Mr Speaker: Order. I wish to inform Members that under the provisions of Standing Order No 102, I have on 19 March this year nominated Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin to fill a vacancy in the House Committee and Mr Murali Pillai to fill a vacancy in the Public Petitions Committee. The nominations took effect from 19 March 2024.
Order. Questions for Oral Answer.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Vaping Feedback Sent by Public, Educational Institutions, Police and Central Narcotics Bureau","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"1 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Health (a) for each year from 2021 to 2023, what is the number of vaping feedback received by the Health Science Authority (HSA) from the public, educational institutions, Police and the Central Narcotics Bureau, respectively; (b) what is the size of HSA’s enforcement team dedicated to vaping enforcement; (c) what is the number of summons on vaping offences issued by HSA in the last three years; and (d) how many summons are issued in collaboration with other law enforcement agencies.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) received 1,700, 1,500 and 2,070 vaping-related feedback from the public and through other agencies in 2021, 2022 and 2023 respectively. We do not have readily available data on the breakdown of the feedback sources.
We are taking a multi-agency collaborative approach to enforcement. Hence, while HSA is primarily a scientific agency with a modestly-sized enforcement team, it is supplemented by outsourcing and enforcement support from other agencies such as the National Environment Agency (NEA), National Parks Board (NParks) and Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA). Our schools also take an active approach to prevent students from picking up the habit of vaping.
There were about 7,600, 5,600 and 8,000 vaping-related offences in 2021, 2022 and 2023 respectively. Of the vaping-related offences, about 4,700, 5,000, 7,900 were purchase, use and possession offences in the same three years. Cases which require a Notice of Composition to be issued are handled by HSA.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Thank you, Speaker. Thank you to Ms Rahayu for the comprehensive reply. I just want to ask a couple of supplementary questions. The first is: has the size of HSA's enforcement team grown for the past three years, since I see that the figures for violations for vaping have increased quite steadily? Two, is the agency also getting help from the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) and the Police Force to help in the enforcement. Three, we read about the multi-agency approach to vaping enforcement as well as the importing of vaping equipment. Can Ms Rahayu give more details on how this is set up and what are the key performance indicators (KPIs) to be met?
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: Mr Speaker, I appreciate the Member's concern about the size of the enforcement team at HSA to deal with this growing problem. We note the concern and the approach that we are taking is, as mentioned, that we are looking at a multi-agency approach. We do have to look at this issue from a multi-pronged perspective as well.
We are taking the approach of outsourcing some of the enforcement measures. The agencies will cross enforce, meaning that if there are agencies that take up and pick up some of these cases of vaping, it is referred to HSA and HSA can then issue the necessary Notice of Composition.
The Member had also asked whether the Police is also involved in this. Yes. If they go out and as they do their own work, and they do discover cases of vaping, they will refer these cases to HSA, and also at many different fronts, because this issue, as you know, is a big one.
We are also looking at things upstream. At the front where it relates to the sale and the advertisement of the products online, we are working with the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) and the Infocomm Media Development Authority. This is where we are working with other agencies to track and stop the efforts of people selling all these products online.
We are working with the agencies in the community, as I mentioned earlier, with NEA, NParks, the Police, in the community. When they catch these cases, these cases are referred to us and then we issue the Notice of Composition or do the necessary enforcement.
We are also working with the schools. The schools work with us to look at education and informing the public about it.
These are some of the various efforts of how this multi-agency collaboration effort works. We are continually monitoring this. And if there is a need, we can definitely size the manpower and adjust our manpower accordingly to address the problem.
At this juncture, because it is something that happens in multi-facets of people's lives – I mean, we also have to consider things like at the borders when things get smuggled in – so, we do need to take that approach of working together with all these other agencies collectively, so that we can have a more effective response to the growing problem.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Ang.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng: Thank you, Speaker. But at this point in time, when a member of the public or the schools call the Police for help in vaping enforcement, they will be asked to refer it to HSA. So, I hope HSA can work with the different agencies to have a no-wrong-door policy to deal with this feedback, rather than all go to HSA, which is a very modest set-up, as you said. We do not want to have a young generation that is a vaping generation in Singapore.
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: I thank the Member for the feedback. If he has some specific issues that have arisen, please do let us know. This is something that we have also progressed over time. Initially, perhaps, there may have been some apprehension with regard to the other agencies getting involved in this, but we had recently announced the multi-agency effort, so, I think there is better coordination now between the agencies.
We are looking at how we can make sure that the different aspects are dealt with. For example, if it is a complaint to schools, the schools will look at it with disciplinary proceedings as well. At the same time now, we are also making sure that HSA is kept apprised of this and the necessary compositions are issued.
But I note your concerns about the enforcement measures all being handled by HSA. At this juncture, it comes under the Tobacco (Control of Advertisements and Sale) Act, and that is something that is under the purview of HSA. So, at this juncture, the enforcement bit of that, in terms of issuing of composition as well as any action taken in Court, is done by HSA.
But actually, there are other aspects of the work – there is the catching, there is education, there is also checking at the borders, there is checking on the online space – which all need collective effort from different agencies.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for her response. Since 1 December 2023, NEA's enforcement officers have been empowered to take action against individuals who possess vaporisers and cases have been referred to HSA. Two supplementary questions. One, will more agencies come on board as part of this cross-enforcement project? And two, will HSA continue to take the lead on this issue and ensure that, amongst the agencies involved, processes will be aligned, protocols will be made smoother in the apprehension of people who have vaporisers?
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: We will continue to assess and monitor the situation. At this juncture, yes, HSA is the one that is doing the enforcement. When we are involving all these agencies, there is some thought to it. These are the agencies that are relevant in the problem. They are involved because, as I mentioned earlier, there are different aspects of the issue which we want to resolve, and their support and action is also necessary.
We need to figure out what is the best approach. It is not just about bringing all different agencies in, but how can they meaningfully come on board to work together.
We are looking at how we can ensure effective enforcement and deploy resources meaningfully. I guess that addresses his first question about whether there are other agencies coming on board. We will assess this.
In terms of whether there will be guidelines and protocols in place, yes, that is something that is being looked at. At the moment, there is some understanding between the different agencies as to how to make this work meaningfully so that we are having an integrated approach that will help to address the whole problem.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Classification Framework for SkillsFuture Courses","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"2 Mr Mark Lee asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry will consider a classification framework for SkillsFuture courses, featuring a dual-index system with (i) a Mobility Index to assess the potential for career advancement of these skills within and across industries and (ii) an Industry Heat Index to gauge hiring trends in booming sectors; and (b) if so, whether the Ministry can collaborate with trade associations to ensure these indices accurately reflect industry demands, and integrate it into the MySkillsFuture portal for users to make informed choices.
The Minister of State for Education (Ms Gan Siow Huang) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) works closely with industry partners, such as queen bee companies, trade associations and professional bodies, to analyse market trends in high-growth sectors and translate them into job and skills insights. These are published regularly so that individuals can make use of the information. For example, the annual Skills Demand for the Future Economy report identifies the priority skills for the green, digital and care economies.
In relation to the Member’s suggestion of a Mobility Index, the Skills Demand for the Future Economy report provides information on career transition pathways to help individuals with relevant skills pivot to job roles in these growth sectors. Information on hiring demand for these priority skills, in terms of the number of job postings and types of jobs that require these skills, is also provided within the report and as an accompanying Jobs Skills Dashboard, which is similar in intent to the Member’s suggestion of an Industry Heat Index.
We welcome partnerships with the industry and trade associations, including the Singapore Business Federation, to further improve the signposting of SkillsFuture courses to individuals seeking to upskill.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Mark Lee.
\tMr Mark Lee (Nominated Member): I thank the Minister of State for her comprehensive reply. I was wondering because if you read the newspaper article on TODAY, there are certain sectors that are saying that there is a large skills mismatch, especially for the tech sector. Perhaps we can work more closely with the business community to ensure that there is more transparency and more signposts for individuals to understand what skills are required within certain specific industries. The trade associations are wanting to work hand-in-hand with you. And maybe there would be a requirement for higher subsidies for maybe the hottest skills that are needed and less for skills that are currently in less demand.
\tMs Gan Siow Huang: I thank the Member for his suggestion. In fact, SSG welcomes more partnerships with the business associations and trade associations. Just for information, we work very closely with the sector agencies to identify suitable groups that we can work with so that the information on jobs and skills can be made more responsive and available to Singaporeans who are looking for jobs and skills training opportunities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increasing Quantum and Income Ceiling of HDB's Open Market Rental Voucher Scheme for Lower-income Families and In Response to Higher Rentals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"The following question stood in the name of Ms Joan Pereira –
3 To ask the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider offering Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme rental vouchers of more than $300 a month for couples who are from families with lower household incomes and who stay in smaller flats.
4 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) in the last three years, what is the average increase in open market rents for HDB 3-room, 4-room and 5-room flats; (b) whether the Government will consider raising the monthly household income ceiling of $7,000 for families using the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (Open Market) Voucher to rent HDB flats from the open market; and (c) if not, how will the Government assist more young couples to afford interim rental properties in the open market.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Question No 3, Sir.
\tThe Second Minister for National Development (Ms Indranee Rajah) (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 3 and 4 together.
\tMr Speaker: Please proceed.
\tMs Indranee Rajah: Open market rents had stayed broadly stable prior to the COVID-19 pandemic but have increased in the past three years due to unprecedented supply-side constraints and increased rental demand arising from COVID-19.
In 2021, the average year-on-year increase in open market rents for Housing and Development (HDB) 3-room, 4-room and 5-room flats was 5%. This increased to 35% in 2022, amid the easing of border restrictions and recovery of non-resident rental demand. We have since implemented a suite of measures to support households who need to rent accommodations. These include increasing both private and public housing supply, temporarily relaxing the occupancy cap for larger HDB flats and private residential properties, as well as ramping up our supply of rental flats under the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme, or PPHS.
Public and private housing rents have shown signs of stabilising. The average year-on-year increase in open market rents for HDB 3-room, 4-room and 5-room flats was 10% in 2023.
The PPHS provides a temporary housing option for families with less income at their disposal to rent a flat while waiting for their HDB flats to be completed. HDB is working to double the supply of PPHS flats from about 2,000 units currently to about 4,000 units by 2025.
Meanwhile, we will introduce the PPHS (Open Market) Voucher Scheme as a temporary measure to support eligible families who rent HDB flats or bedrooms in the open market. The scheme will run for a one-year period from July 2024 and eligible families will receive $300 per month. Families must be eligible for PPHS and have a rental tenancy registered with HDB.
\tThe PPHS Voucher parameters have been carefully calibrated to provide some relief for eligible families, while mitigating the potential inflationary impact on the rental market. The $7,000 income ceiling targets our support at families with less income at their disposal to rent on the open market. Given the voucher quantum of $300 per month, eligible families will receive up to $3,600 if they qualify for the full year of support. Families will have the flexibility to select a rental option – whether a whole flat or an HDB bedroom – that suits their budget and needs.
There are currently no plans to raise the income ceiling of $7,000 for the PPHS Voucher, or to offer a higher voucher quantum. Households with incomes above $7,000 but have additional expenses due to exceptional circumstances, such as high medical expenses, may approach HDB for help. HDB will consider their applications on a case-by-case basis.
Families will also continue to have the option to apply for a PPHS flat offered by HDB. Married couples with children will continue to be given priority for PPHS flats. In recent exercises, all married applicants with children, including those expecting children, had a chance to select a PPHS flat.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
\tMr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just one supplementary question for the Minister. Given that, if I look at the median rentals of 3- to 4- room flats in the last two years since the income ceiling was introduced in 2021, I think it has gone up by about 30% to 70%, or about $600 to $1,600, a month, which is considerably more than the $300 voucher given, which while would go some way in defraying the rental costs, I wanted to ask the Minister if she would consider whether or not to provide greater assistance, especially for those who are less able to afford it, in the interest of equity, especially if rents continue to increase during this one-year trial period.
\t
\tMs Indranee Rajah: I thank the Member for his supplementary question. I think the first thing to bear in mind is that the $7,000 cap is actually a measure to help those who are less able to afford. That is the first point, because if we did not have that cap or if we increased that cap, you would have more people coming in, and that would drive the rents up. So, the first point to bear in mind is the $7,000 is a way of helping the lower-income group.
I think the main point he was asking was whether there would be greater assistance for those less able to afford it. At the moment, there are no plans to increase the voucher amount, but do not forget that we do have plans to double or to increase the number of PPHS flats.
So, there is a range of measures. There would be those who would be able to afford, to rent on the open market, whether private or HDB. Then, remember, in 2021, when we first introduced the PPHS, we started at about 800 PPHS units; which, in 2022, we then said we would be increasing to 840. And then by 2023, we actually more than doubled it to about 2,000. And now, we will be doubling it to 4,000. So, by increasing the number of PPHS flats and putting that into the mix, the lower-income can access that, even if they are not using the PPHS voucher.
I think what I would like to say is that we will keep an eye on this. We will bear in mind those who are not able to afford, to have such easy access. But for now, there are no plans to increase the amount. And also, for the PPHS voucher, we only just announced it in Budget this year. We have to give it some time to run.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Probe into Incident Where Private Military Conference Call at Singapore Hotel was Intercepted","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"5 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Defence in view of the recent incident where a private military conference call in a Singapore hotel was being intercepted (a) whether the Government is investigating the incident to identify and address specific vulnerabilities in our telecommunications infrastructure; and (b) whether there are measures in place to safeguard the security of communications lines originating from Singapore, especially during international meetings and military events which involve high-level foreign dignitaries.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Defence (Mr Heng Chee How) (for the Minister for Defence): Mr Speaker, this reply will only address the hon Member's question as to whether Singapore can safeguard the security of communications used by visitors to international and military events held here. It is a reply in general, without reference to any incident referred to by the Member.
Participants to international events and conferences, including those attended by military personnel and government leaders and officials do not, as a rule, expect the host country to provide secured means of communications. Even if a host country is to offer such means, it is questionable whether foreign participants are comfortable using it. Foreign guests who need to transmit sensitive information will typically arrange their own secured means, such as encryption hardware or software, commercial secured or embassy lines and other security measures. This is the practice of the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) officials when attending meetings overseas.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. Can the Senior Minister of State elaborate on the potential impact of this incident on Singapore's reputation for international military and defence-related discussions, like the Shangri-La Dialogue? And is the Ministry proactively conducting vulnerability assessments on our telecommunications infrastructure to prevent something like this from happening?
\t
\tMr Heng Chee How: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his supplementary question. First, I must explain that there is a difference between conferences and meetings that are organised by Singapore, that are of a sensitive nature, like Government meetings, military meetings where communications are sensitive. Secured measures are implemented for those meetings. That is one type.
Then, there are the general communications that visitors to Singapore – tourists and other visitors to Singapore – may choose to use, such as open communication lines. These are not within the purview of the Government or the military meetings that we are referring to. For those, the visitors would have to, as I said in my reply, take necessary measures themselves, such as using encryption hardware and software, or other means that they are confident of being secure. Overall, we will also encourage everybody to practise cyber hygiene and take care when using, for example, open wi-fi access.
For MINDEF and SAF, we take a proactive approach to cybersecurity when we are involved in high signature events, inclusive of those involving high level foreign dignitaries. And we work closely with event organisers, who remain accountable for the overall cybersecurity of these events.
These proactive efforts would include identifying events' digital footprint and cybersecurity risk areas, scanning the event websites and checking the commercial systems and applications used for the event, and working out the cybersecurity incident escalation and reporting processes.
If vulnerabilities are uncovered through these checks, the event organisers would be required to resolve them, prior to the events. MINDEF and SAF, however, do not cover the cybersecurity of foreign militaries' internal, unilateral virtual meetings, which are outside the scope of these events.\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Anticipated Disamenities to Residents and Commuters Due To Reclamation of Land for Woodlands Checkpoint Expansion","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in view of JTC Corporation's plan to reclaim 44 hectares of land to expand the Woodlands Checkpoint from the third quarter of 2024 (a) whether the Ministry anticipates any disamenities to residents and commuters in the vicinity; and (b) if so, how will the Ministry mitigate the inconvenience to those who may be affected.
\tThe Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Ms Low Yen Ling) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Mr Speaker, as the appointed agent to carry out reclamation and related works at Woodlands Checkpoint, JTC is mindful that such reclamation works may increase noise, dust and traffic.
JTC will ensure the necessary mitigating measures to minimise inconveniences arising from such reclamation work. For example, JTC will erect a three-metre-high noise barrier along the shoreline of Woodlands Waterfront Park and restrict the duration of noisy activities where needed. It will also monitor and manage the air quality throughout the construction period and deploy dust suppression measures, such as water spraying. In addition, JTC will also moderate and monitor the traffic-related construction works to reduce congestion during peak hours.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Hany Soh.
\tMs Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): I thank Minister of State for her reply. I have a few supplementary questions. One is in relation to the bus service that we understand, at this moment, is used by commuters to the checkpoints. Following from this reclamation, how will this change when the area will be closed, especially for roads around the Woodlands Town Centre?
The other question pertains to how this reclamation will affect the environment. In particular, some residents have expressed their concerns about the environmental impact study, whether that has been carried out to address any restoration of the natural habitat and species diversity in the area.
Finally, what I also understand is that, as part of these reclamations, there will also be some land that needs to be acquired from Malaysia to expand the checkpoint. How does that impact the development and will there be any delays in Malaysia's decision that may affect the implementation timelines?
\t
\t
\tMs Low Yen Ling: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I want to thank Ms Hany Soh for her three questions. First, let me take the last question about the land. The Woodlands Checkpoint is being redeveloped to provide a more sustainable and a more long-term solution to the chronic congestion at this land crossing, which can be described as the world's busiest and is of importance to both countries.
The Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA), under the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), is the overall project lead of the redevelopment of the Woodlands Checkpoint. They have conducted very extensive feasibility and technical studies, and assessed that the land needs for the redevelopment of Woodlands Checkpoint can only be met through a mix of land acquisition and land reclamation.
I want to assure her that the expanded Woodlands Checkpoint works will not disrupt the operations including of the bus service and so on. There might be some re-routing to keep passengers, commuters and motorists safe, but it will not disrupt the checkpoint operations. The expanded Woodlands Checkpoint will be operationalised progressively from 2028 and redevelopment works will not, like I have mentioned, disrupt the operations.
In terms of the first question, she asked about the bus, transport and so on. ICA and JTC do not anticipate any significant traffic diversion or detours due to the reclamation works.
Before I talk about the environmental impact assessment (EIA), I know she is serving the residents in that area, together with her Group Representation Constituency (GRC) mates, so, allow me to reassure her that JTC, as the agent appointed to conduct the reclamation works, will work very closely with ICA, as well as with the eventual contractor that has been appointed to do this, to implement necessary mitigating measures, such as the noise barriers I talked about, hoarding and also dust control.
I want to assure her that some of the mitigation measures for noise, for example, we have looked into all the details. For example, I mentioned the three-metre-high noise barrier. It will be erected along the shoreline of Woodlands Waterfront Park. I think she is very familiar with it. In fact, the whole length will be 600 metres long. I think she will be very assured by that. The length of the shoreline is about 300 metres and the length perpendicular to the shoreline is about 300 metres, so a total of 600 metres.
In terms of dust, I want to also assure her and her residents that JTC and the appointed contractor will certainly monitor the air quality and manage it. We will implement a range of dust control measures, I cited a few; for example, erecting hoarding to contain the dust, spraying water on the reclaimed land, cleaning the tyres of the vehicles at the site exits, keeping speed limits and so on. And in addition to all that, we will also make sure that the dust-intensive activities will be planned in stages or phases, to minimise accumulative dust emissions. I think it is important that I share these details with her and her residents.
On the environmental impact analysis, in fact, JTC has conducted a very detailed and in-depth EIA for the reclamation project, and it examines the air and water quality, the noise and the visual impact, the preservation of biodiversity, the habitat disturbances and so on.
\t
And she may have noticed that JTC has put out the full EIA report. It was gazetted on 29 January this year and the hard copy was made available for public viewing at JTC Summit for four weeks, from 29 January to 26 February. Even though the public consultation has ended, if any parties are interested, including the residents, they can still write to JTC to review it.
The assessment revealed that the impact on the biodiversity would be considered insignificant with the mitigation measures carried out during the redevelopment of the Woodlands Checkpoint. The report does not expect major environmental concerns from the construction works. I want to assure her that all hands are on deck, not just within the Ministry of Trade and Industry and JTC, but together with ICA, in fact, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) as well and the appointed contractors to put in all the necessary measures to minimise disamenities to the residents, the commuters and also to the environment.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Soh.
\tMs Hany Soh: Thank you, Minister of State. Just one quick clarification, which I also seek your reassurance on. I understand that the viaduct that will be constructed will run through the Marsiling Park area. So, will the relevant agencies be taking this opportunity to have a huddle and have a better understanding on how certain facilities will be improved, and also to minimise the disamenities that the park users will face around the area?
\t
\tMs Low Yen Ling: Mr Speaker, I want to thank the Member Ms Hany Soh for her follow-up supplementary questions. And her question on the viaduct is part of the broader Woodlands Checkpoint expansion that MHA and ICA are undertaking. So, this part does not come under the JTC reclamation works, but in the spirit of whole-of-Government, we welcome her to file a separate Parliamentary Question, and our counterparts at MHA will certainly provide her the details.
I know that MHA, ICA and HDB colleagues have as early as 2022 conducted door-to-door visits, conducted dialogues. And these dialogues will continue, and in fact, will intensify. As far as JTC is concerned, we are currently evaluating the tender to appoint the contractor, and once that has been finalised, we will conduct regular meetings between JTC and the contractor. The contractor will also appoint designated contact persons, more than one, in fact; and all these will be placed on notices at each HDB block and also at the hoarding, to make it easier for her, her community leaders, for the residents to give feedback. We certainly will put together the multi-agency team to bridge the communications with her and her team.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Factoring in Findings from Environmental Impact Studies for Development of Former Keppel Club and Gillman Barracks Sites","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"7 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Government intends to take into account the Environmental Impact Study that was undertaken during the development of the former Keppel Club site, which found ecological connectivity for birds between the Southern Ridges and Labrador Nature Reserve, when conducting environmental studies of the proposed development of Gillman Barracks; and (b) if so, how will the Ministry ensure that any future development of Gillman Barracks will not significantly compromise this important ecological connectivity.
