The government has announced that they are collecting feedback for Budget 2026. In their press statement released this month, the Ministry of Finance (MOF) posed several questions to Singaporeans as they currently seek feedback. Some of such questions include:
- What are the barriers that workers face in keeping their skills up-to-date, and how can the Government better support them to do so?
- How can we prepare our students and workers to secure good jobs and grow amidst a more uncertain global economy and technological changes?
- How can we ensure that every child has opportunities to achieve their full potential, regardless of their background?
- What more can be done to support persons with disabilities?
To answer such questions, DPA would like to reiterate several of the points we have advocated for over the years, and take this opportunity to once again call upon the government to invest in building a Singapore that is truly disability-inclusive.
Many of the items below will require not only investments but policy change and planning. One budget will not be able to solve many of the issues outlined below but the government can begin implementing timelines or investments in research and development (R&D) and various initiatives and programmes in Budget 2026 to eventually work towards and progressively realise the below goals and objectives.
An Inclusive Lifelong Learning Landscape for Skills Upgrading
As the government seeks to address the question of barriers in skills upgrading and increasing job security for Singaporeans amidst an uncertain global economy, it must ensure that Singapore has a truly inclusive life-long learning and skills upgrading landscape.
As we outline in our 2024 position paper on inclusive and accessible life-long learning, Singapore currently does not have an inclusive nor accessible life-long learning landscape for persons with disabilities. The government’s current approach to fostering life-long learning opportunities for persons with disabilities is a segregated one – and not aligned with best practices as found in the United Nations Convention on The Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) – which the Singapore government has ratified in 2013.
As we outline in our position paper, the government’s approach to providing life-long learning opportunities for persons with disabilities through entities such as the Enabling Academy, while yielding important outcomes in the short-term, is a segregated approach that in the long -term is not conducive to wider inclusion and integration – as it is only available to persons with disabilities. As we highlight, the Enabling Academy, while beneficial in the short-term, is also not a sustainable approach in the long-term as the courses offered through it is a small fraction (less than 5% by the most generous of estimates) compared to the total number of courses offered through the wider SkillsFuture system.
There thus needs to be strong intentionality through protocols such as reasonable accommodation assessment and provision integrated within SkillsFuture itself to foster a truly inclusive lifelong learning landscape.
As the government has been investing heavily in SkillsFuture – especially in recent Budgets, we are concerned that the government’s segregated approach, coupled with not investing in SkillsFuture accessibility from the get-go through structured protocols to ensure reasonable accommodations in SkillsFuture courses and programming, will leave persons with disabilities behind.
[We elaborate on such points in our 2024 position paper.]
The government’s own statistics shows that persons with disabilities age 18 – 64 participate in training programmes at approximately half the rate of the resident labour force – at 21.6% to 43.5%respectively.
We thus take this opportunity to once again call on the government to look into establishing protocols within the SkillsFuture system to ensure the fair and timely assessment and provision of reasonable accommodations in SkillsFuture courses and programmes. Budget 2026 should invest in, at the very least, capabilities – whether in the form of manpower and/or other R&D capabilities – to oversee the design and implementation of a timeline to expand on existing frameworks in pursuance of eventual protocols to ensure the assessment and provision of reasonable accommodations within SkillsFuture courses and programmes.
Expanding Coverage of Financial Supports Amidst Global Economic Instabilities
Budget 2025 contained important improvements to several of the government’s financial supports for the disability community – namely the per-capita household income (PCHI) cap to qualify for a number of such supports were raised.
Prior to Budget 2025, the PCHI cap for many of such important supports and subsidies were set at notably low levels. One example was with The Assistive Technology Fund (ATF) – an important support scheme to assist persons with disabilities in the purchase or repair of assistive technology. The ATF subsidises up to 90% of the cost of particular assistive technologies with a lifetime cap of $40,000. Yet, prior to Budget 2025, one would need to have a PCHI of no more than $2,600 to qualify for subsidies under the ATF – notably below the average PCHI in Singapore (which stood at $3,615 in 2024). This means that a person with disability living in the average household in terms of PCHI in Singapore would not be able to qualify for such important subsidies under the ATF – regardless of how expensive their assistive technology costs.
Increasing the PCHI cap for such supports is something we at DPA have advocated for and thus were heartened that in Budget 2025, the PCHI cap for the ATF and several other important financial supports were raised significantly to $4,800.
