Parliament sitting 7 July 2026

Parliament 15, Session 1, Volume 96, Sitting No 32
Sitting date: 2026-07-07

Fifteenth Parliament, First Session, Volume 96, Sitting No 32 — Tuesday, 7 July 2026. The House met at 10:30 AM.

Oral Answers to Questions

[Oral Q1]

Mr Darryl David asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs regarding the 14 online social media posts which seemingly targeted the Indian community and undermined Singapore's multiculturalism (a) whether investigations have revealed the posts to be a coordinated and deliberate effort by any particular agency or organisation; and (b) if so, what action has been or will be taken against such agency or organisation.

The Minister of State for Home Affairs (Mr Goh Pei Ming) (for the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, with your permission, my response will cover oral Question Nos 1 and 2 on today's Order Paper, and will also address a related question filed by Ms Hany Soh for a later Sitting. If the Member is satisfied with the response, she may wish to withdraw the question after this session.

Mr Speaker: Please proceed.

Mr Goh Pei Ming: Thank you. There is currently no evidence to suggest that this is a coordinated campaign by any particular government or organisation. Investigations revealed that the content likely originated from a China-based platform, and was subsequently carried on other platforms and websites, including those in our local information space.

The posts attempted to sow discord by inciting ill-will against our Indian community and sought to undermine Singapore's model of multiculturalism. The content was assessed to constitute an offence of knowingly promoting feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different groups on grounds of race and doing acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony in Singapore under section 298A(a) of the Penal Code. The Government has issued Disabling Directions under the Online Criminal Harms Act (OCHA) to block access by Singapore users to the 14 online social media posts.

In recent years, there has been an increase in artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled and inauthentic content on a range of topics which has seeped into Singapore's online infospace. We monitor the infospace closely and will not hesitate to take measures if it is in Singapore's interests.

The Government regularly reviews our laws to ensure that they are updated and fit for purpose to deal with the evolving landscape.

Aside from the legislative measures, building up a discerning and resilient populace against external influences is equally important. The Ministry of Defence drives National Education and Total Defence to build a shared understanding of Singapore's foundational values and principles to deepen our public's sense of identity and nationhood, and to strengthen awareness of and collective resolve against threats that may undermine social cohesion and resilience, including foreign interference. The SG101 website is a one-stop Government site that consolidates educational resources on foreign interference, as well as Singapore's positions on sensitive issues to help the public better understand our national positions and to stay resilient against attempts to divide us.

The National Library Board works to cultivate critical reading as a foundational skill and to engage the public through its Source, Understand, Research, and Evaluate (S.U.R.E) programme, and this equips our citizens with the skills to verify and fact-check online content.

In addition, we regularly conduct briefings, dialogues and workshops to raise awareness of foreign interference amongst groups including our public servants, national servicemen and students. The Ministry of Home Affairs also rolled out a campaign in 2025 on the use of deepfake videos, AI-generated content and other inauthentic online posts to influence overseas jurisdictions to alert Singaporeans to this threat. This effort will continue, so as to raise awareness of the role that our Singaporeans can play.

Ultimately, a discerning population is the most important defence against attempts to influence or divide our society. We urge Singaporeans to be discerning when consuming and disseminating information online, and to reject all attempts to divide our society.

We take a serious view of threats to our social cohesion and racial harmony, including external actors, and will act resolutely against them.

[Oral Q2]

Dr Neo Kok Beng asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs in view of the Disabling Directions recently issued to block online posts targeting the Indian community (a) whether the Ministry will consider reviewing the current national framework and tools to counteract such external influences; and (b) what upcoming programmes or initiatives are being planned to equip residents with the competencies to discern such negative external influences, whether individually or through community efforts.

Answered jointly with Q1 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq1, which covers both Question Nos 1 and 2 together as delivered by Mr Goh Pei Ming.

[Supplementary]

Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Speaker, Sir, just have two supplementary questions. While it is heartening to know that there have been no evidence of external influence in this case, I would like to ask if the Government does indeed keep track of possible cases that fuel the possible coordinated efforts of organisations and agencies that may not be made so public and if so, are such cases on the rise? The second question would be, if these cases show evidence also of the influence of state actors, what actions would our Government typically take?

Mr Goh Pei Ming: I would like to thank the Member for his questions. Specifically, like I said in my response earlier, we have noticed an increase in the number of such posts, especially given the use of AI enabling the creation of such posts. So, we do see an increase and we do track very carefully every single case, including investigating whether there are possibly state actors behind the posts.

Some of this information, we may not find that it is suitable to release to the public, but we do look at every single case. We track the data over time to ensure that there is no coordinated campaign. More importantly, we will not hesitate to take action if there is a need to protect Singapore's interests.

Ultimately, we hold the view that any country out there would agree with us that we are just safeguarding our information space. And if we are interested in protecting our social cohesion – and we are – they will agree with us that such content is unacceptable and that the stance that we have taken is totally understandable.

[Supplementary]

Dr Neo Kok Beng (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Our current framework of preventing external influences is primarily based on a couple of Acts or laws: the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act (or FICA), the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) and also OCHA. These are, in the view of our population, pretty much reactive in nature. I believe there are also proactive measures. The population looks at it as what we do after the events have happened. The question is, how effective are they and how do we measure this effectiveness? Is the Ministry exploring more preventive measures compared to these slightly more reactive measures? What are the programmes or initiatives that are preventive in nature and again, how effective are they? Specifically, how to educate or train or inoculate our residents from believing or disseminating such malicious influence?

Mr Goh Pei Ming: Mr Speaker, allow me to reiterate my response to the Members' questions. The Government had to act decisively against these videos because they seek to undermine Singapore's cohesion, and they seek to attack our multi-racial society and attempt to divide us based on our race. Our societal harmony cannot be taken for granted because it has been painstakingly developed over decades and every community in Singapore is valued. Everyone has our equal place.

This diversity in Singapore's fabric is our greatest strength, but it requires deliberate and constant protection against division. These videos strike at the very foundation of what makes Singapore home for all of us. That is why the Government acted firmly against these videos, especially also because they originated from a foreign source. We must reject all attempts that seek to divide us.

The Member asked about proactiveness and effectiveness. He also mentioned that we do have various Acts in place. Yes, I would like to reiterate that the Government has various legislative levers, some more recently introduced, in place to deal with such threats. These include FICA, the Maintenance of Racial Harmony Act, POFMA, as well as OCHA. These are a range of levers that allow us to be able to act decisively should any such narrative or attempt to divide us arise.

I want to make the point that having these laws allows us to be very proactive, going upstream to demonstrate that we not only have the laws and that we are also willing to exercise these laws to protect our citizens and our social fabric before our racial harmony is affected. Our online directions under FICA were first issued or first used in July 2024. We have also used other various online directions under OCHA. They have been generally effective as the social media companies have worked with us and complied with the directions issued by the Government. Of course, we will from time to time continue to review the laws to ensure that they are fit for purpose, to continue to be proactive in this space.

In my main reply earlier, I have also listed various efforts in terms of public education. I would like to reiterate that a discerning public is the most effective tool to fight against such foreign interferences to split our society. Every incident that has happened is also a potential learning opportunity that we will use to educate our public to fight such division efforts.

[Oral Q3]

Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what are the Speak Mandarin Campaign's current stated policy objectives; (b) whether the Ministry will review the campaign's continued application to locally screened dialect films, given that over-the-top and social media platforms do not carry the same restriction; and (c) whether the Ministry has assessed whether mandatory Mandarin dubbing of dialect films has any measurable effect on the campaign.

The Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr David Neo): Mr Speaker, my response will address Question Nos 3 to 5 by Mr Cai Yinzhou and Ms Eileen Chong Pei Shan on the Speak Mandarin Campaign in today's Order Paper.

Sir, Question Nos 6 to 12 on today's Order Paper addresses the use of dialects in films. The two sets of questions, while distinct, are related. So, may I seek your permission to allow the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) to provide the answers to Question Nos 6 to 12, before the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth, and MDDI address any supplementary questions that Members may have? Members may be better informed after hearing both sets of responses and that might give better clarity to our discussions.

Mr Speaker: Yes, you may. Please proceed.

Mr David Neo: The Speak Mandarin Campaign was launched in 1979. By promoting a common language across the Chinese community, it helps Chinese Singaporeans from different dialect backgrounds to communicate with one another and it preserves access to the Chinese culture through Mandarin, rather than through separate dialects.

By simplifying the linguistic environment, it also gives our bilingual policy the best chance to succeed. These objectives remain valid today.

The Promote Mandarin Council, which comprises distinguished private and public individuals across all different sectors who are volunteers, regularly reviews the campaign to keep its framing, approach and objectives relevant and meaningful in Singapore's multicultural context. It is important to do so as the language environment continues to evolve.

Singapore families are using English more at home and much as our young want to be better at Mandarin, the opportunities to do so may be insufficient. So, hence the campaign has evolved from promoting Mandarin as a common language, to strengthening their appreciation for our Singapore Chinese cultural identity and making the learning of Mandarin fun and enjoyable. Its current tag line, "讲华语，我也可以", or "Speak Mandarin? Yes, I can", encourages everyone to learn Mandarin even as English becomes more dominant in daily life.

In education, the Ministry of Social and Family Development and the Ministry of Education are setting aside more curriculum time to expose young Chinese students to Mandarin. For older students, we provide opportunities to those with the aptitude and interest to develop into bicultural talents. It is a challenging task and our Chinese teachers are working very hard. We will continue to do our best to continue to uphold the bilingual policy.

As the use of English continues to displace mother tongues, the use of dialects in Singapore, has continued to decline. We increasingly see dialect artistic materials, not as competing against the use of Mandarin, but as part of our heritage and cultural practices that deepen Singaporeans' appreciation of our cultural heritage. Hence, the National Arts Council supports arts groups that practises traditional forms of dialect cultures such as the Siong Leng Musical Association, which preserves Nanyin and Nam Hwa Opera, the Teochew opera group. The National Heritage Board recognises and supports practitioners and groups that transmit Chinese dialect culture. Clan associations, such as the Singapore Hokkien Huay Kuan or the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan and Hainan Hwee Kuan also conduct regular dialect classes for interested Singaporeans.

Our linguistic diversity and heritage are distinctive parts of Singapore Chinese culture. The Government welcomes ideas to preserve dialect cultures while upholding the importance of Mandarin. We will continue to take in feedback and we will work with the community to consider carefully what further steps are appropriate to support and to promote our distinctive Singapore Chinese culture within our multicultural society.

[Oral Q4]

Ms Eileen Chong Pei Shan asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether the Ministry's assessment of the effectiveness of the Speak Mandarin Campaign includes any indicators of the campaign's impact on the use and transmission of Chinese dialects; and (b) if not, how does the Ministry track whether dialects remain in active use, in view of the position that dialects are part of Singapore's cultural heritage.

Answered jointly with Q3 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq3, which covers Question Nos 3 to 5 together as delivered by Mr David Neo.

[Oral Q5]

Ms Eileen Chong Pei Shan asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether the Ministry has reviewed if the Speak Mandarin Campaign framing remains suited to today's conditions; and (b) whether the Ministry will evolve its approach so that promoting Mandarin no longer comes at the expense of preserving Chinese dialects as heritage.

Answered jointly with Q3 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq3, which covers Question Nos 3 to 5 together as delivered by Mr David Neo.

[Oral Q6]

Ms Valerie Lee asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) what considerations led to the original decision to permit limited screenings of the film "Dear You" in its original Teochew version rather than subtitled wider screenings; and (b) what factors will guide the Ministry's more flexible approach towards permitting future dialect film screenings.

Mr Speaker: Senior Minister of State Tan, you will be taking Question Nos 6 to 12?

The Senior Minister of State for Digital Development and Information (Mr Tan Kiat How) (for the Minister for Digital Development and Information): Yes, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Please proceed.

Mr Tan Kiat How: Mr Speaker, my response will cover the questions raised by Mr Cai Yinzhou, Mr Gerald Giam, Mr Kenneth Tiong, Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Mr Dennis Tan, Ms Valerie Lee, Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Dr Neo Kok Beng in today's Order Paper, as well as related questions by Mr Darryl David and Ms Mariam Jaafar for subsequent Sittings. If Members are satisfied with the response, they may wish to withdraw their questions after this session.

Guidelines on language use in media are implemented by the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA). They support the Government's longstanding policy to promote Mandarin as one of four official languages and have generally served us well. However, as noted in the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth's (MCCY's) earlier reply today, Singapore's language environment has evolved. Recognising this, in implementing the guidelines, IMDA has exercised greater flexibility to allow more dialect content in films.

Each year, around 30 to 40 dialect films are screened at film festivals. At the same time, IMDA has allowed unrestricted screenings of films with substantial use of dialect, such as "881", "Long Long Time Ago" and "Wonderland". For the film "Dear You", IMDA has approved a total of 272 screenings of the Teochew version and is prepared to approve additional screenings should the film distributor request them in response to audience demand.

Beyond these implementation changes, several Members have called for the guidelines themselves to be reviewed. We recognise that the circumstances have changed since the guidelines were first introduced. There is, therefore, scope to consider how we can expand the space for dialects, while continuing to uphold the importance of Mandarin. In doing so, we should also take into account the different media platforms. For example, there are no dialect restrictions for arts performances or content available on the Internet and online streaming services. On free-to-air television and radio, we believe that Mandarin should continue to be the mainstay. For cinemas, we are prepared to allow more screenings of dialect-language films, so as to provide audiences with greater access to such content. We appreciate the feedback from Members and will carefully consider what further steps are appropriate.

Mr Speaker: Mr Cai Yinzhou.

Mr Cai Yinzhou (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Thank you, Speaker. I would like to declare my interest as Advisor to Chinatown Heritage Centre, an attraction referencing 1950s' Singapore, with our exhibits featuring dialect content. "Parasite" sparked conversations on inequality. "How to Make Millions before Grandma Dies" spurred end-of-life conversations. "Dear You" has renewed interest in the sacrifices of our forefathers and personal heritage. Locally, "Parasite" screened close to 12,000 sessions. "How to Make Millions before Grandma Dies" around 5,000. "Dear You", in Mandarin, 2,570; while its Teochew version, the original, a mere 126 public screenings as of early-July.

My first question to the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) is, today, cinema is the only mainstream medium in Singapore where Chinese dialect content is restricted. Over-the-top (OTT) streaming on social media platforms and YouTube all already carry dialect content without equivalent restrictions. Should cinema remain subject to the campaign's dialect restriction rationale?

There is also a commercial case, our cinema operators have been under real pressure. "Dear You" shows that original dialect programming can be an asset, not a niche indulgence. Would the Ministry go further in the review to consider removing this default restriction? In Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): As the saying goes, "The master leads you through the door, but the practice is yours to pursue." Yet dialect arts face a more fundamental problem today – the masters are growing old and no young people are walking through that door. Dialect artists are gradually passing on, with no one to carry the torch, and the flame risks being extinguished. What concrete plans does the MCCY have to support the preservation of dialect arts and ensure that they continue to thrive in Singapore?

Mandarin is the bridge that connects us in society. Dialect is what connects us, heart to heart, with our grandparents at home.

Mr Tan Kiat How: Sir, I thank the Member for his clarifications on the review of the use of dialect in cinema and films. As I have explained in my reply, we are getting feedback from different parties – industry stakeholders and community partners. We appreciate and welcome the conversations that have arisen from the "Dear You" screening.

The Member talked about screening of the original Teochew dialect of the film being popular. We have said that we will provide flexibility and we will continue to provide flexibility. In practice, if the film distributor feels that audience demand is there for the Teochew original film, we will provide flexibility. But more importantly, having a Mandarin version creates a bigger access to many more audiences in Singapore.

The Member mentioned OTT platforms, Internet streaming for example. Different platforms have, historically, been regulated differently based on different reach of audiences. Cinemas, being a public-regulated exhibition space in Singapore, ought to be seen closer to mainstream media. Having said that, we appreciate that the language environment has changed and we are prepared to see how we can expand access to dialect movies as we undertake our review.

Mr Speaker: Ms Eileen Chong. Sorry, Minister David Neo.

The Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr David Neo): Mr Speaker, to answer the Mandarin portion of the Member's question and in the spirit of the Speak Mandarin Campaign, if you would allow me to take this supplementary question in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): Chinese dialect art forms are an important part of the traditional arts. Over the years, the National Arts Council (NAC) has nurtured and supported Chinese dialect art forms through funding arts groups and help them engage audiences. In 2025 alone, NAC funded 10 productions, spanning Hokkien, Teochew, Cantonese and Hainanese opera. We will continue to expand the space for our Chinese dialect art forms and nurture the next generation of practitioners.

Mr Speaker: Ms Eileen Chong Pei Shan.

Ms Eileen Chong Pei Shan (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to ask whether MCCY will be working with IMDA to review the relevance of the policy, which still requires permission for us to screen dialect films. Instead of trying to see where we can exercise more flexibility, why not consider offering the freedom of simply just screening these dialect films?

Mr David Neo: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her support. MCCY and MDDI are open to ideas about how can we preserve dialect cultures while upholding the importance of Mandarin, and we will continue to take in all the feedback and consider carefully the appropriate next steps on how to do this well.

Mr Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to ask the Government: given that the media is the primary vehicle for youth cultural engagement, whether either Ministry agrees to review the lifting of the 1981 dialect broadcast restrictions? And a question for Senior Minister of State Tan: will the Ministry consider establishing a standing institutional arrangement between IMDA and the National Heritage Board (NHB), with regard to a consultation on the heritage aspects for dialect films?

Mr Tan Kiat How: Sir, IMDA works very closely with different Government agencies including the NHB. There is no need for an explicit institution arrangement as they are already doing so. We do consider the context in which the dialect is used in the film — whether it reflects the cultural context of the movie of that time.

Mr Speaker: Ms Valerie Lee.

Ms Valerie Lee (Pasir Ris-Changi): I have two supplementary questions, one for MCCY. What steps is MCCY taking to ensure that Chinese-dialect cultures are being systematically documented, preserved and transmitted? The second is for MDDI: will the Ministry publish clearer guidelines incorporating the said flexibility for dialect general screenings?

Mr David Neo: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her questions. When it comes to documentation, the NHB works very closely with heritage practitioners, clan associations and all who are keen, to research and document our dialects and cultural heritage. We will continue to work with all our clan associations, heritage practitioners and all who are keen to document and to expand the space for our Singapore Chinese dialect culture.

Mr Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam.

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): For the past 40 years or so, has the Speak Mandarin Campaign not been geared more towards encouraging English-speaking Chinese Singaporeans to speak Mandarin, instead of changing the language speaking habits of dialect-speaking Singaporeans? Can case-by-case basis in the guidelines be interpreted as allowing certain dialect films a general commercial release, without restrictions on the number of screenings?

Mr Tan Kiat How: Sir, our implementation of the guidelines, of the regulations have evolved with the changing language environment. We are reviewing our current film classification framework with respect to the use of dialect in films. We will take some time to do so because it is an evolution, it is a thoughtful approach.

Mr Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): As Singapore's population ages, does the Government regard original language Chinese dialect films as supporting active ageing, social inclusion and inter-generational bonding? Has IMDA assessed audience demand for original language Chinese dialect films, particularly among seniors and younger Singaporeans?

Mr Tan Kiat How: Sir, I must add that beyond just films and cinema, there are many other venues for seniors and younger ones to engage with the dialect culture — clan associations, programmes, different streaming applications or even activities in the community. We will certainly consider the different inputs as part of the review.

Mr Speaker: Mr Kenneth Tiong.

Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat (Aljunied): (In Mandarin, then Teochew, then English): Mr Speaker, I have three questions. First: which version did the Ministers themselves watch? Second: is the Government's goal to promote Mandarin, or to restrict dialects? If the goal is simply to promote Mandarin, will the Government review all measures that exist purely to restrict dialects? Third: dialect courses run by clan associations are currently open only to members of the respective dialect group. Will the Government consider expanding eligibility to a wider audience?

Mr David Neo: (In Mandarin): First of all, we Ministers have no time to watch movies. [Laughter.] (In English): To the Member's question about dialect classes, we work with the clan associations all the time. If there is a demand, I think they will be more than happy to extend their classes to more people.

Mr Tan Kiat How: (In Mandarin): This film has been deeply moving and has resonated with local audiences. As Singapore's linguistic landscape has evolved, the Government has from time to time reviewed its approach to dialect films, adjusting to meet demand. We will continue to listen to public feedback and give serious consideration to whether restrictions can be further relaxed.

Mr Speaker: Last supplementary question. Mr Liang Eng Hwa.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): (In Mandarin): I would like to thank IMDA for its flexibility in allowing the filming of "Dear You" in the Teochew dialect. Will IMDA consider adopting a more open and transparent approach when it comes to dialect films going forward?

Mr Tan Kiat How: (In Mandarin): We have always maintained a practical and flexible approach. If demand grows, we can allow more screenings of Teochew dialect films. But what is equally important is that we do not lose sight of our original objective — and that objective is to promote the speaking of Mandarin.

Mr Speaker: Last supplementary question. Dr Neo Kok Beng.

Dr Neo Kok Beng (Nominated Member): (In Mandarin): I wonder whether we might consider designating one of our six radio stations to play songs from the olden days – perhaps with around 50% in Mandarin and the remaining 50% in dialects.

Mr Tan Kiat How: (In Mandarin): We feel that Mandarin should remain the mainstream language. That said, there is some flexibility — on Channel 8, for instance, there is a designated morning slot for dialect broadcasts. We have taken note of the warm reception that "Dear You" has received from our people, and we will look into this film policy further.

[Oral Q7]

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) whether the Ministry will review the Film Classification Guidelines to allow Chinese dialect films, including the film "Dear You," to have a general commercial release with their original audio instead of restricting them to niche screenings; (b) why foreign language films face no equivalent linguistic audio restrictions; and (c) whether the historical rationale for mandatory Mandarin dubbing remains relevant to Singapore.

Answered jointly with Q6 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq6, which covers Question Nos 6 to 12 together as delivered by Mr Tan Kiat How.

[Oral Q8]

Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) whether the Ministry will abolish the guideline that Chinese films for general release be in Mandarin and allow dialect films on general release in their original dialect with subtitles; and (b) whether the Speak Mandarin Campaign rationale for the guideline still applies, given that dialect use at home has fallen below 12%.

Answered jointly with Q6 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq6, which covers Question Nos 6 to 12 together as delivered by Mr Tan Kiat How.

[Oral Q9]

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) whether the framework for classifying dialect language films for general release includes any assessment of Intangible Cultural Heritage value; and (b) if not, whether the Ministry will work with the National Heritage Board to incorporate such an assessment.

Answered jointly with Q6 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq6, which covers Question Nos 6 to 12 together as delivered by Mr Tan Kiat How.

[Oral Q10]

Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) what factors are taken into account in Infocomm Media Development Authority's (IMDA) decision for the film "Dear You" to be dubbed in Mandarin for general screening instead of the original Teochew version; (b) whether heritage and cultural preservation value formed part of the assessment; and (c) whether IMDA will consider giving greater weight to heritage and cultural preservation value in future assessments.

Answered jointly with Q6 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq6, which covers Question Nos 6 to 12 together as delivered by Mr Tan Kiat How.

[Oral Q11]

Dr Neo Kok Beng asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information whether the Ministry will consider reviewing its policy to liberalise or abolish its language requirements with respect to Chinese dialects for media such as films and theatre, since the bilingual policy has reduced the use of dialects to less than 0.8% of Chinese households.

Answered jointly with Q6 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq6, which covers Question Nos 6 to 12 together as delivered by Mr Tan Kiat How.

[Oral Q12]

Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) what is the percentage of households that primarily speak Chinese dialects at home today as compared to 1979 when the Speak Mandarin Campaign was launched; (b) whether the Government sees the need to review the relevance of the Chinese dialect policy in its current form; and (c) if so, what considerations will be taken into account in any such review.

Answered jointly with Q6 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq6, which covers Question Nos 6 to 12 together as delivered by Mr Tan Kiat How.

[Oral Q13]

Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Law in view of the Paris-based Financial Action Task Force's assessment that Singapore is partially compliant in implementing technical requirements on transparency and beneficial ownership of legal persons and legal arrangements, how is the Government planning to address gaps in relation to verification requirements and the accuracy of beneficial ownership information.

The Senior Minister of State for Law (Mr Murali Pillai) (for the Minister for Law): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 13 and 14 in the name of the hon Member, Mr Louis Chua, together?

Mr Speaker: Please proceed.

Mr Murali Pillai: Sir, my response will also cover matters raised in the related oral questions, as well as written questions, all filed by the hon Member, Ms Sylvia Lim, for a subsequent Sitting. The hon Member may wish to withdraw her Parliamentary Questions (PQs) if her queries are answered in today's Sitting.

Sir, these questions pertain to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Mutual Evaluation Report of Singapore 2026 and span matters within the purview of the Ministry of Law (MinLaw), Ministry of Finance (MOF), Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS).

In the event that there are any supplementary questions that pertain to MOF, MHA and MAS, Sir, I seek your permission for such supplementary questions to be answered by the Ministers overseeing those Ministries and agency.

Mr Speaker: Alright, please go ahead.

Mr Murali Pillai: Thank you, Speaker. Sir, the FATF is the global body that leads action to tackle risks associated with money laundering, terrorism financing and proliferation financing (ML/TF/PF). Members periodically undergo a peer assessment, known as a "Mutual Evaluation" (ME), of their level of compliance with the FATF Standards and effectiveness of their anti money laundering, countering of terrorism financing (AML/CFT) and countering proliferation financing framework.

Singapore was one of the first countries and the first international financial centre assessed in this fifth round of the FATF MEs. Against this context, Singapore performed credibly and achieved better overall results than we did in the fourth round. In recognition of this, the FATF has placed Singapore on regular follow-up, which is the category for countries that have been assessed to have performed well.

With that, let me now cover the four areas raised in the PQs.

On international cooperation, the FATF found Singapore provides timely, quality and constructive assistance to our foreign counterparts. Straightforward requests are executed in as little as three days, while complex requests are executed within an average of about 10 weeks. We will continue to strengthen our cooperation with foreign counterparts, including better explaining our requirements for assistance.

Moving on to Beneficial Ownership (BO). The FATF acknowledged that Singapore has taken significant steps to prevent the misuse of legal persons and legal arrangements. First, we have a central BO registry for all companies and Limited Liability Partnerships. Second, AML/CFT-obligated entities, such as banks, are required to conduct customer due diligence checks. Third, BO information obtained by AML/CFT obligated entities is readily available to law enforcement agencies in a timely manner. We will carefully study the FATF's recommendations and consider whether further enhancements will be needed.

Let me now turn to the matter of financial penalties against financial institutions (FIs) and virtual asset service providers (VASPs). The FATF has acknowledged Singapore's stepped-up sanctions — the maximum financial penalties imposed on FIs and VASPs increased from $800,000 in the previous ME to $5.8 million this round. The FATF has recommended us to review the dissuasiveness and proportionality of our financial penalties. We will consider the recommendation.

Moving to countering proliferation financing. The FATF has found that Singapore has a robust countering proliferation financing legal framework, and strong coordination and cooperation among Singapore authorities. The FATF has recommended a deepening of our PF risk understanding and strengthening the risk mitigation measures. We will continue to improve our risk understanding as PF risks change and evolve.

In conclusion, Singapore has performed credibly in this latest round of MEs. Where the FATF has made recommendations to strengthen certain aspects of our framework, the Government will carefully study them and develop action plans that are risk-proportionate and suited to Singapore's context.

Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.

Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Thank you, Speaker. Allow me to first declare that I work in an FI. Two supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. The first is on BO: will the central register's coverage be extended to Variable Capital Companies and unregistered foreign companies, and if so, any timeline? The second: Singapore makes four times fewer Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) requests than it receives — how does the Ministry intend to increase the use of MLAs or other cooperation channels, especially for scams?

Mr Murali Pillai: Sir, I am obliged to the hon Member for his two supplementary questions. On the first, our operational experience is that law enforcement agencies can and have gotten timely and accurate BO information in relation to legal persons and legal arrangements. There was no evidence that the BO information was inaccurate.

Mr Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.

Mr Murali Pillai: Sorry, Sir. There is still a second supplementary question that has to be answered, Sir.

Mr Speaker: That is right. Who is going to take that? Senior Minister of State Sim Ann.

The Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs (Ms Sim Ann): Sir, given the increasingly transnational nature of crime and the rapid advancement of digital finance, international cooperation is indeed key. Singapore will continue to issue MLAs where it is appropriate, but also pursue international cooperation in informal manner.

Mr Speaker: Ms Lim.

Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. I have a supplementary question for Senior Minister of State on PF. It was pointed out in the FATF report that representatives of foreign flag states have a very low understanding of their PF obligations, and ship-to-ship transfers are a key vector for PF. What else is the Government going to do about the maritime sector?

Mr Speaker: Minister Chee.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Chee Hong Tat): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am answering in my capacity as the Deputy Chairman of MAS. Sir, these representative offices of foreign flag states based in Singapore are subject to and must comply with Singapore's laws, including United Nations Security Council sanctions. Singapore has and will continue to engage these entities to alert them to the PF risks and to remind them of their countering PF obligations.

[Oral Q14]

Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Law in view of the findings of the Mutual Evaluation Report of Singapore published in May 2026 by the Paris-based Financial Action Task Force, what steps will be taken to (i) reduce delays in addressing mutual legal assistance requests (ii) increase the use of formal and informal cooperation channels in transnational crime investigations and (iii) accelerate asset recovery efforts from abroad.

Answered jointly with Q13 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq13, which covers Question Nos 13 and 14 together as delivered by Mr Murali Pillai.

[Oral Q15]

Ms Poh Li San asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) out of the 3.35 million tonnes of waste disposed of in 2025 (i) what is the estimated proportion that is recyclable and (ii) what is the proportion of industrial versus domestic waste; and (b) of the 52% recycling rate, what are the main categories of recycled waste and their corresponding proportions.

The Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to answer oral Question Nos 15 to 18 on today's Order Paper?

Mr Speaker: Please proceed.

Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, Singapore disposed of 3.36 million tonnes of waste in 2025, with 1.67 million tonnes from domestic sources and 1.69 million tonnes from non-domestic sources. A breakdown by the type of the amounts of waste generated, disposed of and recycled can be found on the National Environment Agency (NEA) website.

Sir, technological solutions are available to recycle most waste streams if properly separated and treated. However, even if recycling is technically possible, it may not always be practical or economical to do so. There are several economic, logistical and behavioural factors determining our recycling rates: the business case for recycling has deteriorated due to rising logistics, freight, manpower and energy costs; export markets for recyclables have become increasingly stringent; and the contamination of recyclables remains a persistent challenge.

The definitions of recycling rates also vary internationally, with no consensus. Comparing recycling rates across countries is therefore not always meaningful if the bases are different.

However, we do believe that we can and must do more to strengthen resource circularity in Singapore. This is why the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) and NEA will be reviewing the 2019 Zero Waste Masterplan. Under the 2019 Masterplan, we had set a target of 70% recycling rate by 2030 and to reduce the waste sent to landfill per capita per day by 30% by 2030. While we are striving to achieve these targets, we will review them for relevance.