8 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether rejuvenation plans for Gillman Barracks that were announced by the Singapore Land Authority in 2022 will be taken into account when studying the future development of Gillman Barracks; and (b) whether the environmental and heritage studies commissioned for the potential development of the area will be accessible to environmental groups and the wider public.
\tThe Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to answer Parliamentary Question Nos 7 and 8 on today’s Order Paper, as they both relate to the plans for Gillman Barracks?
\tMr Speaker: Please proceed.
\tMr Desmond Lee: Thank you, Sir. As announced during the recent Committee of Supply debate, the Government is studying the possibility of redeveloping the Gillman Barracks site for a mix of public and private housing. This will not affect the committed tenure of existing tenancies, which will progressively expire by 2030.
We will commence environmental and heritage studies in the second quarter of this year to guide the sensitive development of the site. When the studies are complete, we will publish these reports online for members of the public to provide their feedback.
Our plans will also take into account past studies, including findings on ecological connectivity from the National Parks Board (NParks’) Ecological Profiling Exercise (EPE) and the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the redevelopment of the former Keppel Golf Course site.
\tMr Speaker: Ms He.
\tMs He Ting Ru (Sengkang): I thank the Minister for his reply. I have a couple of supplementary questions. First is, in terms of the previous environmental impact assessments that were done, which found a significant ecological connectivity between the Keppel Club site and also the Southern Ridges and Labrador Nature Reserve site. The EIS for the nearby Keppel Club site found that even with mitigation measures, redevelopment could have major residual impact on biodiversity due to permanent habitat loss and fragmentation. In light of this, can the Minister clarify what specific plans are in place to designate sizeable core habitat patches and green corridors within Gillman Barracks to maintain landscape connectivity between the Labrador Nature Reserve, the Southern Ridges and the Greater Southern Waterfront? If there are no such plans, how does the Government intend to prevent critical ecological linkages from being irreversibly compromised?
I also heard the Minister mention earlier that the existing tenants whose leases will run out progressively until 2030, will not be affected if the plans to redevelop the site goes ahead at Gillman Barracks. However, I anticipate that there will be some new tenants who might come in and can the Minister confirm whether the leases will run beyond 2030? And also, will help be given to these tenants who come in a bit later, especially during the rejuvenation period? Will there be help given to them to find new leases elsewhere if the redevelopment plans actually do go through?
And finally, my last supplementary question is, I think the Minister mentioned earlier that there will be certain heritage and environmental impact assessments also carried out and that these will be made available. Can I ask whether the reports will eventually be made available in full for the public, because I understand that sometimes these are only made available in a redacted form. So, can I ask whether these will be made available in full?
\t
\tMr Desmond Lee: I thank the Member for the three supplementary questions. As I said earlier in my reply, the masterplanning for the Gillman Barracks site will take place after we have done detailed environmental and heritage studies and that the planning for Gillman Barracks will take into account the EIS findings for the Keppel Golf Course site, in as far as the EPE findings are concerned.
In the Keppel Golf Course EPE, we identified five corridors that need to be provided for, even as we redevelop the site for residential housing on the golf course. And we will make sure that that ecological connectivity is provided for, in the surroundings of the Keppel Golf Course.
On lease, as I have said, the site had been made available for interim use since the 1990s. The existing tenancies will progressively expire by 2030. Thereafter, we will plan for the entire site, including residential as well as the commercial uses of the site. And so, at that point in time, we will engage the tenants, engage future tenants as far as the commercial use of the site is concerned. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Minister for National Development\", Official Report, 2 April 2024, Vol 95, Issue 133, Correction By Written Statement section.]
As for heritage, the studies for both the environmental and heritage studies will be made available online. As with all these studies, they come in large volumes with lots and lots of technical detail. We will make sure that what we put out is meaningful for members of the public as well as experts to be able to understand and comment on.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"ComCare Support for Those Who Do Not Stay in Public Rental Housing and Extension of ComLink+ To Them","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"The following question stood in the name of Ms Mariam Jaafar –
9 To ask the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the proportion and number of families who have received ComCare support in the past 24 months who do not live in public rental housing; and (b) whether the ComLink+ package can be extended to lower-income families who do not live in public rental housing.
\tMr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim (Chua Chu Kang): Question No 9, Sir.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Eric Chua) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Sir, around half of households that received ComCare support in 2022 and 2023 did not reside in public rental housing. This translates to about 20,000 households. Many of these received Short- to Medium-Term Assistance, and may have been going through a temporary setback in life.
In addition to families with children residing in public rental housing, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) will also offer ComLink+ to lower-income families that are not residing in public rental housing but who are eligible for KidSTART or the UPLIFT Community Network. We aim to reach 3,000 such households over the next three years. Like other ComLink+ families, these families can be offered the ComLink+ Progress Packages if they take active steps towards securing a better future for themselves.
ComLink+ represents society’s determination and good intention to uplift our lower-income households and to ensure no one is left behind as Singapore progresses. MSF’s focus during the three-year pilot is to make sure that we translate intentions into concrete and significant results for these families. Only then would we consider if ComLink+ should be expanded further to cover other groups of lower-income families.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Zhulkarnain.
Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim: Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the answer. Of the 20,000 households not in public rental housing and receiving ComCare, how many are there not already enrolled in KidSTART, UPLIFT or Project DIAN, and what are the plans to engage these families in order to extend ComLink+ to them?
\t
\tMr Eric Chua: Sir, I thank the Member for his supplementary question. As I mentioned, there are about 3,000 households who are not in rental flat housing but qualify for KidSTART or UPLIFT Community Network. So, in the next phase of ComLink+ in the next three years, where we are trialling our ComLink+ progress packages, we will be reaching out to these 3,000 families. And if these ComLink+ progress packages prove indeed successful, we will then consider reaching out to more lower-income families beyond these 3,000.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Employment and Deployment Restrictions on Healthcare Professionals Undergoing Investigations for Patient Abuse Charges","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Miss Rachel Ong asked the Minister for Health (a) whether there are any restrictions on the employment or deployment of healthcare professionals who are undergoing investigation for charges relating to patient abuse; (b) for each year since 2010, what is the number of healthcare professionals who have been charged for patient abuse; and (c) of these, how many continued to work in the healthcare industry in Singapore.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, under the Healthcare Services Act 2020 (HCSA), all licensed healthcare institutions are required to report any incident or allegations of abuse involving a patient to their management. This includes cases of patient abuse by healthcare professionals.
The licensees must take steps as soon as possible to manage the risk of recurrent abuse. This may include the reassignment of a healthcare professional to non-clinical duties or to require the healthcare professional to take a leave of absence to minimise further patient interactions while investigations are ongoing. The healthcare professional may be further referred to the Police if a criminal offence is likely to have been committed and to the relevant Professional Board for further disciplinary action.
Since 2010, four healthcare professionals have been convicted of offences related to patient abuse. Disciplinary actions were taken in all these cases, including suspension and being struck off the appropriate professional register. Three are no longer practising and one returned to practice after serving a 15-month suspension.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress on Areas of Collaboration Identified during Inaugural Meeting of India-Singapore Ministerial Roundtable","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Mr Neil Parekh Nimil Rajnikant asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether he can provide an update on the progress made in the five mutually beneficial areas of collaboration that are identified in the first inaugural meeting of the India-Singapore Ministerial Roundtable in September 2022; and (b) what is the Ministry’s assessment on the role of the business community, in particular the Chambers of Commerce and trade associations, to achieve the desired outcomes laid down at the meeting.
\tThe Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Sir, the India-Singapore Ministerial Roundtable (ISMR) identified five areas of collaboration during the inaugural meeting held in September 2022. These five areas are food cooperation, health and pharmaceuticals, digitalisation, energy and green projects, and skills development. Since then, the digital payments linkage between Singapore’s PayNow and India’s Unified Payments Interface (UPI) was launched in February 2023. This allows customers of participating financial institutions to send and receive funds through their banks or their e-wallets in real time.
We also facilitated a pilot shipment involving the digital exchanges of Bills of Lading through the TradeTrust framework. The shipment showed that the digitalisation of cross-border trade financing documents can improve the efficiency, the speed and accuracy of information of shipment transactions.
There are also ongoing discussions on other initiatives, such as increasing food trade between India and Singapore.
Sir, India has the world’s fifth largest gross domestic product (GDP) and its rapid economic growth presents many opportunities for Singapore companies. The chambers of commerce and trade associations play a key role in encouraging and helping Singaporean companies and enterprises to do more business in India. For example, the Singapore Business Federation and the Singapore Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry led business delegations to the Vibrant Gujarat Global Summit and Tamil Nadu Global Investors Meet in January 2024.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Bulk of New Jobs Created Will Go to Singapore Citizens and Residents, Including Those Above Age 40","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"12 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Manpower in view of the fact that non-residents make up 83,500 of the 88,400 total employment growth in 2023, how will the Ministry ensure that the bulk of new jobs created in 2024 will go to Singapore citizens and residents, including those aged 40 and above.
\tThe Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): Mr Speaker, the Member asked the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) to ensure that the bulk of new jobs created go to Singaporeans. I think the Member seems to be under the misconception that a net increase in foreign employment means that jobs are not going to Singaporeans. I just want to clarify if that is so, then that view is fundamentally misguided. So, let me explain why.
\t
Firstly, what MOM is focused on and is interested in is whether Singaporeans who want to find a job can indeed do so. One way to look at this is to examine the resident employment and unemployment rates.
In 2023, our resident employment rate was 66.2%. This puts us as having the fourth highest resident employment rate compared to other advanced economies in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Our resident unemployment rate and long-term unemployment rate remain very low, at 2.7% and 0.7% respectively. So, we are close to full employment.
In fact, the Government has invested much effort in safeguarding resident employment. To illustrate, over the 2020 to 2022 period, when COVID-19 had an impact on our economy and labour market, resident employment growth remained robust, increasing by more than 110,000, while non-resident employment declined by 3,000.
Secondly, with the slowing resident workforce growth, it is imperative that Singapore remains open to complementary foreign labour to meet the demands of our growing economy and our businesses. If you take a closer look at the 83,500 non-resident employment growth last year, about 18,700, or 22.4%, was from higher-skilled Employment Pass (EP) and S Pass holders. The total number of EP and S Pass holders combined is still below pre-COVID-19 levels. The remaining increase of 64,800, or accounting for more than 77%, was due to an increase in the number of holders for Work Permits and other work passes in sectors such as construction. These are not typically the type of jobs that Singaporeans want to do.
Members of the House, there is a global shortage of skilled talent, with global cities competing for both investments and human capital. To stay competitive and to nurture a vibrant corporate ecosystem, we need to ensure that our businesses can access talent and they can expand. Thriving businesses create jobs for Singaporeans. They contribute taxes which, in turn, can be used to improve the livelihoods of our fellow Singaporeans.
We continue to enhance the complementarity of our foreign workforce. We peg the minimum costs of hiring EP and S Pass holders to the top one-third of local professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) and the associate professionals and technicians (APTs) respectively.
By regularly updating the qualifying salaries based on the set wage benchmarks, we ensure that our EP and S Pass holders are of high quality and they maintain a level playing field for our locals. The Complementarity Assessment Framework (COMPASS), which came into effect for new EP applications in September 2023, also allows us to evaluate EP candidates holistically, based on individual and firm-related attributes. This ensures that employers bring in the right profile of foreign workers to complement our local workforce and that companies develop healthy workforce profiles that are powered by a strong local core.
The fundamental objective of our approach is to strike a balance between ensuring that businesses have access to skills and manpower needed to grow and succeed, while creating opportunities for our local workers to grow and to progress. Our approach has helped our locals to secure good jobs.
Between 2013 and 2023, the number of resident PMETs increased by 380,000; and the number of EP and S Pass holders increased by 50,000. In growth sectors, such as finance, infocomm and professional services, resident PMETs increased by 190,000; and the number of EP and S Pass holders increased by 20,000. But more importantly, over the decade, resident income has also increased by 21.6% in real terms.
So, we must not view residents and foreigners as a zero-sum game and continue to draw divides. Thriving businesses with access to complementary foreign talent will not only lead to more job creation, but also improve overall wage outcomes, as businesses expand and improve their productivity. By growing our economic pie, we will be better able to secure positive outcomes for Singapore and Singaporeans.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): I thank the Minister for his reply. Can I ask the Minister, what percentage of the 88,400 total employment growth in 2023 were for PMET roles? And of these, what percentage went to Singapore Citizens and, in particular, older Singaporean PMETs?
\tDr Tan See Leng: I thank the Member for that question. Of the increase in total employment – the 88,400 – there was an increase of 4,900 residents and 18,700 EP holders and S Pass holders. So, that 64,800, that 77.6%, are actually in sectors or jobs that our Singaporeans do not typically want to go into. So, I think the right comparison would be that 4,900 residents versus the 18,700 EP and S Pass residents.
So, if you compare that increase in employment growth attributable to that segment that I just talked about. Let me repeat that. Residents versus EP and S Pass holders, there were 4,900 jobs for residents versus 18,700 for EP and S Pass holders. The key sectors with the largest increase in employment for the EP were admin and support services, food services and retail trade. For the S Pass, the key sectors were process, financial and insurance services and marine.
The growth last year in EP and S Pass holders exceeded growth in resident employment, as this category of EP and S Pass holders, the non-resident PMET employment is still recovering from the pandemic. The total number of EP and S Pass holders was 393,700 in December 2019 – this was the year before COVID-19. And we ended last year with 383,900 – this was in December 2023.
If you compare over the few years that I talked about, that 100,000 jobs that we safeguarded, as a result of Government efforts to safeguard jobs during the pandemic, our resident employment increased every year since 2019 and the proportion of PMETs amongst employed residents increased in tandem as well. As I have shared time and again, the various COVID-19 measures that we introduced actually safeguarded resident employment during that period to maintain high employment rates. While EP and S Pass holder proportions dipped significantly and it is still recovering back to pre-COVID-19 levels.
Hence, the larger proportion of growth attributed to EP and S Pass holders last year did not affect PMET resident employment at all. I hope that clarifies.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song: I thank the Minister for his reply to my supplementary question, but I do not think it actually addresses the question I was asking. He is comparing the 4,900 residents with the 18,700 EP and S Pass holders. But the 4,900 consists of all the Singaporean growth, all the resident workforce growth, not just for PMETs.
So, if we are to assume that EP and S Pass holders are PMETs, what is the percentage of the 4,900 that goes to Singaporeans?
I listened carefully to the Minister's reply and I understand what he is trying to get at. But given the substantial Government expenditure used for job creation in Singapore, including the Economic Development Board's efforts to attract foreign direct investments (FDIs), the extensive tax incentives given to multinational companies (MNCs), if most of these jobs continue to be filled year after year, mostly by foreigners, is the Minister concerned that these Government expenditures appear to be disproportionately benefiting MNCs and foreign workers, in particular, foreign professionals, over Singaporean workers?
\tDr Tan See Leng: Mr Speaker, as I shared earlier on, on a like-for-like comparison, you need to look at that 4,900 versus that 18,700 jobs in the same sectors. Because, really, more than 77% of last year's employment from the construction, process and manufacturing sectors, are typically jobs that Singaporeans do not want to be part of.
So, really, if you want to compare the type of jobs that Singaporeans would prefer to be in and, as I have shared earlier on, our focus is on enabling, helping and facilitating every Singaporean who wants to choose a particular job or role, will be able to do so. So, look at that particular sector and for the record, in terms of the total EP and S Pass holders, it is still about 32% of our overall workforce.
I think to say that we have expended significant Government expenditures, in terms of growing the economy and how many of these jobs end up with residents, I think that is myopic. Why do I say that?
Today, if you look at the overall statistics that we have presented in our Labour Market Report, our long-term unemployment is at 0.7%, 0.8%. And how we classify long-term unemployment is anyone who is unemployed for above six months. Based on a snapshot, our resident unemployment is about 2.7%. So, really, that 2% is churn. Most of them, if they so wish to do so, would find a job within six months. So, it is churn. So, for all intent and purposes, we are at very close to full employment.
We have also shared at the Budget, Committee of Supply, and Deputy Prime Minister has also shared in his Budget Statement, that for us to continue to grow, we cannot just grow the workforce indefinitely. We need to also grow our productivity and our value added.
Businesses, when they thrive, as the economy grows, they need access to workforce; they need access to workers; they need access to foreign talent; they need access to local talent. In a situation where our labour market is so tight, how do we ensure that our startups, our small and medium enterprises (SMEs), our large local enterprises and the MNCs, who make significant FDIs here in Singapore, can continue to grow and tap and leverage on the ecosystem, especially when we are already at close to full employment?
Is the Member, therefore, suggesting that, because of the fact that we are at full employment, we do not, or we put a dampener on our businesses' ability to grow? I think that is very short-sighted.
I hope that sets the perspective as to what we are thinking. Today, we are at a pivotal moment, with all of the transformation, with the significant disruptions happening, this is our opportunity to work together, to make sure that we continue to create and sustain a thriving metropolis for our successive generations.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for his enthusiastic response to our questions on Singapore manpower policy and all that. However, I would like to highlight, like what I have done a few years ago, during the job surplus —
Mr Speaker: Are you asking a supplementary question?
\tMr Leong Mun Wai: Yes.
Mr Speaker: Please just ask the supplementary question.
\tMr Leong Mun Wai: So, as I have said and as I have highlighted in the jobs debate a few years back, the conclusions that the Minister is trying to present is not complete.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong, I would really like you to ask the supplementary question. Do not make a mini speech here.
\tMr Leong Mun Wai: Yes. So, does he agree that his conclusions are not complete, as long as the jobs statistics do not separate the Singaporeans from the permanent residents (PRs), because there are these changes within the resident employment that are not completely transparent to us?
\tDr Tan See Leng: Mr Speaker, I think the Member, Mr Leong, has decided to rehash the divide of \"us versus them\", \"Singapore Citizens versus PRs\". Again, I think the fundamental answer to the Member, Mr Gerald Giam's, question has been addressed.
If he wants to start another debate, which we have done through Ministerial Statements delivered before, I suggest he files a separate Parliamentary Question.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Character and Citizenship Education Lessons on Gaza Conflict","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"13 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Education (a) whether he can make public the content and materials of the Character and Citizenship Education lesson on the Israel-Hamas conflict; and (b) whether any teacher has declined to deliver a lesson and, if so, how is such a situation dealt with.
14 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Education (a) whether primary school students are being taught about the Israel-Hamas conflict, either in the Character and Citizenship Education curriculum or otherwise; (b) if so, at which levels are students taught about the conflict; and (c) how are the contents differentiated among the different levels to take into account the different maturity levels of the students.
15 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Minister for Education (a) with many teachers implementing the Character and Citizenship Education lesson package, how will the Ministry ensure a safe space for students to share diverse views and arrive at their own conclusions on complex issues; and (b) how will the Ministry ensure that students realise the importance of looking at such situations through the lens of Singapore's national interests and the need to maintain our social, racial and religious harmony.
\tThe Minister for Education (Mr Chan Chun Sing): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take the next three Parliamentary Questions together, please?
Mr Speaker: Please proceed.
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, these questions have been addressed in my response on the Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) Lesson on the Israel-Hamas Conflict at Ministry of Education's (MOE's) Committee of Supply (COS) Debate on 4 March 2024, which can be found on MOE's website.
I understand that Mr Leong was absent during my speech and our subsequent discussion, while Ms Hazel Poa was around. So, with your permission, Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Clerks to distribute the transcript of my response. Members may also access these materials through the MP@SGParl app.
Mr Speaker: Please proceed. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, if I may continue, Ms Hazel Poa may refer to paragraphs 40 to 41 in the handout, on making the lesson materials public; and paragraph 9 as well as paragraphs 18 to 21, on the response of teachers and how we are supporting our teachers to deliver the lessons. Mr Leong Mun Wai may also refer to paragraphs 13 to 16 on how the lesson materials are customised for different levels of students.
Mr Sharael Taha may refer to paragraph 36 on how teachers ensure a safe space for discussion of such issues, and paragraphs 28 to 31 and paragraph 51 on the lesson's intent for students to learn how to maintain our religious and racial harmony.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong.
\tMr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, in our Parliamentary Question, we did request for the Ministry to release the teaching materials for the CCE lesson, but the Minister had replied that he will not release the slides in his reply during the COS, I think. We would like to, first, express deep disappointment that the slides in question, which form the primary teaching resource for the CCE class, have not been released to this House or to the public.
So, my first question is: despite what the Minister has said, how is it justifiable not to release the CCE lesson slides to the public, when the materials had already been imparted to our children? This is my first question.
My second question, as an extension of that, can we have the Government's commitment that all teaching materials for CCE in the future, should be made available to the public, so that parents would know what has been taught to their children?
I have actually made an effort to go to the bookstore and got the textbook for CCE for Primary 6 students. From the content of the textbook, you cannot imagine that a complex and controversial current issue, like the Israel-Hamas conflict, will be taught to our children. So, I urge the Government, in future, to make the material transparent and available to the public.
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, all the three supplementary questions are related. And let me just say this. I have made a commitment to this House during my reply, where I said the following: the slides alone do not fully communicate how we teach the subject and we welcome parents with concerns to come and see the teachers, who will explain to them how the lesson is conducted.
This is much better than just looking at the deck of slides without explanation. That is our stance. And this is how we intend to make available our teaching materials, including explanations to parents who are concerned.
Mr Speaker: Mr Sharael Taha.
\tMr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Speaker, I do share a differing view from Mr Leong. He said our children should not be exposed to and learn from such topics when it is a bit more complex. I would like to thank the Minister for his clarifications that the CCE lesson is aimed at allowing students to share and receive diverse views, and arrive at their own conclusion on complex issues – because they are already exposed to it from the social media. I am certain that there would be even more complex issues in future which our students would be exposed to and we would have to teach them to approach these in a way that maintains our social, religious and racial harmony in Singapore.
So, my supplementary question to the Minister is, given the threat of worsening geopolitical tensions, whether it is China-US tensions or Taiwan, or conflicts against races or religions in other countries, how will the Ministry decide when the different issues will be addressed as part of the CCE lessons? Would it be useful for students to discuss these topics before the tensions are significantly heightened?
