MDDI: Digital Inclusion
Digitalising services improves efficiency and convenience for both individuals and organisations. However, some Singaporeans struggle to keep up, whether due to physical limitations, lack of digital literacy or difficulties adapting. These individuals risk being left behind as more government and business services move online.
Providing parallel paper applications is not always the solution to digital marginalisation. Instead, all agencies should have walk-in computer stations staffed by officers who are trained in that agency’s processes. These officers should guide users through digital applications, helping them to use the systems independently over time.
ServiceSG centres play an important role in guiding citizens through government e-services, but their officers cannot be expected to know every agency’s processes in detail. While they can assist with common digital functions, they are not equipped to handle complex applications like for an LTVP or Public Defender. Government agencies must take responsibility for guiding users through their own systems. The ServiceSG network should also be expanded, including to Serangoon.
The Seniors Go Digital programme was introduced to help older Singaporeans navigate digital services. How effective has it been so far? How many seniors have been trained, and to what extent has their digital literacy improved? Are there plans to expand the programme to reach more citizens?
Beyond basic training, digital inclusion efforts should also ensure that seniors and other digitally underserved groups can more confidently use essential platforms, including communication apps that connect them with family, businesses and government agencies.
Digitalisation must bring greater inclusion, not create new barriers, so that all Singaporeans, regardless of age, ability or financial means, can fully benefit from digitalisation.
MDDI: Public Opinion Surveys
Last year, I took a survey conducted at the doorstep of my flat which covered various political and social topics. I was asked about my satisfaction with life, the economy, and my neighbourhood. I was also asked to rate whether I believed the government makes decisions in the best interests of Singapore, whether it takes my opinions seriously, and if there are enough channels to voice my views. I was also asked to rate the quality of the Armed Forces, Civil Service, mainstream media and online media, as well as my confidence in the police and the courts. There were questions on affordability—whether I find housing, healthcare, public transport and education affordable. I was asked about competition from foreigners at work, the pace of immigration, and the quality of migrants. Lastly, I was asked how strongly I identify as a Singaporean and whether I would migrate to another country for a better quality of life.
When I asked who commissioned the survey, the pollster could not tell me. More recently, I saw another pollster conducting a similar survey in my neighbourhood. I also received similar surveys via phone in the past.
Are these surveys being commissioned by the government, and if so, which ministry is responsible? Are they used only to shape public policy, or are they also used to gauge public sentiment for electoral purposes?
If public funds are being used, the results should be made public. Otherwise, there is a risk that such surveys will be seen as serving partisan interests rather than benefiting Singapore and Singaporeans as a whole.
