retrenched parents and parents with stillborn children. 

Single unwed parents are also parents. In fact, if it is difficult to be a working parent, single unwed working parents have an even heavier burden of filling the shoes of both parental figures both emotionally and financially. 

The Government's stance towards single unwed parents has evolved and I am appreciative of this.

In 2019, then Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling, in response to my Adjournment Motion, said, "Single unwed parents and their children are valued citizens in our society, and like all parents, are respected for the love and care they provide for their children. They are no less a mother or a father, just because their child was born outside of marriage. Their children, like any other children in our society, are precious and every parent, regardless of their marital status, ought to be treated with respect. I acknowledge that in the past, the Government was fairly strict in limiting public housing access to married couples. However, over time, this position has evolved. For single unwed parents, we hope to facilitate their efforts to build a stable environment for their child."

Indeed, we have made much progress. We already provide them with the CDAC component of the Baby Bonus. We have leveled the playing field in terms of maternity leave. 

The cash component of the Baby Bonus will go a long way in helping single unwed parents build a stable environment for their children. This policy has to evolve too. This discrimination may lead to the odd position where millionaires may be getting cash from the Baby Bonus, cash they do not need. But single unwed parents do not receive the same benefits, even though they too are parents too and even though many of them are low-income, with those under 35 years old having just a median salary of $600.

Many single unwed parents need the cash component more than parents in dual-income families. They are not asking for more. They are asking to be treated fairly and equally. I sincerely hope that the Ministry will review this. 

My last point is on paternity leave. Members of this House will be no stranger to my daughters Ella, Katie and Poppy. Some Members tell me that they wait for me to say their names in my speeches. 

I have shared many of their stories in this House. All these stories come from the memories I have forged with them through time spent together, precious time, especially when they were little babies.

I took my paternity leave, treasured it and wished I had more time. My factory is closed so I would never get paternity leave again, as Ms Joan Pereira has said, when you have twins, you will never have more kids. But I know how important this leave is and I want to make sure fathers have previous time with their children. I have said this many times, "Spend time with those you love, one of these days, you will either say I wish I had or I am glad I did."

Study after study show that paternity leave is vital. Researchers at NUS looked into this and published their findings just a few months. "This is the first evidence-based research that documents the positive relationship between paternity leave provision and family dynamics and children's well-being in Singapore. It is useful to see that in addition to the immediate benefit for fathers to share the joy and responsibility of childcare when a child is born, leave-taking has a mid-to-long-term impact on children's and family's well-being and that a longer leave has greater benefits to the children's well-being."

They concluded that a two-week or longer paternity leave is significantly related to lower family conflict, maternal depression and mothers' parenting aggravation, and positively related to marital satisfaction and father-child closeness. In addition, children whose fathers took paternity leave have fewer behavioural problems.

These findings were similar to an IPS research paper in 2019 that found that fathers who took paternity leave experienced reduced conflicts, stronger family relationships and increased satisfaction in their marriage. 

Madam, we are calling for more paternity leave not just for fathers to have more time with their babies but also to fight the gender stereotype. What message do we send out when we give mothers 16 weeks of maternity leave and fathers two weeks of paternity leave? 

The IPS research paper stated that, "Family policies in Singapore continue to signal that childcare is a woman's responsibility and reinforce gender stereotypes." Indeed, they do.

 The policy recommendations put forth by the IPS study include extending the length of paternity leave and that instead of shared parenting leave, exclusive and non-transferable paternity leave can be put in place for parents. I wholeheartedly support this call and hope that we set a target year, perhaps 2030 or 2040, at which we will have an equal number of paternity leave and maternity leave.

We can introduce the increases to paternity leave in phases, giving our employers time to plan ahead, while also providing a clear signal of our intentions to reduce the gender stereotype around parenting. 

I hope Minister will look into this proposal in consultation with the relevant stakeholders, including the tripartite partners and NGOs, such as Families for Life and Centre for Fathering.