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Mr Sharael Taha. Indeed, we share his views that this will not be the only sensitive, emotive issue that our students, and even our population, will come across in the days, weeks and years to come.
That is the reason why we feel the importance to conduct the CCE lessons – to help our people understand their emotions, the diversity of perspectives within our society, help our students to learn to verify the information that they come across that is widely available on social media, help them to understand our national priorities, positions and interests. Most importantly, help them to take constructive and positive actions for the sake of our cohesion and harmony. And these are the reasons why we conduct the CCE lesson.
So, I fully agree with Mr Sharael Taha. This may not be the one and only sensitive and emotive issue that we would have to deal with in the coming years. In fact, we can fully expect, as Mr Sharael Taha has mentioned, that there will be other equally, if not more challenging circumstances that we will have to deal with and allow our students a safe space to understand their emotions, grapple with the issues, verify the information they come across and to take positive actions.
Fundamentally, in this House, we have to consider this: do we agree that this is an emotive and sensitive issue that can fray our social fabric and cohesion? Fundamentally, if we believe that, then do we agree that we have a leadership responsibility to guide our people, especially our young, to not allow this to affect our social cohesion and harmony? If we agree to both of these points, then we welcome constructive suggestions on how we can better support our teachers, principals who have stepped forward to execute this challenging task for our nation.
And I would like to end this off by sharing a vignette from my own sharing with my principals and CCE teachers when I personally, together with Second Minister Maliki, conducted the discussions with them in preparation for this module.
One of my senior educators rose and spoke and reflected on this after we had an hour or more of sharing. She asked, \"Minister, why is it that whenever something like that happens, you have to come and tell us and share with us? How long will it take us to develop those instincts to react together as one united Singapore, that we will not be pulled apart by different forces, from different directions?\"
It is poignant moment. I assured her that I did not expect – and I do not expect – all my educators to be experts in foreign policies; and it will take us time, and perhaps generations, for us to reach this stage, whereby we can respond as one united Singapore.
But to do that, we have to first understand and appreciate that we are different. We have different backgrounds. We have different perspectives. And while we may be different in our outlook and perspectives, we can all share the same goal to unite and not let others divide us. That while we may not have a common past, we can all share a common future, with a shared sense of ethos of what it means to be Singaporean and not to be torn apart by other competing forces, which as Mr Sharael Taha said, there will be many more to come, perhaps closer to home.
For Members who are interested, you may want to read a recent article by Gideon Rachman in the Financial Times. It talks about identity geopolitics, how different identities threaten to pull different communities and societies apart, in support of their respective causes.
Mr Speaker: Ms Hazel Poa.
\tMs Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): The Minister has said that instead of releasing the slides, MOE would prefer to explain directly to the parents. Can the Minister let us know, how many schools have organised such dialogue sessions?
And secondly, I understand that the CCE materials were curated with the help of the other agencies, like the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), can I ask the Minister whether there were any prior consultations, given the context of this issue, with community and religious leaders, as well as prior consultation with the teachers who are to deliver these lessons?
\t
\t
\t
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, on the first supplementary question, the offer stands. All our schools are prepared to engage parents who are concerned with the material. And so far, some schools have received such requests. Most of them have not received these requests. For those schools that have received these requests, they have engaged the parents.
On the second question about consultation, yes, indeed, MOE consult various stakeholders, but I think we have to be clear when we use the word \"consult\", what do we mean? Do we mean to consult to do or not to do, or do we mean to consult on the content of what to do? And I can be sure, we all in this House can be sure, that in any consultation there will be a diversity of views of to do or not to do. Ultimately, consultation does not take away the leadership responsibility for us to decide what is right and necessary to do for our own society and our children. So, yes, we consult but, ultimately, we need to make that leadership decision. And that is our responsibility.
Second, on whether we consult on the content, as I have said, in my parliamentary explanation on 4 March, this is not a history lesson and we welcome suggestions from all Members on how we can make the material more targeted, more suitable. But I will be the first one to admit that I think none of us, none of us, not even historians, will be able to come up with what would be considered a fair representation from everyone's perspective – and that is not our goal.
As I have mentioned before, in my media interview, we are not here to adjudicate between the right and wrong of a conflict that has happened for many years, decades, if not centuries. Each and every one of us will judge the material from our own perspective and come to our conclusion to what is fair or not.
If there are constructive suggestions on how we can simplify the material to make it simpler, better, we welcome that. But I would caution against thinking that any one of us can come up with a set of materials that will satisfy everybody. And that is not our goal.
Our goal is to understand that such differences exist and they have an emotive pull on different segments of our population in different directions. And our goal is to ask ourselves how to help our children navigate through these challenges, come to their conclusions, but, most importantly, not lose the peace and harmony that we have in this land. And it is a work that is in progress, a work that is very much in progress.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Leong, last supplementary question.
\tMr Leong Mun Wai: Sir, every time we raise questions that may not be in line with what the Government wants, we are always accused of being divisive. In this case, the Minister for Education just said that we are not being united.
But I think what we are trying to do here, can I ask the Minister, from the response the Minister had given to us on this issue, does it reflect enough transparency and also clarity on the process of how the materials are being decided? We are not particularly against any topics to be raised actually, as long as there is a defined process. What is the expert panel that decide on the topic, for example, and after deciding on the topic, why can the material not be made just transparent? Why must we ask the parents to come to the school to ask for it? All these materials are taught to our children and they ought to be 100% transparent?
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, my first response to Mr Leong's first comment is, \"Please do not twist our words\". I have never accused anyone in this House of being divisive. I said we have different views in our population and our job, as part of the CCE lessons, is to help people understand the differences, manage those differences, respect those differences, do it sensitively and work towards a more united future. That is what I said.
On the second issue to Mr Leong's question, MOE is being more than transparent. We are not only prepared to show the parents the material, we are prepared to explain to the parents how the materials are used, rather than to just give a deck of slides which can be taken out of context. So, if anything, we are going out of our way to assure parents how we conduct the lessons, rather than just giving a set of slides, as has been proven in the previous episode where people took the slides out of context or took the slides selectively and made comments on it. So, I think the correct perspective is that MOE has been more than transparent in allowing our students and children not only to see the materials but also to explain to their parents how the lessons are conducted.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Unveiling of Shared Responsibility Framework for Phishing Scams","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"16 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Prime Minister (a) when will the Shared Responsibility Framework for phishing scams be released; (b) what is the take-up rate of the Money Lock feature offered by our local banks, broken down by ages of bank customers; and (c) whether the MAS will make it mandatory for all banking institutions to participate in this initiative in the near future.
\tThe Minister of State for Culture, Community and Youth and Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Prime Minister): Sir, the Government will take into account suggestions and feedback received from the public consultation on the Shared Responsibility Framework (SRF) that closed on 20 December 2023. We aim to publish our response to the consultation and implement the SRF later this year.
For Money Lock, Money Lock gives customers added protection against digital scams by blocking online access to a portion of their funds. Since the three local banks launched Money Lock in November, more than 78,000 Money Lock accounts have been set up, with over S$6.6 billion of savings set aside in March 2024. Among customers who have used Money Lock, those aged 50 and above make up 44%, those between 30 and 50 years old comprise 41%, and those under 30 years of age form 15%. Local banks will continue to raise awareness and encourage adoption amongst their customer base across all demographic segments.
Other major retail banks will introduce Money Lock by mid-2024 and the vast majority of retail depositors will have the Money Lock option available to them. Hence, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has no plans to make Money Lock mandatory for all banking institutions.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Choo.
\tMr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Mr Speaker, I thank Minister of State Alvin Tan for his response. I have two supplementary questions. The first one is on the consultation. Clearly, MAS has done a very wide consultation. I would like to ask what has been the approaches taken by other jurisdictions with regard to this issue? What has worked and what will be incorporated for Singapore?
The second one would be on Money Lock. When I spoke to many of my residents, they heard about this from me and they said it is a great thing. But this is the first time they are hearing it. So, how can we expand the awareness amongst the people who need it most which are likely to be the seniors, who might not be very Internet or digitally savvy?
\t
\tMr Alvin Tan: Sir, I thank the Member for his questions. The second question is that we are enhancing, MAS together with the banks, to increase awareness and encourage adoption of Money Lock across not just the local banks but, as I said earlier on, by mid-2024 other banks will also incorporate Money Lock. So, there is a concerted effort to raise awareness and to increase adoption of Money Lock.
On the SRF consultation ended on 20 December, we received a number of very good consultation responses. I would like to highlight a couple of interesting points.
The first is that the consultation responses that we received were very thoughtful. Some had asked whether we could expand the SRF to include more scam variants, more entities – that is entirely reasonable and we talked about that in this House.
But there is also an interesting number of responses by members of public who submitted the consultation responses that talked about how do you factor consumers' responsibility and the contributing role in determining the payouts. And in this case, how do you encourage consumer responsibility and also to reduce moral hazards? I think this is a very important point that responsibilities must be shared and I think that is the essence of the SRF.
At the same time, we are studying about how other jurisdictions are deploying their different approaches to scams, including different shared responsibilities. The United Kingdom (UK) is one, Australia is one. If you look at the UK's contingent reimbursement model, the number of Authorised Push Payment (APP) fraud cases had increased by 34% since they implemented the CRM compared to the same period in 2022.
So, I raised this just to share that different approaches have to fit different jurisdictions and what we are doing is taking a very concerted, careful study approach so that we do not have or come into unintended consequences that will exacerbate moral hazard, but bearing in mind that we want to protect consumers in the process as well.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Mr Speaker, I like to thank Minister of State for his answer. Can Minister of State reassure the House that in the development of the SRF, there will also be consideration to what has been debated in Parliament as well as suggestions that have been raised? That is my first question, because a number of Members have raised suggestions over the past few years.
The second question to Minister of State is will the framework also adopt a forward-looking horizon scan of emerging scam modalities? And I say this because two years ago, in this House, I and some others talked about the risk of deepfake scams coming through and today we see around the world the rise of AI voice cloning and deepfake attacks on public figures, replicating public figures and even the cloning of people's voices which is an emerging technology.
Will the SRF consider all this because moral hazard sometimes is not a step off a cliff that people fall off or get cut off by? It can sometimes also exist in a continuum of forced, or unforced errors based on circumstances and what public understanding is of the scams out there.
\t
\tMr Alvin Tan: Sir, I would like to assure Dr Tan Wu Meng that these, in fact, are the types of feedback and suggestions, including by the Member himself and Mr Desmond Choo and other Members of this House to look at the rapidly evolving nature of scam typologies.
We focus the SRF on phishing, but we are well aware that malware scams have also contributed to the number of scams that Singaporeans have encountered. And so, we will factor all of these in and that is why the consultation had also, as I mentioned earlier on, looked at suggestions on whether we could expand the kind of scam variants or the entities in the SRF. But, at the same time, as we combat this rapidly evolving scam nature and different typologies, we need to take a suite of approaches towards combating this.
The SRF is one way in which we will ascribe responsibility using a waterfall approach. And I said earlier on that we are exploring other jurisdictions' different approaches. Not every jurisdiction's approach will fit and we need to study that carefully.
But at the same time, to Member Desmond Choo's point, Money Lock is another feature that we are trying to encourage people to adopt to safeguard a portion of your funds. We also have a very strong consolidated public education and public awareness campaign that is one of the best inoculations against scams. Also, at your device level, some of the banks have ensured that there is no side-loading of apps.
The key thing here is for all of us to take an upstream approach, be aware of scams, look out for scams and also to encourage your friends, family members to be very much wary of this.
So, thank you for Members' contributions to this very important topic. We will factor all of these into consideration when we roll out SRF which is a \"live\" document, and also, put in a significant amount of effort to raise awareness and to prevent scams from happening.
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the day.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Second Minister for Finance (Mr Chee Hong Tat) (for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minster for Finance): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time\".
The Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill 2024 makes amendments to address the issue of wrongful charging of Goods and Services Tax (GST) on fees charged by the Government and statutory bodies, excluding Town Councils, which I will refer to collectively as \"Government fees\".
As Members are aware, Ministry of Finance (MOF) announced on 14 February 2024 that GST charged on 18 Government fees across six agencies would be refunded. This arose from an internal review of regulatory and ancillary fees that charge GST, where we discovered that GST should not have been charged on these 18 fees, as they are regulatory in nature.
Such regulatory fees should not be subject to GST as they are imposed for the purposes of control and regulation. In contrast, fees for provision of services, such as for the rental of public sports facilities, should be subject to GST. This approach ensures parity in tax treatment, where services that can potentially be provided by, or outsourced to the private or non-Government sector, are subject to GST. Some countries which levy GST also adopt similar principles.
We have, thus far, left it to agencies to self-assess and determine what constitutes a regulatory fee, with guidance provided through Government circulars. However, agencies may not always be clear where to draw the line. This is not ideal and can give rise to wrongful charging of GST, as was the case for the 18 fees.
This is why, in response to several Members' earlier Parliamentary Questions on how the Government would take steps to prevent this problem from recurring in future, I explained that MOF will amend the GST Act to simplify and clarify the rules around when GST should be charged on Government fees.
Sir, we will centrally prescribe a list of non-taxable Government fees. Fees in the non-taxable list would include those for applications to confer approval for the conduct of a regulated activity. For example, applications for professional licences and their licence renewal fees will be non-taxable, as they confer applicants the right to practise in the regulated profession. This would also include the 18 regulatory fees that we are refunding. All other fees that are not part of this list will be subject to GST. This is provided for under clause 2 of the Bill.
As part of this change in legislative approach, moving forward, MOF and the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) will henceforth work closely with agencies to assess their fees instead of allowing self-assessment by agencies.
MOF had earlier reviewed all the regulatory and ancillary fees that currently charge GST and announced in February the refund of GST on 18 fees, where GST was wrongly charged. We are now working with agencies on the remaining regulatory and ancillary fees, which do not charge GST. There are in total more than 1,700 such Government fees, which MOF is in the midst of reviewing.
If Parliament approves this Bill, the initial list of non-taxable fees will be published in the Gazette in end-April, when the Bill comes into force. MOF will continue to work with agencies to progressively prescribe their regulatory fees in the non-taxable list and we aim to complete this by September 2024.
All fees that are not prescribed in the non-taxable list, will be subject to GST. There are three categories of such fees.
The first category, which is the vast majority of fees, comprises fees for services provided by the Government, which are clearly subject to GST and are already charged with GST today. There is no change in the treatment of these fees. Examples are fees for the rental of public sports facilities which I mentioned earlier.
The second category comprises fees that are charged with GST today, but where there has been inconsistency in the interpretation of the law by agencies. Let me give an example.
Agencies may charge fees for examinations that an individual must undertake prior to being licensed as a practising professional in a regulated industry. Some agencies have assessed such examination fees as taxable, whereas others have not – arising from differing interpretations of the GST Act. Based on our policy intent, as I have clarified above, such examination fees should attract GST. Only the eventual licence fee that confers applicants with the regulatory approval to practise should not be taxable.
The charging of GST on these fees is in line with our clarified policy intent but is susceptible to legal challenge under the current GST Act. Hence, for agencies that have been charging GST on such fees, we will validate these past GST collections, should they not have been made in accordance with the current GST Act, to ensure consistency between the legal position and the clarified policy intent, which is to subject these fees to GST. Clause 4 of the Bill provides for this.
For these two categories of fees, there is no change to the status quo. These fees are already charged with GST today and will continue to be charged with GST.
The third category are fees that are not charged with GST today, but should be charged with GST moving forward, based on our clarified policy intent. These include examination fees, which some agencies are currently not charging GST. Other examples include inspection fees prior to the licensing and conduct of certain business operations. We estimate that there are more than a hundred such examination and inspection-related fees.
For this third category of fees where GST has to be charged, the Government will help to minimise the impact on the public. We will absorb the GST on these fees in the first instance and impose a freeze on these fees until end-2025. Hence, all affected fees will not increase immediately as a result of the amendments.
MOF has separately asked the agencies involved to review their fees and charges and to consider ways where they can streamline processes or reduce costs. We will work closely with agencies on this, to review if the above-mentioned fees may be reduced or even removed. If there are unavoidable cost increases, then agencies would have to raise their fees. But they will do so only after end-2025 and will ensure that any increases are phased-in gradually, taking into consideration the impact on affected stakeholders.
Mr Speaker, we are proposing a clearer and more robust approach going forward, one that ensures that the correct GST treatment on Government fees by centralising the assessment and making clear the list of non-taxable fees via legislation. This will provide greater clarity and certainty to everyone on the GST treatment for Government fees. Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Ms Usha Chandradas (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, this Bill seeks to treat all taxable supplies made by public agencies as supplies which are made in the course or furtherance of a business. Notwithstanding this, the Minister for Finance has the power to disapply the provisions of the GST Act to certain prescribed taxable supplies made by public agencies.
Under clause 4 of the Bill, or the validation clause, every sum purportedly imposed as GST, before the date of publication of the new Act, on any supply made in connection with the performance of a regulatory function by a public agency, is deemed to be and always to have been, validly imposed. Accordingly, clause 4 goes on to say that no legal proceedings may be instituted on or after 7 March 2024 in respect of the imposition of any of these taxes. The provision is then accompanied by a Schedule, which sets out a list of supplies to which clause 4, the validation clause, does not apply. This list includes details of the 18 different types of supplies which relate to the sums of GST wrongfully collected by Government agencies as announced by MOF on 14 February. So, to recap, these were regulatory fees identified to have been charged with GST wrongly and which needed to be refunded. To summarise, while clause 4 validates past GST charges on regulatory fees, the specific supplies set out in the Schedule are not shielded by the validation clause.
My clarifications relate to this validation clause. Primarily, what is the purpose of the validation clause and why has it been included?
Following the Government's internal review last November, which identified inconsistencies in the application of GST on certain Government fees, why is there a need to deem that all previously collected GST in relation to regulatory fees has, in fact, been validly imposed? The new provision also states that no legal proceedings may be instituted outside of the transactions referred to in the Schedule.
As MOF has itself mentioned, over 5,000 different types of fees are charged by Government agencies and accordingly, is it possible that other erroneous transactions could have taken place in the past? And if so, what recourse will there be for persons affected? If this possibility exists, is it then appropriate to retrospectively validate these errors and limit the availability of legal remedies?
Generally speaking, where a GST-registered person wrongly collects an amount of GST with no reasonable excuse or through negligence, that person would have committed an offence and this is one which is punishable by a fine, or prison term or both. The Comptroller of GST has the power to consider the circumstances of each case. But the fact remains that GST-registered persons are held to a high bar when it comes to the wrongful collection of the tax. While these two kinds of situations are not exactly the same, the main principle that we can take away is that the wrongful or mistaken collection of GST is indeed a very serious matter.
As the Minister has explained previously, each Government agency, like any GST-registered business, has to assess whether its fees should be GST-chargeable whenever a fee is introduced or revised. Agencies did so based on the law, with guidance from MOF and IRAS, but the GST Act is also a complex piece of legislation. Mistakes in its interpretation can happen. This is understandable and it is laudable that the Government has not shied away from making tough decisions about being transparent whenever errors are made. As the Minister has said, the new proposed amendments aim to clarify GST treatment for regulatory and non-regulatory fees moving forward. To be clear, I do believe this a is a good development that will minimise errors in interpretation moving forward. That being said, I would be grateful if the Minister could share the intentions and thought process behind the inclusion of the validation clause at clause 4 of this Bill. Notwithstanding my clarifications, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Minister Chee.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Mr Speaker, I would like to start by thanking Ms Usha Chandradas for her support for the Bill. She asked about the purpose of validation clause and whether there were other erroneous transactions in the past.
Sir, as I explained earlier in my Second Reading speech, we are validating the collection of fees where there is inconsistency in the interpretation of the law by agencies on whether GST should be charged. The charging of GST on these fees is consistent with our policy intent as clarified, but is susceptible to legal challenge under the current GST Act. We are, therefore, validating the past collections of GST on these fees to clarify the policy intent and legal position should they not have been made in accordance with the current GST Act. For the 18 fees where the collection of GST was not consistent with our policy intent, we are refunding the GST collected to affected stakeholders.
As Ms Usha has noted, the GST Act is indeed a complex piece of legislation. Interpretation and application by agencies on the ground can be challenging. This is why we have proposed the amendments in this Bill to ensure consistency in the policy intent, legal basis and agencies' practices relating to collections of GST on Government fees.
Mr Speaker: Any other clarifications for the Minister?
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Chee Hong Tat]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and I will take the Chair at 2.05 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 1.49 pm until 2.05 pm.
Sitting resumed at 2.05 pm.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Second Minister for Home Affairs (Mrs Josephine Teo): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a second time.\"
This Bill introduces three sets of amendments: the first strengthens our levers against scammers; the second enhances the efficacy of Home Team operations; and the third facilitates and safeguards Yellow Ribbon Singapore's (YRSG) operations. I will elaborate on each in turn.
Sir, scams remain a problem around the world. Singaporeans are not spared. There were over 46,000 cases in 2023, a nearly 50% increase from 2022. Scam losses fell slightly but are still high. At the Global Fraud Summit which I attended last month, other countries shared that they were facing similar challenges. Scams have also skyrocketed in their jurisdictions.
We have implemented multiple measures to combat scams. For example, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) has been working with telecommunication companies to block all incoming calls from overseas that spoof local numbers. As a result, the volume of such calls attempted has dropped. In 2022, there were approximately 970 million of such attempts. In 2023, there were 18 million attempts, a far smaller number but all were blocked.
In 2023, IMDA introduced the SMS Sender ID Registry, which requires organisations to register the alphanumeric Sender IDs which they want to use in SMS communications with their customers. SMSes using non-registered Sender IDs will be marked as “Likely-SCAM”.
In the three months after its implementation, scams due to SMSes fell by 70%. As a result, phishing, which was the main type of scam perpetrated through SMSes, has claimed fewer victims. Amounts lost to phishing scams have also fallen.
With these measures in place, scammers have quickly changed their tactics and pivoted to using local SIM cards to reach prospective victims. People who receive scam calls and SMSes from locally registered numbers may think they are legitimate and fall prey. In 2023, over 23,000 local mobile lines were involved in scams and other cybercrimes. This is four times the number in 2021. In 2023, about $400 million were lost from scam and cybercrime cases involving local mobile lines. This is three times the amount lost in 2021.