Budget 2026 and subsequent Budgets going forward can and should build off such important progress. While it is a positive step that the PCHI caps for a number of important financial supports and subsidies were raised in 2025, there are other parts of such government supports that can and needs to be improved to ensure those who need assistance are not unnecessarily or arbitrarily excluded.
We elaborated on a few of such examples for improvement in our commentary on Budget 2025 and take this opportunity to call for Budget 2026 to include such recommendations – including but not limited to:
- Increasing other economic caps such as average monthly income for eligibility to various financial supports such as the matched retirement savings scheme
- Expanding flexibility of means-testing requirements to meet a diverse range of needs – i.e. allowing those who require assistance with fewer than half of the six activities of daily living (ADLs) – along with those who require assistance with instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) – to attain some level of financial assistance through supports such as the Home Caregiving Grant (HCG)
- Ensuring means-testing requirements optimally take into consideration the diverse and complex realities of persons with disabilities – i.e. ensuring subsidies pertaining to transport such as the Enabling Transport Subsidy (ETS) and the Taxi Subsidy Scheme (TSS) are inclusive of the nature of transport needs
- Amending the definition of disability used by the government to ensure persons with the diversity of disability experience are considered in the design and implementation of such schemes
Persons with disabilities are usually one of the hardest hit amidst financial crises and global instabilities and it is thus important to expand such financial supports to optimise the reach of such assistance – especially if we are to witness growing global economic instabilities that may raise the costs of daily expenses.
Building an Inclusive Understanding of Disability in Singapore Workplaces
One of the major legislative and policy developments of 2025 was the passage of the Workplace Fairness Act (WFA) – Singapore’s first workplace anti-discrimination law. However, the WFA lacks many important provisions – including any measures to ensure the assessment and provision of reasonable accommodations.
the government is currently working on a Tripartite Advisory on Reasonable Accommodations. However, a Tripartite advisory is a document outlining a set of best principles and practices on a given topic. It is non-binding, and can only be used to raise awareness of and encourage best practices. As we highlighted to the government in our 2024 report on employment, there are significant limitations to an awareness- raising and encouragement approach – especially in attempting to implement protocols in everyday workplaces let alone workplaces managed by the most errant employers.
As the government has opted for an awareness-raising approach towards reasonable accommodation protocols in Singapore workplaces, it is important that at the very least the government invests to optimise the efficacy of this upcoming advisory.
We thus recommend the government invest in manpower and capabilities to optimise outreach of the Tripartite advisory on reasonable accommodations while ensuring that the advisory is aligned with best practices as found in the UN CRPD.
To optimise the efficacy of the advisory, the government must ensure there are investments in sufficient manpower and capabilities to optimise outreach. This must include not only investments in staffing, but also developments of metrics to measure the efficacy of such and advisory over time. This can include expanding research capabilities of the Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment Practices (TAFEP) to implement proper metrics or survey tools to be able to capture the awareness and levels of implementation of the advisory. Such research must be intentional to not only survey and monitor the perspectives of employers but also the perspectives of persons with disabilities. To facilitate such investments, TAFEP must develop a timeline that outlines how many employers or workplaces they plan to reach with the advisory within specified time frames.
Most importantly, the advisory and any metrics or tools utilised to measure its efficacy needs to be aligned with definitions and standards found in the UN CRPD – as we outline in our 2024 report on employment. We are appreciative that we have been invited by TAFEP to contribute to the development of the advisory itself. However, in addition to the advisory, the metrics and tools used to monitor the advisory and the manpower staffed to optimise and oversee efforts around the advisory must be based in and trained in such UN CRPD standards. Ideally, education efforts on the advisory should be co-led with persons with disabilities who are also trained in and knowledgeable about such UN CRPD standards.
Addressing the Digital Divide Amidst Technological Changes
As the government has repeatedly emphasised, we currently are witnessing significant technological changes – 2025 being a year of no exception – a year that witnessed a world diving deeper into trends such as AI for better or for worse.
As we recently highlighted, AI, similar to previous technological trends, can and has already shown to widen the digital divide – fostering inequity and inequality for persons with disabilities and other historically-marginalised groups.