For households, the blue bin network under the National Recycling Programme remains the primary channel for recycling. PWCs have deployed additional bins at around 700 locations and increased the collection frequency at more than 1,100 locations. NEA has also worked with all PWCs to offer dedicated collection of paper and cardboard since December 2025.

Recycling is important, but we must also reinforce the other "2Rs" – Reducing waste at the outset and Reusing where possible. Domestic waste generated per capita has fallen by 21% over the past decade, and non-domestic waste generated per unit gross domestic product has dropped by more than 30% over the same period.

I thank Members for their interest in the Zero Waste Masterplan review. The work on this is still ongoing. We will engage the public and industry as part of the review process and share more details in due course.

Mr Speaker: Ms Poh Li San.

Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang West): Thank you, Speaker, and I thank the Senior Minister of State Janil. I have two supplementary questions. Will NEA consider adjusting gate fees for industrial and commercial waste collection to shift behaviour of businesses towards higher recycling rates, especially for food waste? Will there be any plans for NEA to consider a national recycling campaign to reduce blue bin waste contamination?

Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Ms Poh for her questions. Indeed, we do have to shift behaviours. We will consider her suggestion on looking at the fees. The issue of blue bin contamination will certainly form an important part of the review of the Zero Waste Masterplan.

Mr Speaker: Ms Valerie Lee.

Ms Valerie Lee (Pasir Ris-Changi): I have two supplementary questions. Beyond recycling rates, can the Ministry consider complementary indicators and targets such as waste reduction, material circularity or recycling contamination rates? How will the Ministry assess whether public education campaigns are working?

Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Ms Lee for her two supplementary questions. The study and the review will address whether we should introduce new indicators or change the emphasis between the indicators that we currently track. We do track the waste production recycling rates and many other outcome indicators, and we will continue to do so.

Mr Speaker: Ms Lee Hui Ying.

Ms Lee Hui Ying (Nee Soon): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Our waste generation per capita has fallen from 1.06 kilogrammes in 2015 to 0.83 kilogrammes today. What are the measures MSE will take to help Singaporeans realise this? What are the policy thresholds that MSE considers to disincentivise single-use packaging?

Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Ms Lee for her questions and also for highlighting that waste generation is falling. The suggestions she has made around packaging regulations and RFID-based sorting are things we can look at. We have to look at it holistically — whether it is about a policy threshold for a disincentive, technology implementation or regulation, what is the outcome around waste generated.

Mr Speaker: Ms Hany Soh.

Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Thank you, Speaker. Just one supplementary question on whether there are any recycling plans in the pipeline for collaborations with our partners in the region or globally.

Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, about half of our recycling material is exported and processed overseas. Those arrangements allow for businesses to address a larger market and become sustainable as a commercial interest. We will continue to work with stakeholders and partners on making sure that this is a viable process.

[Oral Q16]

Ms Valerie Lee asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the Ministry has an ideal yearly national recycling rate target for 2026 to 2030; (b) what lessons have been learnt from how Singapore's waste and recycling profile has changed over the past decade; and (c) what updated measures are being considered to improve recycling rates for (i) glass (ii) paper and cardboard and (iii) textiles.

Answered jointly with Q15 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq15, which covers Question Nos 15 to 18 together as delivered by Dr Janil Puthucheary.

[Oral Q17]

Ms Lee Hui Ying asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the Zero Waste Master Plan review will focus on reducing overall waste produced or circular economy outcomes rather than recycling rates, in view of the high contamination rates for recycling; and (b) whether the Ministry plans to implement nationwide clean-stream recycling bins that segregate recyclables and minimise cross-contamination at the source.

Answered jointly with Q15 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq15, which covers Question Nos 15 to 18 together as delivered by Dr Janil Puthucheary.

[Oral Q18]

Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the Ministry tracks data on the overall recycling rate by region and globally; (b) if so, whether the Ministry has observed a declining trend in the overall recycling rate regionally and globally; and (c) how does Singapore's overall recycling rate compare with other countries.

Answered jointly with Q15 — see full answer_text on item p15-s32-oq15, which covers Question Nos 15 to 18 together as delivered by Dr Janil Puthucheary.

[Oral Q19]

Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) whether there are any plans to strengthen the regulatory regime for nursing homes to ensure that systemic lapses similar to those identified at the Windsor Convalescent Home do not recur at any other nursing home; and (b) if not, why not.

The Senior Minister of State for Health (Mr Tan Kiat How) (for the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health): Sir, as part of the Ministry of Health's (MOH's) regulatory oversight over providers, we conduct regular and periodic audits, special thematic reviews and inspections on nursing homes. This includes off-cycle audits in response to feedback and complaints to ensure residents' safety. Such an approach ensures that shortcomings and lapses in nursing homes are addressed and rectified in a timely way.

The great majority of nursing homes placed on closer monitoring take adequate corrective actions and sustain the improvements. However, if the gaps are serious, repeated and there is a lack of serious effort to rectify them, such as in the case of Windsor Convalescent Home and LC Nursing Home, MOH will have to escalate our measures. These two cases of licence revocation are therefore an outcome of the regulatory framework working as intended.

In response to previous identified non-compliances, MOH conducted a thematic audit focusing on compliance with infection prevention and control practices, and basic custodial and nursing care for selected higher-risk operators. After the gaps were first identified, operators were given an opportunity to rectify the lapses, during which we intensified our monitoring of and engagement with the operators. When we ascertained that the remediation efforts were inadequate or were not sustained for the two operators, we revoked their licences and arranged for Vanguard Healthcare to step in.

MOH and the Agency for Integrated Care will also be sharing the findings of our recent audits, and the various manpower training and grant support available with the nursing home sector.

In response to Mr Fadli Fawzi, like all regulatory functions, it is impossible to eradicate and prevent recurrences of lapses. But with a robust regime, we can uphold good standards of operations and constructive relationships between the regulator and operator to better serve the residents.

Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked about claims and compensation. MOH's regulatory framework aims at assessing licensees' care delivery practices and protocols in compliance with the Healthcare Services Act to ensure resident safety. However, as the provision of care is a contract between the resident and the nursing home, MOH is unable to coordinate private claims from residents or their families against the nursing home.

Mr Speaker: Mr Fadli Fawzi.

Mr Fadli Fawzi (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Speaker, I have three supplementary questions. Firstly, are there any other nursing homes that have been found to have significant lapses in an initial audit, similar to Windsor Convalescent Home and LC Nursing Home, but have been given the opportunity to rectify these lapses and are still being monitored by MOH? If so, how many? My second question is, will MOH consider providing smaller nursing home operators with greater support, for example, through a review of foreign manpower requirements? My third question is, for the transparency and welfare of residents, will MOH reconsider its stance of not informing residents and their family about audit findings before any regulatory action is confirmed?

Mr Tan Kiat How: Sir, first and foremost, I would like to assure Members and members of public that MOH has a robust regime to make sure that our nursing home operators maintain good standard of care. The audit findings for these two nursing homes are a feature, not a bug of our regulatory framework. A large majority of these nursing homes with identified areas of improvement have taken steps to rectify them and sustain the improvements over time. To his point about supporting nursing homes, we do support our nursing homes through different support from manpower training grants to other support, raising the collective standard of care and professionalism. On informing the family members, MOH's first priority is to make sure those improvements are done, lapses are rectified and to make sure nothing endangers the residents' safety. MOH is continually looking at how we can provide meaningful information for caregivers and family members to make a decision.

[Oral Q20]

Mr Pritam Singh asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health in relation to the mandatory tuberculosis screening exercise announced at three locations in Bedok on 30 April 2026, what lessons have been learned from this exercise for future reference, particularly in relation to its impact on the business prospects of high footfall locations such as hawker centres and markets.

The Senior Minister of State for Health (Mr Tan Kiat How) (for the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health): Sir, from time to time, the Communicable Diseases Agency (CDA) will need to conduct ground operations to contain disease outbreaks, such as the tuberculosis (TB) screening exercise that was carried out in Bedok recently.

A key success factor for such operations is clear communication with residents, notwithstanding that residents were largely very appreciative of the efforts to keep them safe. This is because in the absence of authoritative information, rumours will spread. Hence, in this case, the public would need to know exactly what to expect from the screening, the details and locations of the clusters, and be assured that the risk of TB transmission through casual visits or sharing a meal was low.

Further, measures will need to be taken to minimise disruptions to businesses and the community. Hence, eligible hawkers and tenants also received rental, and service and conservancy charge rebates to mitigate the temporary impact on their businesses.

Finally, partnerships between CDA, community stakeholders and grassroots organisations are critical. This ensures that public health measures are coordinated with community engagement and that any concerns are addressed promptly.

Mr Speaker: I will allow a short supplementary question. Mr Singh.

Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Obliged, Speaker. I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. I refer to the notice that was released by CDC on 30 April where it said that the mandatory screening exercise would take place over three days, 4 to 7 May. The impression that was created, in my view, suggested one of urgency and criticality, but the very act which triggered the exercise, the identification of 13 cases with genetic similarities, occurred over a period of three years from January 2023 to February 2026. So, does the Senior Minister of State not agree that in future, perhaps, a longer timeline for a screening exercise, or a differentiated regime for hawkers on the one hand and residents who may have transited through those areas, could be considered?

Mr Tan Kiat How: Sir, I thank the Member for his clarifications and questions. First, like I said in my earlier reply, CDA will have to do such precautionary screenings on a regular basis, when needed. This is really part of our more proactive sentinel surveillance stance. The second, CDA has explained that the 13 cases were over a period of three years, but recent developments in whole genome sequencing capabilities were able to track that the TB bacteria was genetically linked across 13 individuals. As a matter of precaution, we wanted to make sure we test everyone there, those who are working there and those who frequent facilities often. There are many learning points on how we could have explained it better, as the Member has pointed out, and we take those learnings to heart. CDA will see how to better improve the public communications to assure people.

[Bill · 1st Reading]

"to amend the Road Traffic Act 1961 and the Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Risks and Compensation) Act 1960", presented by the Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs (Ms Sim Ann) on behalf of the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

[Bill · 1st Reading]

"to amend the Road Traffic Act 1961 and the Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Risks and Compensation) Act 1960", presented by the Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs (Ms Sim Ann) on behalf of the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

[Ministerial Statement]

The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, I wish to make a Ministerial Statement to this House regarding the "Determination on the Committee of Privileges (COP) Findings on the Conduct of Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Faisal Manap".

On 14 January 2026, this House debated and passed a Motion on "Expression of Regret at the Conduct of Mr Pritam Singh and Consideration of His Suitability to Continue as the Leader of the Opposition". The resolutions in that Motion relating to Mr Singh were all dealt with and concluded on that day. One matter, however, remained outstanding.

Members will recall that in the fifth limb of that Motion, this House noted "that the High Court judgment and the Committee's findings have implications for Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Faisal Manap, which have to be considered separately". That is unfinished business which has to be dealt with. The question is what to do with the findings regarding Ms Lim and Mr Faisal in the COP Report on the "Complaint against Ms Raeesah Khan for Untruth Spoken in Parliament", specifically the Committee's finding that Ms Lim and Mr Faisal were untruthful to the COP about what was said at the 8 August meeting. I am now dealing with that today.

To recap briefly, a key issue in the COP inquiry was what was said at the meeting of 8 August 2021 between Ms Khan and the three senior Workers' Party (WP) leaders: Mr Pritam Singh, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal. In particular, whether Ms Khan was told to suppress the fact that she had told an untruth in Parliament, that is, that she should "take it to the grave". The three WP leaders all denied this. The Committee found otherwise.

As the findings against Mr Singh were the most serious, the House referred his case to the Public Prosecutor. This enabled the matter to be independently investigated and if charges were brought, Mr Singh would be able to defend himself with the benefit of legal representation, and it would be for the Court to determine whether the charges were proven beyond reasonable doubt.

In relation to Ms Lim and Mr Faisal, the Committee found that they had lied about what was said at the meeting of 8 August. The Report stated, and I quote, "Ms Lim and Mr Faisal attended the 8 August meeting. They agreed (to Mr Singh's advice) that the Untruth should be buried, and that Ms Khan would not have to tell the truth. They did not tell the truth to the Committee about that meeting."

However, the Committee considered Ms Lim's and Mr Faisal's roles in the matter to be subsidiary, and noted that both had been somewhat helpful to the Committee, albeit in a limited way. The Committee therefore recommended that consideration of what, if anything, should be done about their conduct of stating untruths to the Committee should be deferred until the conclusion of investigations and/or criminal proceedings against Mr Singh. Parliament accepted the Committee's recommendation.

This was done to be fair to Ms Lim and Mr Faisal. If the investigations or court proceedings produced evidence inconsistent with the Committee's findings, Parliament could take that into account before deciding what, if any, action should be taken. Pending that process, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal were given the benefit of the doubt.

The criminal proceedings against Mr Singh concluded on 4 December 2025 when the High Court Judgement was delivered.

On 14 January 2026, Parliament passed a resolution noting that the High Court Judgement and the Committee's findings had implications for Ms Lim and Mr Faisal. Let me explain why.

During the Committee hearings: (a) Ms Lim denied that Mr Singh had told Ms Khan to take her Untruth to the grave. She said that there was no discussion on this point. (b) Mr Faisal's evidence was that all three WP leaders did not remark on Ms Khan's confession that she had lied and did not discuss what to do about it. (c) Thus, at the COP hearings, both Ms Lim and Mr Faisal denied that Mr Singh had advised Ms Khan to take her lie to the grave, and said that the matter was not discussed.

However, now, after a full investigation, trial and appeal dealing with this issue, the Courts have expressly and conclusively found that: (a) At the 8 August 2021 meeting – at which all three WP leaders were present – Ms Khan's Untruth was discussed. (b) Mr Singh had lied when he denied that he told Ms Khan to "take it to the grave" – "it" meaning her Untruth.

The Courts' findings directly contradict Ms Lim's and Mr Faisal's evidence. It follows logically from the Courts' findings that their evidence to the Committee was not true. The Court Judgment effectively confirmed the findings of the Committee in relation to Ms Lim and Mr Faisal.

The question that arises is what is to be done in light of this. That is the unresolved issue that was deferred for decision.

In principle, if someone gave untrue evidence to a Committee of Parliament and did so knowingly or intentionally, this would be dishonourable conduct and a serious contempt of Parliament and would be dealt with under the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act 1962 (or PPIPA). Ordinarily, if there is evidence someone has lied to a Select Committee, I would initiate the PPIPA process for dealing with such conduct.

However, there are certain timelines within which such action must take place. Let me explain.

In most cases, offences under the PPIPA can be dealt with fairly quickly and in the same session of Parliament. Occasionally, the offence may occur in one session of Parliament but for whatever reason Parliament may not be able to deal with it immediately and it is dealt with in a subsequent session of Parliament. However, in the interests of finality, there are constraints on this.

Under section 22 of the PPIPA, Parliament has the power to punish offences which have been committed in either (a) the preceding session or (b) the last session of the preceding Parliament.

The previous Parliament – that is the 14th Parliament – was first constituted on 24 August 2020. It was prorogued on 24 March 2023 and re-opened on 10 April 2023. It was dissolved on 15 April 2025. The 14th Parliament therefore had two sessions.

In this case, the relevant conduct of Ms Lim and Mr Faisal took place in 2021, during the First Session of the 14th Parliament.

Mr Singh was convicted by the District Court on 17 February 2025. This was during the Second Session of the 14th Parliament. However, Parliament rightly deferred consideration of Ms Lim's and Mr Faisal's cases until the Court process had concluded.

Those proceedings concluded only on 4 December 2025, when the High Court delivered its judgment. By then, the 14th Parliament had been dissolved, a General Election had taken place, and the 15th Parliament had begun.

Under section 22 of the PPIPA, this 15th Parliament can only deal with offences committed either in this Session of the 15th Parliament, or during the Second Session of the 14th Parliament.

As the conduct in question took place during the First Session of the 14th Parliament, it is no longer open to this 15th Parliament to impose any penalties in respect of this conduct under the PPIPA.

This does not mean that Parliament is without recourse. The House could, if it wished, pass a Motion to express regret at such conduct. Such a Motion would serve to signal Parliament's disapproval, as it did in Mr Singh's case in January this year. However, it should be noted that in the January Motion, this House had already signalled its clear disapproval of lying to Parliament or its Committees.

Given the very specific circumstances of this case, it is my view that no further action need be taken by this House in relation to the Committee's finding regarding Ms Lim and Mr Faisal. Had the timelines been different, I would have proposed a different course of action.

This outcome has happened because even though this House was entitled to act on the Committee's findings in 2021, it decided to give Ms Lim and Mr Faisal the benefit of the doubt for the time being. Even though the Committee's findings have now been effectively confirmed by the High Court Judgment, the law in this case, the time-bar provisions of the PPIPA must be observed.

Unless any Member objects, we can now bring this matter to a close.

Mr Speaker: Before I call on hon Members for clarifications if any, I should point out that pursuant to Standing Order 23, Members may seek clarification on the Ministerial Statement, but no debate shall be allowed thereon. Members can seek clarifications by way of asking questions. I seek Members' understanding to keep your clarifications clear and concise, so that the Leader of the House can answer as many clarifications as possible. Likewise, I will ask Leader of the House to also keep your answers clear and concise. Any clarifications for the Minister? Ms Lim.

[Clarification]

Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Thank you Speaker. I have noted what the Minister is proposing that the House do. I am not standing up to object to it. But I think it is important for me to also state that my response on some of the issues that she mentioned, I have made them on 14 January during the debate on the Motion of the Leader of the Opposition, and I do not think I need to repeat them. That is all.

Ms Indranee Rajah: I thank Ms Lim for her indication that she will not be objecting to my recommendation. And likewise, when she made those statements on 14 January, I had also responded on 14 January, and my statements are on record.

12.17 pm

Mr Speaker: Order. End of Ministerial Statement. Introduction of Government Bill. Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs.

Motions

[Motion]

Reinforcing Singapore's Position as a Global Transport Hub (Motion)

12.19 pm

Tin Pei Ling (Marine Parade-Braddell Heights): Mr Speaker, I move, "That this House affirms the importance of strengthening Singapore's long-term economic competitiveness by leveraging international cooperation, frontier technologies and world-class infrastructure to reinforce Singapore's position as a globally connected aviation, maritime and logistics hub, and to anchor good jobs in Singapore."

The Motion was also entered on the Order Paper under the names of Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui, Mr Jackson Lam, Ms Poh Li San and Ms Yeo Wan Ling.

The Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Transport, comprising Ms Tin Pei Ling as Chairperson and fellow PAP MPs Mr Edward Chia, Ms Yeo Wan Ling, Ms Poh Li San, Mr Jackson Lam, as well as Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Sharael Taha, moved this Motion as Singapore is compelled to rethink how it remains globally connected amid a dynamic geopolitical environment and emerging technological changes.

[Motion Speech]

Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Mr Speaker, I declare that I am a consultant in a law firm which services maritime and logistics businesses.

The Motion today calls on this House to affirm the critical importance of strengthening Singapore's long-term economic competitiveness by leveraging international cooperation, frontier technologies and world-class infrastructure to reinforce our position as a globally connected aviation, maritime and logistics hub and to anchor good jobs in Singapore.

I start with the standard of competitiveness and the changing horizon. We are not blessed with natural resources, a massive domestic hinterland nor an expansive geographical footprint. Capitalising on our geographical position, continuous investments and sustained developmental efforts since Independence have allowed us to establish Singapore as both a maritime and aviation hub.

In 2025, the Singapore Port handled 44.66 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) of container throughput while the bunkering sectors supplied over 56 million tonnes of marine fuel. Concurrently, Changi Airport has steadily recovered from the severe travel freezes of the COVID-19 pandemic. We are now working on mega projects, such as the Tuas Port and Changi T5.

But Mr Speaker, past operational success does not guarantee resilience against future structural changes. The rules of global commerce are shifting. Competition in logistics, aviation and maritime operations is moving away from purely physical throughput towards ownership of the software, data systems and digital platforms that orchestrate these global movements.

As we debate this Motion on preserving our long-term competitiveness, we must continue to evaluate the structural vulnerabilities underlying our transport hub status. If we focus solely on physical asset efficiency, we risk watching the true values of the global supply chain migrate to digital capitals elsewhere.

Next, the geopolitical crucible – regional disputes and hub resilience. The severe escalation in the Middle East following the outbreak of hostilities between the US and Iran in late February 2026 has severely disrupted shipping and energy flows through the Strait of Hormuz and shattered hopes of global supply chain normalisation.

The closure of Hormuz has sent severe shock waves through our maritime transshipment and bunkering operations. The immediate halts of outbound crude oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the Persian Gulf triggered an unprecedented global energy price shock. According to MOT, this capacity crunch led to severe vessel branching at the port of Singapore as container lines rapidly reshuffled schedules. Finally, the crisis has proven that neutral flags are no longer safe — this included a Singapore-registered ship, the Ever Lovely, on 25 June 2026.

The lesson for Singapore is clear. The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) can accelerate strategies to anchor alternative multimodal trade corridors and aggressively diversify our bunkering and energy supply networks.

Next, the air hub space constraints and a rerouting penalty. Extensive air space restrictions across parts of the Middle East have fundamentally reconfigured international aviation. Changi Airport and Singapore Airlines (SIA) were well positioned to capture the traffic opportunities arising from disruptions elsewhere. However, longer routing patterns increase flight times, fuel consumption, operating costs and carbon emissions.

Next, the strategic vulnerability – the adopter versus creator gap. We are world-class technology adopters. But let us ask an uncomfortable question: who owns the core software system? Many local ship managers, airlines, freight forwarders and logistics operators continue to rely heavily on foreign-developed software platforms for critical operational functions. If Singapore remains content with being an exceptional adopter of foreign technology, we risk becoming a low margin highway.

To bridge this gap, we must examine our underlying operations. Singapore holds over 200 international shipping groups and thousands of logistics firms, yet day-to-day workflows remain legacy- and relationship-driven. Our national research ecosystem, including agencies such as A*STAR, can support SMEs in developing and adopting AI-driven predictive maintenance capabilities.

Next, re-evaluating our innovation and funding frameworks. The Government has poured significant resources into these sectors through the Maritime Innovation and Technology Fund (MINT). However, our funding philosophies remain too cautious, incremental and focus on short-term software adoption.

Next, three proposals for technological leadership. One, shift innovation funding to deep tech software and intellectual property — allocating dedicated tranches within the MINT Fund towards exportable Singapore-owned intellectual property. Two, mandate shared data standards via a national transport data trust, building on the model of the Singapore Trade Data Exchange (SGTraDex). Three, broaden global talent rotation to tech native tracks, expanding the Maritime Cluster Fund Global Rotation scheme to include software engineers and data scientists.

Next, jobs. Singapore continues to face challenges in maintaining a sufficiently deep pipeline of local Singaporean maritime professionals. Following the sale of Neptune Orient Lines (NOL), Singapore no longer has a national shipping line of the scale and strategic significance that NOL once represented — it was an important pipeline for the wider maritime ecosystem. My colleague, the hon MP Kenneth Tiong, will be speaking more on this.

Mr Speaker, our national strategy must follow a clear multi-tiered approach. First, the Government must aggressively support and build operational and seafaring careers among Singaporeans. I call on MOT and MPA to significantly enhance our existing frameworks, such as the Tripartite Maritime Training Award. Simultaneously, deploying frontier technology must be our second strategy — not about replacing our people, but scaling them.

In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Singapore has never won by competing on physical size or sheer volume. We win by moving ahead of the curve. We must move decisively from an efficient technological adopter to an aggressive platform creator, shifting from operational excellence to global technological leadership.

[Motion Speech]

Mr Jackson Lam (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore has always been more than just a place on the map. Our success has come from connecting people, businesses and ideas with the rest of the world. For a small island with no natural resources, connectivity has never simply been about transport. It has been about survival, resilience and economic competitiveness.

Today, this remains just as true. Our aviation sector contributes around 5% of Singapore's gross domestic product (GDP) and directly employs more than 60,000 people. Our maritime sector is the world's largest container transshipment hub, handling a record 41.12 million TEUs last year, with around 90% of the containers transshipped through our ports. But we should never assume this position is guaranteed.

Across our region, countries are investing heavily in ports, airports and logistics infrastructure. In this environment, our future competitiveness will depend not only on the infrastructure we build, but also on how intelligently we use it. That is why I believe Singapore should focus on three priorities.

First, we must become the world's smartest transport hub through AI and data. AI can optimise cargo flows, predict equipment failures before they occur, improve vessel and aircraft scheduling and detect supply chain disruptions before they become costly delays. Singapore has also made encouraging progress. MPA has launched Singapore's first Maritime Digital Twin, a real-time virtual model of our port that supports planning, risk management and operational optimisation. The next step is to connect these efforts across our ports, airports, logistics providers and customs systems into an integrated digital ecosystem.

Second, Singapore should aspire not only to be a transport hub, but also a transport innovation hub. Our ports and airports should become living test labs where SMEs and startups developing AI-powered logistics platforms, autonomous inspection systems and warehouse automation can test their innovations in real operating environments.

Third, as technology transforms transport, we must invest just as strongly in our people. As AI becomes embedded across our transport ecosystem, demand will grow for data analysts, systems engineers, cybersecurity specialists and digital operation managers. This means continuing to strengthen SkillsFuture, expanding industry attachments and supporting mid-career workers, and helping SMEs adopt new technologies.

Finally, as we become more digital, we must also become more secure. Cybersecurity, trusted digital identities and secure cross-border data flows are matters of national competitiveness.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore's story has never been one of standing still. Our future will not be determined simply by how many containers pass through our ports or how many passengers travel through our airports. It will be determined by whether Singapore becomes the place where technology, talent, trusted institutions and world-class infrastructure come together to create the transport ecosystem of the future. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, in a world that is in turmoil, in retreat from multilateralism, it is often tempting and, even some say, intuitive for us to hunker down and look to protect our own first.

Trump's Liberation Day tariffs, Brexit, the success of the far-right in many democratic systems are all reactions to the sense that many across the world have – that globalisation has failed. Yet, I would argue that this world view risks going down the very same pathways that would further entrench polarisation.

It also becomes important to have a hard look at where we stand in a world where truly global supply chains are being unpicked, localised, rewired. And the role that I believe we must play has to revolve around trust — trust that we remain open, predictable and never an instrument of another's strategic goals. This is why I believe our way forward has to be a reframing of the role that we play in the world — to promote Singapore not simply as a competitor but a connector.

I now turn to our trade infrastructure. We should stay attentive to the growing importance of digital public infrastructure. Singapore already has an advantage in this area — an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) report published in 2024 ranked us among the best performing economies in terms of our overall digital infrastructure and digital governance frameworks. However, the same report shows a dip in Singapore's relative rank in the people pillar.

Way back in 2007, Singapore launched TradeXchange. In 2018, this was replaced by the Networked Trade Platform. This now appears to have been replaced by SGTraDex, launched in June 2022. Yet publicly available data suggests that SGTraDex, like its predecessors, has not achieved universal use. Could the Minister thus clarify what progress have been made in terms of working towards the Government's declared adoption and value creation metrics?

More broadly, we must go beyond helping SMEs digitalise and instead equip them to take advantage of internationalisation in the digital economy. We must also concern ourselves with the possibility of large MNCs dominating high-value ecosystems while local enterprises take up low-value, low-margin activities. Could the Minister provide more details on our efforts thus far in countering economic enclaving?

We cannot overstate how exposed Singapore is. Shipping, maritime, aviation and related industries account for around 12% of Singapore's GDP, and for our trade flows, which are about three times our GDP, 90% depends on sea lanes. The expansion of modern conflict includes attacks on critical infrastructure, such as damage to submarine cables around the Baltics, Taiwan and the Red Sea. Could the Minister clarify the specific risk frameworks and contingency plans that would keep Singapore connected if key maritime, aviation, digital or energy supply routes are disrupted?

To conclude, Mr Speaker, as the world is becoming more volatile and less forgiving, Singapore must redouble efforts to remain globally indispensable. In doing so, we must champion connection and collaboration instead of close-minded focus on competition. But this larger strategic view must never obscure the real value of economic success — we do not pursue growth or connectivity for their own sake. We do so for Singaporeans. Thank you.

[Motion Speech]

Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang West): Mr Speaker, as we debate on the future of transport in this Motion, I would like to propose establishing Singapore as an international green air hub as a new growth engine for our aviation and aerospace industry. In relation to the language in the Motion proposed, I will focus on two points: frontier technologies and good jobs in Singapore. I hereby declare my interest as an employee in the aviation sector.

We are at the critical juncture today. We are committed to specific green goals, including on carbon emissions. We are also committed to building a vibrant aviation industry to provide good jobs and continued growth, but we cannot meet both ambitions under the current "business as usual" paradigm.

We need a leap of imagination and technology, a completely new way of doing things. It is a risky move, but we have made decisive breaks before.

Five decades ago, we made a big bet to move our airport from Paya Lebar to Changi. We put in place attractive air hub policies, make concerted efforts to grow airlines, airports and ground-handling capabilities. Today, we have a successful and multiple award-winning Changi Airport and SIA. Changi Airport is now ranked fourth business busiest airport in international passenger traffic and SIA has clinched the world's best airline successively.

Changi Airport is also one of the world's largest air cargo transshipment hub. Today, the aviation industry accounts for 5% of Singapore's GDP, or around $30 billion. Planning and construction for T5 is currently underway to create future capacity to handle up to 114 million passengers per annum, and SIA currently has 164 aircraft in its fleet, with another 49 aircraft on its order books.

The aerospace maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) industry houses regional headquarters for more than 130 companies, including leading ones such as Airbus, Boeing, Rolls Royce, Pratt and Whitney, and so on. And Singapore's aerospace output exceeded $18 billion in 2024 and accounts for about 10% of global MRO output.

This series of successes in our aviation sector are not coincidental. It took many years of long-term planning, significant investment, systematic development and well-coordinated implementation. The same big leap to create our new and next competitive advantage must begin now.

Our Singaporean psyche of "never rest on our laurels" and "plan for rainy days" will keep us thinking of how do we stay ahead of competition, not just by doing more of what we excel in, but to identify critical weaknesses and develop new competitive advantages.

In key air hubs around the world, there are three constraints limiting growth. First, capacity; second, manpower; and third, carbon emissions.

With the third runway completed and T5 construction underway, the first constraint on capacity growth is being addressed.

The second constraint on manpower is an ongoing challenge. Many airport staff had left the industry during the pandemic. We have an ageing population and worsening climate conditions.

To tackle this, we have started concerted R&D innovation efforts in Changi Airport over the past few years, leveraging technology developments in AVs, robotics and AI. In the next decade or so, we should see a new generation of autonomous solutions deployed, particularly in traditionally manpower heavy roles, such as in-ground handling and facilities management. Also, the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) has launched the One Aviation Manpower Fund to attract and retain talents in the aviation sector, with some $200 million of government grant allocated.

The third constraint in carbon emissions is probably the hardest to crack. In a recent report published by Transport and Environment, an aviation think tank, Changi Airport is ranked ninth in the world in terms of Scope 3 carbon emissions. As an expanding air hub, Changi Airport will inevitably chalk up higher carbon emissions so long as aircraft engines continue to burn jet fuel.

In 2024, CAAS released the Sustainable Air Hub Blueprint, the key recommendations included improving the efficiency of air traffic management, increased solar panel deployment in Changi and Seletar airports, expand the use of clean energy around ground vehicles and adopting sustainability aviation fuel by airlines. The Sustainability Aviation Fuel Levy Bill was passed in October 2025 in this House and will take effect from 2027, barring further delays.