Local numbers have also been used by scammers to set up WhatsApp and Telegram accounts to target victims or receive their monies via PayNow. This comes on top of their being used for other crimes, such as unlicensed moneylending.
To enforce against scammers who abuse local SIM cards, the Police has worked with foreign counterparts as these scammers are mainly based overseas. In February 2023, the Singapore Police Force (SPF) worked with the Royal Malaysia Police to conduct simultaneous raids at three apartment complexes in Johor. They arrested 12 Malaysians for their involvement in using six prepaid Singapore SIM cards to perpetrate fake friend calls. These were scams targeting Singaporeans. The syndicate is believed to have been involved in more than 360 reports, with more than $1.3 million of losses.
But enforcement after the fact is scant comfort for the victims. We want to go upstream, to prevent the scam from happening in the first place, by strengthening deterrence and accountability in the use of local SIM cards. Hence, clause 3 of this Bill introduces new offences to target three groups of people who misuse local SIM cards to facilitate scams.
First, irresponsible subscribers. These are people who give away their local SIM cards or provide their particulars to others to be used to sign up for local SIM cards. Often, they do so to earn a quick buck. Based on a sampling study, close to 80% of local SIM cards misused for crime were registered with another person's particulars.
Every SIM card in the hands of a scammer is a weapon. Armed with even just one SIM card, a scammer can do a great deal of harm. In a 2021 case, a single local mobile line was linked to 48 job scam reports, with losses amounting to approximately $1 million.
In most of the cases, the Police have faced difficulties in taking these irresponsible subscribers to task. Current laws put the onus on the Police to prove that the subscriber knowingly gave away their local SIM cards for unlawful purposes. This is hard to prove. Irresponsible subscribers can easily claim that they were unaware of the consequences of their actions.
For example, in 2023, a subscriber signed up for 11 postpaid SIM cards and sold them to a friend and claimed that his friend said the mobile lines were needed to create accounts on cryptocurrency platforms. Six out of the 11 mobile lines were later found to have been used in scam cases. When interviewed, the subscriber claimed that he did not know that the mobile lines would be used for unlawful purposes. As there was no evidence to suggest otherwise, the Police could not take any action against him.
The Bill will introduce new offences in sections 37B and 37C of the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act, or abbreviated as MOA, targeting irresponsible subscribers. It will be an offence for a person to hand over local SIM cards registered with his own particulars to another person; or allow his own particulars to be used to sign up for a local SIM card by another person. A person will be liable, if he did so, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe, that the local SIM card would be used for unlawful purposes.
To address the challenge that the Police face today in proving knowledge or criminal intent, an irresponsible subscriber will be deemed liable in the following scenarios: one, the irresponsible subscriber gave away the local SIM card for any gain; two, he did not take reasonable steps to find out the identity and physical location of the recipient of the local SIM card; or three, he did not take reasonable steps to find out the recipient's purpose for obtaining the local SIM card.
These scenarios are based on actual cases. With these new laws, a person in these scenarios will no longer be able to simply claim ignorance as a defence. The law puts the onus on the person to prove that he was unaware.
To be clear, Sir, it is not our intent to criminalise people who give away their local SIM cards for legitimate purposes. For example, some people register SIM cards in their names for family members' use, including elderly parents and children. It is also not our intent to penalise people who were genuinely tricked into giving up their credentials, which were subsequently used to register for local SIM cards.
The second group we are targeting are middlemen involved in procuring or providing local SIM cards to scam syndicates. The Police have caught people transferring or possessing local SIM cards not registered with their own particulars. In most of the instances, they were doing so without legitimate reason. Similar to irresponsible subscribers, the Police have faced difficulties in prosecuting such middlemen, as it is difficult to prove that they had intended to abet an offence.
In one case, the Police identified a middleman who collected fraudulently registered local SIM cards from an accomplice and then sent the SIM cards to scammers in Malaysia. At the point of arrest, the middleman was found to be in possession of 290 prepaid SIM cards that were fraudulently registered. In total, the middleman was found to have purchased over 1,000 prepaid SIM cards that were fraudulently registered, between 2010 and 2021. Although the middleman was initially charged in Court, he was eventually given a discharge amounting to an acquittal, due to evidential difficulties.
The Bill introduces offences in sections 39D and 39F under the MOA to target middlemen. They would be liable for either: first, receiving or possessing local SIM cards, with intent to use or supply them for unlawful purposes; second, supplying local SIM cards, knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that they would be used for unlawful purposes. These provisions will not only cover local SIM cards registered with other persons' particulars, but will also cover unregistered local SIM cards, as these can easily be activated by scammers using stolen credentials.
To address the evidentiary challenge that Police face today, a person who receives, supplies or possesses such local SIM cards may be deemed liable, without the Prosecution having to prove knowledge or criminal intent, if the local SIM cards were used for crime; or 11 or more local SIM cards were found in the middleman's possession.
Specifically for dealing with local SIM cards registered with other persons' particulars, a person may be deemed liable in three scenarios: one, he received or supplied the local SIM card for any gain; two, he did not take reasonable steps to find out the identity and physical location of the recipient of the local SIM card; three, he did not take reasonable steps to find out the recipient's purpose for obtaining the local SIM card.
The Bill also introduces a new section 39E in the MOA to deal with people who buy, sell or rent a local SIM card registered with another person's particulars. As this involves an exchange of money, it is more serious than simply receiving or supplying local SIM cards.
There is no reason why someone other than a contracted retailer should be trading local SIM cards registered in another person's particulars, in exchange for money or other benefits. As such, the provision is drafted such that the Prosecution would not need to prove criminal intent in making out an offence.
It is not our intent to catch those who receive, supply or possess local SIM cards for lawful purposes. For instance, employers holding on to SIM cards intended for their employees. So, if they make an explanation, then this would be taken into consideration.
The third group of people we are targeting is errant retailers. IMDA requires mobile service providers to implement measures to prevent fraudulent registrations. The mobile service providers may appoint third-party retailers to sell SIM cards and perform registrations, and subject these retailers to similar requirements by way of contractual obligations.
For example, retailers are required to verify the identity of subscribers by visually checking the subscribers against their original IDs. They are also required to scan subscribers' IDs instead of manually keying in the subscribers' personal particulars. Mobile service providers may be in breach of the regulatory obligations, if they or their appointed retailers had lapses in implementing these requirements.
The vast majority of retailers adhere to IMDA’s requirements. However, a number have used stolen or false credentials to register local SIM cards, which they then sell to scammers. In a sampling study of around 1,400 local SIM cards used in scams in the second half of 2023, we found that about 65% of such SIM cards were sold by just nine retailers. In a recent case, the Police arrested four handphone retailers who had used the particulars of unsuspecting subscribers to register post-paid SIM cards and then sold these SIM cards to customers, likely scammers, who wanted to conceal their identity.
Such errant retailers should be held accountable. Not only do they tarnish the reputation of their peers, their actions cause many victims to suffer losses.
However, there is no offence that specifically deals with these retailers. Under today’s regime, these retailers might simply lose their contracts with the mobile service provider. Stronger deterrence is needed if we are to prevent such retailers from helping scammers easily acquire fraudulently registered SIM cards.
As such, the Bill introduces a new section 39G to target errant retailers. The new section makes it a criminal offence to facilitate fraudulent registrations knowing or having reasonable grounds to believe that the local SIM card would be used for unlawful purposes. Errant retailers may also be liable if the local SIM card is proven to have subsequently been used for unlawful purposes.
The new criminal offence will complement our current regulatory levers and allow heavier punishments to be imposed on errant retailers. This includes imprisonment sentences for the employees who were involved in the fraudulent registrations. The vast majority of law-abiding retailers need not be concerned. The offence does not affect them.
Let me explain the other aspects of the new offences.
The penalties for the new SIM card offences will be pegged to those for the misuse of Singpass credentials under the Computer Misuse Act. The offences for irresponsible registrants will carry a fine of up to $10,000 or imprisonment of up to three years, or both. The offences of receiving, supplying and possessing local SIM cards and facilitating fraudulent registrations of local SIM cards, will carry a fine of up to $10,000 or imprisonment of up to three years, or both, for a first offence. For a second or subsequent offence, the penalty will be a fine of up to $20,000 or imprisonment of up to five years, or both.
All the new offences will also apply to corporations and unincorporated associations, such as partnerships and societies. However, as such entities cannot be subject to imprisonment, the maximum fines for these entities will be twice the amount for individuals. Clause 4 of the Bill introduces standard provisions for the attribution of liability for MOA offences committed by entities.
The Bill also introduces a new section 39H to the MOA to allow the new SIM card offences to apply extraterritorially, as long as there is a proven link to harm in Singapore. This is necessary, as most scam syndicates operate from overseas. The new section 39I will provide for all local SIM card offences to be arrestable.
Next, the Bill amends the MOA to allow the transmission of false messages for certain legitimate purposes, such as to facilitate the conduct of simulated phishing exercises to enhance awareness and vigilance against scams.
Currently, section 14D of the MOA – which can be traced back to the Telecommunications Act 1965 – criminalises the transmission of a message which the person knows is false or fabricated. Because of how the provision was drafted, any transmission of a false or fabricated message could be caught, even if the transmission was for legitimate purposes, like the prevention of crime.
The most pertinent example today would be simulated phishing exercises.
Today, many organisations conduct simulated phishing exercises. This is done to sensitise the staff to phishing attacks, thereby reducing the risk that they and consequently the organisation, fall victim to scams, cybercrimes and malicious cyber activities.
With the current provision, however, the conduct of such exercises could be considered an offence. Clause 2 of the Bill amends section 14D to introduce a defence for the transmission of false messages for legitimate purposes related to public order, public safety or national security; or the prevention, investigation or prosecution of offences. This would give organisations assurance that they would not be committing an offence if they transmit false messages for legitimate purposes, such as simulated phishing exercises.
Sir, I will now speak about the amendments to enhance the operational efficacy of the Home Team Departments.
The first group of the amendments will clarify powers of apprehension, under the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act (MHCTA). Let me begin by reiterating the Government's commitment to mental health.
Mental health and well-being is a key priority in our national agenda and the Government is fully committed to doing more to improve mental health and well-being. During the Motion on Advancing Mental Health in February this year, Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong highlighted several key moves the Government will be making, including increasing the number of public sector psychiatrists and psychologists, introducing mental health services to all polyclinics and more general practitioner (GP) clinics, and training frontline personnel and volunteers to help people struggling with mental health.
The importance of treating people with mental health conditions with respect and empathy is also not lost on our ground officers, many of whom would be familiar with their own friends or family, who may likewise struggle with mental health. This has always been the case since the existing provisions in the MHCTA were enacted in 2008, we have also seen largely effective outcomes when Police interventions were requested.
To be clear, the current amendments do not directly relate to how such cases are treated in our medical system nor does it relate to the wider community acceptance for people with mental health conditions. The amendments we are dealing with today relate strictly to how Police can be most helpful when they are called to assist in cases when a person may harm themselves or others around them; and Police have reason to believe that the better cause of action is apprehension rather than arrest.
Let me unpack for Members how the situation typically unfolds.
The Police are often called to respond to incidents involving persons who may pose a danger to themselves or to others. This may include cases of criminal intimidation where threats of harm are made or cases of violent behaviour in a public place. The duty of the police officers is to prevent the danger from materialising. Where criminal offences are made out, Police may make an arrest.
However, where such danger is reasonably suspected to be attributable to a mental disorder and it might be more appropriate to bring such persons to a medical practitioner than to a police lock-up, the Police can apprehend them under section 7 of MHCTA. This is already provided for by law since 2008. After apprehension, as opposed to arrest, the Police will bring the person to a medical practitioner and not to a lock-up.
To be clear, powers of apprehension under section 7 cannot be applied just because a person is suffering from mental health conditions, if the person does not pose a danger to themselves or others. The person must pose a danger to themselves or others. Therefore, it is completely mistaken to think of the existing section 7 as a measure to address mental health conditions when, in fact, it deals simply with situations of danger.
In other words, the Police do not get involved in cases of persons with mental health conditions unless they pose a danger to themselves or someone else. The Police will not do so and, in fact, cannot do so even with the amendments to the MHCTA. Such persons will be treated and managed directly by medical practitioners.
However, such persons may pose a danger to themselves, for example, threatening to commit suicide; or to others, for example, conducting themselves in a manner which may hurt their family or members of the public nearby. In these circumstances, the public would expect and indeed want the Police to intervene, before anyone gets hurt.
In a real case, a 73-year-old man was found to be in possession of an ice pick and knife at a Police station. When asked why he had those items, he said foreign law enforcement agencies were disturbing his sleep and he would use the ice pick and knife in a bid to tell them to leave him alone. Police apprehended him under the MHCTA and brought him to the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) for medical treatment.
However, in a recent judgment, the High Court made a determination that for apprehensions under the MHCTA, the danger presented had to be imminent and it had to be in a matter of hours rather than days. Because of the High Court's determination, for cases where the time frame of the danger presented is unspecified or is not imminent, the Police do not have the option of apprehending the person and bringing him for medical treatment.
Police officers confronted with these situations are left with two options, either not take any action and risk people getting hurt or even killed or make an arrest under criminal laws and put the person through the criminal process. The first option is not responsible – the public expects Police to keep Singaporeans safe. The second option is not ideal – criminal arrest is not what the person who may have mental health conditions needs.
Clause 13 therefore amends the MHCTA to allow the Police to apprehend the person in such situations to take them for medical treatment.
The same High Court judgment determined that apprehensions are distinct from arrests under the Criminal Procedure Code. This means that Police officers do not have certain powers associated with arrest, which are essential when making apprehensions. In particular, the High Court determined that the Police do not have powers of search and seizure to ensure that the person is not hiding dangerous weapons or items.
This presents a problem. Police would be expected to hand over the person to the staff of the medical facility only after ensuring that he is not in possession of weapons. Clause 14 therefore amends the Police Force Act to make clear that relevant powers, such as those of search and seizure, are available to the Police when making apprehensions, whether under the MHCTA or any other Acts. This does not mean that the person will be needlessly roughed up. On the contrary, having assessed that the person may be suffering from mental health conditions, Police offices are minded to carry out search and seizure with due care and respect.
Sir, I want to reassure Members that the Government is mindful of the social stigma and challenges that persons with mental health conditions face. Section 7 of the MHCTA is not meant to place additional burdens on such persons or their families. Instead, our goals are to prevent danger from materialising and enable persons with mental health issues to access medical care in a timely manner.
I will now move on to the next group of amendments. Members know that the demands on the Home Team are growing, including the Police. Some have spoken about this at the recent Committee of Supply debate and I thank them for their support and appreciation of the hard work Home Team officers do for the safety and security of Singaporeans.
The following amendment relates to Police's obligations when non-arrestable offences are reported.
Clause 6 of the Bill amends the Criminal Procedure Code to enable the Police to not take further action for non-arrestable offences in two circumstances – one, if the case is not of a serious nature, or two, if there are insufficient grounds for proceeding with the matter.
Similar provisions are already present for arrestable offences. For example, where Police receive a report of a traffic accident with no injuries, they are empowered to not take further action, even though arrestable offences, such as dangerous or careless driving may be disclosed. However, the same exceptions are currently not available for non-arrestable offences.
Today, when a non-arrestable offence is reported, the Police must either investigate the case, refer the informant to a magistrate, or refer the case to a mediator of a Community Mediation Centre. This legal obligation applies even if the Police have reason to believe that the case is not of a serious nature, or there are insufficient grounds for proceeding with the matter. This obligation results in poor use of public resources.
This amendment therefore seeks to align the Police's obligations whether for offences that are arrestable or non-arrestable. This will provide Police more operational flexibility to decide whether a Police report is deserving of action.
Another group of amendments enhances the Home Team's operations and reduces operational risks.
Clause 5 and clauses 7 to 12 allow officers from the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB), Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) and Gambling Regulatory Authority (GRA) to grant bail or personal bond for arrested persons. Today, these persons have to be brought to a Police officer to be released on bail or personal bond.
The amendments improve efficiency, as these arrested persons would no longer need to be brought to a Police lock-up or to a Police officer for granting of bail or personal bond.
The proposed amendments also allow persons arrested under the National Registration Act and the Passports Act to be detained in immigration depots, such as ICA Building, Tuas Checkpoint and Woodlands Checkpoint, instead of bringing them to Police stations. This reduces operational risks in the transport of these arrested persons.
I will now speak on the third and last set of amendments, which seeks to enhance and safeguard YRSG's operations.
Clause 15 of the Bill includes two amendments to the Singapore Corporation of Rehabilitative Enterprises Act, or the SCORE Act for short. The first amendment is to provide YRSG with greater flexibility on staff administration and disciplinary matters. Currently, YRSG's internal disciplinary framework is stipulated in subsidiary legislation. This means YRSG needs to enact changes in the subsidiary legislation in order to change its internal disciplinary framework. This is unnecessary and inconsistent with the practices of most Statutory Boards.
The Bill amends the SCORE Act to remove the need for subsidiary legislation to be made regarding administrative staff matters. Consequently, the two existing pieces of subsidiary legislation on staff disciplinary matters will be revoked.
The second amendment is to safeguard Yellow Ribbon symbols and representations. They include YRSG's corporate logo and symbols of initiatives related to YRSG's mission, such as the Yellow Ribbon Project and Yellow Ribbon Fund logos. These logos are registered trademarks belonging to YRSG. They are used in YRSG's campaigns and programmes to galvanise society to support the reintegration of ex-offenders.
However, there have been instances where these symbols were misused for ill intent. For example, we had received feedback from members of the public that they were approached at hawker centres by individuals selling merchandise, or individuals going door-to-door asking for donations and were shown documents with the Yellow Ribbon logo. In these instances, the symbols were used for the individual's own benefit, under the guise of supporting ex-offenders.
To safeguard the symbols and ensure that they are not misused, the Bill amends the SCORE Act, to give YRSG the exclusive right to the use of YRSG's symbols and symbols of initiatives related to YRSG's mission. Those who misuse these symbols will be liable for prosecution and could face a fine of up to $10,000 or imprisonment of up to six months, or both. In the case of a continuing offence, the offender could be further fined up to $250 for every day or part of a day during which the offence continues after conviction. This is consistent with existing provisions governing the use of the symbols of other Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Statutory Boards.
Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill will strengthen our anti-scam efforts. The new SIM card offences will help disrupt the operations of criminal syndicates.
The Bill will also allow us to better protect the public, as well as enable our Home Team officers to carry out their duties more effectively and efficiently. Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Mr Speaker, this Bill is aimed at bolstering law enforcement efforts in Singapore. It addresses two critical areas: combating scams and enhancing Home Team operations. I will speak on them in turn.
First, on combating scams. Scams have surged globally with technological advancements and Singapore is no exception. From 2022 to 2023, there was a 46.8% increase in scam cases. Victims lost more than S$600 million. This is despite having measures, such as SMS Sender ID Registry and blocking overseas scam calls, amongst other measures.
The Bill targets three key groups involved in facilitating scams: those irresponsibly registering local SIM cards or Group A; those possessing or supplying SIM cards or Group B; and retailers facilitating fraudulent SIM card registration or Group C.
For Group A, can the Ministry clarify why 10 SIM cards is used as a threshold? For Group C, authorisation is an essential condition. How can the Ministry simplify and standardise the authorisation processes for companies to implement this effectively?
The proposed penalties for offenders include fines of up to $10,000 and/or imprisonment, with harsher penalties for repeat offenders. Because the potential losses caused to victims are high, we should consider minimum fines and jail terms for individual offenders and fines tied to a percentage of annual revenue for retailers.
Effective strategies are crucial to detect and prosecute such sales of SIM cards. Many of them operate on platforms like Telegram or Carousell. How would the Ministry work with the platform owners to stem out such activities?
Next, on the enhancements to support our Home Team operations. The proposed amendments empower law enforcement agencies, particularly the Police Force, in handling mental health-related incidents. It seeks to set clear thresholds for apprehension, ensuring effectiveness and clarity.
Mental health experts, rightfully, are concerned that the changes could lead to wrongful apprehensions and deepen stigma of mental health patients. Currently, Police can only apprehend mentally disordered individuals if they pose \"imminent\" danger.
The proposed amendments would allow apprehension based on a \"reasonable belief\" of potential harm. What are the measures put in place to minimise hasty assessment by untrained officers that increase the chances wrongful apprehension? In addition, can the Ministry also clarify what are the scenarios constituting what is \"reasonably\" in determining when a Police officer may make such arrest or apprehension. I propose that the Ministry also partner the mental health community to train and prepare our officers for this new change in the law.
At the same time, we must appreciate the difficulties in making the right operational decisions. It is not uncommon for Police officers to encounter situations on the ground where the threat of violence can escalate very quickly. There are many variables that can cause such escalation. Such situations can happen during patrols. They can also happen when Police officers are called down to a scene. There can be very little time from the escalation to harm actually being caused.
Our officers must be trusted and empowered to protect not only the subject but also innocent bystanders. They must also have the weight of the law behind them to discharge their duties and not have to second-guess themselves. In fact, second-guessing in such situations can be highly dangerous. In the years that I served in the Singapore Police Force, I have witnessed a few of such situations that warrant decisive actions. Our officers' deep training allows them to execute their roles decisively even while they put themselves harm's way. These very actions make the difference between minimising harm and allowing a situation to go very wrong. Thus, we must provide our officers with every available tool to protect life and property.
Thus, I support the enhancements in the Bill. At the same time, I note that it is crucial to ensure sensitive and safe apprehension procedures that are updated regularly. Partnership with the mental healthcare sector to develop standardised procedures and providing additional training and resources for law enforcement officers is essential.
Lastly, regarding apprehension in attempted suicide cases, individuals are obligated to aid Police officers. Can the Ministry clarify that refusal to aid the officer, while regrettable is not an offence?
In conclusion, I support the Bill as a crucial step in fortifying Singapore's security and resilience. The amendments targeting scams offer promising solutions which can reduce the number of scam-related incidents. Additionally, sensitive treatment and effective handling of mentally disordered individuals by law enforcement agencies with clear parameters informed and supported by the mental health community will be paramount. Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms He Ting Ru.
Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, I will focus my speech today on concerns that I have on Part 3 of the Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill, which deal with the apprehension of persons.
