Mr Speaker,
When Singaporeans hear about greater use and sharing of health data, their first reaction is rarely about system architecture or data flows. Their concern is much simpler, and much more human.
And they ask: Can this information be used against me? Will it affect my job? Will it affect how I am treated?
I hear this from workers, seniors, and caregivers alike. Many residents, especially older residents managing long-term conditions, worry about who can see their information, whether consent is meaningful, and what happens if something goes wrong.
These are legitimate concerns, and I know that other Members will address them in detail, particularly on system safeguards and patient protections.
As a Labour MP, I rise today to focus on a pillar of this Bill that is essential to public confidence: Worker Trust, and in particular, the safeguard that disallows health data from being accessed or used for employment purposes.
Health Data and the Reality of Work
Sir, for workers, health data does not exist in isolation. It intersects very directly with their livelihoods, with hiring decisions, job retention, access to work opportunities, and sometimes, continued participation in the workforce.
This applies not only to traditional employees, but also to self-employed persons, platform workers, whose access to work can be more fragile and more easily withdrawn.
In these contexts, the imbalance of power is real. When income and job security are at stake, workers often feel they have little room to refuse disclosure, even when they are uncomfortable.
And that is why legal safeguards matter, not just in theory, but in how workers experience the system.
This is why I want to state clearly and on record that I strongly support the safeguard in this Bill that disallows health data from being accessed or used for employment purposes. This safeguard is not peripheral. It is central to whether workers trust the system at all.
Why This Safeguard Is So Important
So why is this safeguard so important? Some may ask why this needs emphasis, since the safeguard already exists in the Bill.
The reason is not legal, it is behavioural. Even the perception that health data could affect employment decisions can discourage workers from:
This would undermine the very objectives of this Bill. Workers should never have to weigh their health against their livelihood.
If this Bill is to succeed in improving continuity of care and public health outcomes, workers must feel safe engaging with the healthcare system, without fear of downstream consequences at work.
Protected Characteristics and Risk of Discrimination
This concern is especially relevant for protected characteristics such as disabilities, including mental health conditions.
I want to be clear: I am not suggesting that any one type of health condition is more important than another.
But from a workplace fairness perspective, some types of information are more likely to be misunderstood, stigmatised, or misinterpreted in employment contexts.
Mental health conditions, for example, are often:
The issue is not the data itself. It is the risk of unfair treatment if such information is misused or even informally taken into account. This is precisely why the employment-use safeguard is so important.
Consistency with the Labour Movement’s Principles
The Labour Movement has long stood for the principle that workers should not be discriminated against on the basis of protected characteristics, including disabilities and mental health conditions.
The safeguard in this Bill include specific prohibitions on NEHR access for insurance and employment purposes. It reinforces, in the context of health data, the same values we have already affirmed as a society that personal characteristics and health conditions should not become barriers to fair treatment at work.
Seen in this light, this safeguard is not an additional demand. It is a logical extension of principles Parliament has already endorsed.
Guarding Against Indirect or Backdoor Use
Workers are also concerned about indirect or “backdoor” use of health information.
Not necessarily through direct access to records, but through:
I note that the Bill identifies specific Statutory Medical Examinations (SMEs) where NEHR access is permitted, such as pre-enlistment checkups or assessments for vocational driving licenses. These are strictly defined to prevent harm to the individual or to public interest.
I seek the Minister’s assurance that this list of exceptions will remain tightly scoped and will not be expanded to general pre-employment screenings without rigorous oversight.
Furthermore, while healthcare providers can override an individual's "Access Restriction" during a medical emergency, the law must remain clear: that data can still never be used for employment purposes.
Healthcare Workers and HSEU Members
Mr Deputy Speaker, I also want to speak briefly about healthcare workers, including members represented by the Healthcare Services Employees’ Union (HSEU).
Healthcare workers occupy a unique position in this Bill.
They are:
From a labour perspective, safeguards must protect not only patients, but also the workers tasked with implementing the system.
I hear you, accountability is important, and wilful misuse of data must be dealt with firmly. But accountability must also be fair and proportionate.
We must distinguish clearly between:
This means we need to have:
Protecting patient data and treating our healthcare workers fairly are not competing objectives. They must go hand in hand if the system is to function well.
A Word to Residents and Seniors
Sir, if I may briefly return to the concerns of my residents, especially those who are seniors and caregivers. Many seniors manage multiple conditions and interact frequently with the healthcare system. They worry about privacy, about consent, and about whether their personal information is respected.
While I have focused today on worker trust, I want to assure residents that their concerns are also heard. Trust is the common thread, whether one is a worker, a patient, a caregiver, or a senior managing long-term care.
When Singaporeans trust that their health information is handled with care, strong safeguards, and clear boundaries, they are more willing to seek care, share information honestly, and participate fully in our healthcare system.
Malay Summary
Sir, please allow me to continue in Malay.
Rang Undang-Undang ini mesti membina kepercayaan rakyat. Data kesihatan bertujuan untuk menjaga kesihatan, bukan untuk menjejaskan mata pencarian.
Oleh itu, perlindungan yang melarang penggunaan data kesihatan bagi tujuan pekerjaan adalah amat penting, bagi pekerja, pekerja sendiri, dan pekerja platform.
Tiada pekerja seharusnya berasa takut bahawa mendapatkan rawatan boleh digunakan terhadap mereka di tempat kerja.
Perlindungan ini selaras dengan prinsip keadilan dan maruah di tempat kerja, termasuk bagi individu dengan ketidakupayaan atau keadaan kesihatan mental.
Apabila kepercayaan dijaga, pekerja dan warga emas akan lebih yakin untuk mendapatkan rawatan dan berkongsi maklumat kesihatan dengan jujur.
Sistem penjagaan kesihatan yang kukuh bermula dengan kepercayaan, dan kepercayaan hanya wujud apabila sempadan jelas serta perlindungan tegas dilaksanakan.
Conclusion
Mr Speaker, with the right safeguards in place, this Bill can strengthen healthcare delivery and public health outcomes.
The safeguard disallowing the use of health data for employment purposes is a critical part of our trust framework.
It reassures our workers that seeking care will not put their livelihoods at risk. It aligns with long-standing principles against discrimination. And it supports, rather than undermines, the objectives of this Bill.
At the end of the day, a healthcare system can only be as strong as the confidence that people put in it.
When workers, patients, and seniors trust that their health data will not be misused, at work or elsewhere, they are more likely to engage, participate, and benefit.
For these reasons, I support this Bill and the safeguards it contains.
Thank you Sir.