The goal is to create certainty in aggregate demand, so as to prime local sustainability aviation fuel production at-scale by key producers, such as Neste.

In 2022, Neste established the world's largest sustainability aviation fuel production facility in Singapore. The intent is to start small with 1% to 3% sustainability aviation fuel uplift, because the price of sustainability aviation fuel is currently at least two to five times the cost of normal aviation fuel. Coupled with the recent war in the Middle East that already drove fuel prices to double their original levels, aviation authorities worldwide will be reluctant to mandate a more aggressive sustainability aviation fuel policy.

Moreover, feedstock availability to produce sustainability aviation fuel is limited, so the ability to meet long-term supply capacity at the market competitive cost may still be in question.

Like all fossil fuels, the supply of aviation fuel will one day run out. In recent years, there are two other streams of technology development for aircraft powered by clean energy.

In 2020, Airbus announced the hydrogen powered aircraft concept, ZEROe, for roll-out in 2035. However, presumably due to uncertainties of hydrogen as a fuel and the challenges of deploying hydrogen in an operational environment, Airbus has shelved the ZEROe prototype from 2035 by five to 10 years. Instead, Airbus announced, in March 2025, the Open Fan engine, next-generation single-aisle hybrid-electric aircraft that will enter operations in the second half of the 2030s.

Meanwhile, another track to design and manufacture battery-operated hybrid-electric and electric aircraft has been progressing steadily. With the rapid improvements in battery technology, it is estimated that in 15 years' time, hybrid-electric aircraft flights for short-haul flights within a range of 1,000 nautical miles will become a reality.

From Singapore, popular destinations within a 1,000 nautical mile radius include Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, Phuket, Langkawi, Medan and Tioman. Worldwide, about half of flights operated are short-haul flights under three-hour flight times and up to 1,000 nautical mile range. Short-haul flights create four times more carbon emissions per seat, compared to long-haul flights. Hence, decarbonisation of short-haul flights should be prioritised and switching them to fully electric flights will reduce overall aviation carbon emissions by an estimated 20%.

As battery technology developments have been making rapid progress, hybrid-electric and eventually, fully electric aircraft could replace conventional aircraft for these routes. This is a game changer in carbon emissions reduction, and we must spot the trend and the technology early. If we can do so and establish ourselves as an international green air hub, that will not only address our growing carbon emissions challenge, but also cement our position in sustainable aviation and in turn, create many new opportunities for Singapore's aviation and aerospace industry.

We have done this before for new technologies in the past. For example, the Economic Development Board (EDB) brought in Hyundai Motors Group to set up its electric vehicle (EV) manufacturing plants in Singapore, even though we did not have any car manufacturing track record and facilities.

To become an international green air hub, Singapore can be established as a centre of excellence for the R&D of hybrid-electric and electric aircraft, manufacture the aircraft parts in land abundant Johor, under our Special Economic Zone collaboration framework, assemble the aircraft back in Changi East Industrial Zone and finally, test flight the aircraft in Changi Airport. This approach is how Toulouse became the home of Airbus and Seattle became the home of Boeing decades ago. However, with trillions of dollars worth of back orders, neither of these two hubs are focused on becoming hubs of the future aircraft.

We are already halfway there. We are an established international aviation and aerospace hub, with a mature and thriving ecosystem of aviation, original equipment manufacturer (OEMs), MRO facilities, IHLs training aerospace engineers and technicians, 80 airlines, three runways and we will have five terminals and a new aviation industrial zone. We have a biennial Singapore Airshow and a very pro-innovation, pro-investment funding and financing environment.

Moreover, Singapore sits in the centre of the world's fastest growing region for aviation, comprising India, China and Southeast Asia. The carbon emissions in the supply chain logistics in terms of aircraft manufacturing, assembly testing and delivery would be minimised.

There is a famous saying by a Chinese philosopher, Mencius: "To achieve success, the right timing, right place and right people must coexist."

Now is the time, Singapore is the place, what is needed to turn us into an international green air hub is the right partners who share this ambition and are willing to work together to realise this vision.

Our Singapore is already home to the regional headquarters of conventional aircraft manufacturers, Boeing and Airbus, smaller aircraft manufacturers, such as Embraer and Avions de Transport Régional, and new players in the electric aircraft space, such as Elysian Aircraft, Heart Aerospace, Nimbus Aviation, Electra and Mitsubishi Aircraft Corporation, are mostly based in the Western world in North America and Europe.

Similar to how the Chinese EV manufacturers are disrupting the automobile industry, this electric aircraft companies will be the new darlings shaping the future of the aviation industry. The first step is to attract this disruptors, electric aircraft manufacturers to set up base in Singapore for R&D. Next is to connect them with funding platforms, such as the National Research Foundation (NRF) and EDB, as well as the private and institutional investors and banking sector financiers. Under the Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2025 Plan (RIE2025), significant R&D funding for aviation sector, for manufacturing, trade and connectivity purposes has been set aside.

And finally, to connect the electric aircraft manufacturers with their potential customers, namely major airlines operating short-haul routes in the region, such as SIA, Scoot, Lion Air, AirAsia Group and VietJet.

The value we bring as an established international air hub to these electric aircraft manufacturers is invaluable, because they can immediately plug into a robust and ready machinery, and fulfil fast-growing aggregated demand, financed by low-cost and abundant funding. The aircraft manufacturers can stay focused on their niche expertise and bring product to market in the shortest time.

Finally, what is all this for? An international green air hub does not just benefit the aviation industry. It is an asset for all Singaporeans. We will be an R&D Centre of Excellence for the IHLs and young aerospace engineers for the long term. Currently, the National University of Singapore and Nanyang Technological University both offer undergraduate courses in aerospace engineering. Graduates may join MRO companies like ST Aerospace or aircraft engine companies like Rolls Royce, but doing mostly maintenance work.

One of my young residents, N, 18 years old, is an aspiring final year student at Ngee Ann Polytechnic, studying aerospace engineering. She is mulling over whether she should continue to pursue a university degree in aerospace engineering or a more traditional engineering degree in mechanical engineering. She shared that if there are more exciting R&D opportunities in aerospace, like designing and manufacturing an aircraft, her decision would have been very clear.

Young Singaporeans want to be challenged and we can create opportunities for them. We can also attract world-class talents in aerospace engineering to work and live here. In time, Singaporean engineers and designers can become world-class leaders in this nascent field.

More importantly, aviation manufacturing is a high tech, high value industry and these new career pathways will create many high-paying jobs. They can apply the latest AI and 3D printing technologies to design and build an electric aircraft from scratch. Adrian Gooz and Akim Niyonzimas, the founders of Nimbus Aviation, shared that his team used AI and 3D printing to design and build its aircraft prototype, massively reducing the cost of R&D and the time required to commercialise a solution.

Moreover, many young people very much care about the environment and want to contribute to the decarbonisation journey. Creating an electric aircraft that can dramatically reduce aviation carbon footprint would be a dream career for many young engineers.

Mr Speaker, as I said earlier, we are today at a critical juncture. It is our time for an ambitious goal for air transport, from Paya Lebar to Changi almost 50 years ago, from fossil to green aviation today.

I hope the Minister for Transport and his team will carefully consider my proposal to create an international green air hub and grow the Centre of Excellence for electric aircraft manufacturing in Singapore. This will be a new engine of growth. This is the use of frontier technologies to secure good jobs for Singaporeans.

This is the story of the past, which has given us our prosperity and our place in this world today and this can be the story of our future – and we must take to the skies and reshape our destiny once again. Mr Speaker, I support the Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Mr Fadli Fawzi (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, hardly anyone in the House will disagree that our openness to the world and our world-class infrastructure are key reasons for Singapore's prosperity. Our major gateways like Changi Airport and the Port of Singapore have enabled our nation to punch above our weight. Our future success will rely on us being at the forefront of connecting people, markets, ideas and capital.

Today's Motion affirms the role of a world-class infrastructure in reinforcing Singapore's position as a global transport hub and anchoring good jobs in, Singapore. All of us here can appreciate how and why this is important.

However, I hope the House will join me in reflecting whether our world-class infrastructure should only have the purposes of consolidating our status as a transport hub and anchoring jobs here. Should we not ponder on the question who should our world-class infrastructure serve? Should our class infrastructure merely facilitate the movement of capital, goods and talent across borders? Or should it also improve and enhance the everyday lives of Singaporeans?

My answer, Mr Speaker, is that our world-class infrastructure should not just create economic opportunities for Singaporeans. No doubt that is an important objective. However, it is also imperative that our class infrastructure is something that serves our citizens directly.

As far as possible, our infrastructure should not merely facilitate Singaporeans getting good jobs but also tangibly improve the lived experiences of our people. By this, I mean ensuring that Singaporeans can genuinely enjoy or benefit from our infrastructure.

Changi Airport offers an example of what I mean. Changi is unquestionably a world-class aviation hub. It is also well loved by Singaporeans, something that we all are proud of. Even if one is not catching a flight, one can spend an afternoon at Jewel. Families can gather there for meal at one of the many wonderful restaurants. Couples can go for a date at the Canopy Park and everyone, young and old, can enjoy the Rain Vortex.

Changi Airport is an excellent model of infrastructure that generates economic value while simultaneously enriching the everyday lives of Singaporeans. Yes, the airport creates job opportunities but it also offers social and recreational amenities to ordinary Singaporeans, including those who are not frequent flyers. And I think it is good that Changi Airport is not merely the preserve of jetsetting elite but open to all Singaporeans in the sense that there will always be something for someone to do that even if they are not catching a flight.

Sir, this element of public access is what our world-class infrastructure should always aspire to include. In our pursuit to be a globally connected aviation, maritime and logistics hub, we must ensure that Singaporeans are not and do not feel alienated from the world-class infrastructure which underpins and makes possible the hub status.

Allow me to further illustrate my point with the more mundane example of expressways. They undoubtedly facilitate trade and logistics. Goods can be efficiently transported from our port terminals to our industrial estates and commercial zones and vice versa.

But while we appreciate the economic efficiencies created by our network of expressways, we should also keep in mind that two-thirds of Singaporean resident households that do not own cars, including myself. Non-car owning Singaporeans can only directly benefit from an eight-lane expressway if they are riding in a private hire car, or one of the bus services that ply an expressway sector.

It is thus heartening that the upcoming of North-South Corridor is designed to be multimodal with dedicated bus lanes and cycling paths to allow as many ordinary Singaporeans, including those who do not own cars to directly use and benefit from the new expressway.

These two examples of our airport and our expressways hopefully clarify my point that our infrastructure should be designed with public access in mind. Our people should be able to use our world-class infrastructure to enhance our immediate quality of life.

Sir, while we are on the topic of public access to our world-class infrastructure, I want to reiterate the Workers' Party's (WP's) call for public transport to be made free for seniors and people with disabilities during off-peak periods.

I have previously in raised in this House that the Freedom Pass in London is a worthy model to consider emulating. The Freedom Pass is given to London residents above the age of 66 and those with eligible disabilities to freely travel across the Transport for London network. There are, however, peak hour restrictions on weekday mornings for holders of the older persons' Freedom Pass.

There is a study on the Freedom Pass, which was published in 2014, and I hope to read part of the abstract into the record. In their article, "More than A to B: the role of free bus travel for the mobility and well-being of older citizens in London", the author stated that "travelling by bus provided opportunities for meaningful social interaction. Travelling as art of the 'general public' provided a sense of belonging and visibility in the public arena, a socially acceptable way of tackling chronic loneliness. The Freedom Pass was described not only as providing access to essential goods and services but also as a widely prized mechanism for participation in life of the city."

What the research suggests is that providing free travel on public transport helps with seniors' well-being and enables their civic participation. Crucially, it makes senior citizens feel like they belong and have a place in society.

This comes back to my earlier point that Singaporeans must not feel alienated from our world-class infrastructure. Singaporeans, regardless of age or means, must be able to use that infrastructure, not merely benefit economically from them.

I should acknowledge that my hon friend from Sengkang, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, had also called for off-peak public transport to be made free for seniors and persons with disabilities during the 14th Parliament. The then Minister for Transport, S Iswaran, rebuffed this proposal with the warning that the ensuing financial burden is by no means insignificant.

The WP has consistently argued that public transport should be viewed primarily as a public service rather than a profit centre. Especially for our seniors, public transport helps to fulfil important non-material needs such as for companionship, community and belonging. These are sometimes overlooked when we consider the matter only in terms of dollars and cents.

Sir, the Freedom Pass has demonstrated its value for the senior citizens of London. As Singapore becomes a super-aged society, I believe that our senior citizens here similarly deserve their own Merdeka Pass.

Mr Speaker, the Motion also mentions the role of frontier technologies in anchoring good jobs in Singapore. While AI threatens to change the face of many professions, we continue to face persistent labour shortages in the public transportation sector. Currently, less than a third of bus captains are Singaporeans. The Acting Minister for Transport has also acknowledged that recruitment and retention are the biggest challenges preventing further expansion of the bus network.

Frontier technologies, like AVs, could offer a potential solution. AVs have already been trialled in Punggol to ply short, fixed route services and self-driving public bus services will also be piloted in Marina Bay and One-North from the second half of 2026.

Should the self-driving public bus service pilots in Marina Bay and One-North be successful, I would like to suggest that the Land Transport Authority (LTA) next consider deploying self-driving public buses to build a network of night bus services. We could start by running self-driving night buses along existing Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) lines when these lines are closed during the overnight hours. Late night bus services have in the past suffer from low ridership and the NightRider and Nite Owl Services have been discontinued since the COVID-19 pandemic.

But even before the pandemic, we never had a proper network of late bus services that replicate even on a limited basis the connectivity provided during daylight hours, unlike in other major global cities like London, New York, Hong Kong or Beijing. The pre-pandemic NightRider and Nite Owl services only operated uni-directionally, from the city to various housing estates, and primarily serviced people having a night out in the city.

But a proper network of self-driving late night buses bus services, running along existing MRT lines would be truly revolutionary for Singapore. It would not just benefit Singaporeans enjoying the nightlife, but also people who finish or start work after the MRT shuts down, and staff and travellers going to the airport for late night flights. Affordable late-night mobility should be part of a vibrant, world city like Singapore. And with AVs, what was previously economically and logistically infeasible could become a reality.

I urge LTA to seriously consider trialling self-driving buses on bus routes overnight as well, as this is a use case that could benefit many Singaporeans while traffic levels and any risk posed by the AVs to public safety are also much lower.

Eventually, we can even consider expanding AVs to support school bus services, which is another area where a shortage of drivers and rising cost pressures have made it more difficult for school bus operators to sustain operations. For example, AVs could be used to shuttle students who live more than four kilometres from their school since bus operators are now no longer contractually required serve them.

This is not to suggest that automation is a substitute for valuing human work. Even with AVs, Singaporeans will continue to depend on thousands of bus captains for the foreseeable future. While we rely on AVs to supplement our manpower needs, we must continue to make sure that our bus operators enjoy the wages, career progression and working conditions that commensurate with the skills and socially valuable work that they do. Bus driving should be seen as a profession Singaporeans should be proud to enter and not simply one that we struggle to fulfil.

Sir, in this speech, I only want to affirm that ordinary Singaporeans should not feel alienated from the world-class infrastructure sitting in our country.

As we have seen with Changi Airport, Singapore is capable of building infrastructure that both impresses the world and benefits the lives of Singaporeans. Changi drives our economic competitiveness while simultaneously being a place for Singaporeans to gather, relax, celebrate and create memories.

So, as we develop the infrastructure befitting a global hub status, I hope the House can appreciate that the real measure of a truly world-class infrastructure is whether the people who build our country can truly enjoy it.

[Motion Speech]

Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast-Jurong West): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak on a future that is no longer a distant sci-fi movie, but a reality knocking aggressively at our doors: AVs. Before I proceed, I would like to declare my interest as the chief executive officer of Strides Premier, a subsidiary of SMRT.

As someone who has been in the transport sector for years, I have watched this space very closely. Almost 10 years ago, I took my very first AV ride with nuTonomy at One-North. It was groundbreaking for its time, but looking back, it was quite basic. If there was a simple obstacle on the road, the vehicle came to a dead halt, it could not even overtake.

Fast forward to the last couple of years. I have personally tested Waymo in the US, Mobileye in Germany, Baidu Apollo Go, WeRide and Pony.ai in China. The leap in technology is staggering. These are no longer mere "experiments". They are fully mature robotaxis taking fare-paying passengers, navigating complex mega-cities daily. Globally, over 10,000 robotaxis are already deployed across the US, China, Europe and the Middle East. Meanwhile, here at home, we are also conducting localised AV trials in Punggol.

Mr Speaker, the technology is ready. But the critical question is: are our people ready?

To understand what is at stake, we must look at the human face of the point-to-point (P2P) transport sector. In 2013, before the explosion of private hire cars (PHCs), Singapore had over 28,000 taxis. Today, the taxi fleet has shrunk to about 12,000, but we now have over 60,000 PHC drivers. Combined, that is over 70,000 Singaporeans earning a living on our roads.

For many of them, driving is a job of the last resort. It is the safety net that keeps their families afloat, bringing home an average of about $3,000 a month. Many have opted this line of job due to changes in industries. Driving taxis or PHCs, for some, is the job of last resort to maintain an average salary. If AVs were to replace just 10% of this fleet, displacing 7,000 drivers, where will they go? It will be an uphill battle for Singapore to find equivalent jobs with similar pay for 7,000 of our fellow citizens. Not all of them will be able to adapt to new jobs associated with our new AI-led economy. We cannot afford to let them become the collateral damage of progress.

Therefore, I would like to urge MOT and our tripartite partners to take a proactive, human-centric approach to this transition. I suggest a clear, strategic framework to deal with this situation.

First, we need to strategically deploy AVs to areas that are currently underserved by our pool of P2P drivers. Every day, passengers struggle to find rides to remote industrial areas like Tuas and Jurong Island, and to some extend, leisure spots like Sentosa and Mandai Wildlife Reserve – because drivers are reluctant to go there due to the low chance of finding a return passenger. Similarly, finding a ride in the wee hours of the morning remains a challenge for many commuters. Let us consider deploying AVs to plug these exact operational gaps and serve the underserved, rather than pitting machines against our drivers in high-demand zones.

Second, we must look at retraining with a dose of realism. I urge MOT to collaborate with the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) or the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) to convert some of our displaced P2P drivers into controllers at AV operations control centres to monitor fleets and to take over the AVs during unusual circumstances and during emergencies.

However, we need to be brutally honest with ourselves. This cannot be the only solution. As each controller is expected to oversee up to 15 AVs concurrently, the math simply does not add up. There will not be enough controller jobs for every displaced driver. Furthermore, these roles require entirely new tech skill sets that some existing drivers may not possess.

Therefore, MOT and NTUC need to work aggressively with various agencies, including the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) and social service sectors to provide comprehensive Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs). We need to look beyond land transport and transition these drivers into other structural growth sectors of our economy, such as healthcare, or our booming aviation sector, including the upcoming new T5. It is highly unlikely that AVs will displace a massive number of P2P drivers in the near term, but we must start planning today, so that our people will be prepared.

Finally, Mr Speaker, we need a dual-speed strategy. While we have to move cautiously on robotaxis to ensure safety and because of the direct impact on Singaporean livelihoods, we should do the exact opposite where we face severe domestic shortages. We must deploy AVs where we have a high reliance on foreign labour.

Look at our public buses. LTA recently had to work with Public Transport Operators to significantly increase the starting pays and sign-on bonuses for bus captains. Why? Because local manpower is shrinking. In 2021, Singaporeans and Permanent Residents made up 54% of our bus captains. By 2025, that number dropped to just 41%, a worrying 13% drop.

Assuming they are completely safe, autonomous buses are the exact solution we need to mitigate this acute domestic manpower crunch. LTA is already trialing AVs for bus services 400 and 91, but we can consider doing more. I urge MOT to consider investing more capital, pouring in more resources and moving with a much greater sense of urgency.

The same logic applies to our maritime and aviation sectors. These critical economic engines have a heavy, structural reliance on foreign labour where deep automation would be immensely valuable. However, unlike robotaxis, AV deployment in these heavy industrial sectors yields lower immediate commercial returns, making private players hesitant to shoulder the massive upfront risk alone. MOT and the related agencies could intervene, co-invest and accelerate adoption by making far better use of the NRF's funding under the RIE2030 framework. Instead of small, isolated pilots, we need to direct these national resources toward high-impact, scaled-up industrial applications.

At Changi Airport, we also need to aggressively expand airside trials, utilising autonomous baggage tractors to optimise the ferrying of luggage and cargo dollies between terminals and aircraft. Simultaneously, at the Tuas Megaport, we need to accelerate the trial and push for the full commercial maturity of AGVs to replace foreign container truck drivers. By boldly backing these strategic sectors, we can solve our structural labour constraints while firmly securing Singapore's position as a premier, future-ready global transport hub. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): In early June this year, at the invitation of LTA, I brought nearly 50 residents and grassroots leaders to Punggol to personally experience a ride in the AVs. Although a safety driver was present onboard, residents could see it clearly for themselves that the steering wheel in the AV was turning on its own. Throughout the entire 20-minute journey, there was no need for any human intervention whatsoever. When obstacles appeared on the road, the self-driving car navigated around them with ease and continued on its way. One resident remarked with wonder: "With my eyes closed, I wouldn't have known I was in a self-driving car at all." I smiled and asked: "If there were no safety driver in the AV, would you still dare to ride in it?" Another resident immediately replied: "I'd want to even more – because without a driver around, you'd have more privacy!"

The positive response from residents surprised me somewhat. Everyone marvelled that self-driving cars were no longer a scene in a science fiction movie, but a reality right before our eyes. Yet even as people were excited about the technology, a moment of silence fell and residents, almost in unison, gave voice to a deep and shared concern: what will become of our taxi drivers and ride-hailing drivers in the future?

Mr Speaker, this is precisely the point that strikes closest to my heart. In Singapore, more than 70,000 taxi and private-hire drivers brave the roads day in and day out to earn their living. For them, ferrying passengers is the safety net that keeps their entire families fed, housed, and clothed.

While AVs may not pose too great a disruption to them in the near term, we must plan ahead. We cannot wait until the rain has soaked us through before thinking to find shelter. The tripartite partners must begin working together now to find alternative pathways for affected taxi and private-hire drivers. We cannot allow these drivers who have quietly served Singapore all these years to become casualties of technological progress. On the contrary, we must help them through the transition and make them a vital new force across our emerging industries.

(In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, disruption is inevitable, but hardship for our workers is not. Innovation is a tool, but compassion must be our guide. Let us prepare Singapore for the AV revolution, not by rushing to replace our local drivers, but by strategically using technology to solve our deepest manpower deficits, while protecting, retraining and honouring the human beings who keep our nation moving every single day. I support the Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat (Aljunied): Singapore is a maritime nation in the fullest sense – the world's busiest container transhipment port, the world's largest bunkering hub, and by one global ranking, the leading maritime city on the planet.

The sea is not one sector among many for us; it is the foundation we were built on. We are an island that imports more than nine in 10 of our calories across the water and we sit astride the Straits of Malacca, through which roughly a quarter of all seaborne trade and nearly half the world's seaborne crude oil moves.

A nation this dependent on the sea cannot safely treat the capability to move on it as a commodity to be rented. Yet, over two decades, we quietly gave away one of its core sovereign capabilities – a shipping line of our own.

NOL, the national carrier, was sold to France's CMA CGM in 2016, the last act in a long dismantling: the tanker fleet to Malaysia in 2003, the headquarters in 2012, the logistics arm in 2015 and then, the line itself. In so doing, we exited an entire strategic domain.

We did this right as every serious maritime nation moved the other way. France is putting 10 of the world's largest ships under its flag as a "strategic fleet" – requisitionable in a crisis, crewed by its own officers – using CMA CGM, the very company that bought our line.

Korea, after Hanjin collapsed the same year we sold NOL, poured state billions into rebuilding Hyundai Merchant Marine (HMM) into a top 10 carrier through a dedicated sovereign vehicle. China built COSCO into an arm of national power. Even Australia, down to a dozen trading ships, is legislating a national strategic fleet.

These are not nostalgists. They are states that understand shipping is a strategic capability, not a commodity service to be rented.

And our own Government knows this – in the air! "For Changi to work well and succeed", it told this House, "You must first have an anchor national carrier – SIA". When SIA neared collapse, Temasek put in up to $15 billion dollars to keep it alive. SIA and NOL were both Temasek operators. We treat the airline, SIA, as strategic and rescue it. But we treat the sea carrier, NOL, as a commodity and sell it. Temasek has since bought into a different carrier – Pacific International Lines (PIL) – but we hold it for a return, not for a purpose.

So, Singapore stands as a major maritime hub with no national line of its own.

It sold NOL on the argument that container shipping is fungible. The box does not care whose ship it rides in.

It does not defend SIA on those grounds at all. It keeps the airline because a national carrier is a strategic asset in its own right: a capability the country controls, the people it trains and the option to direct it in a crisis. The Government has not stopped believing a national carrier is strategic – it has only stopped believing it for the sea.

The case for selling NOL rested on a category error: that a shipping line is just freight and freight is fungible. It is not. A national line is two strategic capabilities bound together.

First, it is the academy that makes our maritime people. It is a ladder that runs from the deck of the ship to the command of a port, and every rung is built on the one below. It begins at sea. A cadet stands his watches and qualifies as an officer of the watch, then as shift mate and, a decade or more on, as master. The engine room climbs the same way to the chief engineer.

None of this can be done in a classroom or bought with a grant because each certificate is a legal product of documented sea time on a working ship. That sea time is the entry ticket for the shore roles that keep the port's waters safe. The harbour pilot who boards and berths the largest ships afloat, and the surveyors who inspect them must, by the rules, hold those certificates. And above them sits the Port Master, the statutory officer who can order any vessel in our waters to move, stop or stay.

Singapore's Port Masters have been a line of master mariners – Captain M Segar, who came up as a cadet and a harbour pilot, then port master, then rose to assistant chief executive of MPA; and Captain Lee Cheng Wee, the harbour pilot in the early 1970s whom the Government held up in this year's Budget debate as an example for the next generation. No one is being made a master mariner by a scholarship.

Marine command is the one part of the port that still requires a master's ticket – and we are failing. Fewer than one in 12 officers on our own flag is Singaporean. Our cadets must seek their sea time on foreign ships and may face a lack of access.

Britain watched its officer corps age and shrink as its fleet flagged out and then had to pay shipowners, through the tax code, to train cadets again. Australia, down from 100 trading ships to about a dozen, is now legislating a strategic fleet to rebuild the skills they had lost. Ships can be bought or chartered within a year, but a generation of sea-experienced Singaporeans takes a generation to grow.

When Temasek sold NOL, it crystallised a financial gain – a one-time figure on a balance sheet – and sold the entire training ground which the whole ladder stands on. Cut the feet away at the foot of the ladder and a decade or more on, the top of it empties. This is what we are seeing. We have been in search of lost time ever since. In the long run, the seafaring core of our own port, our harbour pilots and the marine command above them, cannot be kept Singaporean. It must be staffed, like our own flag already is, by other nations' officers.

Second is directable capacity – the difference between sovereignty and dependence in a crisis.

Container space is rationed whenever effective capacity is squeezed faster than it can be replaced. The demand surged at the pandemic, when rates rose seven-fold, or risk-driven diversions, like the Red Sea, where rerouting every ship around Africa swallowed a-tenth of the world's capacity.

In such a crunch, the market does not serve all comers equally. The carriers still sailing gave priority to exporters under their own flag. Korea ordered HMM to ringfence space for Korean firms.

A nation relying on foreign lines is served last, at whatever price is named. A country that owns no capacity in a capacity crunch is a beggar for allocation and will be served with all others.

I put this to the Government in April. Its answer was that our supply lines are secured by diversification, our standing as a trusted hub and a wide network of global shipping lines. I respectfully disagree and I think it conflates the role of the port and the carrier.

It turns on the ambiguity in the word "node". When we call ourselves a node, we mean "leverage" – some power to bend the flow of trade our way. But a hub port only gives you half of that. It gives you centrality – the power to attract. But it does not give you leverage – the power to make ships that call, serve us first when it counts or to train our merchant navy.

After all, a neutral hub holds its traffic only by staying competitive. Even winning that competition, if it wins, is not the same as holding leverage. While Singapore is still the world's largest transshipment hub, the Maersk Hapag-Lloyd Gemini Network still chose Tanjung Pelepas over Singapore as its most important hub in 2025. The carrier picks its port, but the port cannot pick its carriers. When space runs short, it is the carrier that rations it, not the port.

The sale of NOL and the stripping before it, were Temasek's calls. The same Temasek that in 2020 put $15 billion dollars into rescuing SIA. One set of hands kept one national carrier and sold the other. It was a big failure of strategic judgement, and the Government should not have allowed Temasek to sell off NOL.

So, let us rebuild. I am asking the Government to treat sovereign shipping as what it is – a strategic capability to be rebuilt deliberately.

If we wanted to rebuild a national carrier, we would not start from zero. Through Heliconia, Temasek holds the majority of PIL, our largest homegrown carrier, which has 100-odd ships, profitable and strongest where the giants are thin – in Africa and the Global South. But Heliconia currently holds it the way it holds any company, as an investment for a return. It calls itself, in its own words, an SME-enabler. PIL is run as a profit-maximising line by a professional chief executive under no national duty of any kind, no obligation to reserve capacity for Singapore in a crisis, no Singaporean crew requirement even on the ships that fly our flag, no training quota and the one voluntary scheme it has is winding down – and no mandatory routes that it must run.

What it is missing is a purpose. PIL could be given a national mandate, held both for a return and also to train our officers, to hold capacity that can be directed when a crisis comes and backed to grow over time. PIL's moat is a niche – Africa and the global South. It is not fully the academy that we need because our port is an East-West machine – Asia, Europe and transpacific arteries, the largest ships afloat and transshipment at scale that only those lanes generate.

So, the real questions are how much of the East-West capability that we gave up with NOL we now have to rebuild and how far up the ladder we are willing to climb to do it.

Hard choices face this country again. At the floor, a national mandate over PIL as it stands, a training quota, reserved crisis capacity, a Singaporean crew requirement on the ships that fly our flag for a cost of about tens of millions a year. The next rung, back PIL to climb into the East-West trades. At first, through slot charters and vessel sharing, rebuilding the operational skills our hub actually runs on. At the top, owning mainline tonnage outright, the capital-heavy commitment a serious rebuild demands.

Each rung costs more and buys more sovereignty. The judgement is how far to climb. But standing still is also a choice and the one that ends in the port unable to crew its own senior ranks.

We should study all proven models. Korea's Korea Ocean Business Corporation is a statutory body charged by law with maintaining an essential national shipping system, financing the fleet and guaranteeing tonnage. We, too, should also consider a binding obligation to train our Singaporean cadets.

And to be clear about the costs, scale in the mainline trades is brutal and capital hungry, which is why it needs to be Government-backed, phased and built with patience. Korea rebuilt HMM over five years and several billion dollars. If we were to do it, it would cost us billions, too.