Clause 13 of the Bill amends section 7 of the Mental Health Care and Treatment Act 2008, or MHCTA, by reducing the threshold requirement for a police or special police officer to exercise the power to apprehend a person. This amendment supersedes the interpretation of danger by the General Division of the High Court in Mah Kiat Seng vs Attorney-General and Others. In that case, the Court held at paragraph 48 that the use of the word \"danger\" implied a degree of imminence, that is, that without the Police officer's intervention, such behaviour is likely to occur within a short time, which the Judge stated that he would consider to be a matter of hours rather than days. In addition, the Court clarified that there must be a reasonably imminent risk of physical harm to the person apprehended or others.
The new amendment proposed in this Bill supersedes the High Court's interpretation by empowering Police and special police officers to apprehend a person, P, if they believe that P may endanger peace or any other person's life or personal safety. It would also introduce a new sub-clause (2), subsection (aa), which provides that it is sufficient that the danger to life or personal safety is only reasonably likely to occur and need not be imminent and actual harm is not required.
While I appreciate that the Minister for Home Affairs had previously stated in this House that law should not inadvertently result in defensive policing, I believe that it is important to make it clear that the amendments reducing the threshold to apprehend a person is subject to safeguards and for the public to know and understand what those safeguards are.
As our law currently stands, the Police's general power of arrest is subject to various safeguards under the Criminal Procedure Code. The distinction between arrestable and non-arrestable offences make clear the situations where a police officer may arrest someone without a warrant. For example, while the police may arrest without a warrant someone on suspicion that they have caused or may voluntarily cause grievous hurt to another person, the police cannot arrest without a warrant in a situation where the offence is that of voluntarily causing hurt.
With the proposed amendments, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister of my understanding that these changes are in response to the High Court's ruling in Mah. Additionally and specifically, can the Minister detail what specific challenges our law enforcement officers have had while carrying out their policing duties with suspects who are persons suffering from mental health crises or illnesses that warrant these amendments?
I have concerns that the threshold being lowered has to be very carefully weighed up against the expressed aims of Singaporean society to do more to properly support and address mental health challenges facing some of our fellow Singaporeans, especially when law enforcement officers do not necessarily have the training and resources to fully understand the challenging and complex issues surrounding mental health conditions.
I have five main points and clarifications about the new threshold.
First, I have a concern that the lowering of the threshold from the Court's clarification of a reasonably imminent risk being lowered to a reasonable likelihood that danger to life or personal safety may occur under the MHCTA would lead to different standards applying to those who may be living with mental health conditions or illness. In fact, according to the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD Committee), such a distinction is discriminatory.
In September 2015, in Guidelines on the Right to Liberty and Security of Persons with Disabilities issued by the CRPD Committee, legislations like the MHCTA, which allow the detention of persons on the ground of their actual or perceived impairment on the basis that they are deemed dangerous to themselves or to others, are discriminatory in nature and amount to arbitrary deprivation of liberty.
Can the Minister clarify if the Government has considered its obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which the Government ratified in 2013, in tabling this amendment? If so, how do the proposed amendments square with our CRPD commitments?
In October 2022, the CRPD Committee issued its concluding observations for its first periodic review of Singapore's record on disability rights. At paragraph 30A of the concluding observations in respect of Article 14 of the CRPD on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to Liberty, the CRPD Committee urged Singapore to repeal all legislative provisions allowing for the involuntary deprivation of liberty of persons with intellectual disabilities and persons with psychosocial disabilities on the grounds of their impairment or their perceived dangerousness to themselves or others.
As noted above, this refers specifically to the MHCTA.
I note that the Minister for Health had stated in a response to a Parliamentary Question (PQ) in 2021 that the MHCTA is already in compliance with the requirements of Article 14 of the CRPD. Can the Government confirm if this position on the MHCTA remains the same, notwithstanding the CRPD Committee's recommendation for this House to reform this law? If not, will the Government consider the necessary steps to be taken to ensure that the MHCTA complies with our obligations under the CRPD?
Second, the High Court Judge in Mah also noted that he considered that a time frame for imminence under the new old threshold would be a matter of hours rather than days. With the introduction of the new threshold of reasonable risk to safety, can the Minister confirm if there would be any time frames that are applied to the assessment of whether to detain? If so, what are they?
Third, paragraph 23 of MHA's press release on this Bill gives an example of a situation where police records show that the person making the threat has a history of mental disorder. Would the Minister be able to confirm that all persons suspected to be suffering from mental crises and falling under this new threshold would be subject to a background check for a history of mental disorder? However, it is unclear to me also what the records refer to and what kind of history would be applicable here. If there is no history, does this mean that no intervention is possible?
Fourth, given the concerns above, what safeguards, guidelines or training and support would police officers be given in applying the new threshold to situations on the ground, especially after they have made a decision to detain the suspect? After all, we are drawing a delicate balance between public safety on the one hand and the proper treatment and approach to those living with mental illness and conditions.
In an article published in JOM last week, Chan Lee Shan, drawing on her own experiences of being arrested while suffering from her first and only episode of psychosis, raised concerns about a person living with mental illness and crises ending up being traumatised by the experience, particularly if they are then treated no differently from a conventional arrest and held in police cells while checks are being made and next steps are being decided as to what would be the most appropriate step for treatment, release or otherwise.
Finally, on the new thresholds, what options are available to those who believe that they were erroneously detained, subject to what they believe to be excessive force or trauma? These are not theoretical concerns, as after all, the Mah case was one where the officer was found to have made certain statements which were later withdrawn after being contradicted by body-worn camera footage and the judge also expressed concerns about the discrepancies between the medical report produced by the examining doctor and the evidence later submitted.
The safeguards and guidelines I asked about are thus extremely important if an occasion arises where the conduct of the arrest or apprehension and subsequent procedures are problematic.
Taking a step back to look at a bigger picture and in light of the Second Minister's acknowledgement of Deputy Prime Minister's declaration to this House that mental health is a key national priority, in February 2024 and the large number of Members who spoke to express their concern and even alarm over the situation facing us, I am worried about the amendments to the MHTCTA unnecessarily perpetuating stigma against persons living with mental health conditions.
This entrenchment of discrimination against those living with mental health conditions was also a concern that was highlighted in an op-ed published in The Straits Times last week. The authors pointed out quite rightly that this is a major concern and identified the balance between three main prongs. First, upholding public safety; second, respect for the dignity of the person in crisis; and third, the proportionate use of force. For sure, this is a tricky balance to get right and I hope that my concerns raised above can help us better appreciate the various segments contained of each of these prongs when discussing whether these amendments help or hinder our stated aims to reduce and ultimately eliminate stigma for those living with mental illness or mental health conditions.
A related point then is also whether the police are best placed to respond to persons experiencing mental health crises. In recent years, many countries have taken steps to implement alternative strategies to provide support and de-escalate the situation. For example, in 2017, Sweden introduced a psychiatric emergency response team which would send an ambulance comprising two mental health nurses and one paramedic to attend to persons experiencing a mental health crisis. Another approach is the United Kingdom (UK) Street triage model, a partnership scheme between the police and approved mental health professionals to provide advice and support for people experiencing mental health crises.
We have taken encouraging steps in this direction here in Singapore. In March 2021, IMH partnered SPF to pilot the Crisis Response Team, a mental health crisis response team in Singapore dedicated to providing timely care and support to persons with suicidal tendencies in the community.
A 2023 journal article published in European Psychiatry found that CRT intervention could mitigate suicide risk and pressure on the mental health system, that is, reduce unnecessary emergency room visits and hospital admissions, create greater mental health awareness and facilitate individuals' connection to mental health care services, that is, in hospitals or the community.
Given the positive impact of the CRT, has the Government considered expanding the programme to respond not only to cases involving the risk of suicide but also persons experiencing mental health crises more generally? Such a move can also help reduce the strain on our police.
In response to a PQ in March 2022, the Minister for Home Affairs had stated that the Police and other investigative agencies' primary task is to deter crime, investigate and deal with crime, and they are not deeply trained in mental health issues. We have to balance our current police and public safety approach to persons experiencing mental health crises and discuss how we may adopt a more person-centric approach that focuses on providing care and support in these situations.
I thus conclude my speech with two suggestions. First, I hope that more work will be done across the Government to educate and help more citizens better understand the complex issues that lie behind the occasional intersection between public law enforcement and those experiencing mental health crises.
For this, the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) launched the Beyond the Label Collective in 2022. At the launch of the Collective, former President Halimah Yaacob noted in her speech that we should not erroneously associate criminality or violence with mental health conditions, as this is rarely the case. We therefore need more public education campaigns to help Singaporeans better appreciate the difficulties involved in achieving the tricky balance between public safety and the needs and dignity of those living with mental health conditions, which may end up being infringed when they are unable to get appropriate support and treatment that is needed to get them and their loved ones when they may be experiencing a mental health crisis.
Second, interested members of the public can be trained as community first responders to support persons experiencing mental health crises. Currently, the Community Life-Saving Programme, offered jointly by the People's Association and MHA, offers the standard First Aid plus AED Awareness Course, SFAA and the CPR AED certification. This can be expanded to include the Singapore Emergency Responder Academy's First Aid and Mental Health Training Programme. Volunteers with the People's Association Community Emergency Response Team should also attend such training so that they are able to respond to persons experiencing mental health crises. With their knowledge, these trained volunteers can also serve as ambassadors to educate their communities and persons living with mental health conditions.
Mr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I will focus on two topics: first, on local SIM card misuse; and second, on the enhancement of police officers' powers in apprehending people who show signs of a mental disorder and pose a safety risk to themselves or others.
First, local SIM card misuse has seen an exponential surge in recent years. The statistics are alarming. The number of local mobile lines implicated in scams and other cybercrimes has quadrupled in just two years. This worrying trend is reflected in the financial losses as well, with victims losing nearly triple the amount in 2023 – a staggering $384 million compared to $137 million in 2021.
The nature of these scams has also evolved, making them more insidious. In the past, a simple rule of thumb of ignoring unexpected calls with foreign numbers sufficed as a cautionary measure. However, criminals have now shifted tactics, exploiting local phone numbers to lure unsuspecting victims. This shift preys on the inherent trust we place on local calls, especially for our vulnerable elderly population. Our seniors are more likely to answer local calls, creating a prime opportunity for scammers to exploit their trust. The consequences can be devastating when victims fall prey to such deception.
While I commend the Government's initiative to tighten regulations and combat this issue, I believe that there are several key clarifications that need to be addressed.
First, Mr Speaker, Sir, we must acknowledge the vulnerability of certain individuals. These very people can become unwitting accomplices, having their SIM cards misused either by mistake or through exploitation. They are, in essence, both victims and potential targets. I am glad that those who have legitimate reasons or were genuinely tricked into giving up their particulars would not be held liable. Nevertheless, I also understand that this could complicate enforcement and proving intent is always difficult. Hence, we must try to tackle the problem at its roots.
How will this Bill target family members, relatives, caregivers and persons who exploit their close contact with vulnerable elderly, in misusing their identity to register SIM cards? Are there plans to educate and warn the elderly against the misuse of their identity in SIM card registration? Likewise, how does this Bill address situations where multiple SIM cards have been misused by family members, but the elderly person feigns or alleges ignorance? Will there be penalties for the elderly and subsequently, the main perpetrator?
Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, we should create a system that empowers retailers to whistle blow conveniently and anonymously. The role of retailers in combating this issue cannot be overstated. Retailers are on the front lines. Empowering them to act as a safeguard is critical. But expecting them to reject every suspected case of bulk SIM card purchases for malicious purposes may not be practical. Customer service personnel may face pressure from their superiors or irate customers if a purchase is mistakenly flagged.
Therefore, exploring alternative avenues for retailers to report suspicious activities is essential. The Government should develop an avenue that allows for convenient and anonymous whistle blowing. This would alleviate the burden of direct confrontation for customer service personnel and will encourage more proactive reporting.
Furthermore, exploring incentives for such reporting is worth considering. Recognising retailers who actively participate in combating SIM card misuse could be highly effective. For example, a public recognition program that designates them as \"Trusted SIM Retailers\" would not only incentivise vigilance, but also boost their reputation among customers seeking secure and responsible service providers. It may also deter possible perpetrators from approaching such retailers. This approach fosters collaboration and promotes ethical practices within the retail sector.
Next, Mr Speaker, Sir, I will move on to address the amendments relating to the apprehension of mentally disordered persons. In particular, the lowering of the threshold before a mentally disordered individual may be apprehended to one of reasonable suspicion, when an act of possible harm is reasonably likely to occur and not only when it is imminent and mental disorder is suspected.
I support the move to empower Police officers to apprehend the said individuals. The harm they may cause to themselves or others around them is irreparable. An obvious example is if they end up successfully committing suicide or homicide. The move is a pre-emptive approach that protects both the person, as well as those around them.
At the outset, we must always remember that mental illness is not a crime. Mental illness expressed as anti-social behaviour in and of itself may not be life-threatening. Even among the mentally ill, there is a wide spectrum of behaviours. It is thus imperative that our Police officers must be better equipped to identify potential signs of mental illness, both in the individuals with a history and those without, always with the view of harm reduction and not the stigmatisation of the mentally ill.
I am concerned that if our Police officers lack the expertise to do so, they may not be able to use the powers effectively or responsibly. The recent case of Mah Kiat Seng vs Attorney-General and Others has raised some concerns. In this case, Mr Mah claimed he was wrongly arrested and imprisoned based on false information provided by a Police officer. How can the Government prevent similar situations from happening again?
With great power comes great responsibility. The good standing of our men in blue relies on them being able to exercise their powers in a manner that balances the need for decisive action in high-stress operational situations, with a keen sense of human dignity and skillful instinct honed through experience and training. This is all the more delicate when Police deal with the mentally ill who have already been triggered by stressful situations and this becomes further exacerbated by Police intervention.
While the law empowers Police to apprehend individuals believed to be a danger to themselves or others due to mental health concerns, it is critical to have safeguards against misuse. The Court acknowledged the importance of Police discretion in such situations, but also highlighted the need for responsible action. This case raises the question: what safeguards are in place to prevent Police officers from overstepping their authority, as seen in the Mah Kiat Seng case?
Public trust in our institutions hinges on the belief that we act in the best interests of all Singaporeans. This extends to our Police force, who require proper training and clear guidelines to uphold their duty effectively. Unclear procedures create apprehension for both the public and Police officers, potentially hindering enforcement and fostering disputes. The proposed law empowers Police to apprehend individuals under specific circumstances. To ensure transparency and to minimise apprehension, the Ministry should clarify these thresholds.
Additionally, clear guidelines are critical to prevent potential power abuses and ensure effective collaboration with mental health professionals. While traditional training methods have value, equipping Police with real-world case studies, hands-on experience and access to mental health experts is vital. Training should emphasise de-escalation tactics and provide a framework for officers to escalate complex situations to appropriate personnel for further evaluation.
Moving on, Mr Speaker, Sir, as we delve into other aspects of the Bill, it is critical to acknowledge the limitations of some of the new regulations while exploring further solutions. While section 39H of the Bill allows for extraterritorial effect, the question of enforcement remains. How will this provision be effectively implemented? How will we establish collaborative efforts with other foreign jurisdictions to apprehend perpetrators operating outside our borders?
Additionally, part 2 clause 6 empowers the Police to decide against pursuing non-arrestable offenses. The criteria outlined – cases deemed \"not of a serious nature\" or with \"insufficient grounds\" – warrant further clarification. For instance, how will this impact issues like neighbourly disputes or noise complaints? Will isolated incidents of nuisance be entirely dismissed, leaving residents with no avenue for recourse? A clear framework for addressing such situations is necessary.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill represents a positive step towards combating the rise of SIM card misuse and enhancing public safety. However, to maximise its effectiveness, I urge the House to consider the following: first, protect vulnerable populations. We must establish clear guidelines to address the misuse of seniors' identities for SIM card registration. Educational initiatives can empower them to identify and prevent such exploitation.
Second, empower retailers. A system for anonymous whistleblowing by retailers, coupled with an incentive program like \"Trusted SIM Retailer\" designation, can significantly improve vigilance and reporting.
Next, regarding the amendments to Police powers, while empowering officers to apprehend individuals with mental health issues is critical, ensuring fair implementation is paramount. To this end, transparency and clear guidelines are essential to prevent misuse of power and public fear. We also need to equip Police officers with comprehensive training, with real-world scenarios, giving them access to mental health professionals, and providing a framework to escalate complex cases.
By prioritising these recommendations, we can strengthen the Bill and ensure it safeguards both our citizens and their security. Let us work together to send a clear message: zero tolerance for SIM card misuse and having trust in the enforcement of Police powers. With the proposed amendments, we can create a more secure Singapore for all. I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Dr Syed Harun.
Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi (Nominated Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker. My contribution to this debate relates specifically to part 3 of the Bill, the Amendments Relating To Apprehension under the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act and the Police Force Act. I wish to declare that I am a psychiatrist in private practice and am the Honorary Secretary of the Singapore Psychiatric Association. I am also a visiting consultant psychiatrist at a restructured hospital.
I wish to also add that I have dealt with many a psychiatric emergency in my line of work. I have myself been conflicted and made the harrowing call to law enforcement over grave concerns that an acquaintance was at risk of potential suicide.
Firstly, let me qualify categorically that by an overwhelming proportion and majority, most individuals labouring under mental illness would not fulfil the threshold set out within this proposed Bill for apprehension by Police. The large majority of those with mental illness struggle silently, may appear normal to most and are able to navigate life's challenges with some treatment and support from family and loved ones.
The individuals for whom this Bill could apply represent but a slither of individuals who are afflicted with mental illness or mental health concerns. When placed under much duress, entrenched and severe mental illness can impair one's mind, to the extent that he or she may consider life not worth living anymore and contemplate suicide. Often, at this juncture, all hope appears lost, reasonableness is absent and negative thoughts have festered well beyond fleeting moments of self-doubt in themselves and their lives.
If we are lucky, such individuals – with encouragement from family and loved ones – would agree to present themselves to a psychiatrist much earlier for treatment. However, there are times where family members, who themselves could also be at a loss, reach out for external help from community organisations or call upon law enforcement, especially when they are deeply concerned for the safety of the individual.
I can say with some confidence that our Police officers are confronted with this on a daily basis. Almost a daily occurrence, at the IMH Emergency Room, ever so often there would be some Police presence bringing a distressed person to be assessed by a designated medical practitioner, on account of section 7 of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act, or MHCTA.
When someone is on the brink of suicide and immense despair, they would have lost all hope, are taxed with a sense of worthlessness and with no longing to continue living. Police officers and their Home Team colleagues remain their last hope for rescue, and such officers often put themselves at risk to honour their duty to protect fellow Singaporeans.
For context, often these apprehensions take place in unfamiliar surroundings and home environments, in the presence of sharp objects like blades and knives, with open ungrilled windows or even at corridors of significant height. The tension in the air would be palpable, sometimes with raised voices of frustration and emotions running high.
Time is of the essence and where reasonable grounds are sufficiently present to suggest a potential threat to self and others, my view is that apprehension may be necessary to save a life under such circumstances.
This Bill, Mr Speaker, gives some latitude for Police officers to act with some urgency and not reactively, before a suicide attempt becomes imminent and before rescue could be more risky, both for the person who is under duress and for those who are trying to make a genuine attempt at rescue.
Where suicide risk assessment, even for psychiatrists, is not a perfect science, my view is that it is fair and appropriate for Police officers to exercise reasonable judgement without waiting for a suicide to be imminently clear or after such attempt at lethal harm has been actualised.
Mr Speaker, there are ground concerns that stigma could be further perpetuated as a direct result of the proposed changes in the Bill, but I beg to differ, in that this Bill is scoped within a very specific circumstance of a psychiatric emergency and only where there is a patent risk of suicide.
Even as I advocate for this Bill today, there are three things I hope the Ministry can look into moving forward, if not already done today, to really reassure concerns on the ground and hon Members of the House today.
First, it is to ensure structured training. Structured training for Police officers in the apprehension of attempted suicide cases would be important to guide Police officers fronting such work, and this could be coupled with considered inputs from care professionals and specialists in the field. Such structured training would also be important to ensure that while there is some latitude and range for judgement by Police officers on the ground, the exercise of such powers of apprehension continues to be done with propriety, with confidence and with safety in mind.
Second, to ensure access to psychiatric evaluation and assessment without delay after apprehension. Where the apprehension is done under subsections 26A to 26F of the Police Force Act, the Ministry must then ensure that the individuals are sent for a formal assessment by a medical practitioner or a designated medical practitioner at a psychiatric institution under the sections 9 and 10 of the MHTCA with expedience and without delay. If the premise of the apprehension was due to concerns over a potential suicide attempt and a mental disorder, then it follows that it is treatment that the individual needs and care and assessment must be forthcoming as soon as safety is established.
Third, to work more closely with mental health professionals in such crisis work. I think there is scope for the Ministry to study the prospect of closer collaboration between mental health professionals and law enforcement especially when dealing with crisis calls relating to mentally disordered individuals. There could be value in having combined teams of law enforcement and mental health practitioners as collaborative first responders to ensure that, on one hand, there is Police resource for swift apprehension to safety of such individuals where required and if the threshold is not met and care can be safely given, mental health professionals, in turn, could be the ones offering supportive care thereafter.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, I would like to thank our Police officers on the ground for the work that they do in relation to such apprehensions, where there needs to be a delicate balance in their approach of care for the person in distress, alongside a swift desire to bring the person to safety.
As a clinician and psychiatrist, my role in addressing psychiatric emergencies is moot without first ensuring that any patient of mine is safe, first and foremost. No meaningful medical treatment is possible without first ensuring safety of the patient and rescuer.
This parallels our approach to dealing with medical emergencies too, as is the protocol for Basic Cardiac Life Support which I am sure many Members of the House are trained and are familiar with. The acronym is DRSABCD – Assess for Danger, Assess for Responsiveness, Send for Help, Airway, Breathing, CPR and Defibrillation, where in the first instance, danger must be ameliorated as a first and utmost priority and remains several steps ahead before CPR treatment can take place.
Similarly, in the face of a psychiatric emergency, where there is an active threat or concern over suicide, a danger to life either imminent or reasonably anticipated, the work of our Police officers and their Civil Defence counterpart remain important. Within reasonable grounds, my view is that they should be empowered to exercise appropriate means to perform such a lifesaving role, before any ensuing treatment can be administered accordingly. Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, my speech today will touch on the proposed amendments to deter the misuse of local SIM cards.