In Singapore, there are currently few to no accessibility regulations in policy for the disability community in accessing the digital space run by the private sector – leading to in some cases vastly inconsistent experiences, precarious options, and in some cases lack of options for persons with disabilities in accessing amenities run by the private sector in Singapore – such as online banking, e-commerce platforms, etc. If this were to continue with AI, the digital divide in Singapore for persons with disabilities could only increase. We thus take this opportunity to again call on the government to establish important protocols and regulations especially within the private sector pertaining to accessibility of the digital space.
As R&D investments especially in technology usually comprise a significant portion of the government’s annual Budgets, it is important to reiterate calls we have made during previous Budgets about the need to ensure there are R&D efforts that address the digital divide that usually arises from technological change.
There are concrete ways the government can begin to address this in the upcoming Budget 2026. For example, Singapore’s national AI strategy does not mention disability, let alone any specific plans on how Singapore’s approach to AI will be inclusive of the disability community. Budget 2026 can begin to invest in studies or timelines that examine AI’s impact on the disability community in the Singapore context to eventually update Singapore’s AI strategy especially in addressing the digital divide.
Enhancing Education Equity for Children and Youth
As the government seeks to address the question of what can be done to ensure that every child has the opportunity to achieve their full potential despite their background, we find it necessary to reiterate our calls to ensure that development of mainstream school accessibility and inclusivity is not neglected.
The government has paid close attention to investing in developing the special education (SPED) sector in recent years – with the investments in new SPED schools, financing to lower SPED school fees, and increasing the talent development opportunities of SPED school teachers comprising some of the main announcements in recent Budget statements.
Yet, there also needs to be intentionality to continually develop the inclusivity and accessibility of mainstream schools to optimise the opportunities of all children and youth with disabilities. There have been some important investments in this area, namely the number of Special Education Needs (SEN) officers in mainstream schools witnessing a steady increase between 2019 and 2024.
While 80% of students with SEN attend mainstream schools according to government statistics, the government should also track and invest in other measures to improve the quality of that integration.
While physical infrastructure accessibility has improved, our calculations as outlined in our 2022 Parallel Report show that most primary and secondary schools remain non-barrier-free for students who are wheelchair users. Additionally, there still remains a relatively small handful of schools that are fully equipped with the accessibilities for students with sensory disabilities. Budgets such as the upcoming Budget 2026 should include and monitor plans for investments to increase the number of mainstream schools that are equipped with such accessibilities.
Moreover, a 2025 study by EveryChild.SG highlights pertinent and important findings relating to the need for improvements in terms of how students with disabilities are accommodated and included in mainstream schools. The study focused on neurodivergent children and highlighted significant gaps in mainstream schools – including the need for how teachers are trained, the need for reform on how SEN officers are utilised in mainstream schools, and the need for structural protocols on the assessment and provision of reasonable accommodations – amongst others.
We at DPA have called for such protocols around reasonable accommodations to be instituted in spaces including in mainstream schools, and take this opportunity to reiterate our calls for such important protocols. As the 2025 EveryChild.SG study shows, due to the lack of structured protocols and policies on the assessment and provision of reasonable accommodation in mainstream schools, experiences by SEN students and their families are at best inconsistent – with a number of SEN students and their families significantly lacking support.
Such findings all the more highlight the need for investments – especially through annual Budgets – in mainstream school capabilities. Not doing so, and mainly focusing on developing the SPED sector is also not aligned with best standards of inclusive education found in the UN CRPD.
—
Overall, as outlined through the examples above, there is much more that can be done by the public sector and larger Singapore society to foster a truly inclusive landscape that ensures essential targets such as skills upgrading, job security, workplace fairness, and educational equity and opportunities are truly available for all.
The above is no means an exhaustive list. In addition to the above, there are other examples of areas that are important for annual Budgets such as Budget 2026 to address. These include but are not limited to increasing investments in the provision and education of Singapore Sign Language (SgSL) – establishing a timeline towards recognising SgSL as an official language, ensuring that strategies to combat climate change are inclusive of the realities of persons with disabilities – amongst others.
As the above examples show, and as important standards such as the UN CRPD outline, merely asking the question of what can be done to “support persons with disabilities” is insufficient to foster a disability-inclusive society. Fostering a disability-inclusive society requires not merely asking what can be done for the disability community, but rather investing to transform everyday spaces and sectors – from employment and education to emerging technologies and the digital space.
While one budget cannot address all concerns, each budget – including Budget 2026 – can begin to progressively realise some of the above areas.