But to balk at that cost means having almost no Singaporean sailors manning Singapore's ports. Ultimately, we need to decide if we are going to create a system to perpetuate Singaporeans in our own maritime industry and ports, to rebuild our own leverage over shipping capacity – whether we are a country that means to own a ship or one content to crew someone else's. Or if we want to be a country that does not have the ships to train our own people in ship-faring and that will, in the next supply shock, stand as a price taker in its own port.

Speaker, in conclusion. France was our counterparty and is a mirror. It treats the company CMA CGM that bought our line NOL as a sovereignty asset and it is enlarging its national fleet, while we dismantled ours and called the matter settled. This is not settled. I have three questions for this Government.

One, by the same logic that makes SIA the anchor in the air, why does a national carrier stops mattering at the water's edge? Two, if we mean to grow our own seafarers, how do we make a master mariner with no fleet to make him or her on? And who then fills a marine command our own port depends on? And three, when shipping space is next rationed, what capacity can Singapore actually direct?

That the sale of NOL was a very poor decision, CMA CGM's ability to turn a net profit less than one year after acquisition clearly proves. My belief is that we must draw a line on Temasek's very poor decision to sell NOL in 2016, move on to rebuild our shipping capacity and make back the time we have lost. Thank you.

[Motion Speech]

Mr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Changi): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sir, I declare my interest as I work in the aerospace industry and serve as an Authority Member of CAAS.

I rise in support of the Motion tabled by my fellow MOT GPC colleagues. Over the past few months, the GPC has engaged extensively with industry leaders and experts because we believe this is the right time to take a strategic relook of transport in Singapore. While we continue improving our transport system for the daily needs of Singaporeans, we must also recognise transport as a cornerstone of Singapore's long-term economic competitiveness in an increasingly fragmented and uncertain world.

This Motion is, therefore, about far more than transport. It is about Singapore's future.

Our position as a leading aviation, maritime and logistics hub was never inevitable. It was earned through decades of bold leadership, long-term planning and the discipline to stay ahead of change. But staying ahead is becoming harder. Around us, countries are building bigger airports, deeper ports and larger logistics parks. Infrastructure alone is no longer enough. Singapore must create new sources of competitive advantage.

Today, I would like to propose a simple framework: growing trust to gives us influence; through influence, we create integration; integration generates intelligence; and intelligence creates economic value.

I will shape the framework through four interconnected ideas: first, strengthen Singapore's international leadership by shaping global standards and leading aviation and maritime governance; second, build an integrated regional transport and manufacturing ecosystem that deepens connectivity and multiplies ASEAN's collective competitiveness; third, harness frontier technologies and AI to transform Singapore from a trusted transport hub into the trusted orchestrator of intelligent, multimodal transport and logistics flows; and finally, treat transport not merely as infrastructure but as a national economic strategy that creates new engines of growth, high-value jobs and long-term prosperity for Singaporeans.

First, lead by shaping the rules. Singapore's success has never been built on geography alone. It has been built on trust. Every aircraft departing Changi depends not only on our airport, but on international agreements that allow aircraft to move safely across borders. Every vessel entering our ports depends on trusted institutions, common standards and international cooperation.

The recent Singapore-Indonesia Flight Information Region agreement, together with disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz, reminds us that diplomacy, trusted partnerships and international law remain strategic assets.

As countries invest in bigger infrastructure, Singapore cannot compete on size alone. We must compete by shaping the rules that govern global transport. History shows that countries which write tomorrow's rules rarely struggle to compete under them.

We should continue strengthening institutions, such as CAAS, MPA and the Singapore Aviation Academy, not only as regulators, but as global platforms for capability development, thought leadership and international collaboration.

I would also like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the outstanding work our CAAS officers, whose dedication helps Singapore secure re-election to the 36-member ICAO Council with the highest number of votes ever received by any member state in ICAO history.

While we continue to strength institutions, at the same time, Singapore should lead the governance of next-generation transport from low-level airspace management systems (LLAMSs), cross-border drone corridors and autonomous aviation to AI-enabled air traffic management, autonomous vessels and digital maritime standards. For example, Singapore could pioneer an LLAMS, the digital operating system for low-altitude space. Unlike today's conventional air traffic control, an LLAMS would safely integrate drones, autonomous cargo aircraft and future urban air mobility through dynamic routing, digital flight authorisation, geofencing, AI traffic optimisation and real-time conflict management. This would create the regulatory and digital foundation for regional drone corridors, further linking Singapore with the region, and unlocking new opportunities in industrial logistics, offshore energy, maritime inspection and autonomous cross-border services.

Trust gives Singapore influence. But influence alone is not enough. To create value, we must build a larger ecosystem. Which brings me to my second point on building the ecosystem. If international leadership gives us influence, regional integration gives us scale.

We often view aviation, maritime and land transport as separate sectors. However, our future advantage will not come from having the best airport or the best port in isolation. It will come from orchestrating them as one intelligent regional ecosystem.

The development of Changi Airport T5 presents a once-in-a-generation opportunity. By integrating T5 with Tanah Merah Ferry Terminal and stronger links to the Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone, the oil and gas industry in Pengerang, the Batam-Bintan-Karimun (BBK) free trade zone and regional tourism destinations, we can create a truly multimodal gateway connecting this region to the world.

But the greater opportunity lies beyond just connectivity. Imagine advanced manufacturing systems manufactured in Changi, with its semiconductor chips leaving Pasir Ris, with AI-enabled fleet management and autonomous software developed in the Punggol Digital District, with logistics coordinated from our Tampines Logistics Hub, financing arranged in the central business district and supporting products coming from the Johor Special Economic Zone and BBK free trade zone reaching out to global markets – all operating as one intelligent economic system.

That is the ecosystem that we should build.

I would like to propose to transform Singapore's eastern corridor into an integrated economic powerhouse linking Changi Airport, Tanah Merah Ferry Terminal, Changi's aerospace MRO ecosystem, Loyang Industrial Estate, Pasir Ris Semiconductor Park, Tampines Logistics Park, Punggol Digital District, Seletar Aerospace Park through an AI-enabled multimodal network, all connected through our world-class land transport system of expressways and MRT lines, including the new cross-island line, linking goods, capital and our talented workforce.

Few countries possess such a dense concentration of aerospace, advanced manufacturing, logistics, digital industries and transport infrastructure within such a compact footprint.

Land made Singapore a port. Trust made us a hub. Intelligence can make us indispensable.

Our ambition should not be to compete with our neighbours, but to multiply this region's collective strengths. Singapore can anchor advanced manufacturing, aerospace engineering, R&D, financing and supply chain orchestration, while complementary manufacturing takes place where land, labour and natural resources are more competitive.

Take batteries as one example. Indonesia has abundant nickel. Singapore can become the world's trusted hub for battery certification, financing, commodity trading, sustainability assurance and global logistics.

Transport can no longer create prosperity simply by moving goods. It creates prosperity by connecting ecosystems. Regional integration gives us scale, but scale alone will not define the future. Our next competitive advantage must be intelligence.

Which brings me to my third point, on leading with frontier technology. The industrial age rewarded geography. The digital age rewarded connectivity. The AI age will reward efficient orchestration.

Singapore should establish itself as a global centre of excellence for AI-enabled multimodal transport, logistics and industrial optimisation. To realise this vision, I would like to propose three national initiatives.

First, build the world's first National AI Logistics Control Tower, a digital brain for Singapore's logistics ecosystem. Rather than optimising individual companies as part of a value chain, it would be using agentic AI and integrating maritime, both high-altitude and low-altitude, and land digital twins to orchestrate cargo seamlessly across ports, airports, drone corridors, roads, warehouses and customs as one intelligent national network.

Second, make Singapore the world's living laboratory for autonomous logistics through the Singapore Autonomous Logistics Initiative. By integrating AVs, drones, harbour craft and intelligent logistics systems under a common national regulatory framework, Singapore can pioneer regional drone corridors and autonomous freight networks that become the global reference model for future logistics.

Third, establish the world's first National Quantum Logistics Programme, combining AI and quantum optimisation to solve logistics challenges beyond the reach of conventional computing, from airline cargo allocation and multimodal routing to fleet deployment, port operations and supply chain resilience.

Mr Speaker, the future will not belong to the countries with the biggest ports or airports. It will belong to those with the smartest transport ecosystems. Singapore already has the trust, connectivity and talent. We must now invest more boldly in research, innovation and enterprise so that we do not simply participate in the future of global transport. We help define it.

Finally, transport is an economic strategy. We often think of transport as just a sector. I believe we should think of it as an enabler of our economy. Every investment in transport multiplies opportunities across every other sector. It strengthens advanced manufacturing, anchors global supply chains, accelerates the digital economy, attracts investment and creates better jobs.

As supply chains become increasingly shaped by AI, data and geopolitical changes, the countries that create the greatest value will not necessarily manufacture everything themselves. They will design, coordinate and optimise how the entire network operates. That should be Singapore's ambition. Not merely to move cargo. But to move value.

And no operating system succeeds without great people. I therefore welcome the Ministry's continued investment in developing our transport workforce through initiatives such as OneAviation which was launched by Minister of State Sun Xueling. I am especially pleased that Pasir Ris-Changi will host the OneAviation Career Fair later this month, creating opportunities for more Singaporeans to participate in this exciting future. Because ultimately, our greatest competitive advantage will never be our infrastructure. It will always be our people. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): Singapore's future will no longer depend on having the biggest airport or the busiest port. Our future depends on our ability to lead, connect the region and harness smart technologies to drive the economy. Transport is not just about building roads, MRT lines, ports or airports. It is a national economic strategy. We must take the lead in shaping international standards, strengthening partnerships with our neighbours and harnessing AI to position Singapore as the regional hub for smart transport and logistics coordination.

Our goal is not to compete with our neighbours, but to build a stronger and more prosperous ASEAN together. If Singapore was once known as a global transport hub, we must now aim even higher to become the "orchestra of ASEAN transport for the world", that coordinates the movement of goods, capital, technology, ideas and talent across the region. By doing so, we can create more high-value jobs, attract quality investments and secure lasting prosperity for all Singaporeans.

(In English): Mr Speaker, allow me to conclude with a simple framework. Singapore's future lies in creating FLOW. F, frame the global rules. L, link regional ecosystems. O, we orchestrate with AI and frontier technologies. And W, we win by creating greater economic value, better jobs and better lives for Singaporeans.

For the past 60 years, Singapore mastered the movement of ships. Then we mastered the movement of aircraft. Today, we are mastering the movement of data.

The next chapter is even more ambitious. It is to orchestrate the movement of everything else – of people, goods, capital, ideas, technology, opportunity. That is the difference between being a transport hub and becoming the operating system of Asia's economy. If we succeed, Singapore will not simply connect the world. We will help coordinate it. That is the opportunity before us. And that is why I stand in whole-hearted support of this Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, I support the spirit of reinforcing Singapore's long-term economic competitiveness as a globally connected, aviation, maritime and logistics hub.

The Government's traditional playbook focuses heavily on building world-class infrastructure like Changi Airport T5 and the Tuas next-generation port. However, focusing too much on physical infrastructure carries structural risks in a changing global economy.

As my hon friend and MP for Aljunied, Kenneth Tiong, pointed out earlier, a neutral hub port holds traffic only by staying competitive and a port cannot pick its carriers because carriers pick their ports. We saw the reality of this structural vulnerability when Maersk shifted its transshipment hub to the port of Tanjung Pelepas (PTP) in the year 2000 and again in 2025, when the Gemini cooperation shifted the bulk of their joint shipping volume to PTP.

If we do not own the shipping lines or control the underlying cargo movements, relying solely on massive, physical infrastructure leaves our economy exposed to a sunk-cost dependency risk.

The global trading system is under threat from protectionism and geopolitical rivalries. In addition, there is a possibility that an opening of the Northern Sea route through the Arctic or the creation of a land bridge across or a canal through the Kra Isthmus will divert maritime traffic away from Singapore.

The massive fixed cost of our expanded port may become a fiscal drag if shipping volumes fall short of the Government's projections,

The long-term justification for Changi T5's massive capacity relies on historical hub and spoke models where long-distance traffic requires consolidated transit nodes. However, next-generation hyper-efficient aircraft, such as a long-range narrow body Airbus A321XLR, completely disrupts this model. This aircraft allows airlines to establish economically viable, long and thin direct routes between secondary cities without requiring physical stopovers or refuelling hubs like Singapore. As a result, Changi Airport may face the risk of capital expansions outpacing the growth of traditional transit passengers.

To hedge our exposure to physical trade volatility, Singapore must pivot from being just a physical gatekeeper to also becoming the sovereign digital architect of global trade. By anchoring the financial, legal and operational code of international shipping lines within Singapore's data jurisdiction, we secure a stronger position of leverage. Even if mega alliances berth physically at regional competitors ports, the critical financial transaction layers and supply chain networks running those operations will still run through digital nodes owned by Singapore.

We must therefore rebalance our long-term capital spending. For every dollar spent on pouring physical concrete for Changi T5 or the Tuas berths, a fixed percentage could be redirected towards strategically acquiring, centralising and developing next-generation supply chain software patents under Singapore's sovereign control, such as automated customs clearing platforms and predictive route management networks. As my hon friend, the MP of Hougang, Dennis Tan, highlighted, Singapore must shift from being an outstanding adopter of foreign technology to a creator of our own proprietary systems if we want to capture high margin value.

By securing direct ownership over these foundational digital assets across international trading jurisdictions, we can protect our economic independence and collect licensing rents globally. This allows us to successfully reduce our reliance on absolute volatile physical cargo throughput, ensuring our national revenue is buffered even if global trade patterns shift away from our shores.

We do not just need a more competitive hub. We need a structurally resilient one that owns the software of global trade, rather than just the concrete that sits on it.

This strategic resilience must also extend to the second pillar of the Motion, which champions the use of frontier technologies to anchor good jobs.

While automation drives corporate efficiency, we must build a system that governs these tools to protect the daily working conditions of our workers. If we do not actively govern the code running inside of our transport infrastructure, frontier technology can inadvertently lead to the extraction of productivity solely at the expense of human well-being.

This is not a theoretical anxiety. A 2024 report titled "Algorithmic Management Practices in Regular Workplaces – Case Studies in Logistics and Healthcare" by the International Labour Organization and the European Commission's joint research centre provides empirical evidence of what happens when algorithmic management is introduced in regular transport and logistics workspaces. The report notes that competitive pressures related to cost efficiency and timely deliveries have driven an increased centralisation of control and monitoring through corporate governance structures, shifting the power balance within organisations heavily towards management.

In advanced logistics networks across the world, we are already witnessing these technologies being used in ways that constrain worker autonomy and intensify the pace of work. For instance, the report highlights automated postal and distribution networks, where algorithms generate precise hyper-optimised itineraries, giving workers compressed exact time slots for each delivery. These machine-generated instructions can become so detailed that they leave minimal space for human judgement or physical adjustments.

The report also underscores cases of asymmetric accountability and glitch penalisation. Workers are uniquely vulnerable to connectivity issues and system failures. The report found that when software scanners freeze or experience network disruptions, automated systems can register these technical errors as drops in worker efficiency. As a result, workers risk being unfairly held accountable for mistakes originating from computer errors rather than human errors.

The report found that the introduction of digital tools had a positive impact on job quality in some more developed countries but a negative impact in some developing ones. The authors attributed this to differences in institutional and regulatory frameworks.

Businesses in Singapore have to use digital tools to improve productivity and efficiency, but we must also ensure that these changes will benefit workers rather than harm them. We must remain firmly pro-innovation. Our goal should not be to ban automation or to turn our backs on technology, but to govern it so that productivity gains are equitably shared with workers rather than extracted solely from their physical and mental well-being.

To achieve this, I wish to make three policy proposals.

First, we should update the subsidiary regulations in the Workplace Safety and Health Act to mandate that workforce management and dispatch algorithms used in critical transport hubs explicitly factor in human physiological constraints. The code must include safety buffers for ambient heat stress, which is vital for Singapore's tarmac and port environments, alongside a mandatory human-in-the-loop override. This will give terminal safety supervisors and operations managers the clear statutory authority to adjust AI targets via safety buffer during peak operational strain or adverse weather without incurring penalties.

Second, we should introduce algorithmic transparency and explanability requirements under the Employment Act to give workers a statutory right to explanation. Any automated tracking platform used to grade performance, allocate split shifts or determine contract renewals must provide employees with a clear, plain language breakdown of its underlying metrics. This ensures workers have open accessible administrative channels to contest unfair automated penalties caused by network disruptions, hardware glitches or system errors.

Finally, we should consider implementing a transport sector digital dividend framework. When transport logistics and aviation operators which achieve major productivity breakthrough through the use of AI, those productivity gains must be shared. Instead of squeezing headcount or expanding workloads, operators should be required to pass these gains down in the form of structured wage increases or compressed human-centric working hours with no loss in base pay.

Mr Speaker, we cannot allow physical infrastructure expansion to blind us to the shifting digital geography of global trade nor should we allow frontier technology to reduce the economic agency of our transport workers. We must instead make it our goal to ensure that as our infrastructure and machines grow more capable, our citizens grow more secure. By implementing these targeted worker safeguards and digital asset strategies, we can ensure that technological progress serves the dignity, economic agency and long-term resilience of every Singaporean.

[Motion Speech]

Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Mr Speaker, as we double down on efforts to boost our status as a global aviation, maritime and logistics hub, let us also pay equal attention to how these efforts will reshape jobs and impact our workers.

Up to 30% of aviation jobs may be redesigned within the next five years, mostly in ground handling, and more preparations are required as T5 is being constructed. In logistics, new, higher-paying roles will be created in professional, manager and executive (PME) jobs, including data analysis, supply chain management and software development. At the same time, some roles will undergo displacement, including operators, storekeepers and in sales and customer services functions. At our container terminals at Tuas, Pasir Panjang and cargo terminals at Jurong Port, usage of more automated vehicles and cranes will likely and very much improve productivity and create more higher value jobs.

As we build this future, we must also ask – how are we preparing our people for it?

Mr Speaker, I recently had the opportunity to visit China with Senior Minister Lee and your good self, and we saw ports, logistics facilities and aviation-related operations. What struck me was how rapidly technology is changing transport systems around the world. Across countries and industries, there is a growing push towards automation, digitalisation and new operating models.

The lesson I took away was that it reinforced the need for Singapore to continue adapting, innovating and investing in our people if we are to maintain our position as a leading global transportation hub.

Because ultimately, technology can be bought. Infrastructure can be built. But it is our workers – their skills, their adaptability and professionalism – that will continue to differentiate Singapore. And that brings us back to the central question: how are we preparing Singaporeans for this future?

In my roles as a labour MP and in my work in M3+ under Focus Area Four (FA4) where we look into employment and employability, the question that many Singaporean workers are most concerned about is: will I have a good job in Singapore's future?

So, when we adopt more automation, robotics and AI in our transport sector, let us also ask: how can these technologies help create better jobs for our seafarers, our technicians, our aviation, logistics and maritime workers, and new roles in transport cybersecurity as our sectors become more digitalised? As our rail network expands, with projects like the Johor Bahru-Singapore Rapid Transit System (RTS) Link, how can we create ladders to help our rail technicians progress further? And as we develop the low-altitude economy, including deploying more drones and also unmanned vessels for surveys, how are we creating more career pathways for Singaporeans?

The future of transport must also be a future of career progression, where our workers have the opportunities to become more skilled, more productive, with better wages and better work prospects than before.

So, today, I would like to speak on how we can create a better future for our young graduates and our existing rank-and-file workers and technicians.

First, our young graduates. In my work as an educator, I have watched many of my young students drawn to delivery and gig work to pass time, for their flexibility, and probably the chance to earn slightly extra income. I understand the appeal, but the job has its downsides. There is a higher risk of injury. According to the Ministry of Manpower's (MOM's) Workplace Safety and Health Report, platform workers suffered fatal and major injuries at a rate of 84.6 per 100,000 last year – nearly five times higher than the rate for the workforce as a whole.

Second, there is also limitation in their progression in the long run. Our young delivery riders risk becoming entrenched in these jobs. And there are signs of potential disruptions too. Drone deliveries have been on trials for a few years now over our waters and more recently, across the Kallang River, where my constituency is.

So, as we anchor good jobs through the development of our transport industries, we must also adjust our training curriculum, leverage the new tripartite Jobs Council and create pathways that attract our young graduates into these new and exciting roles. Let us match our young graduates' interests and aptitudes early, while they are still in school, to career ramps available in aviation, logistics and maritime.

And let us ensure that the work conditions and prospects, particularly at the entry level, can genuinely attract and retain our younger workers. Many of them need to see their future potential, beyond the internship and the traineeship period, that, if they work hard, there are real prospects for progression – to move into higher value roles, with better wages, welfare and work prospects.

Let us double down on our efforts so that we can see more young Singaporeans grow and flourish alongside the development of the transport sector.

In this regard, I would like to ask MOT on how it intends to work through the Skills and Workforce Development Agency (SWDA), the tripartite Jobs Council, NTUC and our unions to develop clearer "school-to-sector" pathways into the future transport sectors, careers supported by internships, apprenticeships, structured traineeships and career guidance.

Sir, second is the group of existing rank-and-file workers and technicians. Many of them will see their daily tasks change with technology. We must identify at-risk roles early, map them to adjacent opportunities and build career pathways. If we get this right, transformation becomes a story of renewal and of growth, not about replacement.

So, we must also redesign jobs alongside our workers to help them see how technology can help them to get their jobs done better. And we must provide our workers the necessary support and training pathways to help them move into higher-value, better jobs.

Beyond wages and work prospects, it is also important to ensure that jobs in the transport sector also provide better welfare and better working conditions for our workers. Worker welfare must also include safety, especially for workers whose duties expose them to the heat, thunderstorms and other adverse weather conditions. This matters in transport, where aviation, maritime, logistics and port workers continue to keep operations running on the ground, at our terminals, at sea and on the tarmac. For example, the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE), and the National Environment Agency launched a Heat Stress Advisory in 2023, while MSE is working with agencies, such as MPA and MOM, to better manage weather-related challenges.

As we transform our transport sector, we must apply these technologies more directly to protect our workers. Let us leverage technology to support efforts to plan rostering, shifts and rest hours more thoughtfully, especially to support round-the-clock operations in our transport sector.

As we build world-class infrastructure, let us also ensure that we plan for adequate amenities for our workers who have to work onsite – affordable food, good rest facilities and quiet rooms for long shifts. Recently, SBS Transit opened Singapore's first dedicated accommodation for bus drivers at the Sengkang West Depot, with rooms, kitchens and even a dedicated floor for women drivers. I hope to see more of such amenities provided for our workers onsite.

Sir, let us also leverage technology to reduce commute times for our transport workers who travel more extensively to both ends of Singapore. For example, by deploying AVs to enable first- and last-mile connections to Changi, Tuas, our ferry terminals and our industrial estates. These work sites generally have less access to public transportation, especially in the early and late hours.

Mr Speaker, as we build these pathways, we must also track whether they are delivering real outcomes. We should know who are entering these new roles and whether our young graduates, rank-and-file workers and technicians are benefiting. Such tracking can help monitor worker composition, training outcomes, wage progression and career mobility so that transformation remains accountable to our workers.

An aspect of welfare for our workers is also one that we tend to forget is the word "respect". Mr Speaker, let me briefly share with you from a dialogue that I had with the rail technicians recently. They told me something quite striking. Every time there is a rail breakdown, public frustration is immediate and often directed at them. But what many of us do not see is their reality – working through the night, managing complex systems, carrying the responsibility of keeping millions of commuters safe.

This reminds us that strengthening our transport hub is not just about better systems. It is about valuing the people behind them. If we want the next generation to join such jobs, the jobs must be stable and well-paying too. But at the end of the day, respect is important.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, please allow me to speak briefly in Malay.

When we talk about the future of transport, it is not just about technology or efficiency. It is also about ensuring that our workers, both young and experienced, are able to seize the new opportunities that will emerge. This is closely linked to the work of the Economic Competitiveness Committee, which I co-chair with Mr Saktiandi Supaat. Our task is to translate the recommendations of the Economic Strategy Review into more practical pathways, especially for youths, mid-career workers and lower-wage workers.

Within the transport sector, new opportunities will certainly emerge. But those opportunities will not materialise if information is unclear, training is not aligned with real jobs, and support does not reach workers early enough. That is why we need to build career bridges. It is not just about more courses, but a clear pathway that connects skills to jobs, and jobs to better lives.

(In English): Mr Speaker, allow me to conclude with three asks, or three calls.

First, let us build career bridges early. Support workers before disruption happens, not after. Second, redesign jobs for better outcomes. Better wages, better welfare and better work prospects. Third, make growth sectors accessible. So, every Singaporean, our youth and our rank-and-file workers, can see, can enter and progress in these opportunities.

Mr Speaker, our ambition is not just to remain a global transport hub. Our ambition must be to become a people-centred transport hub, where growth creates good jobs, technology uplifts our workers and every Singaporean has a pathway forward. Because in the end, a hub is only as strong as its people. Airports do not connect themselves. Ports do not run themselves too. Logistics networks do not move themselves either.

Behind every successful transport hub are workers whose skills, whose commitment and professionalism keep Singapore moving. And when our workers move forward with confidence, Singapore will continue to move forward too.

[Motion Speech]

Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, the premise underlying this Motion is a straightforward and appealing one – that we can and must continue to embrace and exploit the strategy of economic, political and technological openness, which has worked to bring Singapore from its status as a secondary, if strategic backwater, to the global first-tier city-state that it is today.

As an international economist who has spent the better part of his professional career teaching and advocating for the virtues of free trade, economic integration and technological forwardness, I am both deeply encouraged and keenly vested in the spirit of this Motion. Alas, it behooves me to point out that the world has, if anything, been moving in the opposite direction, with the erosion of globalisation, a retreat from liberal international organisation and a shift toward policy-making informed by geopolitical might and domestic populist pressures.

I will therefore speak today about a tail risk – how to manage our cross-border economic policy and international relations in the face of a de-globalising world. The risk has been slowly manifesting itself ever more vividly over the course of the past two decades, as the global policy landscape has evolved from the 20th century rules-based order toward the 21st century law of the jungle.

To be clear, I do not do so as an alarmist, but as a realist. Even if a wholesale move in this direction seems remote, we must gird our collective loins and formulate policy that is grounded in the emerging reality of a world where flows of goods, services, capital, labour and technology might face ever greater frictions in their movement. Hence, while I support the overall thrust of this Motion, I encourage this House to also be clear-eyed about a potential downside scenario.

Let me first paint the picture of what I believe this emerging new world order might look like.

To fully understand this, we must look backward to the Global Financial Crisis of 2007/2008, and more recently to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since the global crisis, flows of international trade have contracted sharply, the drop was so severe in the immediate aftermath of the crisis that economists refer to this phenomenon as the Great Trade Collapse.

While the causes are still being debated, the consequences are already clear. Since 2008, the share of imports and exports in global output has gone into retreat, in stark contrast to the decades prior.

The capricious deployment of tariffs and other commercial policy instruments have also resulted in a trade map aligned more toward geopolitical affiliation, rather than economic logic. Cross-border capital flows have similarly stagnated after the crisis. This reverses the heady times of ever-rising financial integration, which took flight in the 1980s. The slowdown has likewise led some to speculate that we are entering into an era of financial de-globalisation, where international finance will become increasingly fragmented and controlled. The trends of friend-shoring and rising economic nationalism also suggest that foreign investment will perhaps be far less forthcoming in the future.

Through all this, the flow of workers between countries has remained robust. If anything, advances in digital connectivity have flattened the world, promoting the outsourcing of tasks between countries and encouraging the globalisation of labour, both unskilled and skilled.

Falling transportation costs also spurred an unprecedented rise in tourism. The pandemic, alas, struck the first blow on this front. And while migratory flows have rebounded somewhat, they have been repeatedly threatened by rising geopolitical tensions and global conflict.

Some believe that information and communication technologies will allow digital flows to substitute for the decline in these other channels of globalisation. Yet, while we are reasonably assured that connectivity will be sustained along this dimension, it has not been unvarnished by geopolitical pressures.

The ban on advanced AI hardware by the US is but one reflection of renewed restrictions, along with the disabling of the most advanced AI models to foreign nationals. Singapore has not been spared, having been degraded to Tier 2 status on suspicions that our transshipment status had been exploited to evade export controls. As the Economic Strategy Review Committee has observed, we also do not possess the capability to build our own foundational AI models. Thus, even as we strengthen our national AI strategy, it is clear that we are vulnerable to being disintermediated in an AI-led world economy, in both hardware as well as software.

Unfortunately, the decline in international exchange has been accompanied by an erosion of international cooperation. Treaties are being repeatedly re-negotiated and international organisations struggle to retain their traditional voice of authority in global fora. Instead, governance is dominated by fears of political polarisation and popular sentiment.

The world is becoming increasingly multipolar, and the conduct of international trade and finance appear to be driven much more by politics than economic fundamentals. Increasingly, economic tools are also being deployed to meet geopolitical objectives.

Sir, since our nation's founding and some would argue even before, Singapore has surfed the waves of globalisation to supercharge our economic growth. This model has served us well, and we have relied on our openness and status as a trusted intermediary to build an economy that is among the richest in the world. But I fear that the new global order will be far less accommodating to business as usual.

With a slowing in international exchange of goods, we need to pivot towards services. Tradable services. Unlike merchandise trade services, have not demonstrated any post-global crisis slowdown and now accounts for one-fifth of global commerce. But Singapore's export basket remains solidly more concentrated in the former, with goods accounting for about 110% of GDP versus 70% for services in terms of our exports.

We must foster more growth in tradable services, which has the added benefit that it is also less subjected to the need to undervalue our exchange rate as a policy, since services are much more likely to be competitive on the basis of quality and efficiency. And if we are indeed focused on trade and services, we should keep in mind that we export more to the European Union (EU) than the US, and more to ASEAN than to China. We also should not expect our trade orientation to be remain global in nature, rather than regional. This does not mean prematurely surrendering our entrepôt status, it does mean taking our economic relationships with our near abroad – Asia, in general; and ASEAN, in particular, much more seriously. We should regard Southeast Asia as our hinterland, producing for that broader market and wean ourselves of trade that is focused much more on the West.

This will position us better in a world that is more multipolar and regional, as opposed to unipolar and global. This also implies that we should rethink how much time and effort we spend on trade facilitation with partners, like the US. Instead, we should devote our energies to improving market integration through introducing more services coverage to the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, upgrading the agreement to include more high-level issues found in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, and pushing for greater market access within ASEAN, especially when it comes to investment and non-tariff barriers.

Moreover, as my hon friends, Gerald Giam and Kenneth Tiong, both pointed out, heavily placing our bets on mega-sized physical infrastructure projects, such as Changi T5 and the Tuas Next Generation Port may backfire if globalisation is more restrained in the future.

This does not mean that we turn inward on these projects or abandon them. Indeed, there is wisdom in planning and building for the future.

But there may be a case to proceed with greater caution, perhaps by planning the build-up in tranches and making parts of the full blueprint contingent on whether future economic conditions justify the massive capacity expected.

The same will apply to our long-term infrastructure borrowing. For instance, we might wish to structure the Significant Infrastructure Government Loan Act (SINGA) bond borrowing in a manner that will only trigger if the project meets certain threshold conditions associated with anticipated need. So long as the parts that are built are fully self-contained, we can adopt a more incrementalist approach.