By now, we are all well aware of how the proliferation of scams and cybercrimes and hence, the overall crime rate in Singapore is on a sharp rise in recent years. While physical crime cases have declined over the past five years, from 23,980 cases in 2019 to 19,966 cases in 2023, the reverse has happened for scam and cybercrime cases, rising almost five times from 11,135 cases in 2019 to 50,376 cases in 2023, with the increase seen last year the largest annual increase yet, at 16,707 cases or an almost 50% jump compared to the year before.
While we may not be living in the metaverse per se as yet, our digital lives and online footprint are increasingly inescapable aspects of our everyday lives – from the way we communicate and socialise via online messaging apps and social media, the way we go about our daily jobs in front of our laptops and even the way we transact in the offline world buying lunch or groceries, with Singapore moving closer towards a cashless society.
The Gallup's Law and Order Index uses four questions to gauge people's sense of personal security and their own experiences with crime and law enforcement. While much of these relate to one's sense of physical safety and security, in this day and age, it is worth looking at these questions from the digital sphere as well.
For example, one of the questions relate to, \"within the last 12 months, have you had money or property stolen from you or another household member?\" These days, the losses from scams are likely to be way more significant, sometimes involving our life savings, than losing one's wallet from snatch theft or robbery. And while we may \"feel safe walking alone at night\", it is noteworthy that 96% of the population, aged 15 and above, are at least somewhat concerned about becoming a victim of scams; with 99% of seniors, aged 60 and above, sharing the same concern.
As scammers and criminal networks continue to evolve their approach in committing scams and cybercrimes against Singaporeans, we need to step up our game to reverse the worrying trend in scam cases and I believe the new measures would be a welcome addition into our arsenal in the war against scammers and cybercriminals. Nonetheless, I have a few areas of concern which I hope the Minister will be able to address.
The Bill introduces offences targeting three groups of offenders – irresponsible registrants; those receiving, supplying or possessing local SIM cards; and retailers facilitating fraudulent registration of local SIM cards.
Given our earlier efforts to tighten SIM card registration requirements and the implementation of the +65 prefix to identify foreign scam syndicates spoofing local numbers, these scammers have turned to using local SIM cards instead.
As set out in the MHA's press release, the rampant misuse of local SIM cards to perpetuate scams has been driven by people who give away their SIM cards or provide their particulars to others to be used to sign up for SIM cards, typically for money, also known as \"irresponsible registrants\".
While it certainly is irresponsible of such people when viewed from a rational third-party perspective, it may be the case of ignorance from the perspective of certain persons, of the significant harms such a seemingly innocent move can cause. To me, it is much less defensible to feign ignorance when it comes to cases involving lending one's identity to be a phantom employee, even earning extra Central Provident Fund (CPF) along the way, while enabling dishonest companies to sidestep foreign worker quotas, or to wilfully lend one's bank accounts in return for a fee to facilitate money laundering.
Under section 39B, it would be presumed that a person has reasonable grounds to believe, that the local SIM card would be used to commit or facilitate a crime and until the contrary is proved, could be found guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or both. To what extent do we wish to pursue or even imprison an elderly person, or someone who may not be literate or sophisticated enough to see the criminal element of this act, even as someone gave him a \"token sum\" to thank him for his time and efforts and would have \"ticked the box\" on receiving \"any gain\"? What kind of educational or information campaigns will be conducted to protect those who may not have wilfully committed an offence for a quick buck and could now face imprisonment?
I welcome section 39G, which makes it an offence for a retailer or telecommunication licensee to register a local SIM card using any person's particulars without that person's authorisation or knowing the particulars were false or misleading under certain conditions.
We have certainly seen cases in the past, where errant retailers were taken to task; such as earlier this year, where an authorised dealer was fined $48,000 for exploiting customers' personal data to register SIM cards without their knowledge or consent, making an estimated profit of $35,000 along the way.
However, just as we censure financial institutions for not putting in place adequate Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing measures, to what extent does the buck stop at the retailers and authorised dealers themselves; and when would the telecommunication licensee itself be liable for failing to prevent, detect and address such abuses of their SIM cards and telecommunications networks to facilitate crime? Beyond employees of retailers or the mobile service providers, who may have been directly involved in facilitating the SIM card registrations, to what extent would the management team and the board of these companies be liable themselves under the new section 39G, especially since the employees of these mobile service providers are specifically identified as such? Mr Speaker, allow me to say a few words in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] As we all know, while physical crimes have decreased over the past five years, scams and cybercrime cases have risen sharply, leading to increase in the overall crime rate in Singapore in recent years.
Signs indicate that more scammers are using local SIM cards for scams and illegal lending, even setting up accounts such as PayNow to receive illicit funds and creating accounts on messaging apps such as WhatsApp. After the passing of the Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill, providing personal information to strangers for the registration of local SIM cards, selling SIM cards registered under one's own or another person's name, or receiving, supplying or possessing someone else's SIM card without proper justification can constitute criminal offences.
Many of us may intuitively know that providing one’s identity to dishonest companies as a phantom employee to earn CPF funds, or handing over one’s bank accounts to strangers to help unscrupulous individuals abuse the accounts, or even facilitating money laundering activities, are all illegal. However, many people may not realise the significant harm that can result from providing one’s identity to strangers for the registration of local SIM cards.
Therefore, I urge the Government to conduct more publicity campaigns on this topic to protect our fellow citizens who may unwittingly commit an offense, such as the elderly and those with diminished mental capacity.
Mr Speaker: Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Speaker, Sir, I met N – not his real name – a few years ago over at my Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS). He was frequently at our MPS and we learnt of his many challenges as he grew to trust us and confide in us. N was in his 60s and I believe him to be an undiagnosed special needs adult, a high-functioning one capable of independent living, albeit an awkward one when it comes to relationships and social norms. During one of our MPS, he came distraught and shared that he was arrested by the Police recently.
He had ordered fast food delivery to be sent to his mother, who is living in an aged home. When his mother told him that she did not receive the delivery, he charged down to the local fast food restaurant, demanding to be compensated for the food his family had failed to receive. N is a tall man and when he is angry, he talks in a very loud voice and can be quite intimidating for the uninitiated. Needless to say, our local fast food counter staff was ill-equipped to deal with him and she called in the mall security and the local Police team for assistance. That day, according to N, he caused the rather elderly security guard to fall. He pushed a passerby who came in to help and he nearly fell on a policeman. He was subsequently taken in by the Police.
When N recounted the event to me, he was distraught but thankful that he did not cause more harm to the people involved. He still wanted his fast food delivered, which was why he came to see us at the MPS, but acknowledged that he would be in deeper trouble, or perhaps have even injured himself seriously, should there not be intervention by the Police. It was, after all, a whole store of people against one N. I later found out that our Police Force are indeed trained to recognise, manage and diffuse such situations and I call for the Singapore Police Force (SPF) to ensure that such training be made mandatory for all enforcers, NSFs included, if it if not already done so and this should be conducted in a timely and frequent manner.
While N's situation is perhaps an extreme one, we see semblances of this in our everyday lives. For example, when someone on the public transport has a meltdown, Singaporeans do not often react kindly. More often than not, the commuters would give them a dirty look, or exchange disapproving looks with their fellow commuters, if not simply resigning to \"mind their own businesses\". It goes without saying, that the social rejection does not help someone who is already over-sensitised.
If our commuters could react to the meltdown with some understanding and compassion, very much like if during that period, N had been treated with some empathy and understanding, the commuter and N would have a much easier time coaching themselves to calm down. Better yet, if most of the commuters have a basic understanding on how to help someone in a meltdown situation, the Police may not even have to be involved in the first place.
This particular amendment clearly is not here to vest more power for law enforcement to make arrests. Instead, it is quite the contrary. It sets clear limits to their power so that we can make the Police Force a force for the nation, to make Singapore the safest place in the world, if I may quote the SPF's vision. More importantly, the heart of this amendment is not to correct behaviours, but to make more Singaporeans aware of people with amplified needs, so that the whole kampung can come together and make a home for us in this city.
I have full support that this conviction will continue its work beyond the matter of enforcement in time to come. With that, Sir, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Keith Chua.
Mr Keith Chua (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I first mention my involvement in a number of mental health support service agencies, particularly as board member.
In February 2024, this Parliament overwhelmingly passed a landmark Motion on advancing mental health. This House recognised the importance of mental health as a health, social and economic issue and called for a whole-of-Singapore effort. This followed the October 2023 launch of the National Mental Health and Well-being Strategy.
The October 2023 report and the February 2024 Motion collectively brought tremendous encouragement to anyone and everyone with interest and concern with mental health and wellness. Persons in recovery, caregivers, mental health professionals and service providers – all found comfort, fresh hope and renewed expectations.
When I first read this proposed Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill – specifically in the reference to mental health and also read the resulting media comment, I was alarmed and concerned. Why the need to make the change now just as we are building a national collective toward enhanced mental health support?
Plugging gaps in the law is the task of the Government. This Bill is wide-ranging and mental health is just one of many proposed amendments. I have no issue with the other amendments proposed in the Bill.
Could this amendment relating to mental health have been introduced at another time? This would enable the many follow-up aspects from the October 2023 Ministry of Health (MOH) strategy plan and the February 2024 Parliamentary Motion to settle in and gain traction.
Would we not be a better prepared community having given this bit more time? Can we still consider deferring this if we are truly trying to send a positive signal of hope for persons coping with mental health issues, especially while we are doing all we can to encourage more to come forward and seek help early and while we continue to fight the stigma associated with mental health?
This House is likely to be aware of several articles that have since been written about the Bill. Most of these articles expressed varying degrees of concerns on the proposed amendments and have been written by persons in recovery, by caregivers and by mental healthcare professionals.
Let me start with the article from Ms Chan Li Shan entitled, \"I object: mental illness is not a crime\". Ms Chan is a patient advocate, an author and a person with lived experience. I met Ms Chan some years back and heard her story of recovery. In Singapore, we do not have many individuals like Ms Chan Li Shan, who have documented their journeys of recovery. I have also heard mental health professionals expressing the need for more persons in recovery to write of their experiences so we can better understand this from the perspective of one receiving treatment and care, understand the challenges, appreciate their feelings and emotions and recognise that just like everyone else, persons in recovery are fellow human beings who have views, who can feel hurt and rejection and can appreciate care and affection.
Today, mental health care at the patient level has improved. Individuals, such as Ms Chan, have shared about the pain and trauma in the use of restraints in hospitals. In her article she voices the issue of real risk of trauma on individuals in recovery if the law is not applied in the way it may be intended. She concludes with these words, \"Mental illness is not a crime and our laws should not be constructed to make it so. I object.\"
Ms Sabrina Ooi, CEO of Calm Collective Asia, also shared her experience on the trauma of getting arrested. She calls on us to find compassion to look beyond the surface and to broaden our perspective on what it means to keep our society safe from the mentally disordered.
Dr Jonathan Kuek, clinical mental health researcher, raised the concern on the thresholds for apprehension. Under the proposed new law, as long as the danger to human life or personal safety is reasonably likely to occur, police officers will be allowed to take someone into custody before any actual harm is caused. The danger need not be imminent.
Mr Speaker, Sir, could the hon Minister kindly clarify how the law enforcement officers will make this judgement call. Can the hon Minister give reasonable assurance to persons in recovery and their caregivers and families, that degrees of unusual or undesirable behaviour can be sufficiently calibrated before apprehension is deemed necessary?
Ms Porsche Poh, Executive Director of Silver Ribbon, wrote on ensuring that police are competent in managing mental health crises.
Mr Speaker, Sir, most of those who wrote in expressing concerns about this new law agreed that we have excellent law enforcement officers. The concerns are not questioning the integrity and existing capabilities. Many give credit for the thoughtful and professional way our law enforcement officers execute their roles.
I sought the views of Mr Nicholas Lee, Executive Director of Resilience Collective, a mental health charity powered by peers for peers. Peers are persons in recovery and persons with lived experience.
Mr Lee shared this with me, \"When I first heard the news of enhancing our police officers' powers when making arrests of people with mental health conditions, I immediately felt there would be a reintroduction of stigma on mental health. 'Why would normal powers not be enough? Are people with mental health conditions violent?'. These potentially new perceptions are not healthy for us as we have been slowly chipping away at this huge, seemingly insurmountable, boulder called stigma.\"
I have read briefly that law enforcement agencies would send officers for training. While I applaud this, I am concerned how thorough this training would be. I say this because each person is different and triggers may take very different forms. As a person being subject to such an arrest, one must always remember that emotions will be at play and whether or not I can control my emotions.
The law, I agree, is meant for good. But perhaps, what is needed is a joint effort to develop these methods so that both officers and persons with mental health conditions are protected. A group with representation from all – from the Police, psychiatrists, mental health professionals and persons with mental health conditions – so that no one is left behind or not considered.
Ms Anthea Ong, former Nominated Member of Parliament; Ms Cassandra Chia, President of the Disabled People's Association; and Dr Rayner Tan from the Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health penned an article entitled, \"When someone has a mental health crisis, arrest is not the answer\". They too speak up for the persons facing mental health issues.
We do have specialised response teams for mental health. Should we therefore scale these up so that as far as possible this will be the first line of response to individuals in mental health crises thus enabling law enforcement officers to focus on their primary duties?
The challenge would be to differentiate the correct response when a call for help or action is received. As with the issue faced by our Accidents and Emergency (A&E) departments as a first port of call for any semblance of a health emergency, so will calls to the police be a likely default position for disruptive behaviour.
I would also like to refer the commentary written by SG Mental Health Matters. Concerns expressed here relate to the significant discretion handed to Police officers. There is also the concern about the potential resultant trauma on persons with mental health conditions.
Dr Jared Ng's commentary, \"Expanded police powers don't have to mean 'three steps forward, two steps back' for mental health in Singapore\", looks at the differing views and offers this proposal: \"Mental health professionals and law enforcement officers have a responsibility to work together to ensure the best possible outcomes. A multi-stakeholder committee could give and gather feedback on operational processes, evaluate intervention strategies to inform policy adjustments. Only then can we ensure both public safety and the compassionate treatment of those in mental health crises. What matters now, is how stakeholders are engaged and collaborate so that Singapore does not detract from the strides made in mental healthcare.\"
Dr Ng was chief of emergency and crisis care at IMH and therefore a voice with experience. He speaks on the interface between the Police and mental health and cites some collaborative models from the United States, the Nordic countries and Australia.
Several years ago, I was introduced to the value of response teams which included trained peers, or persons with a lived experience, as part of the team. A person with a lived experience may often be better at communicating with another person facing similar challenges. They may be better equipped in helping to de-escalate certain situations. Hence, I would suggest that should a multi-stakeholder committee be considered, we need to include persons with lived experience as mentioned by Mr Lee from Resilience Collective.
With a troubled mind, I consulted psychiatrist Dr Muni Winslow for his advice and guidance.
Since the release of the Second Reading of the Bill, Dr Winslow has received calls of concern from his community. Allow me to share Dr Winslow's views and this is with his permission: \"I think the key drawback is that most police knowledge is no better than a layman. It would be helpful if all public-facing police personnel get at least some basic training in identifying symptoms of mental illness – the different types – as it will help them in de-escalating violence, for example, alcoholism and domestic violence and so forth; and identifying signs of dangerousness in folks with mental conditions. Autism spectrum and ADHD folk are considered neurodivergent and more likely to have confrontations with the law as they do not know how to back down, or sometimes, cannot.\"
With resources available in Singapore, it would be good to see all MHA personnel, within a year if the Bill passes, given some training in assessing the various types of mental health conditions and skills to de-escalate and bring them to a safe place.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to raise the concern I have for families with children with autism. They should continue to be free to enjoy public outings and all forms of suitable recreation as citizens. They may have a teenager, young or older adult with autism and we are all familiar that in some instances meltdowns happen.
Can we get an assurance that nothing in the passing of this Bill will diminish their rights or be disrupted in day-to-day living because a member of the public chooses to seek the intervention of the Police prematurely? In addition, persons with certain other conditions may also find themselves under greater scrutiny just because they exhibit behaviour different from what society perceives as the norm? We must not be seen to have taken three steps forward only to take two steps backwards.
Mr Jeffery Tan, CEO of Mindset Care Limited, a charity established to make a tangible difference to the Singapore mental health community, had this to share with me, \"To borrow the phrase from Professor Tommy Koh, as a 'loving Singaporean critic', we often 'overengineer' solution to situations. In so doing, we have the tendency to inordinately apply more 'head logic' than 'heart logic'. If it is eminently clear that the person is struggling under a mental illness, it begs the question whether arresting the individual will offer any valuable solution to the situation at hand and more importantly, the individual. We do not need more 'head logic', which is arrest and apprehension, in this proposed change. Instead, we need more 'heart logic'. Admittedly, the latter may take more effort, time, and resources – but that is the reflection of an enlightened and matured community and not just one that focuses only on expedience and efficiency. As a maturing society that seeks to more inclusive, there is need for us to have greater tolerance, understanding, compassion and a clear demonstration of heart and not just head. The maintenance of public safety and order is important for the community. This is not denied. But this cannot be at the expense of those in the community that will need our help and support – the weak, the vulnerable, the mentally unwell.\"
Mr Tan concludes with this question: is it possible that the proposed change in the law is not addressing the real issues that need to be focused on?
If this House passes this Bill, I can see the silver lining should we consider the following.
I see a silver lining in a better equipped law enforcement team, because we will also train them in basic knowledge of mental health conditions. Therefore, could we delay implementation of the new law, if passed, until the Home Team has been equipped?
I see a silver lining because we have seen many from across the mental health sector come forward and speak up. All these voices bring us better understanding as a community, greater public awareness, hopefully, with more care and compassion and understanding and resulting in overall improvement in our support systems. This will lead us closer to normalising mental health and wellness.
I see a sliver lining because we all now know that trauma in recovery is something we must prevent.
I see a silver lining because the elephant in the room can be debated for the benefit of all who continue to suffer in silence.
I see a silver lining as persons in recovery will be given every opportunity and every support to do so at their own pace and with respect.
Mr Speaker, Sir, this House continues to hold the key to better mental health and wellness in our nation. Many concerns have been raised, many questions have been asked. MHA has come forward with at least three clarifications that I am aware of on the proposed new law in response to concerns. The hon Minister has also given some background and clarifications in the introduction of the Bill. I have added some additional specific questions for the hon Minister to kindly address and clarify.
I continue to be unsettled when I think of the possible undesirable consequences of this Bill on individuals in our society. We want a Singapore that is both safe and at the same time inclusive and respectful. I trust the hon Minister will give us the assurances that not just Members in this House need but also to the persons in recovery, their families, their caregivers and the mental health professionals and healthcare staff.
I also acknowledge the Minister will need to give equal assurance to the public and continue to give unwavering support to the excellent work of the Home Team.
Mr Speaker: Mr Edward Chia.
Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Speaker, Sir, I will speak on the proposed amendments to the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act and the Police Force Act. They have been a topic of passionate discussion and I wish to convey some concerns and seek clarifications on behalf of those we serve.
As we debate these amendments, we need to ensure that these changes enable our police officers to effectively discharge their duties while providing care and support for individuals struggling with mental health issues, as well as their loved ones and caregivers.
Firstly, with the proposed changes granting additional authority to our officers, I would like to ask the Minister if the existing Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) will be updated to align with the proposed amendments.
I am concerned about the treatment of individuals who have been apprehended. These individuals are often in a vulnerable state, and it is imperative that we treat them with kindness and empathy. Can the Minister provide clarity on the procedures in place for their rehabilitation and treatment? How do we further improve these processes to ensure better outcomes for these individuals, providing them with the support and care that they need during these difficult times?
Moreover, I would like to inquire about the follow-up mechanisms with psychiatric institutions and social services. Ensuring continuity of care is essential for the holistic well-being of such individuals and their caregivers.
The amendment clarifies that the Police do not have to wait for an \"imminent\" danger before taking action. However, it is also essential to understand the limits of what constitutes \"reasonable\" to prevent overreach. The term \"reasonable\" is subjective and can vary from one situation to another. On the other hand, any ambiguity could force officers to hastily assess individuals' mental health, placing an unfair burden on them. Our officers must be adequately trained and supported to help them navigate these complex scenarios with compassion and discernment.
Secondly, we should also extend our care to individuals with mental health conditions who come into police custody. Training our officers in active listening and de-escalation techniques can enable them to interact with individuals experiencing mental health crises with greater empathy. For instance, an officer equipped with these skills can more effectively assist someone having a panic attack in public, using non-threatening body language and a gentle tone to offer support and guide the individual to appropriate help.
In other jurisdictions, there is a growing understanding of the importance of collaboration between law enforcement agencies and mental health professionals. These collaborative approaches between the two entities seek to integrate mental health expertise into police responses, prioritise the well-being of individuals in crisis, and reduce reliance on punitive measures. Advancing community mental health support will also mean increased support for Police Officers and downstream care for individuals.
A more collaborative approach between law enforcement and mental health professionals is essential to prioritise the well-being of individuals in crisis. Specialised Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) programmes, like those in some jurisdictions, train officers to de-escalate mental health crises and connect individuals with services than resorting to arrest or apprehension. Research shows CIT improves officer attitudes and reduces injuries during crisis calls. Some Australian states employ unified teams of police and mental health professionals for specialised crisis responses. I am sure that the Ministry has considered some of the models for adaptation in our context and considered the challenges.
In addressing these challenges, enhancing upstream structural interactions between community mental health teams and Neighbourhood Police Centres (NPCs) is crucial for better coordination of responses and support. Currently, Singapore boasts over 70 Community Resource, Engagement and Support Teams (CREST) spread across various regions. I would like to ask the Minister for a status update on any current collaborative efforts between CREST teams and NPC teams. Furthermore, is the Ministry exploring models for fostering deeper collaboration in this regard?
Third, our front-line police officers, including younger National Servicemen, are often the first responders to incidents involving individuals in mental health crises. Witnessing such situations can take a significant emotional toll on them.
The Police Psychological Services Department (PPSD) offers a multi-faceted approach for officers. Dedicated para counsellors are present in all Police units and departments, while PPSD psychologists and Home Team psychiatrists offer professional in-house counselling. This is a good start. In line with these amendments, what more can we do to ensure our front-line officers’ mental health is taken care of?
