Mr Speaker, under the Social Residential Homes Bill, social residential homes include any premises that are used to provide residential accommodation to persons who require care and/or social intervention. We are told that MSF oversees a range of Social Residential Homes that provide short- to long-term residential care to different resident profiles. We are told that MSF has taken feedback from Children’s Homes, Children Disability Homes, Sheltered Homes, Welfare Homes, Adult Disability Homes and Adult Disability Hostels and MSF will support 61 Social Residential Homes to be licensed under this Bill once passed to meet the new requirements of the Bill[1]. This Bill aims to to codify and harmonise existing standards under a common framework to enable Singaporeans in these homes to benefit from a robust regulatory regime.
Mr Speaker, while I welcome the introduction of this Bill, I would like to seek some clarifications.
Minister Masagos mentioned on 10 March 2025 that MSF has worked closely with Social Residential Homes to raise standards of care for residents, and that a new licensing regime is proposed to ensure the safety and wellness of these residents[2]. May I clarify if MSF has uncovered uneven standards of care among these homes requiring the proposed increase and harmonization of regulations under this Bill, and if so, what are some of these shortfalls, and the reasons behind them?
Second, a licensing regime, while well-intentioned, also involves the meeting of government-mandated standards in staffing requirements and other service quality matters. These would involve both upfront and recurrent costs on the part of Social Service Agencies (SSAs) operating these Homes. May I knowhow MSF is reviewing its funding arrangements with these SSAs, whom I believe, would have shared their feedback on their operational challenges, especially in light of the requirements of the new regime?
Third, staffing requirements are a common concern shared by many SSAs that manage MSF-funded programmes. The resident or client profile of MSF-funded programmes, especially those in residential programmes, is often challenging and complex. Running a Social Residential Home is also a labour-intensive operation, requiring dedicated staff, whose pay often does not commensurate with their work.
Understaffing and staff burnout often lead to poor service and care standards. May I clarify whether MSF has received feedback from SSAs for a lower staff-resident ratio and how is the Government going to provide more support for the manpower manning in the Social Residential Homes which is critical to the requirements and improvements expected under this Bill, even if this may require more funding support?
Minister has also said that this Bill provides for the possibility of Homes evolving to meet residents’ needs, where different client profiles could be housed together[3]. As I have mentioned earlier about challenging client profiles, may I clarify the rationale behind MSF considering the possibility of housing different client profiles together? Can the Minister elaborate with some details on this?
While there could be economies of scale from a bureaucratic perspective, from the operational perspective, it could be a layering of one challenge onto another. I hope MSF will adopt a consultative approach with the SSAs before imposing requirements that, if not appropriately funded, would be difficult to meet.
We are also told that MSF will support all Social Residential Homes licensed under this Bill with a one-off transition support package. For Social Residential Homes seeking to be licensed for the first time, MSF will also offer pre-licensing checks to identify areas for improvement, prior to implementation. Granted that the 61 Social Residential Homes may consist of organizations of different sizes, resources or strengths, may I ask what does the transition support package consist and would the support vary depending on the size of the organization or even the extent of assistance specifically as required by specific organizations, rather than a one size fits all?
I also hope that the ministry will exercise sufficient flexibility so that all Social Residential Homes have sufficient time and resources to make the necessary conversion to adapt to the new regulatory regime without being penalized, especially Social Residential Homes who may have been relatively constrained by their resources. We should ensure that the welfare of the clients in Social Residential Homes will remain the top priority even as SSAs convert and adjust to the requirements of the new regime.
Notwithstanding my questions, I support the Bill, which is a step in the right direction. I hope that MSF will consider the concerns I have raised.
[1] PublicConsultation on the Social Residential Homes Bill 2024, updated 6 March 2025, https://www.reach.gov.sg/latest-happenings/public-consultation-pages/2024/public-consultation-on-the-social-residential-homes-bill,
[2] https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/singapore-licensing-social-residential-homes-elderly-disability-children-4989686
[3]https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/singapore-licensing-social-residential-homes-elderly-disability-children-4989686