The same applies to capital flows, where we should look to investing more in the region. Unlike our early days, where we were starved of capital, we now have large public and private funds that can direct our considerable net national savings elsewhere. Yet, the national will to provide such guidance remains unclear.

Look, for instance, at our nation's foreign direct investment (FDI). While it is perhaps unsurprising that China and India top the list of FDI partners, the next ones on the list are the United Kingdom, Indonesia, Australia and the US. Among our top FDI destinations, only two, Indonesia and Malaysia, are in ASEAN.

The argument is also relevant from the sell-side perspective. As we strive to cement our position as an international financial centre, we must also recognise and accept that economies, like China, the EU and the US, are increasingly likely to favour financial intermediation through their own onshore locales, like Shanghai or Hong Kong; London or Frankfurt; New York or Chicago. We should instead appeal to regional businesses and attract them, and not just American entities to list on the Singapore Exchange, and to encourage them to park their buy-side wealth management operations here, rather than elsewhere.

The re-alignment of focus applies to labour flows too. To be fair, we are already highly integrated when it comes to absorbing low-cost workers from the region. Where we have been less forward-facing, however, is in ensuring that our skilled local talent undertake stints abroad. I believe that we should have a more structured framework for encouraging our PMETs to spend a year or two in their firms' affiliates or subsidiaries located in our major ASEAN capitals.

Through Enterprise SG, we already have an analogous scheme – the Global Ready Talent Programme – that encourages companies to train young talent through overseas internships. This should not be limited to early-career professionals. Relocation costs can be minimised perhaps with state acquisition of properties that can be rented out to Singaporean firms at attractive rates, especially SMEs looking to internationalise.

I had also shared that international schools can be made more plug-and-play for relocating families with subsidised fees similar to what is offered at home and stronger syllabus coordination to make the return much more seamless.

Sir, I have received feedback from many a manager that one ceiling they faced in deciding to promote a local PMET over a foreign one is the lack of regional exposure. This can and should be corrected and all the more in the world where PMETs in other regional countries are converging, on our own in terms of training, skills and experience.

Next, if we accept the premise that digital and virtual exchange will increasingly substitute for the other traditional modes of trading goods, services, capital and labour, then the ability to exert control or at least exert leverage over access to the underlying technological infrastructure becomes far more critical. This is the case for both hardware – and here, I am thinking about data centres, in particular – and software, in terms of foundational AI models, whether applied through generative, agentic or embodied cases.

My party colleagues, Dennis Tan and Gerald Giam, argued in favour of expanding our ownership over these tools to build our nation's digital resilience. Even accepting that we may not build in-house foundational models from the ground-up, I would still like to know if this Government, through the National AI Council, has already developed a sort of safeguard plan in the event of sudden withdrawal by big tech firms to data centre access AI models, digital platforms or even application programming interfaces (APIs).

Finally, when we conduct negotiations, we should be cognisant of how it is almost impossible to successfully arrived at terms where positions for outside of the constraints involved by other nations' domestic politics. This may mean a very narrow set of options. We may choose to hue to ideal principles ourselves – keeping tariffs at zero, maintaining the UNCLOS right of free passage or leaving capital actually on taxed. But the rest of the world may not agree.

A practically minded Foreign Service and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) will have to leave room for occasionally departing from non-core principles. Otherwise, we might find ourselves unable to strike deals at all.

Sir, it is World Cup season. So, allow me to close with a football analogy. Players and seasoned fans will know that when pressing a counterattack, one does not pass to where the other players are now, but to where the other players might be going. From my vantage point, on the field's left wing. This is how I believe that our policy-makers should adapt. We cannot bet on the ideal world of yesteryear but should instead align our policy with the likely world of tomorrow. Otherwise, we may find ourselves inadvertently off-side, and our economy and society left out in the cold.

[Motion Speech]

Ms Lee Hui Ying (Nee Soon): Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise to affirm the importance of strengthening Singapore's position as a globally connected transport hub. But this position cannot be taken for granted. We may be small on the map, but we sit right at the crossroads of the world – by land, by air, by sea and increasingly, by data and technology.

Singapore has always understood one thing. In transport, if you want to stay relevant, you cannot afford to miss the boat. If we are not moving forward, we risk being left at the platform. In this increasingly unpredictable world, the strength of Singapore's transport sector and its diversity of interconnectedness to the rest of the world is not only an economic priority but also one of national security.

Singapore's success today as a global transport hub did not happen by chance. It is the decades of hard work of our businesses, the many Singaporean workers and public servants across the transport sector. A world-class transport hub needs a world-class workforce. We must do our best to create these jobs and empower Singaporeans to excel in them.

To this, I will speak on three key areas. First, how our AI strategy is integral to creating good jobs in the transport sector. Second, staying competitive, staying ahead. And third, matching international connectivity with local transport infrastructure.

As the transport sector develops, we need to prepare a workforce that will be able to meet the needs of the future. To get there, I would like to ask how the Government is preparing our workforce for this transformation.

Could the Ministry share with us a forecast of the talent we will need – the expected mix of local and foreign workforce as well as the mix of key functions where demand is likely to grow? More importantly, what are our plans to train, attract and retain the workforce so that Singapore remains well-positioned for the next phase of growth?

AI has taken centrestage over the past few years. As a country, we have been doing a lot to develop a workforce with sufficient tech professionals, including data scientists, developers and product managers, as well as a larger general workforce that is comfortable with using AI in their domain. The Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) is undertaking to ensure we engage in frontier research and to expand our education institutions' capacity to train AI talent.

Tech giants are not the only ones who need tech talent. I call on the Government to ensure our upskilling efforts and AI proficiencies are spread across industries.

One of the things I value about the transport sector is the wide range of talent it requires: we need brilliant AI scientists to design and maintain the cutting-edge model that will transform the industry as well as skilled technicians on the ground. Not all these talents are best developed through university education. Our polytechnics and Institutes of Technical Education (ITEs) will play a crucial role in supplying the workforce of the future.

I encourage the Ministry to broker partnerships between our institutes of higher learning and industry partners to develop and update relevant courses in the present, design programmes that will meet future needs, develop scholarships and internship programmes to draw in talent in advance, and design opportunities for mid-career upgrading and career transition.

The transport sector must transform quickly to stay relevant and our workforce will need to retrain, readjust and in some cases, relearn.

The reality is clear. Remaining competitive and creating good jobs for our residents requires constant change. But as we push ahead, we must remind one another that compassion must prevail in our society. Those who helped build this sector must not be left behind. Even as we press on to be world-leading, we must ensure change is managed with people at its heart.

As we adopt AI, these technologies should empower our workforce and not simply replace it. Our workers should be active partners in this transformation – equipped, involved and given the confidence to experiment with new technologies rather than fear being displaced.

Next, staying competitive. I now turn to the balance between decarbonisation and energy resilience. Recent events in the Middle East have reminded us that global energy supply chains remain vulnerable to geopolitical shocks. Even as countries decarbonise and electrify, many economies will continue, for some time, to depend on reliable supplies of conventional fuels, such as diesel and jet fuel, particularly for aviation, heavy transport and resilience needs.

For Singapore to remain a leading maritime and global aviation hub, we must recognise this reality. We must both embrace new, sustainable technologies, but also continue to ensure that our access to conventional fuels remains secure, reliable and diversified. And so, I hope the Government will carefully consider the future of the Jurong Island refineries.

Beyond their economic contribution, they anchor Singapore's contribution and position in global energy supply chains, support industries that rely on refined fuel products, and preserve capabilities and expertise that have been built over decades. These strategic considerations should form part of any long-term plans for Jurong Island refineries.

To pursue decarbonisation while maintaining our transport sector's economic competitiveness is a precarious balancing act. While it is important for us to take tangible steps towards lowering our emissions and taking the measured approach towards increasing the mandated proportion of sustainable aviation fuel blend, this should proceed with caution.

The sustainable aviation fuel is still currently estimated to be about two to four times the price of jet fuel even when recent oil prices are at a record high due to the Middle East conflict. The costs from mandating sustainable aviation fuel and the accompanying levies could make Singapore less attractive as an air transport hub, especially if neighbouring air hubs choose not to undertake similar measures.

While we currently have a competitive advantage, which would offset these additional costs, we should and must never take our existing competitive advantage for granted. So, I urge MOT to take calibrated steps in future on mandatory sustainable aviation fuel blend rates.

The best way for us to maintain our long-term competitive advantage in the transport sector is to proactively shape the standards of the industry. The Technical Reference 68 is one good start. We must continue to play that strategic role of shaping the international standards on safety, ethics and security in the usage of autonomous technologies and AI in this industry.

Lastly, Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe our intent to be a global transport hub is not just to create good jobs and pursue economic growth. All these are important, but we also want to be able to deliver to Singaporeans connectivity that improves their lived experiences.

In Nee Soon South, Chencharu is planned to have about 10,000 new homes by 2040. This means we can expect around 30,000 new residents to move into this 70-hectare area over the next 15 years, an average of 2,000 residents every year.

So, therefore, upstream planning, transport planning is critical to avoid bottlenecks that will be difficult to solve once residents move in. I am grateful to have started early conversations with key agencies, including LTA, on plans for the local transport network or upgrades for Khatib MRT. For residents, it is often the small improvements that make the biggest difference. More accessible pathways and well-planned transport flow can make everyday journeys safer and easier.

I look forward to working closely with the Ministry, LTA, and our community partners and our residents to plan ahead, address the needs early, deliver practical improvements that will serve Chencharu well for years to come. Sir, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this Motion. Singapore's status as a globally connected hub for aviation, maritime and logistics did not come easily, and we must never take it for granted. A world-class transport hub requires a world-class workforce. We must create as many of these jobs as possible and equip Singaporeans with the capabilities to fill them.

I would like to ask the Ministry of Transport how it plans to help our workers prepare for what lies ahead. Could the Minister share with us the projected manpower forecasts, the expected ratio of local to foreign workers and the job functions likely to see growing demand? More importantly, what plans do we have to train, attract and retain talent so as to ensure that Singapore continues to maintain its edge?

Mr Deputy Speaker, I believe these efforts are about more than just job creation and economic growth. We also aspire to achieve genuine connectivity in every sense – one that enhances the lived experience of the Singaporeans.

In Nee Soon South, the Chencharu area is set to see around 10,000 new homes built by 2040. This means that over the next 15 years, approximately 30,000 new residents are expected to move in at an average of around 2,000 per year.

Early planning is essential to prevent transport bottlenecks that would be difficult to resolve once the residents have already moved in. I am glad to have been able to engage early with the key agencies, such as LTA, to begin preliminary discussions on expanding the transport networks in Nee Soon South or upgrading Khatib MRT station. For residents, it is often these small improvements that make the greatest difference. Better pedestrian access and well-planned transport connections can make daily commutes safer and more convenient.

I look forward to continuing to work with MOT, LTA and our community partners.

(In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, I look to the future of our transport sector with optimism. A world-class transport sector gives our residents more than convenience. It connects them seamlessly across Singapore and opens the door to the world for leisure, education, business and work. Because when Singapore moves well, the world moves with us. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Dr Neo Kok Beng (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, I declare my interest as a deep tech innovator and entrepreneur.

Once upon a time, I had a power pressure craft licence, a pilot licence and, of course, a driving licence. That does not make me a seal. But of course, it piqued my interest in mobility solutions and so, I spent quite a bit of time working in these sectors.

For the Minister for Transport's information, I got my flying licence on my very first test but driving cost me five tests. Which means our road traffic regulations are very tight.

The transportation or mobility sector is a very important area or sector or industry for Singapore as a sea hub, air hub. And so, I would like to focus on innovations and to support the entrepreneurs of deep tech ventures, especially, right now, where with the advance of AI, autonomous technology, drones, this has become a fertile field for us to create many possibilities for our industries in the mobility sector.

But there are actually issues that we face. I note that the wing-in-ground (WIG) craft brought in by ST Engineering known as the "air fish" that floats above the surface of the water. It is now in operation. But however, it takes quite a bit of time. We know that the craft existed for many, many years, but it has been tested overseas and then after that, once they are ready and it will be brought back to Singapore. I like to compare this against two aerospace engineers, who are from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, America, and they are aerospace engineers trained in drones and trained in AVs, and they founded this company called Regent Craft, founded in 2020. Today, they have commercial orders of $20 billion.

I think the imaginations and possibilities in the maritime and mobility industries or transportation industry for our people are infinite. And therefore, we really have to enable them to go and find these possibilities.

What is the issue then? The issue really is that in Singapore, confined environment especially air and sea, it is very difficult for us to trial or pilot anything that is moving. Well, it is for good reason, risk management and also, not to affect our normal operations. For example, if we talk about the low altitude economy, which is the drone or the flying cars, it is actually very difficult to find any place in Singapore for us to do trials. And therefore, it is important for us to provide fixed sites, controlled sites for R&D. So, localised sandboxes both for sea, land and air; and then regional sandboxes so that trials for such craft, which needs longer distance, more complex operations can be done.

I note that in the Nanyang Technological University when they are developing these flying cars, in Singapore, they do trials, they are tethered. But when they need to do free-flying, it was reported that they go to Germany. Well, that is quite far away. Should we or can we explore options of having such regional trial sites with the neighbouring countries?

I note that Malaysia just announced its low altitude economy plan by the Transport Minister, by the Malaysia Prime Minister last week and that they are also proposing sandboxes. They have a lot more space. Indonesia also has a master plan for the other alternative means for low altitude economy called advanced air mobility and therefore, it is an opportunity for us to partner with them to allow or partner such that our companies can go there and do longer-distance flight trials or these testings. Maybe MOT would like to do that.

I would also want to commend the initiatives, the innovations, for example, MPA, which is on PIER71, which creates a lot of innovations. I think that we should consolidate all these into maybe an agency for innovation within MOT from air, sea and land; and then put in aggressive funding and piloting such that this could be a pillar for our economy in the future. I will not suggest a sum, but I think such an endeavour needs strong support as it will allow us to create a new economy. So, my proposal is an integrated innovation agency under MOT, with aggressive funding, aggressive piloting and collaboration within the region for sandboxes and flight testing.

[Motion Speech]

Mr Lee Hong Chuang (Jurong East-Bukit Batok): Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of this timely and important Motion, especially emphasised on anchoring good jobs in Singapore. This is not just a transport issue. It is about Singapore's long-term relevancy in the global economy.

There is an old saying: ships do not sail because the sea is calm; they sail because they are built to weather the storm.

Singapore became a leading aviation, maritime and logistic hub not because geography favoured us but because we transform opportunity into excellency through vision, trusted institution and the determination of our people.

Today, the world is changing rapidly. AI is reshaping logistics. Supply chains are being redesigned. Businesses are placing greater emphasis not only on efficiency, but also resilience, sustainability and trust.

The question before us is simple: how do we ensure companies continue to choose Singapore not just to move goods but to invest, manage regional operations and create high value jobs?

When we discuss strengthening Singapore as a global transport hub, we naturally think about airports, ports and infrastructure. These, no doubt, are important. But equally important are our SMEs. Our freight forwarders, customs brokers, engineering firms, logistics technology companies and service providers are the backbone of our transport ecosystem. Every MNC was once a small business with a big ambition. If Singapore is to remain competitive, we must help today's SMEs become tomorrow's regional champions.

My first suggestion is to strengthen support for SME digital transformation. Technology is advancing quickly. Tuas Port is becoming one of the world's largest automated ports. AVs are being trialled on our roads. Digital trade platforms are replacing paper documentation. But merging our physical and digital infrastructure must include our SMEs and not just our ports and terminals.

The challenge for many SMEs is not buying technology. It is knowing which solutions to adopt, integrating them into operations, training employees and generating real business value.

Grants are important, but they are only the starting point. The last mile of digital transformation is implementation. I therefore encourage continued efforts to strengthen hands-on implementation support through trusted technology advisers, sector-specific consultancy and practical guidance that helps SMEs move from grant approval to successful execution.

Second, we should continue helping our SMEs internationalise with confidence. Many businesses need support to navigate overseas regulations, identify reliable partners and understand emerging markets. Every Singapore enterprise that successfully expands overseas strengthens our economic resilience and reinforces Singapore's position as an international global business hub.

Third, talent remains our greatest competitive advantage. Technology does not replace people. It transforms jobs. Warehouse assistants become robotics specialists. Dispatch clerks become data-driven fleet coordinators. Customs brokers become digital trade experts.

AI can recommend routes, but people make judgement calls. AI can automate processes, but people manage exceptions, build relations and create trust. So, the future workforce needs not only digital skills but also operational judgement, communication and problem-solving.

Job redesign, however, is especially challenging for SMEs, which often lack dedicated human resource and transformation teams. We should therefore continue investing in SkillsFuture and workforce transformation while exploring shared talent pools, industry attachments and collaborative innovation programmes with partners, such as Tech Talent Assembly, also an associate to NTUC, so that SMEs can access specialised expertise that would otherwise be beyond their reach.

Mr Deputy Speaker, sustainability is also becoming a business requirement. Low-carbon shipping, green warehousing and sustainable supply chains are no longer optional. Increasingly, they determine whether companies win or lose the contracts. Helping SMEs adopt greener technologies is therefore not only an environmental priority but also an economic necessity.

We must also continue strengthening supply-chain resilience. Above all, businesses know that when Singapore makes a commitment, we deliver; and that reputation is priceless.

As Singapore prepares to assume the ASEAN Chairmanship in 2027, we should deepen regional connectivity and continue championing common standards in areas, such as digital trade, AI and interoperability.

Mr Deputy Speaker, allow me to suggest one strategic shift. Singapore should aim to move from being a transit hub to becoming a decision hub. A transit hub is where goods pass through. A decision hub is where companies decide how goods move, where they move, how risks are managed and how regional supply chains are coordinated, where they locate their supply chain control towers, procurement centres, digital trade platforms, financing functions and risk management capabilities. And also, where should they coordinate between air, sea and land logistics.

This is where higher value jobs are created when we are reinforcing Singapore's position as a global transportation hub. That is the next stage of Singapore's competitive advantage.

Let me give you an example. Imagine a visitor arriving in Singapore in the future. The flight lands at Changi Airport, immigration clearance is fast and largely automated, luggage is tracked digitally. The traveller may choose for luggage to be transferred securely to the hotel. Transport, hotel check-in and payment made be connected more smoothly. By the time the visitor reaches the hotel, the luggage may already be there.

But the point is not the luggage. The point is the experience. Technology removes friction, but people create trust. When the visitor reaches the hotel, a human concierge may still welcome him, recommend where to eat, explain what to see, and give the warmth and assurance that technology alone cannot provide.

This small example reflects a larger strategy. The future of transport is not only about automation. It is about confidence. It is about how systems, companies and people come together to deliver one trusted experience.

The same applies to businesses. Pharmaceutical companies moving temperature-sensitive medicines through Singapore do not only need air cargo. It needs cold chain logistics, digital documentation, cybersecurity, insurance warehousing, onwards delivery and risk management.

The customer does not experience this as separate sectors. The customer experiences them as one Singapore system. Thus, our ambition should be clear. Singapore should not simply be where goods move through. Singapore should be where supply chains are designed, coordinated and trusted. And this is where everything I have said comes togethe – because a decision hub needs capable local partners around it. Helping our SMEs upgrade is therefore not simply an SME policy. It is national strategy.

Mr Deputy Speaker, ultimately, this Motion is not just about ports or airports. It is about people. Behind every shipment is a business. Behind every business is a worker. Behind every worker is a family. As the NTUC slogan goes, "Every Worker Matters". I believe "Every SME Matters" and "Every Family Matters" too.

Singapore has never competed on size. We compete through trust, excellence and innovation. As our founding Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, reminded us, "If we do not remain relevant to the world, the world will not remain interested in us."

Let us continue helping our enterprises innovate, internationalise and grow. When our SMEs thrive, our workers prosper. When our workers prosper, our economy becomes stronger. And when our economy remains strong, Singapore's future remains secure. Mr Deputy Speaker, please allow me to end my speech in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): The Singapore of the future should not merely be a place where goods pass through quickly. It should be a place that creates value, generates knowledge and develops solutions.

Today, advanced technology can be acquired anywhere in the world and modern ports and airports can be built by any country. What is truly difficult to replicate, however, is the institutional framework, credibility, professional talent and international reputation that a country builds over the long term. When global enterprises choose Singapore in the future, it will not simply be because of our efficiency. It will be because they trust that here, they can make important decisions with confidence, manage regional operations and find partners they can rely on.

In my view, we cannot focus solely on nurturing a handful of successful large enterprises. We must build a complete industrial ecosystem. Large corporations, SMEs, research institutions, institutes of higher learning, trade unions and Government agencies must all form a network of mutual support and shared growth.

When a local SME is able to enter an international supply chain through innovative solution, the impact goes far beyond its own growth. It creates more local jobs, develops more skilled professionals and makes the entire Singapore economy more competitive. That is what a truly sustainable model of development looks like.

Finally, Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to emphasise one point. The competition among global transport hubs in the future will not be fought on speed alone. It will be fought on trust. Technology can improve efficiency and AI can optimise processes. But integrity cannot be auto generated, and reputation cannot be built by algorithms. What international partners ultimately trust is what Singapore has consistently stood for – professionalism, the rule of law and the ability to deliver on our commitments.

As long as we continue to uphold openness and cooperation, pursue relentless innovation, develop our people and move forward hand-in-hand with businesses and workers, I am confident that Singapore will not only maintain its leading position as a global transport hub, but will also become the most trusted decision-making centre for enterprises worldwide, creating more quality jobs for Singaporeans and lay a stronger foundation for the generations to come.

(In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Mr Sanjeev Kumar Tiwari (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, when we speak about reinforcing Singapore's position as a global transport hub, we often think of Singapore Changi Airport, world-class, SIA connecting us to the world. We think of PSA with the towering cranes at Pasir Panjang, Jurong and Tuas Port. We think of the many ships in our waters and the seamless movement of cargo through our logistics network, including our land transport network.

These are powerful symbols of success for Singapore.

Mr Deputy Speaker, infrastructure alone and high-tech systems do not make a global hub. A transport hub is only complete because of the people who keep it moving, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. From the baggage handler working on the tarmac; the technicians ensuring that every vehicle operates safely; the crane operators managing multiple cranes from a control room, the harbour pilot guiding some of the world's largest vessels into our ports; our air traffic controllers and airport crew who ensure the safety of airplanes in and out of Singapore and ensuring people coming through Singapore get the best experience; the seafarer spending months away from home to keep global trade flowing; the logistics planner ensuring that supply chains continue to function, so businesses receive their goods and families receive their parcels. There are many more examples.

These are the men and women who built Singapore's transport hub reputation. They kept our transport system moving during COVID-19. They kept global trade flowing through supply chain disruptions. They adapted through manpower shortages and global uncertainties.

Today, as we speak of transforming and strengthening Singapore's position as a global transport hub, my question is: how will we bring these people along and what is the future that they see as part of that strong futuristic global hub that we want to be?

Because, Mr Deputy Speaker, the future of transport should not be something our workers merely adapt to. It must be a future they can look forward to.

Mr Deputy Speaker, transformations are no longer coming. They are already here. We have many such examples.

Looking at our maritime sector, from the early days of the Singapore River to Jurong Port after Independence, to containerisation at Tanjong Pagar, Singapore has never stood still.

Today, our maritime sector is entering another transformation. Singapore now operates an AI-powered Maritime Digital Twin, integrating real-time information from vessels, weather systems and sensors to optimise traffic and improve safety. Our ports are increasingly automated. Yard cranes and automated guided vehicles are remotely operated.

MPA is driving innovation in autonomous vessels and new maritime fuels, while strengthening Singapore's International Maritime Centre. These are not just investments in technology. They are investments in better jobs. And we already see what this means for our workers.

Take Brother Syed Ali. More than 30 years ago, he began as a yard crane operator at PSA, climbing high into crane cabins every day in physically demanding work.

As technology evolved, so did his career. Today, he is a Senior Quay Crane Specialist, supervising automated operations, mentoring younger colleagues and leading the adoption of new technologies. His career did not end because technology arrived. Technology allowed his career to grow.

Likewise, Mr Tan Sin Poh from Jurong Port has spent over two decades developing engineering expertise. Today, he leads highly complex equipment relocation projects that require precision planning, engineering excellence and close teamwork. His experience has become even more valuable in a technologically advanced port.

These stories remind us that transformation succeeds when workers succeed. The same transformation is taking place in aviation.

CAAS has estimated that up to 30% of our 60,000-strong aviation workforce could see their jobs redesigned over the next five years. With Changi T5 nearly doubling airport capacity, the scale of change will only accelerate. Nearly 20,000 jobs redesigned is not a small number. Behind every redesigned job is a worker who must learn new skills. Behind every new technology is a worker who must be confident enough to use it. And behind every transformation is a family depending on that worker's future.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Singapore faces tight manpower. Our workforce is ageing with low birth rates. Every Singaporean worker becomes even more precious. If we are to remain a leading transport hub, we cannot simply add more workers. We must help every worker become more productive, more skilled and able to enjoy longer careers.

Automation, robotics and AI will be critical. They can remove repetitive, physically demanding tasks. They can create safer workplaces. They can allow experienced workers to move into higher-value roles that command better wages and offer greater career progression.

For our senior workers, technology can extend productive careers instead of shortening them because their bodies can no longer cope with physically demanding work.

But Mr Deputy Speaker, technology alone does not build trust. Workers must know that transformation is happening with them, not to them. They must know that technology is being deployed to strengthen the Singaporean core. And very important, it is to strengthen the Singaporean core: to improve their wages, to improve their welfare, to strengthen their work prospects so that they can stay ahead of the cost curves and provide well for their families. That is why I have two calls in support of this Motion.

First, we must equip and train workers early, with unions involved from the very beginning and we already know that this works with many examples. Within aviation, NTUC's Aerospace and Aviation Cluster, together with unions like SATS Workers' Union, has used Company Training Committees to redesign jobs while equipping workers with new capabilities. As we build T5, the tripartite model should become the norm.

CAAS, CAG, SATS, employers and unions must work hand in hand to ensure that every productivity gain is also a gain for workers. This is also how we attract young Singaporeans into aviation and the industry. Beyond competitive salaries, the young people want meaningful careers with opportunities to grow. At the same time, experienced Singaporean workers must remain the heart of our success.

Technology may automate many processes, but it cannot automate the warmth, the professionalism and service excellence that define us, Singapore and as the Singapore experience.

Our maritime sector offers similar examples. The Singapore Maritime Officers' Union and the Singapore Organisation of Seamen have worked through Company Training Committees to prepare seafarers for future through structured training, professional development and lifelong learning.

Going forward, the Government should continue to work closely with the NTUC, unions, e2i and the Tripartite Jobs Council to support companies, large and small, to redesign jobs well before disruption takes place. All stakeholders should be able to plug into and grow with the vision of a world-class transportation hub. Transformation should never begin after jobs disappear. It must begin while our workers are still employed.

Second, we must ensure that the good jobs we create are accessible to every Singaporean. For senior workers and mid-career PMEs, transformation plans must include clear pathways into emerging roles. Where jobs may be affected, companies should work closely with unions to identify impacted workers early, provide sufficient notice and ensure adequate training so workers can transition confidently into new opportunities.

For our lower-wage workers, technology must become a ladder for upward mobility. They should see the gains. They should see an upward growth for themselves and their families. New technology-enabled roles should help workers progress through and beyond the Progressive Wage Model. Transformation should narrow opportunity gaps and not widen them.

And let us not forget persons with disabilities. As more transport jobs become digital, remote-enabled and less physically demanding, new opportunities become possible. I hope MOT can work together with SG Enable, employers and unions to redesign suitable roles so that more persons with disabilities can participate meaningfully in our transport sector.

Mr Deputy Speaker, technology will undoubtedly reshape our transport hubs. The question is not whether transformation will happen. The question is whether every Singaporean worker will benefit from it. Because Singapore's greatest competitive advantage has never been our port. It has never been our airport. It has never been our technology. Our greatest competitive advantage has always been our people.

Technology will reshape our hubs. That is much certain. But a highly skilled, adaptable, trusted and resilient Singaporean workforce cannot be replicated easily.

By investing in workers' capabilities, career progression and resilience, Singapore transforms its workforce from a factor of production into a strategic asset. This not only strengthens productivity and service quality but also reinforces Singapore's reputation as a reliable and future-ready global transport hub.

If we continue investing in our workers, developing their skills and supporting their careers and strengthening the Singaporean core, we will not only reinforce Singapore's position as a global transport hub. We will reinforce Singapore's reputation as a nation that succeeds because we never leave our workers behind.

And that is what every Singaporean worker can look into the future with confidence, dignity and pride knowing that we have their backs. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Ms Gho Sze Kee (Mountbatten): Mr Deputy Speaker, I declare my interests as a maritime lawyer. I am also adviser to the Singapore Maritime Officers Union, the Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering Employees Union, and the Singapore Organisation of Seamen.

This Motion is about reinforcing our position as a global transport hub and my parliamentary colleagues have spoken well. But as we discuss ideas and innovations, I think it is worthwhile to ask some fundamental questions: what is a true maritime hub? What makes us a hub in the first place? What ultimately underpins our position?

Singapore is now the busiest transshipment port in the world, and the second busiest container port. We top the world too, on vessel arrival tonnage. These are impressive statistics and they do matter. But they are not what truly distinguishes us.

Sir, our port does not stand alone. It sits at the centre of a deep ecosystem of ancillary and allied maritime industries that draws in and supports one another.

The depth of this ecosystem is what makes our position as a global maritime hub so resilient, unique and difficult to displace. It includes services that are critical to shipping interests but are not always visible to the public, such as bunkering, repair, fleet management, crewing, handling, classification societies, surveyors, insurance brokers and so on.

Over time, we have grown into major hubs for many of these parallel industries as well. We are the world's largest bunkering hub, accounting for about 40% of global bunker sales. That is reinforced by our position as a major oil trading, storage and refining hub. Our ship registry is the fourth largest in the world by tonnage.

We are also a leading ship crewing and marine and trade insurance hub, driven by our excellent global connectivity and banking sector. When trade disputes arise, and take it from a lawyer, they always do, Singapore is a globally recognised hub for maritime law and dispute resolution.

We are actually the world's second most preferred arbitration seat globally, second only to London, and number one in Asia. Protection and Indemnity (P&I) clubs, financiers, classification societies and fleet managers all cluster here because our legal and financial system is transparent and trusted.

As you can see, we are no longer just a port where ships call. But we have evolved into a place where shipping decisions are made, logistics are arranged, risks are managed, disputes are resolved, contracts concluded and capital deployed. This is what distinguishes us as a real maritime hub from just another successful port.

Our integrated maritime ecosystem attracts global players. But what keeps and anchors them here is the trust in the Singapore system. Strip all the physical infrastructure, and trust is what ultimately underpins Singapore's position as a global maritime hub.

That trust did not appear overnight. It has been earned over decades through a capable and far-sighted Government, our independent judiciary and the quality and integrity of our public administration, and of course, our unique tripartite partnership between Government, employers and unions that has kept Singapore free from the industrial disruptions seen elsewhere.