Lastly, the decriminalisation of suicide was a significant legislative reform aimed at recognising mental health issues as medical concerns rather than criminal acts. I have received feedback expressing concerns about how this amendment aligns with the decriminalisation of suicide. Can the Ministry confirm whether the amendment grants powers to the Police to intervene when someone attempts to self-harm, with the assurance that the individual is unlikely to face charges but will instead receive mental health support?
In conclusion, Sir, as we discuss these amendments, let us ensure that our approach is rooted in empathy, care and collaboration to effectively support both individuals in crisis and those who serve in our front lines. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim.
Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill.
This Bill suggests several important legislative changes. Notably, the Bill strives to enhance our nation's ability to combat scams, strengthen the effectiveness of Home Team operations, and ensure the seamless functioning of Yellow Ribbon Singapore.
Mr Speaker, to achieve the goals outlined in this Bill, several pieces of legislation will need to be amended. While I acknowledge the objectives and benefits of these amendments, I have some clarifications and suggestions that I will now discuss.
Before I do so, I would like to declare my current role as the Head of the Public Safety and Security Programme at Singapore University of Social Sciences and have previously worked as a Probation Officer for the Ministry of Social and Family Development.
Mr Speaker, my first comments relate to the proposed amendments to the Miscellenaous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act 1906. The proposed changes are timely and necessary.
They are designed to bolster our defence against fraudulent activities and provide our law enforcement agencies with more robust mechanisms to tackle this evolving threat. By doing so, we are not only safeguarding the financial well-being of our citizens but also upholding the integrity of our nation's economy.
Mr Speaker, one significant concern that we must address is the ongoing threat of phishing. This malicious practice, where cybercriminals pose as legitimate entities, is a growing risk that threatens the operation of many organisations in Singapore.
An important question that we must ask ourselves is, how do we equip our employees to recognise and avoid such at? One potential answer lies in real-life simulations that mimic phishing scenarios. By providing employees with these scenarios, we enable them to understand the tactics of cybercriminals and equip them with the necessary skills to identify and avoid phishing attempts.
Mr Speaker, in adopting this approach, we need to find a balance and ensure that these simulations are realistic enough to enhance their learning. The quality of the training materials and the competence of the trainers play a vital role in the effectiveness of this experiential training.
Accordingly: would the Ministry consider encouraging individuals or organisations undertaking training exercises on phishing to use the Playbook for the Conduct of Phishing Simulation Exercises, as published by the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore?
I will now turn my attention to the proposed amendments outlined in section 14D, which would exempt responsibility for transmitting a message that is false or fabricated for the legitimate purpose of raising public awareness.
This amendment has significant implications. On one hand, it could aid in spreading awareness about phishing and other cyber threats. On the other hand, it could potentially be misused by individuals with malicious intent.
Mr Speaker, false messages erode trust and can lead to scepticism even towards genuine cybersecurity warnings and advice. Given the potential for bad actors to exploit this exemption: what strategies are in place to minimise the risk of individuals being misled or confused by genuine cybersecurity warnings and advice?
Next, I welcome the introduction of Part 6A. These rules are indeed a significant step towards deterring the misuse of local SIM cards and I commend the Ministry for their proactive approach in addressing this issue.
I appreciate the safeguard in place as these offences are not used against those who are genuinely unaware of the unlawful act or those who are tricked into registration. This shows the Ministry's commitment to fairness and justice, and this is an important measure in protecting those who are manipulated into acquiring a SIM card or those who may not be aware that their action is illegal in Singapore.
Mr Speaker, the latest data on SIM card misuse paints a worrying picture, yet with the introduction of these amendments we will have an additional tool to combat this issue.
It is, however, important that we continue to monitor the situation closely and make necessary adjustments to ensure that this rule remains effective in preventing scams.
Just last month, The Straits Times reported, and I quote: \"More than 300 people are being investigated for their involvement in more than 1,000 scam cases in which victims lost over $11 million\".
On that note, I would like to clarify: what resources, including training, are being provided to the Anti-Scam Command (ASCom) to strengthen their expertise and capabilities? And what resources, including training, are being provided to general Home Team officers to increase their capacity to recognise, investigate and prosecute scams?
Additionally, with regards to section 39H, how does the Ministry work with telecommunication organisations and enforcement agencies outside of Singapore to prevent, investigate and prosecute scams?
Mr Speaker, my final consideration on this aspect of the amendment is related to the new section 40A on offences by corporations, and section 40B on offences by unincorporated associations or partnerships. I welcome these amendments, noting the high likelihood of bad actors using corporations and associations as a façade to conduct unlawful and criminal activities. On that note, I would like to clarify: what legislative provisions exist to hold individuals personally liable for scams perpetrated by individuals or entities for whom they are administratively or legally responsible?
Mr Speaker, my next point is related to expansion of police power that aims to enhance the efficacy of Home Team operations. Our Police force and law enforcement agencies work tirelessly to ensure the safety and security of our nation and its people. However, to effectively carry out their duties, they require legislative support that is responsive to the evolving nature of security challenges.
The proposed amendments will provide our Home Team with the necessary legal framework to optimise their operations, streamline processes and enhance coordination between various agencies. This will undoubtedly result in a more efficient and cohesive approach towards maintaining law and order, as well as responding swiftly to emerging threats.
Mr Speaker, the concept of \"law and order\" is fundamental in our society, representing a holistic approach to preserving peace, stability, and justice. Being efficient is one pillar of law and order. The other pillar is transparency and legitimacy.
Mr Speaker, the proposed amendments to section 13 of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act 2008 provide the police with the authority to apprehend those who are reasonably suspected of having a mental disorder and pose a potential risk to themselves or others, even if there is no imminent danger.
While I recognise the importance of this measure in protecting the public, it is essential to consider the potential drawbacks. Police are not mental health professionals and their interactions with individuals experiencing mental health crises can be complex and challenging. The use of this power must be balanced with the need to respect individual rights and dignity.
There are several arguments against police apprehending mentally ill individuals. Firstly, it may lead to an over-reactive approach, where individuals are apprehended based on their mental health status rather than their behaviour. Secondly, it could potentially criminalise mental illness, which is a stigma we should strive to avoid.
However, as highlighted by the Minister earlier, the purpose of section 13 is to authorise the detention of people living with mental illness to prevent harm that these individuals may inflict on others or themselves. In other words, to prevent a criminal act and to provide for their treatment and care.
Mr Speaker, it is crucial to provide the Police with comprehensive knowledge and training on how to handle individuals with mental health issues. This includes understanding the signs of a mental health crisis, developing specialised responses and learning how to de-escalate situations effectively.
On that note, I seek clarifications on the following issues.
What training is being provided to Police officers to ensure they understand and comply with the legal requirement that people can only be detained under section 13 as a last resort and only when they pose a danger to themselves or others?
What training is being provided to Police officers to increase their understanding of mental illness and how people living with mental illness may present or behave?
What training is being provided to Police officers to increase their capacity to interact sensitively and appropriately with people living with mental illness?
And what mechanisms are in place to protect the rights of people apprehended under section 13, including their right to independent legal advice?
Mr Speaker, my final comments relate to the proposed amendments to the Police Force Act 2004 relating to the pursuit and prevention of suicide attempts.
The proposed amendments grant Police officers the authority to pursue individuals who have attempted suicide and are failing to stop, to be assisted by police. Furthermore, it permits any person to apprehend such individuals, emphasising the collective responsibility to prevent suicide. I support this change, but it is crucial to examine potential challenges associated with this amendment.
First and foremost, let us acknowledge the significance of this amendment in addressing the pressing issue of suicide prevention. By allowing Police officers to pursue individuals attempting suicide, we enhance our capacity to intervene promptly and provide the necessary support and assistance. Moreover, empowering others to apprehend individuals in distress underscores the importance of community involvement in suicide prevention efforts. This collective responsibility emphasises that every individual has a role to play in safeguarding the well-being of others.
It is, however, important that we approach the matter with sensitivity and understanding. Suicidal ideation is a complex and deeply personal struggle, often stemming from underlying mental health issues and emotional distress. Therefore, we must ensure that our actions are guided by empathy and compassion – recognising the vulnerability of those experiencing suicidal thoughts.
Moreover, while the intention behind this amendment is to prevent harm and provide support, there is a risk of unintended consequences. Pursuing individuals who have attempted suicide may exacerbate feelings of distress and increase the likelihood of further harm. Therefore, it is imperative to implement safeguards and measures to mitigate these risks and ensure that interventions are conducted with the utmost care and consideration.
To ensure the successful implementation of this amendment, several measures must be put in place. Firstly, recognised comprehensive training programmes should be provided to law enforcement officers and citizens alike, equipping them with the knowledge and skills necessary to handle situations involving individuals at risk of suicide. Additionally, protocols should be established to guide the appropriate response and intervention, taking into account the mental health and well-being of the individual in distress.
Furthermore, efforts should be made to enhance mental health support services and resources, ensuring that individuals in crisis have access to the help they need. This includes increasing awareness of available support networks and promoting destigmatisation of mental health issues within our society.
I would also like to take this opportunity to share an initiative rolled out in Australia called Police, Ambulance and Clinician Early Response (PACER). This is a collaborative effort with the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Ambulance Service and Canberra Health Services to enhance mental health crisis response. PACER offers a more comprehensive approach by deploying a team consisting of a paramedic, clinician and police officer, to address the needs of the most vulnerable mental health patients.
On that note, I would like to clarify: would the Ministry consider such partnerships and inter-agency cooperation to ensure positive outcomes for individuals with mental illness or disorder? Would the Ministry consider recruiting suitably qualified volunteers, including those with qualifications in psychology, counselling and social work, to enhance the provision of support to people living with mental illness?
Mr Speaker, while there are concerns about the potential misuse of clause 13, with the right training, resources and initiatives, we can strengthen the Police's powers to apprehend mentally ill individuals, ensuring both public safety and the respect for individual rights.
Mr Speaker, these amendments represent a significant step forward, too, in our collective efforts to prevent suicide and protect the well-being of individuals in distress. However, as we move forward, let us remember the importance of approaching this issue with empathy, understanding and sensitivity. Together, we can create a society where every individual feels supported, valued and empowered to seek help when they need it most.
Before I conclude, I would like to share some words from Deputy Prime Minister Wong’s Motion on Advancing Mental Health on 7 February 2024, “We need to do more to destigmatise mental health conditions, so that people do not hesitate to seek help. Stigma reduces a complex and difficult problem into unhelpful labels or stereotypes. It opens people struggling with mental health to discrimination, such as in the job market. It may cause them to be socially ostracised. It makes them feel ashamed, isolated and stops them from seeking treatment.”
Mr Speaker, clarifications notwithstanding, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Dr Wan Rizal.
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Mr Speaker, in my speech today, I will cover the mental health aspect of the Bill. Although it represents a small segment of the Bill, it has drawn much attention within the mental health community. I would like to thank the Minister for mentioning and reiterating and assuring that mental health is a national priority and the amendments in this Bill aim to uphold that spirit.
As we navigate the complexities of mental health and the pivotal role of law enforcement in our community, it is imperative to recognise the delicate balance required in addressing such sensitive issues.
My experience as a Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) officer handling suicide calls has significantly influenced my perspective for today. I recall the urgency and the critical decisions that need to be made in split seconds, because lives are at stake. These experiences have taught me an invaluable lesson. Behind every call is a human being in need, a family in despair and a family waiting for an officer's safe return.
With this understanding, I approach the amendments proposed in the Bill, striving to highlight the balance that protects all that are involved; those experiencing the crisis and the officers responding with the hope of making a positive impact.
The amendments proposed under the Bill seek to refine and clarify law enforcement's powers when responding to individuals experiencing mental health crises. This initiative underscores our commitment to enhancing public safety while preserving the dignity and well-being of those in vulnerable states. Importantly, these changes aim to provide officers with a clear guideline, enabling them to act decisively and compassionately in situations where individuals may pose a risk to themselves or others. Therefore, the potential risk of harm, rather than imminence, can be the basis for intervention.
Last week, I had a dialogue with mental health advocates, including Total Wellness Initiative, Calm Collective, Silver Ribbon Society, Singapore Association for Mental Health, Mental Act and even PERGAS, where they raised concerns and sought to understand the Bill better. There is an apprehension that, without careful implementation, these amendments could inadvertently contribute to the stigma surrounding mental health or lead to discrimination.
This fear is not unfounded; that in our pursuit of safety, it is possible that we may overlook the necessity for understanding and respect towards those experiencing mental health issues. They highlighted stories and studies pointing to the potential for increased anxiety and trauma stemming from such interventions or interactions, advocating for response mechanisms that are not only effective but also empathetic and respectful.
To that end, I would like to ask how are our Police officers equipped with mental health awareness and knowledge and de-escalation training to use these expanded powers appropriately, with empathy and understanding? Would the Ministry consider periodically reviewing apprehension processes with inputs from mental health experts or even the new Mental Health Office? With the new tier system, we could have a different approach to addressing apprehension processes.
Sir, as the dialogue progresses, one pertinent point emerged.
There is a misunderstanding between apprehension and arrest – apprehension and arrest – and understanding the scope of the proposed amendments. For example, some thought the proposed amendments would give Police officers the power to search and restrain apprehended subjects, similar to when arresting criminal suspects. Also, there is a misunderstanding that the amendments will impact the decriminalisation of suicides or impact the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act and change the approach or processes that the Police may take in apprehending a person with a mental health condition.
The consensus from the dialogue is that, such misunderstandings must be clarified and communicated clearly and the public must be aware of them, too, as the spread of such misunderstandings can be detrimental in our efforts to destigmatise mental health.
Therefore, I am glad that the Minister elaborated in her Reading earlier and gave clear examples of how we aim to solve these problems.
Sir, in conclusion, my aim today is very clear. I would like to offer a balanced approach that supports our Police force while addressing the community's concerns and misunderstandings, or rather, misinformation, that is being shared.
Our Police force plays a critical role in ensuring the safety and security of our community, a duty that extends into the complex realm of mental health and it is not easy. The proposed amendments are about striking a balance; ensuring that our officers have the clarity and guidance they need to make compassionate decisions in the heat of the moment, which could save lives as well.
And on that point, I also note that there are proposals about having a team to go along with the Police officers and my experience tells me that sometimes we do not have the luxury of time. It could take seconds or minutes or even hours and that is when a team could be possible. But usually, the decisions need to be made in a split second and I do not envy the challenges that our Police officers and other Home Team officers face.
Notwithstanding the concerns I shared, and the clarifications sought to quell misunderstandings, or rather, misinformation, that is being shared, I support the amendments to the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, this Bill will strengthen our ability to tackle scams, make Home Team operations more efficient and facilitate Yellow Ribbon Singapore's operations.
I have three points for clarification.
My first point is on the handling of attempted suicide cases. The new section 26AA sets out the manner of apprehension in attempted suicide cases. Under this section, the Police may apprehend a person who is reasonably suspected to be about to attempt to commit suicide. The media has reported on how the Police is working with the IMH crisis response team for cases where there are signs of attempted suicide by calling a dedicated IMH hotline to conduct a suicide risk assessment. The Police also has a Crisis Negotiation Unit to handle attempted suicide cases.
Can the Minister share the Police's process for dealing with an attempted suicide case, including the involvement of the IMH crisis response team and the Crisis Negotiation Unit? At what point will the Police apprehend a person reasonably suspected to be about to commit suicide? What training is provided to officers to handle attempted suicide cases and to apprehend a person involved in an attempted suicide case?
Under the section 26AA(5), every person is bound to help an authorised Police officer in apprehending a person, the Police officer is authorised to apprehend. Can the Minister elaborate on the nature of this obligation imposed on a person “bound to help”? What are the consequences if the person “bound to help” refuses to provide help? Is a layperson expected to know of their obligation to help and, if so, what steps will be taken to communicate to laypersons that they are obliged to help? Lastly, can Minister also explain, practically speaking, how a person requested to help should determine whether the Police is authorised or not to apprehend a person?
Next, my second point is on the apprehension of mentally disordered persons. The Bill introduces amendments to allow the Police to apprehend a mentally disordered person, when there is a reasonable likelihood of danger to human life or personal safety posed by the person. The danger does not have to be imminent and actual harm does not have to be caused.
Some have raised concerns that we may be over-reliant on the Police in cases of mental health crisis. One alternative that has been raised is that mental health professionals should lead the emergency response in such cases, where possible.
This is already done in several cities. In the city of Eugene, Oregon, crisis counsellors from a community programme called Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets or CAHOOTS, receive hundreds of hours of training and send responders to 3% to 8% of police calls.
Can the Minister share if Police officers responding to cases of mental health crisis could be accompanied, where possible, by a mental health professional or someone with specialist training? For instance, we have Victim Care Officers who are specially trained to work with the Police to support victims of crime. Would it be possible to similarly train specialist community-first responders to support the Police in responding to cases involving individuals with mental health conditions?
As for the Police officers, I understand that they are trained to handle persons with mental health conditions. That said, the Bill now requires a Police officer to assess if there is sufficient basis for the reasonable suspicion that a conduct is attributable to a mental disorder before apprehending a person. This is a different skillset from handling a person with mental health conditions. Can the Minister share what training will be provided to Police officers to assess whether the threat of physical harm is attributable to a mental disorder?
The Ministry explained in a press release that a person may be traced in Police's records to have a history of mental disorder. Can the Minister share what other records are available to the Police in determining whether the threat of physical harm is attributable to a mental disorder? For example, does the Police have access to records maintained by IMH or other medical institutions?
Further, can the Minister share what steps will be taken after the individual has been apprehended? For example, will the person be referred for immediate treatment for the mental disorder? If so, are the medical institutions ready for the potential increase in these referrals? Is there a possibility of the person being released back into the community instead of being referred for immediate treatment? If so, how will the Police assess whether the person is suitable for release back into the community?
My third and final point is on the new SIM-card related offences. The Bill introduces new SIM card-related offences. These offences target irresponsible or fraudulent registration, transfer and possession of SIM cards.
I appreciate that the new offences target a set of conduct that is facilitating the growing social problem of scams. However, the ways of using technology for wrongdoings are constantly evolving. Constantly introducing new offences in order to tackle specific methods and technologies if unchecked may lead to an extensive, fragmented and unwieldy set of criminal laws. This may be difficult for the layperson to keep track of and understand.
Just last year, we amended the Computer Misuse Act and the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act to introduce new offences involving the use of Singpass credentials.
Existing Penal Code provisions on abetment or conspiracy may potentially be broad enough to cover some of the new SIM-card related offences. For instance, the Bill introduces new offences of providing a person's personal information to register a SIM card that the person knows will be used to commit an offence. Such conduct may potentially be covered under the existing provisions for abetment or conspiracy.
Can the Minister share the rationale for introducing new offences instead of relying on existing provisions for abetment and conspiracy offences? Are the new provisions intended to address gaps in our laws where individuals could not be prosecuted because our laws were not precise enough to tackle that form of wrongdoing? My concern is that we end up with a proliferation of laws which become too complicated to understand. Sir, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Minister Josephine Teo.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, I thank Members for their support of the Bill. They raised many relevant questions which I will try my best to respond to.
First, those on the new SIM card offences. Mr Louis Ng asked why MHA is introducing new offences, instead of relying on existing laws.
The limitation of the current law is that for irresponsible subscribers and middlemen who deal in local SIM cards, we would need to prove that they had intended to abet an offence. But proving intent is incredibly difficult and often impossible.
Take the example I mentioned in my opening speech, where a middleman purchased over 1,000 prepaid SIM cards that were fraudulently registered and sent them to persons in Malaysia who used them for scams. When he was questioned, he claimed that he merely dealt with the SIM cards and did not know that the receiving parties were scammers or that they would use the SIM cards to commit scams. It might indeed be that he did not know, because he did not care to know who bought the SIM cards from him and what they would do with it. It is equally difficult to prove criminal conspiracy.
The new laws address this gap. With the new offences, we will deem irresponsible subscribers and middlemen liable for an offence, without needing to prove criminal intent or knowledge, in certain scenarios. These include, among others, registering for a SIM card and selling it for gain; possessing a large number of unregistered SIM cards for no legitimate reason; and buying or selling SIM cards registered in another person's particulars.
There is no good reason for such acts, because there are legitimate ways to buy and sell SIM cards. But clearly, there is value to avoid such options and we should not accept them being passed off as legitimate economic activities, when, in fact, they are used to cause harms.
As for errant retailers, there is no specific offence under today's laws for fraudulent registration. While the Police may use other laws to prosecute such retailers, such as offences under the Penal Code or Computer Misuse Act, circumstances of each case may not allow us to proceed. As a result, under today's regime, most errant retailers simply lose their contract with the mobile service provider, effectively getting away scot-free with the profits they had made from the fraudulent registrations.
Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Louis Chua raised concerns about people who exploit elderly persons to obtain SIM cards. In the example given by Mr Yip, where an elderly person's particulars are misused by family members or caregivers to register for SIM cards. The elderly person would not be liable for an offence, if we find that he had no reasonable grounds to believe that his particulars would be used to register for SIM cards.
The Police recognise that there are indeed situations where the elderly might have been tricked into sharing their particulars. The Police will investigate such cases comprehensively and consider any credible evidence that the elderly person was unaware about how his particulars would be used. The Attorney-General's Chambers will also carefully consider each case on its own facts and circumstances and will only pursue prosecution if there is public interest to do so.
On the other hand, the individual who had misused the elderly person's particulars could be liable for an offence of supplying or selling the SIM cards registered in another person's particulars. In addition, if the individual had pretended to be the elderly person and had used his particulars to sign up for a SIM card without his permission, the individual could also be liable for an offence of cheating by personation under section 416 of the Penal Code.
Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Louis Chua asked if there are plans to educate the elderly population about the misuse of their particulars for SIM card registrations. Mr Louis Ng shared his concern about the proliferation of laws which are too complicated to understand.
Sir, we are one of the few jurisdictions that have been able to pass new laws to act against scammers. It is something that a lot of my colleagues in law enforcement wish they could do in their systems. But it has been very difficult for them. It would indeed be better and we agree with Mr Louis Ng, if we could streamline these laws. But at this point in time, this is not a luxury we can afford when scam tactics are still evolving so quickly and Police resources are so stretched. This is a trade-off Parliament must consider, whether to prioritise the streamlining of laws or quickly putting in place levers to act against the scammers. If we asked victims, their answer would be clear. I believe we should, in Parliament, similarly accept this trade-off for now.