Madam, lastly, can Minister of State share if any public consultation was done for this Bill? If public consultation was not done, can Minister of State share the reasons why it was not done. 

Given the amendments has significant effects on many families and all employers, I am sure many would applaud the amendments in this Bill. 

 I am also equally sure that many would have constructive feedback that would have helped refine the Bill further. 

 Madam, this Bill is all about families and parenting. And we all need to remember the advice that Minister Vivian gave us, "Life is a one way ticket. A baby will only remain a baby for a very short time. They will grow up before we even realise it. The thing about life is we cannot rewind time. So my advice to young parents here is, your children need you, they need you desperately, and they need you only for a very very transient time in their lives. If we miss it, we cannot get it back." Madam, notwithstanding the above points, I stand in support of this Bill.

Ms Sun Xueling (The Minister of State for Social and Family Development): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. To all Members who have spoken on the Bill, I am grateful for your support of the Bill and the queries raised. Many of us continue to place emphasis on ensuring an environment that supports families. We are united in this effort. 

Many Members also recognised that it is a complex task to balance the many interests and considerations at hand when it comes to decisions on whether new policies should be introduced and if enhancements should be made to existing schemes. Some have alluded to the many factors at play and I am glad that they appreciate the balance the Government must strike. We have to safeguard taxpayers' monies and allocate as fairly as we can, knowing that any policy decision made has an indelible impact across multiple stakeholders. Let me touch on the points raised in turn. 

Members, such as Ms Carrie Tan, Ms Yeo Wan Ling, Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin, Mr Louis Ng, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Desmond Choo, have suggested that more could be done for single unwed parents. I respect their views and I thank Member Louis Ng for sharing what I had said in Parliament before. Over the years, all Government benefits that support the care-giving, growth and development of children have been equalised. 

I had highlighted in my opening speech the suite of measures that all Singaporean children can access. These include subsidies in healthcare, education, childcare and infant care, as well as the MediSave Grant for Newborns, MediShield Life coverage from birth and the Foreign Domestic Worker Levy Concession. In 2016, we further extended the Child Development Account (CDA) to children of single unwed parents, which includes the CDA First Step Grant and matched co-savings from the Government. In 2017, we extended support to unwed mothers for maternity leave under the CDCA. For unwed fathers who are the main care-givers of their children, MSF also evaluates their requests for paternity leave on a case-by-case basis.

Members have also raised that more benefits could be extended to single unwed parents. Single unwed parents who require further help can approach our Social Service Offices and Family Service Centres.

For other benefits, such as the Baby Bonus Cash Gift and parenthood-related tax benefits, these continue to be targeted to encourage parenthood within marriage. We acknowledge Members' concerns about single unwed parents and we will do what we can to support them based on their needs. I also hope to assure Members that, together with other agencies, we regularly review how we can better support them.

For single unwed parents who require further support, they can also look to the SPIN programme, S-P-I-N, which can help improve their access to information and resources.

Ms Carrie Tan shared that there was a need to look into better enforcement of child support payments so as to reiterate that accountability to a child is independent of marital status. The Member will be happy to note that the duty of a parent to maintain his or her child is already provided for under the Women's Charter, regardless whether the child is legitimate or illegitimate. Unwed mothers are, therefore, already able to apply to the Court for maintenance of a child from the father.

Ms Carrie Tan and Mr Gan Thiam Poh also shared that some low-income parents may not be able to fully maximise the co-matching feature of the CDA. This feature first requires parents to deposit into the CDA to receive Government co-matching, which may be challenging for some low-income parents who may not have the means to set aside enough to save into the CDA. In 2016, we introduced the CDA First Step Grant, which is a $3,000 deposit when the CDA is opened, without parents having to save first. This is granted to all Singaporean children, regardless of their parents' marital or income status. I am glad that some community partners have also stepped forward to help families save more into the CDA by making deposits into the accounts of children from low-income families. These contributions will qualify for Government co-matching and we encourage them to continue to do so. 