We may take these things for granted, but they are all factors that global supply chain managers take into account when deciding where to anchor their operations and route their cargo. Taken together, the message to any global operator is simple. Singapore is stable and trustworthy, and you can trust Singapore to deliver.

As many players have observed, recent global disruptions have initiated a border shift in supply chains. From focusing on the cheapest and fastest towards the safest and most trusted. In other words, the winds have been blowing towards us. This is an affirmation of the system we have built. We are well positioned to take advantage of that. But the challenge is always to stay ahead.

To do this, we must be clear-eyed about what we face. In the sequel to the classic children's novel, Alice in Wonderland, there is a well-known scene where the Red Queen tells Alice that in her country, you must run as fast as you can just to stay where you are.

Sir, Singapore is that country. The world around us is not standing still. For us, to stand still is to fall behind. Complacency is fatal. We can never rest on our laurels.

Consider a few examples. Right next door, within sight of our new Tuas Port, the Port of Tanjung Pelapas, backed by global giant APM terminals, is currently expanding. And not far away in North Sumatra, Kuala Tanjung is being developed into Indonesia's largest transhipment port and it is backed by DP World, PSA's peer competitor in Dubai. They are not out to complement us, but to compete with us. World-class expertise has quietly arrived at our doorstep.

Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong once said that Singapore must always be exceptional just to survive, and I agree. Larger countries can afford to get some things wrong. They have the natural resources and domestic markets to do so. Singapore cannot. For us, the margin for error is exactly zero.

But our answer to this challenge is implicit in the earlier part of my speech. Our playbook is never a secret. Even as we embrace frontier technologies and continue our investments in infrastructure, we must remember that others may embrace the same technologies and build the same world-class infrastructure.

They can also hire the world class expertise that they cannot develop themselves.

But it is the intangibles that we have built that are much harder for others to replicate and follow – the brand name reputation that comes with trusted institutions, a strong Government with good leadership, strong industrial relations, all tied into an ecosystem in which the whole is worth far more than the sum of its parts.

These are Singapore's enduring advantages. They are also our enduring responsibilities. We must remember that these intangibles were earned over decades and can erode away quickly. Once lost, they are very difficult to rebuild.

Technology will keep changing. Supply chains will too. Even the international order is changing before our eyes. But for Singapore, certain fundamentals must never change. We must remain trusted. We must remain exceptional. Because for Singapore, these are the very conditions for our survival.

So, when we ask how do we reinforce Singapore's position as a maritime hub, the real question is not whether to keep investing in future technology like AI or next generation infrastructure. Of course we must. The real question is whether we continue tending to the intangible qualities that underpin our system and make us exceptional. That, Sir, will determine if we can continue to earn our place in the world. I support this Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Dr Choo Pei Ling (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Deputy Speaker, at first glance, this Motion is about transport. But at a deeper level, it is about how Singapore creates value in a changing world.

For decades, Singapore earned its place by connecting the world. We built one of the world's leading ports, one of the world's best airports and a logistics network that businesses around the world came to rely on. Although we are a small island with no natural resources, we became relevant because we connected people, markets and opportunities better than almost anyone else.

That strategy transformed Singapore. But every successful strategy must evolve with the world around it.

Today, supply chains are being redesigned. Trade patterns are becoming less predictable. Businesses are balancing efficiency with resilience. Technology is changing how goods, services, capital and information move across borders.

In this environment, connectivity remains essential. But connectivity alone is no longer enough. The busiest hub is not always the one that creates the most value. The question is no longer whether goods pass through Singapore. The question is whether the decisions behind those goods are made in Singapore.

That, I believe, is Singapore's next opportunity. Increasingly, the greatest value is created long before a container reaches a port or an aircraft leaves the runway. It is created when businesses decide where to source, where to manufacture, where to manage risk and how to respond when disruption strikes. Those decisions matter more than ever because uncertainty has become a permanent feature of the global economy.

Singapore should therefore aspire not only to move trade efficiently, but to become the place where those decisions are made with confidence.

Take a company managing operations across Asia. Yesterday, Singapore's role may be to ensure that its cargo moved quickly through our port or airport. Tomorrow, our ambition should be greater. We want its regional operations, supply chain planning and risk management teams to be based here, not because the cargo stays in Singapore, but because the decisions do. That is a much stronger position to hold. It is also one that cannot be replicated simply by building another port or another airport.

Mr Deputy Speaker, why should those decisions be made here? Because Singapore offers something that has become increasingly valuable in an uncertain world – trust. Trust did not appear overnight. It was built patiently over decades through stable institutions, predictable rules, openness to the world and a reputation for keeping our word. When global supply chains came under strain, Singapore kept trade moving. We honoured our commitments. We remained a dependable partner when certainty was in short supply.

Trust is often spoken of as a virtue. Today, it is also a competitive advantage. When businesses decide where to invest, where to establish regional headquarters and where to coordinate operations, they are ultimately deciding where they have confidence in a system.

Trust has become part of Singapore's economic infrastructure. That is why investments in Tuas Port and Changi T5 are so important. They are not simply investments in capacity. They are investments in Singapore's relevance for the next generation.

But infrastructure alone will not determine our future. Technology will continue to transform aviation, maritime and logistics. AI, automation and digital systems will make transport faster, safer and more efficient.

But these technologies will become increasingly available. Judgement will nonetheless remain scarce. Technology can process information. People decide what matters. Technology can recommend options. People weigh competing priorities. Technology can improve efficiency. People decide when resilience is worth the additional cost.

Technology should never be seen as replacing Singaporeans. It should increase the value that Singaporeans bring.

This also changes how we think about jobs. Too often, we ask which jobs technology will replace. Perhaps we should ask a different question. What expertise should Singapore be known for?

Our ambition should not simply be to create more jobs in transport. It should be to create the jobs where the most important decisions are made. The jobs that design supply chains rather than merely operate them. The jobs that coordinate regional operations rather than simply execute instructions. The jobs that combine technology with judgement. These are the jobs that will command higher wages because they create greater value. These are the jobs that global companies will choose to anchor here. These are the opportunities we must prepare Singaporeans to seize.

Mr Deputy Speaker, every generation of Singaporeans has had to answer one question: how will Singapore continue to matter to the world?

Fifty years ago, our answer was connectivity. We connected the world better than almost anyone else. The next answer must be different. In a world that is becoming more uncertain, Singapore must become the place where the world's most important transport and supply chain decisions are made with confidence.

That is why we continue to invest in world-class ports and airports. That is why we strengthen international partnerships. That is why we embrace new technologies. But above all, that is why we invest in Singaporeans. Because infrastructure can be replicated, technology can be acquired, but trust must be earned, judgement must be developed and confidence must be built over time.

If Singapore becomes the place where the world chooses to make its most important transport and supply chain decisions, then goods will continue to flow through our ports and airports. More importantly, opportunities will continue to flow to Singaporeans. That is how we reinforce Singapore's position as a global transport hub. Not simply by moving more cargo, but by creating more value. And not simply for the next decade, but for the next generation. I support the Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Ms Valerie Lee (Pasir Ris-Changi): Mr Deputy Speaker, Changi is where Singapore meets the world. Every day, hundreds of flights arrive and depart. Thousands of tonnes of cargo move through our airfreight facilities. People, goods and ideas connect Singapore to every corner of the globe.

But for many of the residents I represent, Changi is something else. It is where they report to for work.

As the MP for Changi and as adviser to the SIA Employees' Union and the Supply Chain Employees' Union, I have had the privilege of speaking to many Singaporeans whose livelihoods depend on our transport ecosystem – cabin crew, aircraft engineers, airport operations staff, freight forwarders, warehouse supervisors and logistics professionals. And on behalf of them, I will ask: as our transport hub evolves, will it continue to create good jobs for Singaporeans?

Mr Deputy Speaker, I believe that is the central question behind today's Motion. Singapore has never succeeded because of geography alone. Our success has always come from staying ahead of change. If Singapore wants to remain indispensable, we must once again reinvent ourselves.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to raise three questions.

First, how do we ensure that strengthening Singapore's transport hub continues to create good jobs for Singaporeans? Ultimately, that must remain our measure of success, not simply more passengers, more containers or more cargo, but better career, higher wages and meaningful opportunities for Singaporeans.

Technology is already transforming aviation, maritime and logistics. AI is improving aircraft maintenance. Automation is changing airport and port operations. Digitalisation is reshaping supply chains.

Residents understand that change is inevitable. Their concern is whether they will be equipped to succeed in this new environment. I therefore welcome the Government' continued investments in workforce transformation like the OneAviation Manpower Fund and various SkillsFuture initiatives. But my question to the Minister is this: as we invest billions in T5, Tuas Port and new transport technologies, how will the Ministry ensure these investments translate into better jobs, stronger career progression and higher value opportunities for Singaporeans? Infrastructure alone does not create prosperity. People do.

Second, Mr Deputy Speaker, much has been said about aviation and maritime. I would like to focus on the third pillar of this Motion – our logistics hub. When people hear the word "logistics", they often think about the action of moving goods from one place to another. But increasingly, that is not where value is created. The real value lies in planning, data, visibility and supply chain resilience, in the ability to anticipate disruptions before they happen and increasingly, in AI.

Singapore has always moved up the value chain. We did not remain simply a trading post. We became a global maritime hub. Likewise, we should not remain simply a place where goods pass through. We should aspire to become the nerve centre of regional supply chains, where transport networks are planned, where supply chains are coordinated and where decisions are made. We should be the region's "supply chain control tower".

We already have many of the building blocks: a world-class airport, a world-class port, trusted institution and strong digital infrastructure. The jobs of tomorrow will increasingly be in transport analytics, digital trade, AI-enabled planning, supply chain optimisation and sustainability. These are professional, managerial and specialist roles that will create greater value and better careers for Singaporeans.

My question to the Minister is this: beyond strengthening Singapore's physical connectivity, does the Ministry have a long-term strategy to position Singapore as the region's nerve centre for transport and supply chain management? How will MOT work with other agencies and our tripartite partners to anchor these higher-value activities and the good jobs they create in Singapore?

Finally, how do we maximise the opportunities presented by Singapore's Eastern Gateway, an idea my parliamentary and group representation constituency (GRC) colleague Mr Sharael Taha is extremely passionate about?

T5 is one of the most significant infrastructure investments in our nation's history. It will strengthen Singapore's aviation hub for decades to come. But perhaps we should be thinking beyond T5 itself.

Together with the Tanah Merah Ferry Terminal, Changi Airfreight Centre, Changi Business Park, Loyang Industrial Park and our close proximity to the BBK Free Trade Zone, eastern Singapore has the potential to become an integrated gateway for aviation, maritime connectivity, logistics, business and tourism.

Rather than viewing them as separate developments, could we bring them together under one long-term vision? Could stronger integration between T5 and the Tanah Merah Ferry Terminal create a seamless air-sea connection, making Singapore the preferred gateway for travellers and businesses connecting through the Indonesia-Malaysia-Singapore growth region?

Could this also catalyse new investments, create new businesses and generate even more good jobs for Singaporeans? I would gladly lobby for this vision with Sharael, especially since much of the infrastructure sits within Changi.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Singapore's story has always been one of reinvention. Our pioneers built a trusted port. Another generation built one of the world's finest airports. Our generation must now build the next chapter – not simply by expanding our infrastructure, but by creating more value through technology, innovation and our people.

When my residents ask me whether Singapore will continue to create good jobs as our transport hub evolves, I believe our answer must be a resounding yes. That means continuing to invest boldly, embracing new technologies, moving up the value chain and ensuring that Singaporeans remain at the heart of our transport story.

But honestly, Mr Deputy Speaker, truth be told, besides good jobs, my residents will also greatly appreciate an enhanced bus connectivity to Changi Airport and the Cargo Centre. But I will save that for another debate. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Dr Hamid Razak (West Coast-Jurong West): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as we invest in Tuas Port, Changi Airport T5 and the next generation of transport infrastructure, just like a few of my Parliamentary colleagues, I would like to focus on another form of infrastructure that will determine our long-term competitiveness: our people.

Ports can be built, airports can be expanded, but a future-ready workforce cannot simply be assembled overnight. If Singapore is to remain a leading global transport hub over the next two or three decades, our human capital strategy has to evolve with our infrastructure strategy.

The transport sector is indeed evolving rapidly. Digitalisation, AI and automation are reshaping aviation, maritime and logistics. The jobs of tomorrow will certainly demand different skillsets, stronger interdisciplinary capabilities and a commitment to lifelong learning.

The key challenge then is to ensure that our education system and our training pathways evolve just as quickly or even quicker, to keep up with the pace.

The question is this, do our IHLs provide sufficient opportunities for students of today to combine engineering with AI, logistics with data analytics or maritime operations with digital technologies? Equally important, are we providing enough opportunities for today's workers to continuously reskill as technology evolves?

Our transport strategy should therefore not simply be viewed as purely an infrastructure strategy. It should also keep in mind that it has to be a human capital strategy as well.

Singapore has always stayed ahead because we invested in our people ahead of demand. As we strengthen our position as a global transport hub, we should consider a more integrated National Transport Talent Strategy. Such a strategy could bring together Government agencies, industries, our IHLs and SkillsFuture partners to regularly identify emerging skills, develop future-ready curricula, expand internships and overseas industrial attachments to ensure that Singaporeans are well positioned to take on the high-value jobs that will emerge across our transport sector.

Doing so would also reinforce one of the key objectives of this Motion, which is to anchor good jobs in Singapore.

The best way to anchor good jobs is not simply to attract investment, but to ensure that our Singaporeans possess capabilities that investors cannot easily find elsewhere.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, technology will continue to evolve, whether through AI, automation or innovations that we cannot yet foresee. Our task is not to predict every technological change, but to ensure that Singaporeans have the adaptability and the opportunities to keep learning throughout their careers. If we do that well, technology will strengthen our workforce rather than displace it.

Singapore's transport success has never depended solely on just our ports, runways or logistics networks. It has always depended on our quality, adaptability and resilience of our workers and our people. I believe we can better develop Singaporeans who will become the future leaders of the transport sector, identify where the skills gaps lie and determine how our existing platforms can better support this transition.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we plan our ports decades ahead. We plan our airports decades ahead. We should plan our people with that same discipline and rigour. If we do so, I am confident that Singapore will continue to be not just a global transport hub, but a global transport leader. With that, I support the Motion.

[Motion Speech]

The Acting Minister for Transport (Mr Jeffrey Siow): Mr Deputy Speaker, let me begin by first thanking Ms Tin Pei Ling and the members of her GPC for Transport, who have filed this important Motion.

I also thank Members of this Chamber who have spoken so far, for their wide range of ideas that have been expressed. While I may not be able to respond to every idea individually, MOT will take all of these suggestions back and consider them seriously.

Typically, when I am at this podium, I am speaking about local transport issues. And no doubt, I will continue to do that. Such is the life of the Transport Minister. Local issues are important. We recognise that transport touches the lives of every Singaporean – whether one drives, walks, cycles or rides.

But today, Ms Tin and our colleagues are asking us a different question: to consider the economic impact of transport, which cuts to the heart of how our country makes its living in a changed world.

Transport is one of the largest economic sectors. It contributes about a-tenth of our GDP and 7% of our jobs – good, steady, high-paying jobs, held by Singaporeans who keep people and goods moving, by air, land and sea, every hour, every day.

But the worth of this sector goes far beyond GDP and jobs. Transport is the foundation on which our economy is built.

Where others might have seen a sleepy fishing village, the British looked at our deep harbour and saw a gateway to seaborne trade.

Today, our world-class airport and seaport connect Singapore to every major market on the planet. Through them flows trade, many times the size of our own economy. And this foundation is how Singapore was able to build everything else – an advanced manufacturing base, a high-value services hub and a young but growing engine for startups and enterprises.

At this year's Committee of Supply, I set out three directions for our transport sector: to be globally-oriented, future-focused and people-centric. This remains our north star and it is how I will frame my response to the Motion. I will focus on MOT's overall strategies and Senior Minister of State Sun Xueling and Minister of State Baey Yam Keng will share more details on specific initiatives afterwards.

Let me begin with the first direction: that the transport sector must be globally-oriented. As more than a few Members have already observed, competing in today's world has become far more challenging. Just this year, the Strait of Hormuz was closed for almost four months, upending global energy and supply chains. And the disruption is not yet fully behind us. There were even suggestions from others that countries could levy tolls for passage – as though the right of transit passage guaranteed under UNCLOS simply did not exist.

For most countries, these are distant headlines. But for Singapore, this is existential. We depend on a rules-based international order – one where every nation, large or small, operates on the same terms.

And this is why Singapore spoke up on Hormuz. Because if the rules can be broken there, we worry they can be broken in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore too. And what is done on the seas, could also be done in the skies above us. For a country that lives by its connections, these rules are a matter of survival.

We know the world has changed. In November last year, I was in London for the Assembly of the IMO. Meeting after meeting, one topic was raised – the IMO Net-Zero Framework. Singapore and many others had laboured over this sustainability framework for years and it originally had the support of the majority. But at the 11th hour, the vote was suddenly derailed by intense lobbying from a small number of countries. What troubled people was not so much the outcome that the vote would be delayed for a year. It was a deeper question: does might make right?

If a few powerful countries could arm-twist others and override a deal that was thought to be settled, then what does this mean for the future of the rules-based international order? What does this mean for countries that depend on this to prosper?

One might draw from this a bleak conclusion that international organisations like the IMO have lost their relevance. This is not our view. When institutions come under strain, that is precisely the moment that a country like ours must show up – to bridge divides and to forge consensus on what matters.

Singapore speaks our mind, not only on our own interests, but on what we believe to be right for the world. And other countries listen. In the Council elections for the IMO and for the ICAO last year, Singapore received the highest number of votes in our category. We may be a small country, but we are not a spectator.

So, I agree with Ms Tin Pei Ling and Mr Sharael Taha that we must continue to strengthen Singapore's role as a global thought leader in transport. Singapore must do our part to shape global rules and standards so that they continue to work for small countries like ours.

Our presence in international organisations is only one part of our global orientation. Our connections are the other. Singapore has built a web of agreements around the world – Air Services Agreements, Green and Digital Shipping Corridors, and many more. These agreements open doors. They help explain why our airport has flights to over 170 cities today and our seaports have connections to more than 600 other locations. This is why our transport companies like PSA, CAG, SATS and SIA are able to grow overseas and operate global networks.

We will deepen these links and build new ones with like-minded partners – bilaterally and multilaterally. This includes new initiatives with our ASEAN neighbours: to make cross-border travel more seamless; to improve the efficiency and sustainability of regional ports; and to enhance regional air navigation and liberalise air services within and beyond ASEAN.

Next year, when Singapore takes on the ASEAN Chairmanship, we will have the opportunity to advance these projects and more, to bring our region closer together.

Is our current approach for global connectivity enough for this new world? The Economic Strategy Review recently released its recommendations. The Global Competitiveness Committee, which I co-chaired with Senior Minister of State Low Yen Ling, concluded that Singapore must further strengthen our role as a connected global hub.

You may expect the Transport Minister to say that the answer is to build bigger and better airports and seaports. That is still part of the plan, in case I inadvertently give my colleagues at the Ministry of Finance the wrong impression. But several Members have noted that connectivity today no longer rests on physical infrastructure alone, and I agree.

Supply chains are becoming more fragmented and more distributed. If Singapore is merely a place through which flows happen to pass, then one day those flows will simply pass us by. And that is why our strategy is not to rely on physical connectivity alone. It is to build a host ecosystem that the industry is reliant on.

Ms Poh Li San already explained eloquently how the ecosystem approach works around our airport. In maritime, we have the same thing. Around our port, we have built a maritime industry ecosystem – ship financing, marine insurance, maritime law, arbitration. Ms Gho Sze Kee, as an industry insider, vividly described this earlier in her speech much better than I could.

All this is integrated with our supply chain and logistics ecosystem, which includes air freight forwarding as well as inland transport and logistics. It has taken us decades of effort to build this ecosystem. It is a strategic advantage that keeps Singapore, Tuas Port and PSA competitive and relevant, even as the physical flows of trade shift around us.

Mr Gerald Giam and Mr Kenneth Tiong spoke about Maersk. Coincidentally, the chief executive officer of Maersk, Mr Vincent Clerc, called on the Prime Minister and me just two weeks ago.

Maersk is the second largest shipping line in the world by container volume. It recognises the value of our broader maritime and logistics ecosystem. It may have moved its transshipment operations to Tanjung Pelepas in the year 2000, but its Asia headquarters remain in Singapore. In fact, Maersk manages its entire Asia and Middle East portfolio of port terminals, including Tanjung Pelepas, from Singapore. So, even when its cargo does not physically pass through our waters, the decisions about that cargo may still be made here and we are able to capture value from it.

As supply chains become more digital, connectivity will increasingly depend on technology. This brings me to the second part of our strategy, which is to be future-focused.

Members have spoken a great deal about frontier technology, including AI. Colleagues are correct to dwell on this topic. AI will profoundly reshape our economy and our society in ways that we cannot yet fully understand or imagine. Like the Internet, we can be certain that AI will change our lives, long before we can say exactly how.

Thirty years ago, when web browsers started coming into public use, few of us would be prescient enough to have imagined that banking, shopping and even ride-hailing would one day all run through the Internet. In the same way, we cannot predict precisely the shape of how AI will change our lives. But we must prepare for it now, to stay ahead.

Transport is no exception. In the age of AI, it is even more important to have clarity on what makes Singapore successful in the first place. Shippers and travellers choose Singapore not because we have the best proprietary technologies, but because we are more efficient, we are more connected and we are more reliable than the alternatives.

Technology is only one ingredient in our secret sauce. Our approach will not be to adopt AI for its own sake, but to do so with intention, with clarity and on our own terms.

The National AI Council, chaired by the Prime Minister, drives our efforts on AI. I lead the AI Mission on Connectivity. These AI Missions are industry-centric by design. We begin with a real problem drawn from the industry and we ask what AI can do about it.

This approach suits the transport sector especially well, because our companies like PSA, SIA and SATS are already at the frontier, and we have a real opportunity to grow them into global champions in their own fields.

I am grateful to the Transport GPC Members who crafted this Motion for their thoughtful reference to frontier technologies. Ms Tin, in particular, suggested that we beef up R&D to benefit Singapore's growth. I am happy to share with Members that MOT plans to invest $800 million over the next five years on transport research and innovation to support efforts to develop frontier technology. And this will include projects drawn from the AI Connectivity Mission.

Eight hundred million is more than double the funding over the last five years. We will use these funds to back ideas that could completely transform how transport operates today. For instance, imagine a fully automated MRT depot that maintains and repairs our trains more efficiently, or an AI-enabled air traffic management system that increases our regional airspace capacity to accommodate the needs of all the airports around us, or a smart port network that makes decisions with shipping lines on how to shift containers on a real-time basis, using tools like digital twins, which Mr Jackson Lam and Ms Tin both spoke about. Ms Tin will be pleased to know that the MOT team does intend to explore how we can expand this into an intermodal concept across our air, land and sea networks.

If these projects succeed in the next decade, Singapore will still remain as one of the world's major transport and logistics hubs, but it will look completely different.

That brings me to the third part of our strategy, which is that transport must be people-centric. Many Members have emphasised that technology is not about machines but about people, and I fully agree. On the economic front, it is about supporting our workers – making their jobs easier, more productive and more skilled.

The transport sector is growing. T5 will raise Changi's capacity by more than 50%. Tuas Port will bring us from 45 million TEUs today to 65 million TEUs in the future. There will be many more jobs than workers available, but we will not be able to meet this growth by hiring 50% more.

During Ramadan this year, I broke fast with some workers at Changi Airport. One was a team of air traffic controllers. They shared with me how demanding their jobs are – watching several screens at once, deciding in real time what to tell each aircraft, making certain that no instruction conflicts with another, including with counterparts in neighbouring countries. It is a job of extraordinary demand and a job with no margin for error.

I met another group from SATS. SATS workers are the backbone of our airport operations. They are the reason why your baggage comes out so soon after you land. When we are at the airport, we walk on soft carpets, we enjoy air-conditioning, we listen to calming ambient music. But behind the scenes, there is an army of SATS workers doing backbreaking work, amid the heat and the noise, to move your baggage from the tarmac to the belt.

These are exactly the types of work that AI can lighten. For the air traffic controller, AI can put the full picture together so that the controller is free to do only what a human can: weigh the options, make a decision and carry the final call. For the SATS worker, AI can automate physical and repetitive processes so that he or she is in a safer and more comfortable environment while taking on responsibilities that make better use of their skills.

Technology of this kind raises the value of the worker. As Dr Wan Rizal and Mr Sanjeev Tiwari, among others, put it, workers can enjoy better wages, better welfare and better work prospects. Technology can transform existing jobs and also create new jobs that did not exist before.

I am glad Mr Ang Wei Neng spoke extensively about the new opportunities that AVs will bring. These opportunities are precisely why my Ministry has been preparing for AVs at the airport, at the seaport and also on our roads.

Recently, I gave out scholarships to children of ComfortDelGro's driver-partners. I met many proud parents, most of whom have been drivers for more than 10 years. We chatted about what their children were planning to study – engineering, computer science, finance. All of the parents had one thing in common: they wanted their children to do better in life than they did.

I shared with them the new exciting jobs that AVs will bring – software developers, robotics designers, vehicle engineers and so on. Jobs that many of their sons and daughters would love to take on. I explained that the Government is preparing for AVs for the same reason that we invest in our children's education – we are giving them a better future.

I know there is concern amongst our taxi and private-hire car drivers about AVs. Senior Minister of State Sun Xueling and I meet the driver unions very regularly. We understand the concerns.

Let me be clear. Driver jobs are not going to vanish anytime soon. Today, there are over 70,000 taxi and private-hire drivers in Singapore. In contrast, we only have about 20 AVs running around our roads, mostly in Punggol. Even if I gathered every AV around the world today and moved them all to Singapore, that would only be around 7,000 cars – or less than 10% of our total taxi and private-hire car population.

So, AVs are not displacing today's drivers, and even in 10 years, I expect that we will still require many human drivers. Our plan is indeed to take a proactive approach to support our drivers in any transition.

Mr Deputy Speaker, let me close. Technology matters and we will keep investing in it. But the future of transport is not about robotaxis or about drones or the smartest AI brain. It is ultimately a story about people.

Last month, I was in Chongqing in China. I met our SIA station manager there. Her name was Jocelyn, a young and energetic woman. She was on her first overseas posting – the only SIA staff in that office. There is one flight to and from Singapore daily, but it is at a godforsaken hour, landing at 1.15 am and departing at 2.35 am. So, Jocelyn is out at the airport in the middle of the night and gets home to sleep only at 4.00 am. But from my conversations with her, I could tell that she loves her job – living in a new city, working in a new culture, learning about herself as she strives in a new environment.

We can offer young Singaporeans like Jocelyn such opportunities because of the global reach of our transport sector. Because we build firmly with an eye on the future. Because we do not stand still.

That is what all of us at MOT are striving for. Not technology for its own sake, not staying number one for its own sake, but so that our children, and theirs after them, can reach for opportunities that we ourselves never had.

Globally-oriented, future-focused, people-centric. We hold the line on the rules so that a small nation is never left at the mercy of a large one. We invest at the frontier so that our hard-won lead is not quietly surrendered. We do all of it for one reason and one reason only – for Singaporeans. For the Singaporeans of today and for the Singaporeans of tomorrow who will one day do things that we in this Chamber have not yet even imagined. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this Motion. [Applause.]

[Motion Speech]

Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Ms Tin Pei Ling and the Members for this important Motion, and also for giving me the opportunity to raise a couple of topics related to the future development of transport in Singapore.

Let me first commend the Government on the various key policy moves to electrify Singapore's transport system, especially land transport.

The transition towards electrified mobility is one of the defining shifts in transport today. It is driven by climate imperatives, rapid technological progress, improving vehicle economics and the need for greater energy efficiency. Electric vehicles (EVs) use energy more efficiently than internal combustion engines and their wider adoption can help Singapore reduce emissions, improve local air quality and build a more sustainable transport system.

The Government's approach has been comprehensive – reducing upfront ownership costs, building charging infrastructure ahead of demand, introducing appropriate standards and regulations, and progressively transitioning public transport and commercial fleets.

The policy direction is clear. From 2030, all new car and taxi registrations will be cleaner-energy models, supporting Singapore's broader goal for all vehicles to run on cleaner energy by 2040.

The Government is also working towards deploying 60,000 charging points island-wide by 2030. As of March 2026, around 30,500 charging points had already been deployed, indicating that progress is being made at scale.

The growing take-up of EVs demonstrates that the policy framework is beginning to work. Consumers now have a broader selection of EV models across price points, while the rapid expansion of charging infrastructure is reducing range anxiety, making EV ownership more practical for households.

However, the transition will not be uniform across all vehicle segments. For private cars and light commercial vehicles, the economics are improving quickly. In 2014, EVs accounted for about one-third of new car registrations, while roughly half of the new light goods vehicle registrations were electric.

The more difficult challenge lies in heavy vehicles. Heavy goods vehicles, construction vehicles, coaches, waste-management fleets and other commercial vehicles operate differently from private cars. They travel longer distances, carry heavier loads, face tighter operating schedules and often require reliable charging at depots rather than at public carparks.

This is why the Government's recent heavy-vehicle measures are important. From January 2026, the Heavy Vehicle Zero Emissions Scheme provides a $40,000 incentive for each newly registered zero-tailpipe-emissions heavy goods vehicle or bus above 3.5 tonnes.

The Electric Heavy Vehicle Charger Grant also co-funds up to 50% of charger installation costs, capped at $30,000 per charger for the first 500 chargers. These chargers must be deployed at designated lorry or coach lots, or at the vehicle owner's place of business.

These are sensible interventions because the barrier to heavy-vehicle electrification is not simply the vehicle purchase price. It is the entire operating ecosystem: depot space, electrical capacity, charging downtime, route scheduling, fleet financing and residual-value risk.

For smaller commercial vehicles, the transition is already more advanced. The Commercial Vehicle Emissions Scheme support electric light commercial vehicles, while higher-emission diesel vehicles face increasing surcharges.

Public buses provide the clearest example of how fleet electrification can scale when vehicle procurement, charging infrastructure and operational planning are coordinated.

Singapore is working towards a cleaner-energy public bus fleet by 2040, with electric buses expected to make up around half of the fleet by 2030. The near-term opportunity is therefore clear, and the medium-term test is whether Singapore can create the conditions for broader adoption among logistics operators, construction firms, waste-management companies and other heavy-duty fleet owners.

Sir, may I make three suggestions here?

First, we should ensure that fleet operators, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, can access attractive financing and leasing options for electric commercial vehicles.

Second, we should continue to facilitate charging infrastructure at industrial estates, logistics facilities, depots and designated heavy-vehicle parking areas. The availability of electricity connections, charging equipment and operational space will be just as important as the vehicle purchase incentive itself. Agencies such as LTA, JTC and the Energy Market Authority and the private sector should continue to work closely to identify priority locations where commercial fleet charging demand is likely to emerge first.

Third, we should leverage digital technologies to improve fleet utilisation. Smart charging systems, route optimisation, predictive maintenance and energy-management software can help fleet operators reduce downtime and manage electricity costs more effectively. This is where electrification and digitalisation come together.

