INTRODUCTION
Mr Speaker Sir, I thank all Members who have debated and supported this Motion with such conviction.
All members,
As Minister Tan See Leng and Minister of State Ms Jasmin Lau have pointed out – left to the market, AI growth may not automatically benefit workers. Members like Mr Yip Hon Weng warned about an outcome – where some workers gain, but others risk falling behind.
I am therefore glad that through this Motion, the Government has affirmed that it will not leave outcomes to chance, but will shape the direction of AI growth deliberately.
And I look forward to the measures that will be unveiled through the Economic Strategy Review’s report.
RESPONSE TO POLICY IDEAS
Mr Speaker, members raised ideas in this House that deserve serious consideration.
In my opening, I put forth four practical moves.
These are no-regrets moves — practical, grounded, and effective.
They lay the foundation for AI growth that translates into good jobs and better prospects for our workers – guiding how AI is adopted, how work is reorganised, and how workers can move through change with support and dignity.
Let me draw on Members’ contributions and address them.
First, on intelligence and foresight. Workers and enterprises need more than information. They need trusted intelligence, put directly into their hands, so that they can navigate transition with clarity, not anxiety.
I thank Mr Alex Yeo, Ms Poh Li San and Ms He Ting Ru for supporting this proposal.
Mr Terence Ho likewise underscored the need to deepen local research on how AI is reshaping work – to inform our responses, and to position Singapore within global research networks on human‑AI complementarity.
Within NTUC, we have begun contributing to this work through our Labour Alliance co-laB (LAB) – a research community we formed with academics that brings together experts across our Institutes of Higher Learning.
Working with our tripartite partners, the co-laB seeks to translate international best practices into insights grounded in Singapore’s labour market realities – so that researchers, adult learners, and human resource practitioners alike can have an earlier, clearer basis to act on AI transformation.
Second, on enabling enterprises to transform with AI.
Mr Mark Lee spoke about enterprises’ need to transform to stay competitive — making the important point that enterprise and workforce transformation must move together.
Mr Yip Hon Weng reinforced this: the real constraint is not the technology, but workforce readiness — and we must move from AI adoption to AI fluency, with clear accountability for worker outcomes.
Mr Gerald Giam had a proposal to support employer-led on-the-job training (OJT) model so that employers, especially SMEs, are incentivised to train and retain workers.
I acknowledge and support the objectives behind these proposals.
Mr Mark Lee called for a clearer enterprise "front door" so firms, especially SMEs, are not slowed down by having to navigate multiple schemes and processes. He also suggested that Trade Associations and Chambers could become platforms that accelerate AI adoption across sectors.
This is exactly what the Tripartite Jobs Council (TJC) is setting out to do – to consolidate tripartite partners’ various capabilities under one roof to better serve our enterprises and our workers. I am glad the Government has supported NTUC’s proposal to form this TJC.
Third, enabling workers to seize new opportunities.
Mr Alex Yeo made the point that equipping our workers requires building capability and confidence at the workplace – so learning translates into deeper skills. Mr Kenneth Tiong highlighted the importance of providing our workers access to AI tools. Mr Neo Kok Beng suggested that we define competencies for the AI age and validate competencies through certifications. I note these suggestions.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Mr Vikram Nair also made the point that job redesign, if done well, is the key to ensure that AI creates opportunities and pathways for our workers to grow.
Mr Hamid Razak spoke for the PMEs, residents and the parents carrying this anxiety on AI not just for themselves, but for their children. Indeed, AI-relevant pathways must be tied to job redesign to provide a smoother transition for our youths and PMEs.
Several members have raised concerns about our young graduates.
My fellow Labour MPs – Mr Desmond Tan, Mr Sanjeev Kumar Tiwari, Mr Patrick Tay and Ms Yeo Wan Ling – spoke up from our unions’ perspective. Their asks – that productivity gains are shared, that workers are supported through transitions, and that workers are given a genuine voice in AI adoption – exemplify what the Labour Movement stands for in this renewed Tripartism in the AI era.