The Government also provides ad-hoc top-ups to the CDA. For example, as part of the Household Support Package announced at Budget this year, all Singaporean children aged six and under in 2021 will receive a $200 top-up to their CDA from September this year. The CDA remains open for 12 years. Therefore, parents have a substantial amount of time to deposit money into the CDA to maximise the co-matching caps and should plan to do so at their own pace.

Assoc Prof Jamus Lim has asked why there are no legislative provisions to clearly set out the interest rates that apply to the CDA. We welcome his wholehearted endorsement of the CPF and its very generous, risk-free returns.

The CDA's interest rates are determined by banks but have, generally, been higher than a normal savings account. On top of this, despite the CDA being a bank account, the Government provides co-matching. Monies in the CDA are intended to support the child's growth and development during their early years, in contrast to the CPF, which helps support Singaporeans in their retirement years. And parents are able to withdraw from the CDA, as needed, to defray educational and healthcare expenses at approved institutions, as compared to the CPF.

There are dedicated schemes that low-income families can turn to, if they need social assistance and such families can approach our Social Service Offices (SSOs), which stand ready to render help. Our SSOs will assess their households' needs and circumstances and provide assistance accordingly. For instance, families who require support with their basic living expenses can receive ComCare financial assistance if they meet the criteria, and SSOs may also refer families to other Government agencies and community partners, such as Family Service Centres, for further support.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked that we consider waiving the employment criterion for Leave and Benefits schemes, in consideration of stay-at-home parents. For example, a cash grant could be given to a stay-at-home parent. The Leave and Benefits schemes are meant to support working parents in managing their work and care-giving responsibilities, without having to leave the workforce.

Nonetheless, we value the contributions of stay-at-home parents, as they too play a fundamental role in nurturing the next generation of Singaporeans. As such, we have put in place other support schemes that Singaporean children and their families can receive regardless of their parents' working status, including the Baby Bonus Scheme, the MediSave Grant for Newborns and the Foreign Domestic Worker Levy Concession. 

One of the Government's key priorities is to ensure that parents have access to quality and affordable pre-schools for their children. To this end, we have significantly increased the number of full-day places, from about 120,000 in 2015 to around 190,000 today, an increase of over 50%. To answer Mr Yip Hon Weng's query, in spite of the COVID-19 situation, we are on track to grow the number of full-day places to over 200,000 by 2023. 

Mr Yip Hon Weng also asked about the accessibility of pre-school places for parents who have switched to hybrid or remote working. Today, almost 70% of all childcare centres and over 95% of Anchor Operator childcare centres are located in residential estates, as families have generally expressed a preference for childcare services close to their homes. 

Going forward, we will continue to build more pre-school places in tandem with upcoming HDB developments where there are more new families. ECDA closely monitors local pre-school enrolment and availability, and regularly reviews its plans. Should local demand shift and exceed earlier expectations, ECDA would work with pre-schools and HDB to look into activating more void deck and communal spaces for centre extensions, where available.

Members such as Ms Carrie Tan, Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin and Mr Yip Hon Weng have asked for clarity on the application process and how claims and payouts under the Government-Paid Leave Schemes and Benefits are assessed. In particular, Ms Carrie Tan and Mr Saktiandi Supaat have asked how self-employed persons' leave claims are assessed. 

Let me first address Mr Saktiandi Supaat's query on how we define self-employed persons, which relates to how we assess their claims. Broadly, a self-employed man or woman is a resident of Singapore who engages in or carries on any trade, business, profession or vocation other than employment under a contract of service and derives income from such trade, business, profession or vocation. Freelancers and gig workers fall within this definition, as do delivery drivers.

To be clear, self-employed persons can qualify for payment under either the Leave or Benefits schemes. Their employment arrangement is the one that will determine which scheme they qualify under.  