Sir, the future is not merely about EVs but an integrated transport system in which vehicles, charging infrastructure, grid capacity and logistics operations communicate and mutually reinforce each another.

Mr Deputy Speaker, let me move on to the next topic that is also another manifestation of electrification of transport but unfortunately did not get to proceed. It is a pity that the Singapore-Kuala Lumpur High Speed Rail (HSR) did not go ahead in January 2021, after many years of feasibility studies, planning and negotiations.

Both Singapore and Malaysia announced the joint development of the HSR in February 2013 and subsequently signed a legally binding Bilateral Agreement in December 2016, establishing the governance framework for what would have been Southeast Asia's most transformative infrastructure projects.

The HSR would have provided a compelling new mode of travel between Singapore and Kuala Lumpur, reducing journey times from more than four hours by road to approximately 90 minutes, with trains operating at speeds of up to 320 kilometres per hour.

Had the project proceeded as originally planned, services would have commenced by the end of this year. At about 350 kilometres in distance between Singapore and Kuala Lumpur, this is a sweet spot for high-speed rail, where it is widely considered to be "too far to drive conveniently and too short to fly". And that is why HSR at this range in other places has captured massive market share in outperforming air travel in terms of total door-to-door travel time.

The strategic merits of the project remain compelling.

First, it would deepen economic integration between Singapore and Malaysia by strengthening connectivity between Southeast Asia's two leading business centres, facilitating business travel and encouraging greater cross-border trade and investment.

Second, it would promote more balanced regional development. Intermediate cities such as Melaka, Muar and Batu Pahat stood to benefit from increased investment, tourism and business activity arising from improved accessibility. Similarly for Singapore, the project would also have catalysed urban redevelopment. For example, the planned terminus at Jurong East was envisaged as a key anchor for the development of the Jurong Lake District as our second Central Business District.

Third, the HSR would encourage a shift away from road and air travel. A reliable 90-minute rail journey would offer an attractive alternative to short-haul flights, easing congestion at airports or on highways while supporting both countries' sustainability objectives.

While Malaysia explored the possibility of reviving the HSR in 2023 under a different delivery model, no decision has since been reached. The Singapore Government has consistently maintained that it remains open to future discussions should Malaysia bring forward a commercially viable proposal that serves the interests of both countries.

Of course, the challenges that led to the project's cancellation remain significant. These include the substantial capital costs, questions surrounding financing and ownership structures, cross-border governance arrangements, commercial risk allocation and the need for sustained political commitment from both sides.

Nevertheless, the long-term strategic case for the HSR remains strong. Beyond transport connectivity, it has the potential to strengthen regional competitiveness, enhance economic resilience and support long-term urban and economic development on both sides of the Causeway. I therefore encourage the Government to continue engaging its Malaysian counterpart on this issue, including through the Leaders' Retreat and other bilateral platforms.

Even if the implementation is not imminent, it is worthwhile to keep the dialogue active, keep exploring innovative financing and operating models, and remain prepared should the opportunity arise to realise a project that delivers mutual benefits for both Singapore and Malaysia.

Sir, in closing, with the rapid emergence of powerful digital technologies, Singapore has a significant opportunity to raise its game, reimagining how we organise our systems, services and industries, while reinforcing the competitive advantages that have underpinned our success. Realising this potential may require us to rethink legacy arrangements, redesign established operating models and embed new technologies more deeply across the economy.

Done well, these changes can improve economic competitiveness, strengthen sustainability and enhance our resilience in an increasingly uncertain world. I support the Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Punggol): Mr Deputy Speaker, Singapore has always been a place where the world arrives, connects and moves on. It is the result of decades of investment, sound policy and above all, generations of transport workers.

Because of my work as the Executive Secretary of the National Transport Workers' Union (NTWU) and Advisor to the National Taxi Association (NTA), the National Private Hire Vehicles Association (NPHVA), I wish to take this opportunity to speak up for our transport workers as we advance Singapore's position as a global transport hub.

As we discuss Singapore's future, let us also remember the people who make that future possible every single day – the bus captains, rail workers, taxi and private hire drivers, logistics workers, technicians, aircrew, seafarers who keep Singapore moving, often long before dawn and long after midnight. They are not simply part of our transport system, they are the reason it works.

AI, robotics and frontier technologies will undoubtedly transform transport. Used wisely, technology can make work safer, more productive and more meaningful. But if transitions are poorly managed, they can also create uncertainty and definitely anxiety.

As we embrace an AI-enabled transport system, especially one of global significance, we must re-imagine, with workers at the heart of the process, what jobs, skills and careers will look like in this future. And this begins with listening.

Because when we truly listen to workers, we will stop asking: "Which jobs will disappear?", "How many jobs will be displaced?"

Instead, we begin asking better questions: "What strengths do our workers already possess so that we can build the future around those strengths?", "What practical barriers must we remove if we want workers to embrace transformation?", "And what support must we provide so that no worker is left behind?"

Over the last few months, together with my union leaders and NTUC colleagues, I have spent considerable time on the ground through focus group discussions and individual engagements with bus captains, taxi drivers and private hire drivers.

Every day, our transport workers witness our transport system transforming right before their eyes. They know AI and new technologies are changing the way we move. They are understandably anxious, but they are also curious.

Following the Economic Strategy Review, our workers understand that Singapore must continue to innovate and remain competitive. They are not asking us to slow down. They are asking not to be left behind.

Eve has been driving a taxi for the past 12 years. She put it more eloquently than I could ever.

(In Mandarin): Technology development is good. However, please do not forget our drivers. We must ensure that everyone move forward together with technology.

(In English): Technology should move Singapore forward. But the true measure of progress is whether it brings our people forward with it.

Mr Deputy Speaker, throughout these engagements, one message came through very clearly. Our transport workers are asking a deeply human question: "Where do I fit in the future of Singapore as a global transport hub?"

Our workers want to know what opportunities technology might create, what skills they should begin building today and how they can continue contributing meaningfully tomorrow. Our workers ask for a fair and thoughtful transition, they want the assurance that they will not be left to navigate this change alone because the clarity they seek is not simply about jobs. It is about lives; it is about livelihoods.

For Mr Low, a taxi driver in his early 40s, it means having the flexibility to earn a living while caring for his 64-year-old mother and taking her for her medical appointments.

For Aly, who drives a combi-limo, it means earning enough to provide a better future for her five young daughters.

For Ah Ban, who proudly became Singapore's first EV taxi driver, it means continuing to build a career that he takes pride in as the industry evolves.

And for Harry, after 31 years behind the wheel, retirement does not mean stepping away from transport. He imagines a future where owning an AV fleet with his friends becomes the next chapter of his working life – a retirement built not on stopping work, but on the experience he has spent three decades building.

These are stories of real drivers and those are their real names. But this is what our workers are asking for. Not certainty about the future – none of us can promise that, but clarity that there is a place for them in it.

As we continue building Singapore as a global business and transport hub, we must do more than create the industries of tomorrow. We must also redesign the jobs of tomorrow, making work safer, more productive and more meaningful, while keeping our workers' needs and livelihoods at the heart of every of these transformations.

We have already seen how this can work in real life. To enhance workplace safety and raise productivity, SBS Transit envisioned a predictive AI-enabled maintenance solutions across its bus and rail maintenance operations. Working closely with NTUC through the NTUC Company Training Committee initiative, SBS Transit consulted widely with workers before implementing a suite of predictive maintenance solutions from tyre and track inspections to facility management in its depots and interchanges. In doing so, SBS Transit developed new specialist capabilities. Through its Diagnostic Expert Scheme, workers could move into higher-value maintenance work with progressive career pathways, enhanced livelihoods and safer workplaces.

In this case, technology did not replace our workers. It lifted our workers.

Through our engagements, we also heard about the practical barriers our transport workers face as they prepare for transition.

Unlike salaried employees, P2P drivers stop earning the moment they stop driving. Every hour spent in training is an hour of forgone income. For many, attending a course is not simply about setting aside time. It also means paying vehicle rental, covering operating costs and giving up precious earning opportunities.

The opportunity cost of transformation is therefore much higher for our P2P drivers. If transformation is at too high a personal cost, even the best training programme will struggle to succeed.

Our drivers are also deeply pragmatic about upskilling. They understand that they must continue learning to remain relevant, whether within or beyond the transport industry. But they have also told us, time and time again, that training must lead somewhere. It must open the door to real jobs, real opportunities and of course, sustainable livelihoods. After all, our drivers have mortgages to pay, ageing parents to care for and children to raise.

Finally, any upskilling pathway must recognise why many entered the P2P sector in the first place. Flexibility is not a convenience. It is one of the profession's defining features. Many drivers chose this career precisely because it allows them to balance caregiving responsibilities, family commitments and other life circumstances.

If we want them to embrace lifelong learning, then our training ecosystem must be equally flexible.

Mr Deputy Speaker, to make job re-imagination happen at scale, we must invest in our workforce with the same determination we have invested in our land, aviation, maritime and logistics infrastructure. Allow me to suggest three areas for action.

First, transformation works best when workers help to design it. Job redesign must begin before disruption occurs, and workers and unions must be part of the conversation right from the outset. We cannot design the future of work without workers.

This House unanimously passed the Motion on "An AI Transition with No Jobless Growth" in May. I encourage and urge the Government to continue working closely with NTUC, our unions and our Tripartite Jobs Council to identify how jobs are evolving, expand AI Ready SG to equip more workers with AI capabilities and encourage more companies to leverage our Company Training Committee grants to support job redesign and workforce transformation across the entire transport sector.

Second, workers need visible and credible pathways into future jobs. For bus captains, future roles should continue building on valuable capabilities that they have already developed – managing commuters, responding to real-world situations and ensuring passenger safety.

For our taxi and private-hire drivers, emerging opportunities such as safety operators and remote operators should provide meaningful pathways into the AV ecosystem. Their years of road experience will strengthen the safety and operational readiness of future mobility services.

The transition support we provide matters too, particularly for workers whose livelihoods depend on being behind the wheel every day. We should create more flexible training pathways, Place and Train programmes, strengthen company-level apprenticeships and expand flexible work arrangements to include flexible training arrangements.

For technicians and skilled tradesmen, the shift towards electrification presents one of the greatest opportunities for workforce transformation. Singapore must position itself not only as a leader in electric mobility, but also as a regional centre of excellence for EV maintenance, battery systems and digital diagnostics.

Roles such as EV technicians and EV technical specialists will become increasingly valuable as transport systems across the world become more technologically sophisticated. This is not just a Singapore trend. Around the world, countries are already investing heavily in these specialised capabilities.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Singapore must seize this opportunity, not only to create better jobs locally, but to equip our workers with skills that are globally recognised, relevant and desired. They must see how our workers can progress from technician, to specialist, to diagnostic expert and eventually into engineering, supervisory and leadership positions.

The recently launched Skills Pathway for EV Technical Specialists is an encouraging step in this direction. When workers can clearly see both the skills required and the pathway ahead, they are far more likely to embrace change with confidence.

As we transform the transport sector, let us also measure whether transformation is delivering what truly matters – not simply more technology, but better jobs.

One possibility is a sector-level report card within our Industry Transformation Maps that tracks whether new and redesigned jobs are being created, whether these jobs are of good quality and whether they deliver what NTUC calls the "3Ws" – better wages, better welfare and better work prospects.

Third, AVs must complement our drivers, not compete against them. The tripartite has already begun important work through various workgroups and steering committees to guide Singapore's national AV deployment. This is a nascent space and it is important that the Labour Movement continues to have a seat at the table.

We will continue speaking up for workers on deployment concerns, liability and regulatory frameworks, and more importantly, how the AV industry can create good local jobs and build Singaporean capabilities. We look forward to seeing workers' views incorporated into MOT's national AV deployment plans.

An example is that our drivers have also suggested prioritising AV deployment in areas where connectivity remains challenging or where there are transport gaps. I am glad this sentiment was also raised earlier by the hon Member Ang Wei Neng and his constituents.

As a tripartite, we can and we must ensure that AVs become another opportunity to strengthen rather than weaken our workers' prospects and livelihoods. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): Our taxi drivers, private-hire drivers and bus captains are not afraid of new technology. They simply want to know that when AVs arrive, will there be a place for them?

Technological progress should make the work of drivers safer and more dignified, not cost them their livelihoods. As long as we redesign jobs for our drivers early, put proper transition arrangements in place and keep our drivers at the centre of that transition, technology can bring them new skills, new roles and a better future.

(In English): Throughout my engagements, one question stayed with me: "Where do I fit in the future of transport?"

Our responsibility is to ensure that every transport worker has an answer. That answer is not simply another training course. It is a pathway. A pathway to better skills, better jobs and better livelihoods. We may not be able to preserve every job exactly as it exists today, but we must preserve livelihoods and create pathways to the next good job.

If we get this right, Singapore will not only remain as the world's leading transport hub, we will become something even more important – a transport hub where innovation advances together with workers, and where progress is measured not only by how far technology takes us, but by how far it brings our people along. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I declare I work in a global investment firm with assets across land transport, aviation, shipping and logistics.

I rise on this Motion as a Member of this House and also as the Chair of the GPC for Defence and Foreign Affairs. I mention the second because for us, transport policy is inseparable from foreign policy and national security. To talk about our ports and airports is to talk about our place in this world.

Some 700 years ago, the trading cities of the Hanseatic League built the most successful commercial network in Europe – not because their ports were the biggest, but because merchants knew what to expect. Contracts were honoured. Disputes were resolved. The harbour cities of Srivijaya and Melaka understood the same truth. The most valuable port is not the largest. It is the one people trust.

That lesson is older than Singapore itself. It is why we still exist as a trading nation. This Motion celebrates our infrastructure. Tuas Port will handle 65 million containers a year. T5 will lift Changi towards 140 million passengers.

But world-class infrastructure alone, however necessary, has never been sufficient. Supply chains today are shaped by geopolitics as much as by cost. For Singapore, decisions about transport are decisions about our economy, our diplomacy and our security.

A new berth is worth only what the world thinks of the country behind it. Our task is not just to build, but to shape the environment around what we build so the jobs stay here.

I have three proposals: one about our region, one about ourselves and one about the wider world. Each of them aimed at what this Motion affirms: long-term competitiveness through cooperation with our neighbours, the technologies of the frontier and the infrastructure the world can rely on so that good jobs stay anchored here.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my first proposal is about our neighbourhood. The Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone, signed last year, opens a new chapter for both sides of the Causeway. It also restores something older.

For centuries, Johor, Singapore and the Riau Islands worked as one trading system along the Straits of Malacca through which a third of world trade still flows. With colonial boundaries, our borders changed that. The Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone gives all three a chance to knit that older geography back together, not politically, but economically.

Manufacturing will spread across the region. Our job is to make sure the ecosystem grows with it, on both sides of the Causeway and beyond. Aviation, shipping, logistics headquarters, customs, trade finance, maritime law, supply chain command. These functions need trust and trust is what we have spent 60 years building.

Let me put this personally. My father worked at PSA for 40 years, directing containers on the ground, shift after shift, under the sun and in the rain. He was one of thousands of ordinary Singaporeans whose hands built the port that built modern Singapore.

Today, at Tuas, some of his successors sit in air-conditioned control rooms and run 20 cranes at once, guided by AI, in a port that is increasingly running itself. Their work is safer, their pay is better, their skills are sharper.

But the reason they exist is the same reason he did. Singapore has to be a place the world can rely on. That is what this Motion is really about. It is about honouring those who built this port with their hands and giving the next generation the tools to run it in a very different timeline.

I know the question this will provoke in this Chamber and across the Causeway. It is being asked in Johor and Riau too. If we integrate more with our neighbours, will the good jobs not simply move?

Let me answer directly. Some will move. It has been moving for 30 years. But the jobs that we have always been trusted to do best will not move – financing, brokering, customs, maritime law, air traffic control, supply chain command. And equally, the engineers, technicians, marine crews and training pathways from ITE and polytechnics to a control room.

We are not proposing to hand Singapore's value away. We are proposing to grow Singapore, Johor and Riau together, each anchoring what it does best, connected by the trust the region has built.

There is a proven model close to home. Hong Kong International Airport's SkyPier ferries passengers from Shenzhen and other Pearl River Delta ports directly to airside. They check in at their departure port, never clear Hong Kong immigration and arrive at their gate – something similar between Johor and Changi, jointly designed, we can build on together.

Johor is Malaysian, Riau is Indonesian. We cannot legislate integration. We must negotiate it, earn it and build it patiently. Geography first connected this region. Diplomacy has to reconnect it.

I would therefore ask the Government to look seriously at three practical measures.

First, open Changi check-in and baggage handling in Johor itself so a traveller can begin a Changi journey from Johor Bahru.

Second, build cross-border transport into that system, coach, rail or ferry, integrated with our airlines from the moment a passenger sets off.

Third, establish digital customs clearance and bonded cargo corridors from southern Johor into PSA and the Changi Airfreight Centre.

Each of these measures is designed to benefit our neighbours as much as us. A traveller checking in at Johor Bahru spends money there. A cargo corridor creates jobs on both sides. Batam and Bintan enter on the same terms.

A city-state alone is fragile. Our ambition should be for the wider region to become what it was for centuries: an integrated trading system in which each partner does what it does best and Singapore's role is to help hold it together. Merchants have to know what to expect.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my second proposal moves from what we build outside our borders to what we build inside them. A gateway means nothing if the country behind it is not reliable in a crisis. The Red Sea has been repeatedly disrupted. Undersea cables in the Baltic have been cut again and again. The Strait of Hormuz remains under pressure. These are not distant. They are pressure on the arteries our economy depends on.

For us, resilience is not defensive. It is a competitive advantage. Our position rests on trust: trust in freedom of navigation, trust in international law, trust that we will remain open and reliable whichever way the world turns.

Foreign interference is not just a security problem. It is an economic one. If our autonomy is compromised, or even seems to be, we lose the confidence that brings people here.

I would therefore urge the Government to set up a National Crisis Logistics Compact, bringing MOT, MTI, MFA, the Ministry of Defence and major industry partners into one framework. In year one, it should stress-test our five most critical supply chains, run a whole-of-nation logistics exercise modelled after Exercise Northstar, publish a Hub Resilience Statement and establish a standing industry council for crisis coordination.

We have long taken military contingencies seriously. We have done the same for cybersecurity. Our economic infrastructure deserves the same discipline. We should not wait for a crisis to discover our weak points. Find, strengthen and rehearse them now. Preparation is a capability in its own right. And when the next storm comes, the world has to know it can still count on us.

Preparation alone only manages a world we did not design. If we want to help shape the century, not just weather it, we must do one more thing. We must help write the rules.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, that is my third proposal. For 60 years, we have shown that we can compete under international rules. The next 60 will require us to help write them.

The world we are entering is different. Competition is no longer about products and prices. It is about who sets the standards, defines the technology, runs the institutions, and ultimately writes the rules.

Why should anyone follow rules written by a country of six million? Because the rules a small country writes are not designed to favour a small country. They must work for whoever sits at the table. We can afford to write rules that treat every party fairly, because we cannot assume we will always be at the top.

That is why our Digital Economy Agreements have been adopted by countries much larger than us. It is why the Housing Development Board (HDB), once heterodox, is now studied globally. Singapore is credible as a contributor to those rules not because we insist on our own advantage, but because we do not.

Minister Chan Chun Sing made a related point at Shangri-La Dialogue last month. UNCLOS was written for a world in which oceans mainly carried ships. Today, they carry the digital infrastructure of the world economy. Over 99% of Singapore's international communications runs through undersea cables. The law has not kept up. This is not only a legal problem. It is a strategic opening.

Countries that help set standards shape the markets that run on them and gain influence out of proportion to their size. Through TradeTrust and our IMO work, we have done this before, by designing frameworks that are practical, neutral and useable everywhere.

The Government, and not only MOT, should bring the same ambition into transport, logistics and the infrastructure that underpins them in four areas. These are the four places where frontier technologies and international rules will meet.

First, the operational layer. Common standards for trusted digital trade and cargo certification, so Singapore-issued documents are honoured elsewhere without translation.

Second, the technological frontier. Rules for autonomous shipping and AI in port operations, so questions of liability and accountability do not remain open as ships and ports run themselves.

Third, the transition. International standards for green shipping. A country that supplies close to a fifth of the world's marine fuel, 56.77 million tonnes last year, should be helping write those standards, not receiving them second-hand.

Fourth, and most importantly, the strategic dimension. Stronger international protection for undersea cables, for freedom of navigation through chokepoints, and for the infrastructure the digital economy sits on. Those are no longer commercial assets. They are strategic ones.

In the 20th century, we built the port. In the 21st, we must help decide the rules the port will live under, not just how well we follow them.

In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, every generation of Singaporeans has faced the same question. How does a small country stay indispensable? Our founders built a port where people could trust. The next generation built an airport, a financial centre and a reputation the world came to rely on. We will have to give solutions in a world that is increasingly difficult to navigate.

Three proposals began that answer.

First, position Changi and PSA as the trusted gateway for the wider Johor-Singapore-Riau region: off-airport check-in, integrated cross-border transport and bonded cargo corridors, extended to Batam and Bintan, every measure designed to benefit our neighbours as much as ourselves.

Second, build a national resilience that lets us stay reliable through a National Crisis Logistics Compact to stress test our supply chains, rehearse them, publish a Hub Resilience Statement and coordinate before crises arrive.

Third, move from a country that competes under international rules to one that helps write them. In digital trade certification. In autonomous shipping and AI governance. In green shipping standards. And in the protection of undersea cables and chokepoint navigation.

These may seem like transport proposals but are really national ones. Connectivity has never just been an industry for Singapore. It has been our strategy and often our safety.

We can keep building. And we should. But we must also keep building our trust. It is the only infrastructure a small country cannot afford to lose.

Every generation since Independence has earned our place in the world. Our responsibility is to see that the next generation is given the chance to do the same. A hundred years from now, when our great grandchildren ask what sort of country this was, I want them to be able to say what merchants once said of the Hanseatic cities: they knew what to expect of Singapore; and Singapore kept faith. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support this Motion.

[Motion Speech]

Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Motion recognises that Singapore's long-term competitiveness depends on three mutually reinforcing pillars: international cooperation, frontier technologies and world-class infrastructure.

Transport is where these pillars come together. It connects Singapore to the world, anchors enterprise, creates good jobs and secures our future as an open economy.

For Singaporeans, this means in a very practical ways: efficient port, airport, logistics networks help keep food, medicine, household goods and business inputs flowing reliably and affordably. They also strengthen national resilience in a crisis: strong aviation, maritime and logistics links give Singapore more options to secure essential supplies and keep trade routes open.

Sir, the benefit of Singapore goes beyond experiencing Jewel or Changi Airport. They are reflected in the goods we received and the resilience we have when the world becomes more uncertain.

The global environment is changing. Supply chains are becoming more fragmented. Geopolitical tensions are reshaping trade flows. Businesses are placing greater emphasis on resilience, security and diversification. Critical infrastructure – ports, airports, energy networks and digital systems – are increasingly becoming instruments of national resilience and strategic influence.

So, I would like to make three points. First, Singapore should strengthen regional connectivity by developing the Singapore-Johor-Batam-Bintan-Karimun corridor as an integrated economic, logistics and green energy spine. Second, Singapore should build the world's smartest sea-air logistics hub by applying AI to real operational bottlenecks. And third, Singapore should anchor a regional green fuels ecosystem that creates new opportunities for enterprises, startups and workers.

Mr Speaker, my first point is that transport should be seen not only as infrastructure, but as a platform for regional cooperation. Singapore's success has always depended on an open, rules-based international order. As global trust weakens, we must continue to defend the principles that have served us well: respect for international law, freedom of navigation and the peaceful resolution of disputes. This includes upholding the UNCLOS, which is fundamental to maritime order and the free flow of trade.

But defending rules alone is insufficient. In a more contested world, Singapore must also build practical regional win-win partnerships, with transport as a key enabler. When our neighbours prosper, Singapore benefits. When regional supply chains become more resilient, Singapore benefits. When businesses, workers and travellers can move more efficiently across borders, Singapore benefits.

We are already making progress through the Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone and continuing investments in cross-border connectivity. The next step is to consider how the wider Singapore-Johor-Batam-Bintan-Karimun corridor can be better integrated as an economic, logistics and green energy spine.

This wider regional corridor brings together complementary strengths. Singapore brings global connectivity, capital, services, technology and innovation. Johor brings land, labour, manufacturing capacity and a growing industrial base. Batam, Bintan and Karimun bring industrial space, logistics capacity, renewable energy potential and deepening economic links with Singapore.

Together, this wider regional corridor can become a more integrated growth area if we invest in the right transport, customs, logistics, maritime, aviation and digital infrastructure. This is how we turn proximity into productivity.

But physical infrastructure alone is not enough. Customs processes, digital documentation, data exchanges, payment systems and trusted operator frameworks increasingly determine how efficiently goods and people move across borders.

This is where frontier technologies can make a practical difference. For cargo, AI can predict congestion before it forms, assess clearance risks earlier, optimise truck, ferry and vessel flows, and flag documentation gaps before goods arrive at the harbour.

For businesses, this means fewer delays, lower compliance costs and more predictable delivery times. For agencies and operators, it means better manpower deployment, more targeted inspections and faster response when bottlenecks emerge.

The opportunity is to build a more seamless regional operating layer – not by creating new institutions, but by piloting interoperable data-sharing arrangements, trusted operator frameworks and common digital standards with our neighbours.

This is also timely as Singapore prepares to assume the ASEAN Chairmanship in 2027.

Our Chairmanship should be an opportunity to champion practical regional cooperation in areas where Singapore can contribute meaningfully: connectivity, digital trade facilitation, sustainable transport, logistics cooperation, green fuels and skills development.

Transport connectivity can reduce friction, strengthen supply chains, support regional production networks, create jobs and deepen trust among neighbours. I therefore call on the Government to build on the Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone by exploring a wider Singapore-Johor-Batam-Bintan-Karimun connectivity framework, supported by interoperable digital systems, trusted data-sharing arrangements and AI-enabled logistics.

Mr Speaker, Sir, my second point is that Singapore should build the world's smartest sea and air logistics hub. Major investments such as Tuas Mega Port and Changi Airport T5 will underpin Singapore's competitiveness for decades to come. But our advantage will not be determined by capacity alone. It will depend on how intelligently these assets work together.

We should aim to become the world's most efficient and trusted sea-air-digital logistics hub by strengthening connectivity between Changi, Tuas, free trade zones, logistics parks and regional distribution centres.

In maritime, the strategic question is not whether Singapore owns a national shipping line. It is whether Singapore can continue to anchor the full maritime ecosystem – shipping lines, shipowners, charterers, insurers, financers, bunker suppliers, ship managers, classification societies, legal services, MRO players and maritime technology companies.

Singapore has continued to strengthen its maritime hub position through PSA, MPA, bunkering, maritime services, finance, arbitration, logistics, ship management, MRO, digitalisation and green shipping initiative and Singapore is now the world's largest transshipment and bunkering hub.

So, for a hub, neutrality is a strength. Singapore succeeds because we are a trusted channel through which global trade flows, not because we favour one shipping line over another, but because all major players see Singapore as an open, efficient and reliable hub.

At the same time, we are not without locally anchored maritime players. Companies, such as PIL, give Singapore an important base for shipping capability, but our broader strategy should remain ecosystem based to be the platform where global shipping lines, ship owners, bunker suppliers, financiers, insurers, ship managers and MRO players and maritime technology companies choose to operate. This means deepening our strength in port efficiency, green fuels, digitalisation, finance, insurance and trusted regulation, so that Singapore remains indispensable as a maritime hub.

To further anchor Singapore as a maritime hub, AI should be applied to specific operational problems, harmonising air and sea connectivity.

First, Singapore can develop a sea-air logistics control tower that gives operators and agencies a clearer real-time picture of cargo flows across Changi, Tuas and key logistics nodes. A shared operational view, supported by AI, can forecast cargo demand, optimise routing, recommend lower-congestion time windows, improve warehouse allocation and reduce avoidable delays.

Second, we should use digital twins to stress-test our logistics system. A digital twin of key sea-air cargo flows can simulate disruptions before they happen – whether port delays, aviation disruptions, extreme weather, cyber incidents or supply chain shocks. This allows agencies and operators to test contingency plans, identify weak links and improve resilience before a crisis occurs.

And third, AI can strengthen predictive maintenance across critical transport assets. Sensors and operational data can detect early signs of equipment failure in port cranes, baggage systems, automated warehouses, harbour craft and aircraft support equipment.

These are practical applications. They are about making every piece of infrastructure work harder, smarter and more reliably. But technology alone will not keep Singapore competitive. We must also address cost and operational bottlenecks. We should take seriously feedback from ship owners and ship suppliers that the cost of calling at Singapore has been rising, and that some services may be cheaper in ports such as China. Singapore cannot compete on price alone. But if we are to charge a premium, we must be faster, more reliable, more trusted and more integrated.

We must also take onboard feedback on the lack of availability of heavy vehicle parking lots. As we better integrate our port, airport, logistics parks and warehouses, heavy vehicles remain essential to the transfer of goods across these nodes. If drivers struggle to find suitable parking or staging areas, this adds waiting time, congestion, operating cost and uncertainty to the logistics chain.

Our port and logistics ecosystem must therefore reduce the total cost of call and movement through shorter turnaround times, better coordination of bunkering and supplies, digital pre-clearance, AI-enabled scheduling, sufficient heavy vehicle staging and parking capacity and stronger support for marine service and logistics SMEs. This will allow Singapore to remain the preferred port of call and a trusted, efficient logistics hub.

My third point is that Singapore should anchor a regional green fuels ecosystem. For maritime and aviation, sustainable fuels will become increasingly important. Singapore has already taken important steps in these areas. The next step is to bring them together into a broader regional green transport strategy. We need to partner with regional neighbours who have stronger potential in renewable resources. Clean fuels, including biofuels, e-fuels and hydrogen derivatives, should be seen as an ecosystem opportunity.

For Singapore, this means becoming a trusted regional hub for clean fuels, aggregating sustainable feedstock, certifying provenance and emissions and supporting refining and blending, storage, trading and financing and supplying aviation and maritime users. This would strengthen our aviation and maritime hub status, while creating opportunities for regional partners, fuel traders, refiners, certification providers, engineers, service providers and SMEs.

Green ammonia is one example. Renewable energy generated in the region can be used to produce green hydrogen, which can then be converted into green ammonia. Singapore can play the role of a trusted regional hub – certifying, storing, trading and bunkering green ammonia as a future marine fuel. This could also accelerate regional renewable energy development. Instead of relying only on undersea transmission cables, which can be costly and require complex approvals, renewable energy can be converted closer to source, into hydrogen or ammonia, and then transported and traded as fuel.

This gives regional renewable projects another route to market, while helping Singapore and our neighbours reduce exposure to distant fuel disruptions and use Southeast Asia's own renewable resources to support our region's transport and maritime needs.

There is also an opportunity for marine MRO. When Singapore becomes a future green bunkering hub, vessels must be ready to use new fuels safely. Our marine MRO sector can support vessel retrofitting, fuel system upgrades, ammonia and methanol readiness, safety certification and lifecycle maintenance.

In this way, Singapore can become a regional green vessel transformation hub, connecting fuel supply, bunkering, vessel upgrading, safety standards and skilled jobs for Singaporeans.