Mr Yip Hon Weng called on the Government to establish clear conditionalities for our support schemes to ensure that the public funding goes towards worker outcomes. Ms Yeo Wan Ling called for AI grants to be tied to mandatory job redesign requirements and productivity gains linked to worker outcomes. Mr Andre Low made a similar point that we need accountability mechanisms to ensure that our investments in AI are ensuring augmentation, not automation.
In response, MOS Jasmin shared the Government’s commitment that where public support is given, the Government will expect companies to make effort to support worker outcomes.
Mr Saktiandi, Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Ms He Ting Ru highlighted how AI can cause an uneven impact on jobs, as well as uneven benefits across different worker groups.
Members also highlighted segments of workers who may require additional attention:
I fully agree with members that we must be alive to the needs of specific segments of workers mentioned. I echo Mr Saktiandi’s call for sound policies to shape the trajectory of our AI growth – so it benefits workers and citizens, and remains inclusive.
As Ms Poh Li San rightly reminded us, AI also has the potential to augment our workforce and reduce reliance on foreign labour — unlocking the human bottleneck that constrains many businesses today.
On the fourth move to Enable Displaced Workers to Bounce Back with Dignity and Confidence, Mr Patrick Tay called on the 3 E’s – Equitable Growth, Enhanced Protections and Engaged Workforce.
He calls to raise the Jobseeker Support scheme eligibility to PME median income – around $8,400 as of 20251 – and to provide earlier notification of retrenchment. These are in line with the moves I have suggested in this House too.
These are specific, actionable asks that will make a real difference to blue-collar workers and middle-class PMEs alike.
Mr Andre Low questioned whether the JSS is sufficient and proposed a redundancy insurance scheme instead.
Mr Yip Hon Weng also made the important point that we must rigorously track the speed and effectiveness of our existing measures to support workers who face disruption – especially the financial runway for displaced workers.
I also thank Mr Sanjeev Tiwari, Mr Patrick Tay, Mr Vikram Nair and Ms He Ting Ru for highlighting the potential of AI to cause harm to our workers – such as how AI may intensify workloads and introduce risks of discrimination in employment decisions. Ms Eileen Chong suggested also to legislate the right to Flexible Work Arrangements.
The Labour Movement takes these concerns seriously. We will work with tripartite partners to study these issues, building on the Workplace Fairness Act and Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement (Requests).
Members have also surfaced other ideas to contribute to the Motion.
Thank you all of you indeed who have spoken up and contributed to this Motion. I really appreciate the conviction and commitment expressed for the workers and enteprises, for us to create the biggest possible pie for Singapore. I also want to thank tripartite partners who have been on this journey every step of the way. The Ministry of Manpower, SNEF and all our different partners.
CLOSING
Mr Speaker, with that let me close, after 7 hours and 18 minutes.
I am deeply appreciative of Mr Sharael Taha sharing his experience with labour movements overseas, and his insight that a lack of tripartite trust in their system prevents innovation and change even when this change is most needed.
I thank him for highlighting the uniqueness of our tripartite model – where our unions not only protect workers, but focus on keeping them relevant, employable and ready to seize opportunities.
Our tripartite model works because it is based on trust. Even when amongst our own tripartite partners, there are different views and priorities. We evolve our conversations and we work through differences to find win-win positions that are in the best interest of Singapore and our workers.
It is not labour versus capital, workers against employers, or one group advancing at the expense of the other. Transformation in the AI era can be win-win, and our tripartite model in the AI era will ensure this.
AI is fast-evolving and we do not have all the answers today. Its full impact on jobs and businesses will continue to unfold.
We may not agree with every “how”, but we must set the right direction, and at the same time, know with humility that we are innovating and experimenting with pathways forward in this era.
We have forged a firm commitment – to keep our workers and enterprises at the heart of national efforts to seize new opportunities brought about by AI.
And in this chamber, it sends a clear signal to every worker – blue- and white-collar alike: this House stands with you.
With this House standing united, I am fully confident that we can strengthen our plans and responses at this stage of the AI-enabled growth.
Together with enabled Enterprises, we will forge our “Tripartism in the AI era" for win-win outcomes as we have done before – in Singapore, for Singaporeans.
Not AI instead of workers.
But AI that works for workers.
Because in Singapore, Every Worker Matters.
Mr Speaker, I urge Members of this House to support the Motion as it stands.