To Ms Carrie Tan's queries on how self-employed parents' leave claims are assessed, and Mr Yip Hon Weng's query on whether the application and approval processes are automated, let me illustrate with an example. Self-employed mothers can submit maternity leave claims at MSF's "profamilyleave" website. They have to provide basic information, such as their personal particulars and their child's, as well as their occupation and period of inactivity from work. To avoid over-burdening applicants, we require only critical information to enable assessment. In most cases, they do not need to submit documents at this point of application but are required to declare that the information provided is accurate. We have automated the process, as much as possible. 

We will verify against available data in the Government database that the eligibility criteria are met, for example, that the applicant's child is a Singapore citizen. If eligible, the applicant will be entitled to payment from the Government for the Government-paid portion of leave, based on one's lost income as capped by the limits set out in legislation. In determining the amount, we will look at the relevant Notice of Assessment, which is prescribed in the subsidiary legislation. For self-employed parents without a Notice of Assessment, I can assure Members that MSF will consider other documents which can serve as proof of income to facilitate our assessment. These could include bank statements, contracts for services or invoices. 

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked about the application process for the new Government-Paid Paternity Benefit (GPPB) and the Government-Paid Adoption Benefit (GPAB) schemes. Mr Saktiandi Supaat also asked about the application process for parents who have been retrenched but have unconsumed leave and want to apply for a benefits top-up. 

Generally, the application process is similar to an application under the existing Government-Paid Maternity Benefits scheme, which is done at MSF's "profamilyleave" website. Parents will need to submit all their employment contracts for the period of 12 months immediately preceding their child's date of birth or eligibility date for an adopted child and their payslips for the employments or the latest Notice of Assessment. They will also need to submit the retrenchment letter. The amount that a parent receives will be derived from the average income earned over the 12 months preceding the child's date of birth or eligibility date for an adopted child. 

For parents who require more details and fellow Members who meet residents with these queries, I encourage you to visit the "profamilyleave" website, which has information on the eligibility criteria, application procedures and payment for the various schemes. MSF is also happy to render assistance to parents who require help in navigating the process. 

Mr Gam Thiam Poh raised a good point that we do not want self-employed persons to be left out. I hope that my explanation will re-assure working parents who are self-employed, that they too should apply for the Leave and Benefits schemes. 

To Mr Gan Thiam Poh's point that the amounts reimbursed to employers or paid out in the form of benefits may vary from person to person, this is correct. For employees on the leave schemes, they will continue to receive their salaries for the duration of their leave and for the Government-paid portion, this would be subject to the reimbursement caps. For those who do not qualify for leave but are eligible for the benefits schemes, they will receive a payout from the Government equivalent to the Government-paid portion of leave, pro-rated based on their economic activity in the 12 months preceding the child's date of birth, or the eligibility date for an adopted child. 

The more a parent has worked in the 12 months before the birth of the child or eligibility date for an adopted child, the more benefits he or she will be eligible for. Our Leave and Benefits schemes are intended to support bona fide working parents and therefore, the support granted will differ based on the parent's employment arrangement and economic activity. 

Mr Gan Thiam Poh has also requested for additional data on the various schemes. While having more data-points will bolster our understanding of family needs, as a general principle, MSF does not require information for claims and applications above and beyond what is necessary to determine eligibility and entitlement. This avoids burdening employers and working parents excessively. For instance, household income is not needed to determine the quantum of Baby Bonus benefits, as the scheme does not vary with income. Likewise, we also do not require parents to submit information about the number of children they have when processing claims for Leave and Benefits schemes that do not vary with the birth order. Parents also need not submit information on other grants that they have received.

In this regard, we seek the Member's understanding that we must balance the need for policy review with making our claim and application processes citizen-centric and efficient.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat requested for the GPPB and GPAB application date of 1 December 2021 to be brought forward. I seek the Member's understanding that we require time to make the necessary amendments to subsidiary legislation and to also enhance the IT system to support the schemes.  