I call on the Government to bring together our maritime, aviation and clean energy initiatives into a coherent regional green transport strategy, covering sustainable aviation fuel, biofuels, electric harbour craft, methanol and ammonia bunkering and working with our neighbours on common standards, trusted supply chains and regional offtake arrangements.

This future transport ecosystem must ultimately be about enterprises and people. For SMEs, the key challenge is implementation. This is especially important in transport, logistics, aviation and maritime, where SMEs support MRO, fleet operations, safety systems, supplies, inspection, compliance and training and maintenance.

The Government should help transport SMEs identify practical AI use cases, adopt sector-relevant tools and measure productivity gains. Logistics firms can use AI to reduce empty runs and improve routing, MRO and marine service SMEs can use digital tools for predictive diagnostics, safety compliance and alternative-fuel readiness.

As large players invest in green fuel and vessel conversion, SMEs can provide the specialised capabilities that make the ecosystem work – components, sensors, gas detection, emergency response diagnostics, safety equipment and modular training. I therefore call on the Government to support transport SMEs in building capabilities in AI-enabled diagnostics, green fuel safety, alternative-fuel MRO, electrification and maritime compliance.

This future transport ecosystem must also include technology startups. Startups are agile innovators that can accelerate transport transformation by developing and testing emerging technologies. They can drive innovation in AI, robotics, autonomous systems, maritime digitalisation, aviation software, digital twins, predictive maintenance, cybersecurity and supply chain resilience.

But startups often struggle to access real operating environments, procurement channels, testbeds and first reference customers. This is where the Government can help chart a clearer pathway for startups to scale. This may include pilot procurement, anonymised operational data access, reference customers and partnerships with SMEs, local enterprises and MNCs.

Startups provide innovation, SMEs provide operational expertise and larger enterprises provide scale and market access. This three-way partnership can help Singapore build a stronger innovation ecosystem around transport. So, I call on the Government to develop a stronger transport-tech startup strategy, with clearer pathways for startups to partner with SMEs, local enterprises and MNCs.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this transformation must create good jobs for Singaporeans. I suggest three priority training tracks.

First, AI-enabled transport operations, covering demand forecasting, route optimisation, digital dashboards and predictive maintenance. Second, green fuel and safety capabilities, covering ammonia safety, battery systems, sustainable aviation fuel, biofuels, methanol, emergency response and compliance. Third, advanced MRO and systems integration, covering digital maintenance records, sensors, robotics, cybersecurity and automation.

These pathways should be developed across ITE, polytechnics, universities, SkillsFuture and industry, with strong mid-career conversion routes. So, I therefore call on the Government to develop a transport jobs and skills roadmap, aligned with our future transport strategy, to identify emerging jobs, the skills required and the training pathways to help Singaporeans seize these opportunities.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore's success has always depended on our ability to adapt to a changing world. Transport will be central to Singapore's future competitiveness and relevance. When we execute this well, transport will remain a key pillar of Singapore's competitiveness because we are trusted, innovative, resilient and able to create good jobs for Singaporeans. I support the Motion.

"Resolved, 'That this House affirms the importance of strengthening Singapore's long-term economic competitiveness by leveraging international cooperation, frontier technologies and world-class infrastructure to reinforce Singapore's position as a globally connected aviation, maritime and logistics hub, and to anchor good jobs in Singapore.' – [Ms Tin Pei Ling]"

Also note: between Baey Yam Keng's speech and Sun Xueling's speech, the House dealt with a short separate item of EXEMPTED BUSINESS ("Resolved, 'That the proceedings on the business set down on the Order Paper for today be exempted at this day's Sitting from the provisions of Standing Order No 2.' – [Mr Zaqy Mohamad.]"). This is procedural, not part of the Motion debate, and does not need its own hansard_items row — flagging it here only so it isn't mistaken for a missing gap in the item_id sequence if the underlying transcript is checked later.

---

[Motion Speech]

The Minister of State for Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng): Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. Members have spoken about what the future of transport could hold and why we must invest today to capture new opportunities tomorrow and remain competitive globally. I fully agree.

The seeds of the future must be planted today, through sustained investments in technology, systems and our people. As Acting Minister Jeffrey Siow mentioned, MOT plans to invest $800 million over the next five years on transport research and innovation. I will elaborate on how our investments are strengthening our transport system today, while preparing Singapore for the future.

Transport connects Singapore to the world through our aviation and maritime networks, underpinning our competitiveness as a global hub. We cannot take this for granted. We must continue to plan ahead and invest in the future of transport. I will cover three points. First, how our investments are making a difference today. Second, why we must continue to innovate for the future. And third, why we must build the future together with the next generation.

Across aviation, maritime and land transport, our investments are already improving reliability and efficiency today. Given the focus of this Motion, I will highlight examples from aviation and maritime.

In aviation, CAAS invested in next-generation air traffic management concepts and tools, to optimise flight operations amidst growing traffic density. One focus area is collaborative decision-making. An example is the Regional Collaboration Platform, which is an experimentation tool that allows air navigation service providers to share information and optimise air traffic flows across the region. In July 2025, CAAS and seven regional partners successfully trialled the automated exchange of simulated flight management information, to collaboratively manage flights across the region. Over time, this will lead to more punctual and predictable flights, as well as lower fuel use and emissions.

In maritime, similar improvements are taking place. MPA invested in smart port operations and vessel coordination, to improve efficiency across port activities. For example, AI-enabled vessel voyage planning helps shipping companies plan more fuel-efficient routes and coordinate vessel arrivals more effectively. Although it is at the prototype stage, simulated trials have shown reduced fuel use, pointing to more efficient scheduling and faster turnaround times. In a major hub like Singapore, this translates to lower costs and smoother, more reliable movement of goods.

These examples show how our investments are strengthening reliability and efficiency of our transport system today.

While we continue to improve the transport system today, we must also prepare for what lies ahead. We face tightening manpower, limited space and growing climate challenges. This makes innovation even more critical.

Therefore, we will invest $800 million to support research in transport and connectivity, with approximately two-thirds directed towards cross-cutting capabilities in autonomy and digital twins. A key challenge is tightening manpower, even as our transport system becomes more complex. As such, we are investing in autonomy to fundamentally improve how operations are carried out. We will focus on new operating models involving AVs, vessels and robotics across our port, airport and logistics network. This also builds on the point raised by Mr Ang Wei Neng on advancing the use of AVs in aviation and maritime. This will allow us to handle higher volumes more efficiently and enable workers to focus on tasks that require human judgement and expertise.

Once developed, we will pilot these solutions with the industry. With our high volumes of cargo and supportive regulatory environment, Singapore can serve as a real-world "living lab" to test and deploy these solutions at scale. Once proven here, they can be adopted internationally. This reinforces the point raised by Mr Jackson Lam, that Singapore should not only be a transport hub, but a transport innovation hub.

Autonomy alone is not enough. We must also improve how the transport system works as a whole. Therefore, we will invest in digital twins to manage the transport network more intelligently. For example, by integrating data across port, airport and logistics network, we can track cargo flows in real-time, anticipate disruptions and adjust operations more effectively. This also aligns with Ms Tin Pei Ling's suggestion to deepen digital twin capabilities, alongside proposals by Mr Sharael Taha and Mr Edward Chia to move towards a more integrated sea-air logistics control tower.

To build our digital twins, we are strengthening our common digital infrastructure to facilitate sharing. We are leveraging platforms such as SGTraDex, which Ms He Ting Ru had raised, to strengthen such sharing and seeking more partners for existing use cases and to drive new ones.

At the same time, we will continue to deepen sector-specific capabilities across aviation, maritime and land transport. I will elaborate on aviation and maritime which are closely related to this Motion.

In aviation, we will focus on next-generation air navigation services. As air traffic grows, we need to manage more flights safely and efficiently. We will invest in AI-enabled air traffic flow management to better balance traffic demand with airport capacity, enabling smoother and more efficient flights.

In maritime, we will continue to strengthen our smart maritime operations and services, and support the safe use of alternative maritime energy. As vessel traffic increases, we need to manage more activities within limited land and sea space, as well as manpower constraints. We will invest in AI-enabled port analytics and predictive traffic management to improve efficiency and reduce vessel turnaround times. As the sector transits to alternative fuels to reduce international shipping's carbon footprint, we will also invest in research to ensure they can be delivered and bunkered safely.

Together, these efforts will help us to do more with less. We will make better use of our manpower in a tighter labour environment, while using less space and emitting less carbon so that Singapore remains strong as a global transport and connectivity hub.

Mr Dennis Tan mentioned that Singapore cannot rely solely on adopting technologies developed elsewhere. This is why we are building our own capabilities in areas where we have unique strengths and operational advantages.

As part of the $800 million investment, we will support our IHLs, research institutions and transport companies to develop Singapore-based expertise, generate valuable intellectual property and export to global markets.

Ultimately, the value of innovation depends not just on what we develop, but how it is applied in real operations. Our SMEs will play an important role in making this happen. As rightly pointed out by Mr Jackson Lam, Mr Edward Chia and Mr Lee Hong Chuang, SMEs are a critical part of our transport ecosystem and must be supported to digitalise and remain competitive.

Government agencies have worked with the industry to support SMEs in adopting digital solutions. For example, the Sea Transport Industry Digital Plan provides a clear roadmap to guide maritime SMEs in adopting digital solutions at each stage of their growth while building the necessary skills. To complement this, we have also introduced hands-on programmes. Under the MPA-Singapore Polytechnic Maritime SME Digital Adoption Pilot Programme, SMEs gain knowledge on digital technologies and acquire practical experience in applying automation and data analytics to their operations directly. This helps them move from awareness to implementation, strengthening capabilities and improving productivity.

Beyond sector-specific support, the Government also works with industry partners to help SMEs build capabilities and access overseas opportunities. This includes public-private partnerships such as the Singapore Business Federation's Centre for the Future of Trade and Investment, which provides SMEs with advisory support on trade agreements, regulatory requirements and overseas opportunities.

This brings me to my final point. The next generation is critical to the future of transport. They are not just future users of the system. They are our future planners, engineers, entrepreneurs and leaders who will shape what comes next.

We have already seen how the next generation can make meaningful contributions. A good example is Pyxis. Mr Tommy Phun and Ms Lyn Phun are carrying forward their family's maritime legacy from Eng Hup Shipping, which was founded in 1957. Even earlier, their grandfather used to drive a wooden tongkang along the Singapore River.

Growing up, they spent much of their childhood in shipyards, immersed in the maritime environment. These early experiences shaped their interest in the industry and they later chose to join it. They did more than just continue the business. As the sector decarbonises, they founded Pyxis to develop electric vessels and introduce new technologies.

Their journey shows how the next generation can build on what came before them and help transform the sector. This is why we want to tap on this potential and build clear and structured pathways for the next generation, as highlighted by Dr Wan Rizal. Through scholarships, work attachments and mentorship programmes, we will continue to help young Singaporeans gain skills and build meaningful careers in the transport sector.

The future of transport should be built for future generations and hence, it should be shaped with them. Mr Speaker, allow me to say a few words in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): The future of transport is not only about technological advancement – it is also deeply tied to our national development and overall competitiveness.

What we are witnessing today is the fruit of labour, of generations before us. It is precisely because of the strong foundation laid by our predecessors that we can keep innovating and introducing new technologies into this sector.

Encouragingly, a new generation is already injecting fresh energy into the industry. Building on this legacy, they continue to innovate, propelling the industry towards a more efficient and sustainable future.

This also means that the industry is opening up exciting new frontiers for growth. Our next generation will have far greater opportunities to make their mark here. The Government will also guide them into the transport sector through scholarships, training and career development pathways, so that they can put their talents to good use and contribute to society.

The torch is passed from one generation to the next, and the flame burns on. The future of transport is being built for the next generation and so we must build it together with them. As long as we remain committed to technological innovation and the development of our people, Singapore's transport system will continue to improve and benefit all Singaporeans.

(In English): Mr Speaker, to conclude, our investments in transport research and innovation are strengthening our transport system today while preparing Singapore and Singaporeans for the future. By investing in both innovation and people, we aim to build a transport system that not only serves the future generations well, but one that they will help to shape.

[Motion Speech]

The Senior Minister of State for Transport (Ms Sun Xueling): Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. Members have affirmed the strategic importance of transport and connectivity and shared their suggestions on how we can strengthen Singapore's long-term economic competitiveness. I value their suggestions.

Technology is key to realising these ambitions. If we harness technology early and well to create opportunities and improve lives for our residents and our workers, we can thrive in an increasingly uncertain world.

Several Members have highlighted that transformation must create good jobs for Singaporeans. We agree.

The use of technology helps us solve problems, but people will always remain at the heart of transport. Experience, judgement, professionalism and care are not replaceable. Our transport workforce will always be at the core of our transport services. As Mr Sanjeev Kumar and Mr Wan Rizal have highlighted, we will work closely with tripartite partners to ensure that Singaporeans are well-positioned to seize these new opportunities.

Last July, I launched the $200 million OneAviation Manpower Fund to support employers, unions and workers. CAAS and NTUC have also announced a partnership to co-design an AI training roadmap for aviation union leaders.

Autonomy and AI are at work across our Transport sector. In Tuas port, automation has been built in from the ground up. Automated guided vehicles move containers and cranes are operated remotely, making it one of the most advanced container terminals in the world. Trials for autonomous prime movers are also underway in Pasir Panjang terminal.

I spoke to Mr Faiz who works at PSA in Pasir Panjang. He used to drive a prime mover but has now transited to work in the control room as a remote operator for autonomous prime movers. He said that the workplace is now more comfortable and he is happier with the shift arrangements.

We are investing in our maritime workforce just as deliberately across different stages of their career. Seafarers remain the backbone of the industry. The Sail Milestone Achievement Programme provides up to $50,000 for local seafarers. Together with our unions and partners, we have also enhanced the Tripartite Maritime Training Award for individuals seeking a seafaring career.

On shore, the Career Conversion Programme for the Sea Transport sector reskilled close to 200 mid-career entrants and existing employees last year, equipping them for roles in digitalisation, decarbonisation and cybersecurity. New pathways into shore-based roles are opening, such as Singapore Management University's Industry Graduate Diploma in Maritime for mid-career transitions.

Additionally, as Mr Dennis Tan mentioned, we want to prepare Singaporeans to take on leadership roles in the maritime sector. As maritime is global in nature, maritime leaders will need to have experience and capabilities running international operations and managing cross-cultural teams. And this is why we have launched a new Maritime Cluster Fund Global Rotation Scheme. The scheme provides grants to companies to co-fund the overseas deployments of local middle-managers to equip them with the competencies to take on supervisory roles.

On our roads, the deployment of AVs can help us meet our connectivity needs, ease manpower constraints in public transport and improve safety.

Grab and ComfortDelGro currently operate 16 fixed route autonomous shuttles in Punggol. Safety operators are on board to ensure safety in this initial deployment phase. As of June this year, close to 10,000 unique riders have taken the shuttles and 99% of them surveyed said they felt safe and they would recommend the ride to others. Riders provided feedback that they would like more destinations, direct connections and flexible bookings. We will work with the operators to improve the service.

We agree with Mr Ang Wei Neng's suggestion that AVs should first be deployed to serve underserved areas. We will progressively extend AVs to new areas with clear transport needs and are considering areas, such as Sentosa, Tuas and Mandai as possibilities.

We are also expanding AV trials to other modes of transport, including public buses. We will begin piloting autonomous buses on two public bus services, Service 400 in Marina Bay and Service 191 in One-North. However, in response to Mr Ang Wei Neng's and Mr Fadli Fawzi's points, further deployment must be realistic. The technology for AV buses is not as mature compared to that of AV cars.

Current autonomous bus models also have a smaller passenger capacity compared to our public buses. Public buses also have to meet the needs of different commuters – such as the elderly, parents with children in strollers and persons with disabilities. Hence, the operational aspects of autonomous public buses have to be worked through to meet the needs of different commuters.

That said, we agree that there are good use cases for autonomous buses, such as night bus services, and we will consider it when the technology is more mature.

As autonomy grows across our airport, seaport and roads, new job opportunities will emerge in areas such as fleet management and remote operations, autonomous EV engineering as well as business development.

We recognise that autonomy and AI, if not managed well, can bring disruption to existing jobs, industries and business models. The ultimate purpose of using technology is to benefit people – our residents and our workers. We will not adopt technology blindly. Technology's worth lies in the problems it solves and the lives it improves. We will roll out the use of autonomy and AI at a pace acceptable to residents, commuters and drivers.

As the Acting Minister has mentioned, the introduction of AVs will be a gradual process to give our commuters and drivers time to adapt. Widespread adoption is still some time away. We have been engaging taxi and private hire drivers early as we want to ensure that our drivers are well-equipped to seize job opportunities from this transition and that they can stay ahead of this change.

I recently met leaders from the NTA and NPHVA again, together with Ms Yeo Wan Ling. The union leaders ask what they can do to equip themselves and their members. Together with our tripartite partners, we have put together a manpower transition package to empower our taxi and private hire car drivers to stay ahead of industry developments and to explore new career options with confidence.

This package has three parts.

First, Place-and-Train Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs). This is for drivers looking to transition into new roles that come with up to 90% salary support. The CCPs will be launched in third quarter of this year.

We will introduce a CCP for drivers keen to pivot to the AVs sector, known as the "CCP for Autonomous Vehicle specialists". Like all CCPs, participants will be offered employment prior to the commencement of the programme and training supported by the SWDA. GrabAcademy, Grab's training arm, has been onboarded as a registered training provider with SWDA to deliver AV-related training.

For drivers who wish to pivot to other transport related jobs such as Bus captains, we will introduce a new pathway under the "CCP for Public Transport Professionals". This follows recent announcements we have made regarding increasing salaries and sign on bonuses for new bus captains. Drivers who are keen to move into other sectors can tap on existing programmes offered by the SWDA.

Second, we will pilot a new training incentive scheme from January 2027, focusing on short-form courses. Drivers do not just forego some income when they go for training. They also incur other costs such as car rental expenses. Hence, under this scheme, eligible drivers will get a training incentive of $20 per hour for attending any of over 2,000 curated SWDA-supported courses, up to a cap of 80 hours of training. This training incentive amount is significantly higher than any other training allowances currently offered as we understand that drivers have additional expenditure like car rentals to manage. Drivers can tap on this incentive to acquire new skills before committing to longer-term programmes, such as the CCPs.

Third, we will launch a new one-stop webpage with relevant information and resources curated for drivers and to raise awareness of the new support measures available.

Some of our drivers are already taking steps to thrive in this future of mobility. Ms Ang Li Wei used to drive a taxi with ComfortDelGro, but she seized the opportunity to train as a safety operator for AVs. She believes AVs will change the scene of driving worldwide, and she also sees new and more specialised roles emerging for drivers, such as helping wheelchair users, families with young children and others who need extra care on their journeys.

Another driver is Mr Raymond Tong. Mr Tong is actually here with us today in the Gallery. Mr Tong has spent over a decade behind the wheel. He qualified as a safety operator and he has gone on to get certification as a remote operator. In his words, he wants a front-row seat as to where the industry is heading. Mr Tong says he wants to support our efforts towards the future of mobility, about the future of AVs, so he is here with us today, despite his very busy schedule. Thank you, Mr Tong!

The Government will take a proactive approach to help workers adapt, support job transitions and to equip Singaporeans with the skills and capabilities needed in the age of autonomy and AI. The manpower transition package is one of more upcoming moves we are putting in place for our P2P drivers. We will continue to work closely with the unions and support our workers as jobs evolve. Mr Speaker, in Chinese, please.

(In Mandarin): Times are constantly changing. The advancement of technology and the application of AI have given rise to cause for concern. For instance, whether people's livelihoods might be affected.

Our taxi and private-hire drivers are no exception. Some of you have worked with taxi companies for many years; some found flexible work with Grab after a career transition; some are very familiar with the streets of Singapore and have excellent driving skills.

Regardless of your background, you share one thing in common: you work hard every day to earn a living for your families and shoulder your responsibilities at home. Each day, you race against time to make it easier and more convenient for Singaporeans to get around. For that, we are deeply grateful.

In the face of innovations such as AI and AVs, I believe we must always keep the interests of our transport workers in mind and be people-centric. I have always believed that the ultimate purpose of technology is to benefit people – residents and workers alike.

Based on the current situation, AVs will introduced gradually and progressively. MOT will roll out new technologies and AI at a pace that residents, passengers and drivers are comfortable with.

At the same time, our tripartite partners are actively working together. We will be introducing a Manpower Transition Package to support taxi and private-hire drivers through career transition, skills training and career guidance. We hope this will help our drivers seize the employment opportunities that this technological transformation brings.

I believe that technology is not an end in itself. The well-being of Singaporeans is the objective behind all our efforts. As we work to enhance Singapore's transport efficiency and technological edge, we remain committed to protecting the livelihoods and well-being of our people.

I am confident that as long as the Government, businesses, and workers strive together towards this common goal, we will not only be able to navigate this new wave of technological change, but also seize the opportunities that it brings to build a better future together.

(In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, in English please. Our air hub is one of Singapore's crown jewels. Changi Airport's story is one of deliberate ambition, constant reinvention and an unwavering commitment to connect us to the world.

The Changi East Development, including T5, positions Changi Airport for the future of air travel, anchoring good jobs and a significant part of our economy.

To address Mr Edward Chia's, Mr Sharael Taha's and Ms Valerie Lee's suggestion on strengthening Changi's connectivity to other parts of Singapore and the region, we are studying how to best enable seamless air-sea transfers between Changi Airport and Tanah Merah Ferry Terminal, and synergise future developments in the wider Changi region including Changi Business Park, Changi Village and Loyang.

We agree with Mr Fadli Fawzi's suggestion, that infrastructure should also improve Singaporeans' lived experience. The Changi East Urban district will be a new lifestyle and business hub for Singaporeans and visitors to connect, work and play.

Expanding Changi Airport gives us an opportunity to rethink existing processes, increase productivity and transform jobs. Ms Poh Li San has rightly highlighted that many roles in ground-handling and facilities management are physically demanding and will increasingly take its toll on our ageing workforce. We agree with Mr Gerald Giam's point that digital tools should benefit workers.

Changi Airport has been deploying automation, robotics and AI to improve the safety and productivity of our workers. Since January 2026, autonomous baggage tractors are used to move passenger bags between terminals. They spare workers from repetitive driving, reduces fatigue and frees them up for complex and safety-critical last mile services. From driving a single tractor, a worker can now oversee and coordinate a fleet of vehicles or be trained to maintain the vehicles. The new job role is more sustainable and offers a higher pay. In time, autonomous tractors can be used to move cargo and airside equipment.

Technology tools can also be used to optimise work planning. OpsAssist is an AI Tool that SATS uses to enable better manpower and equipment allocation for each aircraft turnaround. OpsAssist also schedules in breaks for workers to ensure that their well-being is well taken care of.

Beyond our air and sea gateways, Mr Liang Eng Hwa raised the Kuala Lumpur-Singapore HSR project. Such bilateral projects can only proceed if there are mutual interests and benefits. We remain open to discussing new proposals with Malaysia in good faith, starting from a clean slate.

Mr Dennis Tan, Mr Edward Chia and Ms Poh Li San have highlighted the importance of greening our aviation and maritime sectors. We agree.

For aviation, our Sustainable Air Hub Blueprint sets the direction. Sustainability aviation fuel will remain our primary lever for cutting emissions across the bulk of our air traffic. Our goal is to start with a 1% sustainability aviation fuel uplift, rising to 3% to 5% by 2030, subject to global developments and the wider availability of sustainability aviation fuel.

For maritime, the MPA is working closely with the industry to prepare for a multi-fuel future, by investing in infrastructure, developing technical standards and licensing frameworks to ensure that we can handle these fuels safely. These efforts reflect our commitment to position our port to meet the evolving needs of international shipping as it decarbonises.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa raised suggestions to support the electrification of heavy vehicles. This is indeed our direction. With the adoption and charger incentives for heavy vehicles, registrations of electric heavy vehicles rose from less than 1% of all heavy vehicle registrations last year to around 20% as of May this year. We will continue to monitor take-up and see how best to achieve our electrification targets. We will also continue to study new EV technologies adapted around the world, including smart charging technologies to better optimise the grid as well as battery energy storage solutions to manage grid capacity constraints during peak hours.

Ms Poh Li San and Dr Neo Kok Beng have highlighted the opportunities in electric and hybrid-electric aircraft for short-haul routes and drones. I have extensively addressed this topic in my response speech during the Adjournment Motion on "Low Altitude-Economy: Building the Flying Car, Air Tourism and Drone Logistics Industry" during the 8 April Parliamentary Sitting.

Electric and hybrid-electric aircraft is an emerging technology but in the short term, they can only complement aircrafts powered by sustainable aviation fuel as hybrid-electric aircraft technology may take time to commercialise and are not yet suitable for deployment. We will be ambitious but pragmatic, and keep our options open.

There is potential for Singapore to go further as a centre of excellence for research into cleaner and greener aircraft, working with partners, such as the Agency for Science, Technology and Research and our IHLs, with funding set under RIE2030. We will study the Member's proposal carefully and work with industry partners to take it forward where it plays to our strengths.

On drones, they are used across Singapore for a wide variety of functions, from ship-to-shore deliveries at our port to inspections of our rail and road infrastructure and high-rise cleaning.

Many of these use cases improve productivity and worker safety, allowing workers to focus on tasks that call for human judgement and expertise. We are carefully studying how drones can be deployed while being mindful of Singapore's dense urban environment, complex airspace and security needs. We will continue to support responsible innovation through trials, testbeds and regulatory refinement.

Sir, I thank the GPC for raising this Motion. Our best chance at delivering a good life for our people is to strengthen Singapore's long-term economic competitiveness and anchor good jobs in Singapore. This can be achieved through international cooperation, appropriate use of frontier technologies and establishing world-class infrastructure to reinforce our position as a globally connected aviation, maritime and logistics hub. This is how Singapore stays relevant and secures our competitiveness in an uncertain world. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion. [Applause.]

[Motion Speech]

Ms Tin Pei Ling: Mr Speaker, Sir, it has been my great privilege to move this debate on how we can reinforce Singapore's position as a globally connected aviation, maritime and logistics hub so as to strengthen Singapore's long-term economic competitiveness and ultimately, create and anchor good jobs in Singapore.

My transport GPC colleagues, Mr Edward Chia, Ms Yeo Wan Ling, Ms Poh Li San, Mr Jackson Lam, Mr Liang Eng Wah, Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Sharael Taha, have taken turns to explain the different tenets of the Motion statement and together with other hon Members of this House, including Dr Choo Pei Ling, Ms Gho Sze Kee, Ms Lee Hui Ying, Ms Valerie Lee, Mr Yip Hon Weng, Dr Wan Rizal, Mr Lee Hong Chuang and Dr Hamid Razak, put forth many thoughtful recommendations for the Government's consideration. Many thanks to my PAP Parliamentary colleagues for working on this debate and for making these recommendations.

I also sincerely appreciate the interest and support from the WP – Mr Dennis Tan, Ms He Ting Ru, Mr Fadli Fawzi, Mr Kenneth Tiong, Mr Gerald Giam and Assoc Prof Jamus Lim – as well as Nominated MPs, Mr Sanjeev Kumar Tiwari and Dr Neo Kok Beng. I hope I did not miss anyone.

I am also especially appreciative of the receptiveness and positive responses from Minister Jeffrey Siow, Senior Minister of State Sun Xueling and Minister of State Baey Yam Keng. Thank you for listening to us. We are very excited that some of our suggestions will be accepted by the Ministry and we are also very heartened by the efforts made past and present.

Past Sittings have seen colleagues from both sides of the aisle raising questions and putting forth suggestions on issues pertaining to Singapore's logistics, maritime and aviation sectors. I am heartened, therefore, that we have such a robust debate on this Motion today and most of all, I am heartened by the support from both sides of this House that the transport GPC has put forth.

The big direction is clear. We all want to do good for Singaporeans, creating good job opportunities for them by advancing Singapore's long-term economic interest. And we all agree that Singapore, being a global logistics, maritime and aviation hub, is key to that goal.

Across this debate, several threads ran consistently through nearly every speech, regardless of who from which party was speaking. Members agreed that we are facing an increasingly turbulent world and geopolitics. That shared recognition makes the rule of law and our ability to work closely with one another all the more important.

I am heartened in this regard by hon Member from the WP, Ms He Ting Ru's point that Singapore should not be an instrument of other countries' strategic goals. I agree, and this is why this Motion matters.

When Singapore builds strong capabilities of our own, when we have options to who we connect with and when we deepen international cooperation so that other countries come to share a genuine stake in our shared success, Singapore will be able to assert our independence with confidence. We do not stay independent by standing alone. We stay independent by standing strong enough so that no one else's strategy needs to become ours.

On frontier technology, Members spoke of AI, AVs, digital twins and smart hubs. From my GPC colleagues' proposals on AI orchestration and autonomous systems to other Members' calls for Singapore to lead in electric aviation and green shipping technology, technology must be a tool that makes Singapore harder to replace, not just harder to keep up with.

On international cooperation and infrastructure, Members return again and again to the idea that our infrastructure is only as valuable as the trust the world places in it, whether framed through ASEAN chairmanship priorities, regional connectivity with Johor and the Riau Islands or Singapore's role in shaping international rules, rather than merely following them.

I am also encouraged that there was support from some Members from both sides to export Singapore innovations and systems to other countries. Doing so would help set new standards and drive interoperability to drive greater flows of goods, people, information and value seamlessly, yet also strengthen Singapore's standing in the region and in the world. We are, in essence, exporting the Singapore model, our special brand of trust.

And on our people, nearly every speaker insisted that none of this matters unless it translates into good, better and more inclusive jobs for Singaporean workers with real training pathways and real protection for those whose roles will change. Our tripartite model must therefore continue to prevail.

So, yes, we need to embrace technology, but we must not vibe code the humans out of a job. Rather to make sure that every job that we redesign or create beat to the rhythm of real heart beats.

One Member, hon Mr Fadli Fawzi, had understandably raised his concerns about day-to-day public transport matters. These issues matter to Singaporeans' daily lives. As mentioned in my opening, day-to-day land transport issues remain important and a priority to the transport GPC and indeed, for the entire Government. We had and we will continue to discuss these issues in and out of this House, but I would like to reiterate that today's Motion was deliberately framed to look further out at the strategic long-term question of how Singapore secures our place in the world through global connectivity and logistics, maritime and aviation. The Member would agree that we need these connections for our food, medicine and other essential supplies to enter Singapore, so that Singaporeans can access them easily. Attending to the everyday public transport issues and building for Singapore's global connectivity and future are not competing priorities.

Sir, in closing, the big direction remains clear, clearer, in fact, than when we began. We agree that the world has grown more uncertain and that Singapore's independence must be built, not assumed. We agree that technology should make us harder to replace, not just harder to keep pace with. We agree that our infrastructure, physical and digital, poured in concrete and written in code, must be built as one so that it can keep pace with a future that will wait for no one. And we agree that our people must remain at the centre of everything we build.

When a House this diverse agrees completely on the big one, that is not a coincidence. It is Singapore's direction spoken with one voice across party lines and with that, thank you all. [Applause.]