Government defends multi-layered preschool funding, rejects portable subsidies amid MP concerns
Government defends current preschool funding approach, rejecting portable subsidies. Kenneth Tiong warns policy-created fee gaps threaten mid-tier, play-based centres, while Minister of State Goh Pei Ming emphasises holistic funding and play-based learning across the sector.
- Government maintains multi-pronged preschool funding, rejecting portable subsidies to protect accessibility and quality.
- MP Kenneth Tiong highlights policy-driven fee gaps harming independent, mid-tier play-based centres.
- Minister of State Goh Pei Ming stresses holistic funding and play-based pedagogy across 80% of preschools.
The Government has defended its approach to early childhood education funding, prioritising accessibility, affordability, and quality.
Minister of State for Social and Family Development Goh Pei Ming reiterated the need for a multi-layered funding system instead of portable subsidies, citing potential risks such as fee increases and over-commercialisation.
“Our schemes have worked well, with demonstrated success in accessibility and affordability outcomes,” Goh said in Parliament on 6 March 2026.
He added that the Government provides selected operators with funding to cap fees and maintain quality, while parents also benefit from basic and means-tested subsidies.
MP highlights challenges for independent preschools
Workers’ Party MP for Aljunied GRC Kenneth Tiong criticised the current system for creating structural disadvantages for independent operators.
He pointed to a play-based preschool charging S$1,655 monthly compared with S$650 at subsidised centres, arguing that government-subsidised pricing sets market benchmarks that restrict parental choice.
“This gap is not market-created. It is policy-created,” Tiong said.
“Parents are not choosing play-based learning over other approaches; they are choosing AOP prices. At a S$1,000 differential, there is no real choice.”
Tiong called for subsidies to follow the child to any licensed centre and for teacher funding support to be independent of operators.
The impact on mid-tier, play-based centres
Independent centres face challenges beyond fees.
Tiong noted that salary expectations funded by subsidies in government-supported centres have become sector-wide benchmarks, increasing operational costs for independents without a corresponding revenue increase.
He cited the example of Pre-School By-The-Park run by Loy Wee Mee, whose Li Hwan centre closed in January despite her recognition as an expert in play-based learning.
“Passion alone cannot close it,” Tiong said. Two parents, Nicole and Jasmine, took over the school to continue its programmes.
Tiong argued that the middle-tier segment of preschools is collapsing, leaving a dichotomy between mass-market government-supported centres and ultra-premium international schools. “Middle-class families lose meaningful choice,” he warned.
Lessons from overseas
Tiong also referenced Malaysia’s early childhood reforms, noting the national curriculum now prioritises play-based, child-centred learning.
He highlighted Malaysia’s World Forum on Early Care and Education in April, which invites Singapore operators to share expertise.
He warned that Singapore risks losing educators capable of advancing play-based pedagogy due to funding constraints.
He added that teacher funding should be independent of the operator, allowing qualified educators to receive appropriate support regardless of their employer.
Government response on per-child funding
Goh Pei Ming explained the rationale behind the current funding structure.
While anchor operators shifted from capacity-based to enrolment-based funding in early 2025, he said applying a per-child principle to all centres remains a separate matter.
“We want to ensure efficient resources are assigned to all centres, and per-child funding encourages quality improvements to attract parents,” Goh said.
He emphasised that government priority is ensuring 80% of preschoolers can access affordable, quality education.
Selection of subsidised operators
The minister elaborated that funding is targeted at rigorously selected anchor and partner operators.
Criteria include the provision of affordable quality services, professional development, financial sustainability, and accessibility.
Some independent centres do not participate due to niche programming, premium market positioning, or higher operational costs, he noted.
“Good reasons exist why certain operators are not part of Anchor Operator (AOP) or Partner Operator (POP) schemes,” Goh said.
Play-based learning across the sector
Goh reaffirmed the Government’s commitment to play-based pedagogy, which has been embedded in the preschool curriculum for over a decade.
“Play is a child’s natural language. It teaches sharing, problem-solving, adaptability, and emotional management,” he said.
He added that best practices observed from funded operators would be shared sector-wide, with plans to intensify play-based approaches in everyday lessons to meet each child’s needs.
Follow-up clarification in Parliament
Tiong sought clarification on whether per-child funding could be extended to all licensed centres.
He noted, “ECDA itself shifted anchor operator funding from a centre capacity model to a per-child funding model earlier in 2025. If per-child funding is the right principle for anchor centres, why is it the wrong principle for all licensed centres?”
He also asked whether the ministry acknowledges that the current funding model risks making play-based expert schools, like those run by Loy Wee Mee, unviable.
Goh reiterated the distinction between capacity-based and per-child funding for anchor operators, while highlighting the Government’s continued focus on accessible, affordable, and quality preschools for families.
On the role of play-based experts like Loy Wee Mee, Goh noted the ministry’s interest in engaging her expertise to support the broader sector.