Ms Yeo Wan Ling has suggested a review of current schemes to better reflect the principle of shared parental duties, such as through the extension of Working Mother's Child Relief (WMCR) and Grandparent Care-giver Relief (GCR) to fathers. These schemes aim to encourage married women to continue working after childbirth, rather than provide general assistance to families. Families can benefit from other parenthood-related tax benefits, such as Qualifying Child Relief (QCR) and Parenthood Tax Rebate (PTR). She also suggested that exclusive, non-transferrable parental leave be equalised between mothers and fathers. 

Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin stated that more exclusive paternity leave would be a strong signal, so that couples do not have to make tough decisions. Mr Louis Ng has also asked for a phased increase of paternity leave. We know that children benefit from having involved fathers who are committed to their growth and development. Today, fathers can already benefit from a series of leave enhancements made over the years.

Most recently, in 2017, we made the second week of paternity leave mandatory and shared parental leave was extended from one to four weeks. In total, fathers may take up to eight weeks of leave in the child’s first year, which they can use to spend time with both mother and child.

Active fatherhood is on the rise. Over the years, paternity leave take-up has increased markedly. In 2013, only 25% of fathers took up paternity leave. In 2019, the proportion has increased to a healthy 55%. The introduction of GPPB is also a recognition of the Government's support for fathers who may be in less conventional working arrangements.  

Despite these improvements, there is still some way to go. I encourage more fathers to take their leave, but in order for fathers to do so, mindsets will have to shift and this can only happen over time.

One key contributor is whether fathers feel supported in the workplace and I encourage employers to implement more family-friendly practices like flexible working arrangements. I assure Mr Louis Ng that MSF is often in close consultation with our community partners, such as the Families for Life or the Centre for Fathering, which drives the Dads for Life movement to encourage active fathering. MSF takes the building of strong marriages and families seriously. We will continue to push through this effort with our partners. 

Mr Louis Ng and Mr Yip Hon Weng have asked for leave to be extended to couples who suffer miscarriages, as they will need to recover. Mr Louis Ng, in particular, suggested that the Government could extend partial reimbursement to employers who provide leave benefits to couples who have a miscarriage. 

I understand the Members' concern, as miscarriages are unfortunate events. Today, working mothers who need to recuperate after a miscarriage are given medical leave. These working mothers can also use their annual leave and some companies may also offer compassionate leave.  

The Bill takes reference from the Registration of Births and Deaths Act (RBDA), in defining a stillbirth as one occurring after the 28th week of pregnancy. As the Member is aware, the new RBDA was recently passed in Parliament. A stillborn child is now defined to mean a child delivered after the 22nd week of pregnancy. When the new RBDA comes into effect, the CDCA will also take on this interpretation. Parents will become eligible for birth-linked leave and benefits if their child is stillborn after the 22nd week of pregnancy.

I agree with Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Yip Hon Weng, that families require further support as they recover physically and emotionally from the loss of a child, whether through a stillbirth or a miscarriage. We encourage families in need to seek help. Families may also approach Family Service Centres for support on socio-emotional issues.

Assoc Prof Jamus Lim has asked whether shared parental leave could be extended to fathers who have also experienced a stillbirth. I thank the Member for sharing his stories and my heart goes out to him and his family.

I would like to clarify that shared parental leave will be extended to these fathers if their wives have elected to share the leave. They will also be entitled to paternity leave and GPPB.

To the Member's query as to whether an adoptive father qualifies for leave and benefits, currently, paternity leave applies to both biological and adoptive fathers. Adoptive fathers will also qualify for the new GPPB scheme.

Assoc Prof Jamus Lim also suggested that more leave could be extended to parents who have stillbirths above and beyond the current maternity leave provisions. Some companies may also offer compassionate leave over and beyond these entitlements.

Ms Joan Pereira has also called for additional leave for parents with multiple births, as they may face increased care-giving responsibilities. Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked that we consider giving parents a full flexibility to share parental leave. While more leave that could be flexibly used could be useful, Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin has rightly pointed out that there are associated costs in implementing family-friendly practices and a practical approach must be taken, and we have to be mindful that we do not inadvertently affect parents' employability if they are absent from work for an extended period of time.

Employers face manpower and operational demands and these must be calibrated alongside the need to support working parents. But I would like to reassure Members that I know where they are coming from and I do know that they want to support parents as much as they can. Any increase in leave provisions, however, will have to be considered carefully, especially in periods of business uncertainty. 

I agree with Ms Joan Pereira that flexibility and mutual understanding between employer and employee are key. Flexible workplace arrangements (FWAs), which contribute to a family-friendly work environment are more sustainable and can be tailored to a parent's own needs.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat suggested that more could be done to reward companies that are pro-family. Today, the Tripartite Standards on FWAs, on Work-Life Harmony and on Unpaid Leave for Unexpected Care Needs recognise progressive companies that support their employees, including those with care-giving responsibilities, to manage both their work and personal needs. Employers who adopt these Standards can use the Tripartite Standard (TS) Logo to distinguish themselves as employers of choice. COVID-19 has also helped create momentum for the use of FWAs, as companies realised that FWAs could be implemented effectively and efficiently as we transition into the new normal. We encourage more employers to come on board and the Government will work with Tripartite Partners to look into other ways to have FWAs become a norm at workplaces. 

As to the Member's suggestion on introducing grants or funding schemes to employers who have demonstrated their commitment to fostering family-friendly workplaces in Singapore, we thank you for your suggestion and we will review this further.

Mr Louis Ng has also asked if a public consultation was done for this Bill and to share the reasons why it was not done given that many could have given constructive feedback to refine the Bill. I would like to share that there was no public consultation with respect to the Bill specifically and there are two reasons for this.

First, the process of consultation is not a one-off event. Many Members today have given their feedback on the various schemes under the purview of the CDCA over the years, both formally and informally. We have also debated vigorously on the merits of various support schemes that families can access. In addition, we have regular touchpoints with parents and employers through our community partners and Tripartite Partners. I assure the Member that we have always adopted a listening posture and are receptive to feedback. The Bill is therefore a culmination of many feedback cycles, instead of a single consultation. 

Second, most will benefit from this round of amendments. This is the result of the Government stepping up to provide additional support that accrues directly to parents and employers. 

Mr Yip Hon Weng raised a question that is close to my heart. How do we measure the success of our efforts to create a Singapore that is Made for Families? Statistics like the take-up rate of various leave schemes, though useful, provide a limited understanding of the daily lives of families and their needs. I can assure the Member that this question preoccupies our minds and MSF, together with the National Population and Talent Division (NPTD), will strive to continue to keep our ear to the ground. Members may be aware that as part of the Emerging Stronger Conversations, Minister Indranee Rajah and myself have been leading a series of conversations since April with individuals to better understand their experiences and thoughts on getting married and raising families. 

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the current amendments to the Child Development Co-Savings Act are but one step in our endeavour to support marriage and parenthood in Singapore. This is an iterative process and I am heartened by the many views shared by my colleagues; and there are also other on-going reviews related to the conversations on Singapore Women's Development that the Government is leading and I look forward to sharing more in due course.

I thank Members for their various suggestions and inputs. The schemes under the CDCA, be it the various Leave and Benefits schemes, or the CDA, are essential in supporting working parents. However, they do not and should not function in isolation. A tapestry of measures and policies must be woven to ensure that families in Singapore are well supported in their children's growth and development. This will only be possible with the help of our immediate and extended families, employers and community partners.

MSF will continue to do our best to ensure that our policies build a better future for Singapore, anchored by strong families. With that, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. 

Source: Hansard