In any case, to allow members of the public to familiarise themselves with the new offences, we intend for the offences to come into force approximately six months after the Bill is passed. During these six months, we will step up public education efforts to raise awareness of the new offences, red flags that the public ought to be wary about and measures they can adopt to prevent the misuse of their SIM cards and particulars. We will also work with mobile service providers to educate retailers about the new offences and emphasise the penalties that they will face should they be convicted of fraudulent registration.
For the offences of receiving, supplying or possessing SIM cards, Mr Desmond Choo asked how we decided on the threshold of 11 or more SIM cards. Sir, there is no magic formula.
The Police have observed cases of scammers possessing as few as 15 to 20 local SIM cards to send tens of thousands of scam SMSes. Setting a low threshold is therefore important for deterrence from hoarding local SIM cards.
However, we have also tried to ensure that most law-abiding people are not affected. Based on a 2022 poll of all mobile service providers, only about 2,000 subscribers, or less than 0.1% of all subscribers, used their own particulars to register for more than 10 postpaid SIM cards with a single mobile service provider. A typical person is therefore very unlikely to be holding on to more than 10 SIM cards which are registered in his own name and should not even be in possession of cards not registered in his own name. In other words, this amendment is not a concern for legitimate subscribers, even if they have more than 10 cards, as they will not be involved in crime.
Mr Desmond Choo suggested imposing minimum fines and imprisonment terms, as well as pegging fines for retailers to a proportion of their annual revenue.
We assess that the proposed penalties are adequate for now. We do not intend to impose a minimum penalty, so as to give the Courts more flexibility to decide on the appropriate punishment based on the severity of the case. While fines might be a mere slap on the wrists for large retailers, the possibility of an imprisonment term of up to three years should act as a sufficiently strong deterrent.
Assoc Prof Razwana and Mr Louis Chua asked about the legislative provisions to hold key officers and senior management liable for offences committed by entities.
Under the new sections 40A and 40B in the MOA, key officers and senior management who were involved in committing the offence can be held liable. These include officers who were involved in making the executive decision to commit the offence, as well as those who failed to take reasonable steps to prevent an offence that they knew was going to be committed.
Members also gave suggestions on preventing the abuse of local SIM cards.
Mr Louis Chua asked if mobile service providers might also be liable if they are appointed to retailers, conduct fraudulent registrations. Under the new laws, mobile service providers will be liable for an offence, if they were directly involved conducting or facilitating the fraudulent registrations. In addition, we can also take regulatory action against mobile service providers, if we find that they fail to ensure their appointed retailers comply with IMDA's requirements on SIM card registrations.
Mr Desmond Choo asked how we are working with online platforms, such as Telegram. The Police have been working with online platforms to take down accounts involved in scams and other crimes. However, under today's laws, it is not a crime to go online to buy and sell local SIM cards second-hand. This means that there are actually no legal grounds to request the platforms to take down accounts involved in such sales of SIM cards. Once the new offences come into force and the second-hand sale of local SIM cards becomes illegal, we will consider issuing directions under the Online Criminal Harms Act to the platforms to require them to restrict access to accounts involved.
Mr Choo suggested simplifying and standardising the process for a person to authorise another person to register for SIM cards on his behalf. To clarify, IMDA only allows persons to register for SIM cards under their own names, using their own particulars. To ensure this, retailers are required to check the identity of the subscriber during the registration process. Mobile service providers may be in breach of their regulatory obligations, should their appointed retailers fail to conduct such checks. If a person wishes to register SIM cards for his family members, he can do so using his own particulars.
Mr Yip suggested creating an avenue to allow retailers to report suspicious activity conveniently and anonymously. Such avenues already exist. Retailers can file a Police report, which can be done online conveniently using Singpass. They can also submit information through the I-Witness online portal, which can be done anonymously.
Assoc Prof Razwana asked about training and other resources given to Home Team officers, including Anti-Scam Command officers, to recognise, investigate and prosecute scams. To clarify, the key difficulty we face today is with prosecuting scammers, and the people who help them, including SIM card mules. Today’s amendments will help our police officers successfully take to task the SIM card mules that they arrest.
Assoc Prof Razwana also asked how we could work with the telcos to prevent scams. These have been shared earlier in my opening speech, so I suggest not to belabour the point.
Assoc Prof Razwana and Mr Yip asked if we would work with foreign law enforcement agencies to take down scammers operating overseas. The Police have been working with our overseas counterparts, such as the Royal Malaysia Police and INTERPOL, to exchange information and conduct joint operations. This has led to the successful take-down of 19 overseas scam syndicates in 2023. The new SIM card offences will also give the Police more grounds to work with foreign law enforcement agencies to arrest and investigate overseas scammers.
In relation to the proposed amendment to section 14D of the MOA, Assoc Prof Razwana asked if the Ministry would consider encouraging entities to undertake simulated phishing exercises using the Cyber Security Agency's (CSA’s) recently published Playbook for the Conduct of Phishing Simulation Exercises. The short answer is yes. As I earlier noted, such exercises are useful tools for organisations to be better prepared against cybersecurity incidents.
Assoc Prof Razwana asked what strategies are in place to prevent people from being misled by genuine cybersecurity warnings and advice. To clarify, genuine cybersecurity warnings and advice do not fall within the scope of section 14D as they are not false or fabricated messages.
If her concern is that bad actors could take advantage of the proposed exception to section 14D, let me assure her that we have designed the exception carefully. It is not enough for someone to simply claim that they have a legitimate purpose in sending the false message – there is an objective standard that must be met. Furthermore, malicious actors who seek to exploit this exception, for example, by masquerading as public authorities, will be caught under the existing Penal Code offences like cheating by personation.
I will now deal with the questions and suggestions on the handling of cases involving persons with mental health conditions.
I hear all the Members and your concerns, and it is important to reiterate that this Government is fully committed to advancing mental health. We recognise that persons with mental health conditions are part of our society and we should do our best to help them. Our National Mental Health and Well-being Strategy outlines the whole-of-society approach that we are taking to address this important issue and there are many components of them.
Members were concerned about social stigma that mental health patients may face and the appropriate care, which we fully understand and agree with. In fact, we are actively working towards destigmatising mental health conditions, so that people do not hesitate to seek help. Please be assured that Police does not seek to put more burdens on such persons or their families.
As I explained at the start of the debate, Police will not get involved unless called to prevent harm from happening. And the idea that section 7 of the MHCTA is being used for mental health management is entirely mistaken, as I have explained earlier and reiterate again. I would also urge Members to help clarify this mischaracterisation and put the minds of the mental health patients themselves and their families at ease, as Dr Wan Rizal has helpfully sought to do through his engagements with the community. In reality, as pointed out so well by Dr Syed Harun, the vast majority of individuals with mental illness would not fulfil the threshold set out in this Bill for apprehension by the Police and, rightly so. In fact, without being told or having been told previously, Police will have no idea who these patients are.
In the circumstances that warrant Police's intervention, Police are well aware and minded to calibrate their responses, and let medical professionals take over as soon as practicable. That is the overriding priority of the Police if they are called to a scene and they make the assessment that most likely this person would be best served by having medical attention.
When an individual has been apprehended under the MHCTA, they will be brought to a medical practitioner for assessment. That is the whole design of section 7 and the rules governing apprehension.
As I have explained earlier too, this is not the same as arrest, where the person will be placed in a lock-up. The amendments we are discussing are in fact to better achieve the objective of letting medical professionals manage persons with mental health issues, as my responses to specific queries will also show.
Mr Ng and Mr Edward Chia asked about the Police’s procedures for responding to cases of attempted suicide. Such cases involve both persons who have, and persons who do not have mental health conditions. When attending to such cases, the key objective of the Police is to ensure the safety of the person and others around him. If there is risk of imminent harm and a stand-off ensues, such as a distressed person standing on a ledge in a high-rise building, the Police’s Crisis Negotiation Unit, comprising Police officers and psychologists, will be activated. They will try to dissuade him from committing suicide.
After the Police have ensured the safety of the various parties, they may apprehend the person under the MHCTA if they assess that the person still poses a danger to himself, or others, and bring him to seek psychiatric treatment. If not, other relevant personnel may then be brought in to attend to the suicidal person and to provide the necessary support. This may include mental health professionals from the IMH Crisis Response Team. To reiterate, apprehension under MHCTA is not a criminal offence for which the person can be prosecuted.
Mr Ng and Mr Chia asked about treatment of individuals who have been apprehended. These individuals will be assessed by the medical practitioners at IMH to determine the likely medical causes for their behaviour. The medical practitioners may recommend further treatment in either inpatient or outpatient settings, or refer the individuals to social service providers to address their social needs where warranted, for example, where there is employment support and financial assistance.
Mr Chia asked about collaboration between the Police and the Community Outreach Teams, also known as CREST teams, which are set up by AIC. Where appropriate, the Police will refer persons with mental health conditions to the CREST teams in the region or to AIC, which will refer the cases to other appropriate mental health service providers. Keeping in mind that some of these individuals may well prefer to maintain their privacy and not have whatever action that they have taken be made known so widely so I think Police is also mindful of that and they will have to decide whether it is appropriate for them to make a referral.
To Ms He's question on whether the Crisis Response Team may be expanded, Police and IMH are already reviewing this suggestion.
Mr Ng, Assoc Prof Razwana, Dr Syed Harun and Mr Chua asked whether Police should be accompanied by mental health professionals or community first responders when responding to cases involving persons with mental health conditions. Firstly, prior to attending to the scene, Police may not be in a position to assess that there is a mental health condition involved in the person being attended to. But in any case, even if the Police have some sense that this was so, for this idea to work, we will need to have sufficient numbers of such professionals on 24/7 standby, and for them to be able to respond immediately with the Police to all cases at all parts of our island. Unfortunately, I think this will be very difficult to accomplish. The practical approach is for the Police, after dealing with the danger, to refer such persons to mental health professionals for treatment or, as we discussed earlier, to other community support organisations.
Mr Choo, Ms He and Mr Ng asked how the Police assess whether the threat of physical harm is attributable to a mental disorder. The role of the Police is not to assess or diagnose mental health conditions or disorders. They are not best placed to do so. Their role is to deal with the threat of harm and protect public safety. This is why the current MHCTA states that a Police officer’s belief that a person is doing or about to do an act which is dangerous to himself is sufficient basis for the officer to suspect that the danger to that person is attributable to a mental disorder and to apprehend the person.
The Police have access to reports of past incidents associated with the person, whether he had sought treatment at IMH then, and other relevant information including medical history from the family members, to aid their assessment. Police officers can also consult mental health professionals at IMH via a dedicated phone line.
The Police regularly update their training, conducted by suitably qualified professionals, to ensure that it remains relevant. This point was reinforced by several Members, and we could not agree more the importance of training. For example, Police officers undergo a mental health awareness course designed by the Agency for Integrated Care which helps the officers identify and respond to persons observed with indications of mental health conditions. Apart from training, officers are also guided by a specific set of internal SOPs, which are regularly updated. To Mr Chua’s questions on amendment and implementation timelines, we will ensure that the amendments and the training provided to police officers will continue to enable them to intervene in a more timely manner while making decisions that underscore respect and empathy for persons with mental health conditions.
Mr Choo and Mr Yip alluded to the need for clarity on when the Police may make an apprehension. Ms He also asked about the time frame police would now apply in the assessment for danger.
The powers of apprehension under the MHCTA have been in place since 2008. The proposed amendments seek to allow the Police to intervene in a more timely manner, when the danger is there, even though it may not be immediately clear that the danger is imminent or when the person may turn violent.
I would like to echo Dr Syed Harun’s point that risk assessment, even for psychiatrists, is not a perfect science. It is not practicable to be too prescriptive. Doing so could bind the Police officers’ hands or prevent them from acting quickly when they should.
Situations on the ground can be dynamic, and they need to be given the latitude to make quick decisions in difficult situations. The safety of the public and family members around such a person, and of the person himself, should be a priority. As Dr Syed Harun puts it, no meaningful medical treatment is possible without first ensuring the safety of the patient and rescuer.
We agree with Mr Yip and Ms He that safeguards are nonetheless important. Let me state categorically that MHA and the Police do not condone officers abusing their powers or acting inappropriately. Police ground response force officers don body-worn cameras which ensure accountability and transparency. Their actions can be audited very easily because it is recorded.
If the officers have breached the law and committed criminal offences, the Police will refer the matter to the Attorney-General's Chamber for criminal prosecution.
If the officers are guilty of misconduct but it is not a criminal offence, the Police will conduct internal investigations and take disciplinary action as necessary. In serious cases, the officers are dismissed.
To Mr Ng's question on resourcing, we do not expect a significant increase in the number of referrals as a result of the amendments because the threshold is still quite high as pointed out previously by Dr Syed Harun. So, it is not a case that you suddenly are going to go out and make apprehensions. So, there is no anticipated increase in resourcing needs.
The Police intervene only when the person poses a danger to himself or others around him. The Police do not get involved in cases involving persons with mental health conditions but who do not pose any danger to himself or others.
Mr Ng and Mr Choo asked about the requirement for the public to assist a Police officer when he is making an apprehension. Such a provision is not new. The Criminal Procedure Code provides the same duty to assist a Police officer or any other person authorised to make an arrest. The intent is for the Police to be able to reasonably call upon members of the public to assist them in preventing individuals with mental health conditions from causing further harm to themselves or others.
To Ms He's question on whether the amendments are in compliance with the CRPD, we can confirm that the MHCTA continues to be in compliance after the amendments.
Sir, I will move on to other queries about the Bill.
Mr Yip asked how the amendment to the Police's obligations for non-arrestable offences apply to neighbour disputes or noise complaints, and whether such cases will be dismissed. The amendment does not affect how the Police respond to such incidents. This is because such incidents, in and of themselves, do not constitute criminal offences. We have explained the Government's view that neighbour disputes and noise complaints should be resolved through a community-based approach, where community partners, Government social or municipal agencies, and grassroots leaders work together to resolve the issues.
Communal issues between neighbours are not and should not be matters for the Police to intervene. The Police's resources should focus on the prevention, deterrence, and detection of crime. They will respond to neighbour disputes and noise complaints only where there are law and order concerns.
Mr Speaker, I hope I have addressed Members' queries. I thank them once again for their support of the Bill. Sir, I beg to move.
Mr Speaker: Do Members have any clarifications for Minister Teo? Ms He?
Ms He Ting Ru: I thank the Minister for her reply. I just have one quick clarification. This relates to the High Court judgment in Mah. At paragraph 30 in the High Court judgment, it states that the Attorney-General submits that there is no practical difference between the terms \"apprehend\" and \"arrest\", and a person is apprehended under section 7 of the MHCTA when he is compelled to accompany a Police officer to be examined by a medical practitioner.
So, given that the Minister stressed earlier that there is a difference between apprehension and arrest, I would like to understand and seek clarification about the Attorney-General's submissions during the High Court case, and how that squares with what was said earlier.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not familiar with the case that she cited specifically. But what I was trying to get to is that the treatment of a person who is apprehended and a person who is arrested, from the Police's standpoint, is quite clearly different. When a person has been apprehended, the next course of action is to bring them to a medical facility for treatment. When a person is arrested, that next course of action is to bring them to a lock-up where they may then be investigated further. So, I hope that that clarifies things.
If there is a specific question on whether it conflicts with the specific part of the law that Ms He highlighted, with your permission, Sir, may I invite her to file a PQ so that we can deal with it properly. It probably does not impact the way in which the amendments ought to be considered.
Mr Speaker: Ms He.
Ms He Ting Ru: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just wanted to seek clarification about the point made about the procedural difference as well between the apprehension and the arrest, which I think the Minister has clarified. Upon apprehension, can I just confirm that the person being apprehended does not actually get taken in a police cell, or into a lock-up, and instead, is directly taken down to seek medical attention?
Mrs Josephine Teo: I said that probably at least three times, but I am happy to confirm again.
Mr Speaker: Any other clarifications for Minister Teo?
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mrs Josephine Teo]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 5.10 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 4.54 pm until 5.10 pm.
Sitting resumed at 5.10 pm.
[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Mental Capacity (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Eric Chua): Mdm Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Social and Family Development, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
Under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA), a Donor may appoint a Donee through a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA). If the Donor loses mental capacity, the LPA allows the Donee to decide on the Donor's personal welfare, property and other affairs.
Previously, LPAs were made using hard copy forms. In 2021, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) amended the MCA to digitalise the LPA process. This provided more convenience and facilitated an uptake in the number of LPAs created. The online LPA system was rolled out on 14 November 2022.
The LPA is a legal document which confers powers enabling a Donee to decide on the Donor's personal welfare, property and other affairs. In most cases, the property, such as a Housing and Development Board (HDB) flat, a private condominium apartment or a landed property, is registered under the Land Titles Act. To transfer ownership of such a property, there is no need for a deed. However, for property not registered under the Land Titles Act, transfer of ownership must be made by way of a deed. Hence, an LPA is executed as a deed, so that irrespective of the type of property, the Donee has the power to make the necessary transactions for the benefit of the Donor.
Prior to the electronic LPAs, the hard copy form contained a statement in the signature box where the Donor physically signs, that the LPA is \"signed (or marked) and delivered as a deed by Donor\". Section 12A(1)(a) of the MCA is intended to replicate this for electronic LPAs and specifies that the electronic record must clearly state on its face that it is intended to be a deed.
Unfortunately, the electronic LPA, unlike the hard copy form, did not contain this required statement. Two Members of the House have also filed Parliamentary Questions on the matter and I would like to take the opportunity to address them here.
First, we apologise for this omission and for any inconvenience this may have caused. Since 5 January this year, the electronic LPA has been revised to include this statement.
Next, let me touch on the implications of the omission. For the approximately 87,000 electronic LPAs made between 14 November 2022 and 4 January 2024, there is some uncertainty as to whether the LPAs were validly made.
Hard copy LPAs, on the other hand, were not affected by this omission. Till date, MSF is not aware of any actual harm suffered by Donees or Donors. Many of the Donors that made the LPAs continue to have mental capacity, and so, there is no need yet for the Donees to act on their behalf. It is possible that some Donees have begun to exercise the powers in some of the affected electronic LPAs, but we are not aware of any challenge to the exercise of those powers by third parties. This Bill will remove any future potential complications.
Lastly, on the process by which the electronic LPA form was approved for deployment, MSF had an internal proofreading and vetting process. The forms were prepared by the staff of the Office of the Public Guardian and was vetted by the Public Guardian, as well as by a separate Legal Unit. Unfortunately, no system of process checks can be 100% accurate, as this case shows. In fact, the electronic LPA forms go through various parties, including certificate issuers who are people familiar with the hard copy forms, such as lawyers or doctors. Despite this, it took nearly a year before a member of the public noticed the difference and wrote in to enquire.
Let me now turn to the Mental Capacity (Amendment) Bill proper. Our key consideration was to ensure certainty of the validity of the LPAs which the Donors had made, so that the Donors would not have to take steps to re-make their LPAs.
The Bill provides for the retroactive validation of the affected LPAs by introducing a new section 12B in the MCA.
Specifically, subsections (1) and (2) provide that an LPA made between 14 November 2022 and 4 January 2024, both dates inclusive, using the online LPA system, is not invalid as a deed and not invalidly created by reason only that it was not made in compliance with section 12A(1)(a). Our intent is to validate all affected electronic LPAs, provided they comply with all other legal requirements for the making of an LPA. Subsection (3) additionally provides that no legal proceedings may be instituted on or after 6 March 2024 over the validity of these LPAs by reason of the instruments, or forms, used in the making of the LPA not being in accordance with section 12A(1)(a).
With this amendment, the uncertainty over the validity of all affected electronic LPAs will be removed. Again, we apologise for the omission and assure affected Donors that they do not need to re-make their LPAs. With that, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Don Wee.
Mr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I declare my interest as a pro bono deputy with the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG).
I support this amendment Bill, which is necessary to retroactively validate the electronic LPAs certified from 14 November 2022 to 4 January 2024. I was concerned to learn about the omission of the sentence in the LPA expressly stating that it is intended to be a deed. I would like to ask the Ministry to explain in greater detail, what exactly is the significance of an LPA being classified as a deed and why this distinction is important under the Mental Capacity Act?
Secondly, the process of retroactive validation is through the inclusion of the new section 12B. All affected LPA documents will be validated when this section passes into law and comes into force. With this change, affected Donors do not need to remake their LPAs and they would not need to take any action. Mdm Deputy Speaker, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] May I seek clarification regarding the treatment of the electronic LPAs during interim period before the Bill becomes law? How are affected parties be protected and whether there have been any cases of disgruntled family members of affected donors contesting the validity of the LPAs and requesting new donees to be appointed?
Considering that 87,000 electronic LPAs are affected, will the affected individuals be notified and updated on this retroactive validation?
(In English): It was reported in the press that the Ministry had received feedback on the omitted sentence from a member of the public in October 2023. What measures are being taken to ensure that such omissions do not occur in the future, both in terms of electronic LPAs and other related documents?
I would like to take this opportunity to ask the Ministry if the take-up rate for LPAs is on target? In addition, as I had shared in the House before, would the Ministry consider reviewing and enhancing the safeguards for Donors to prevent potential financial exploitation? If Donees siphon away or spend the Donors' monies carelessly, other family members or our national coffers will have to pay for the care of the Donors. Presently, these cases of opportunistic Donees are very few, but their numbers are likely to increase as our population ages.
Finally, I would like to ask for an update on measures to simplify and expedite the process for deputyship, with reference to my own experience as a pro bono deputy with the OPG.
For clients who have lost their mental capacity, medical diagnoses need to be submitted when applying for a Court order to appoint a pro bono Donee. What is the average duration required to retrieve such medical records? What is the role of the National Electronic Health Record (NEHR) system in assisting the affected parties with retrieving and sharing the necessary information in a timely manner?
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Ms Hany Soh.
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I declare that I am a practising lawyer. I rise in support of this Bill.
This Bill purports to remediate the omission in the electronic LPA documents, due to which approximately 87,000 LPA documents are exposed to potential legal challenge. These 87,000 LPAs were certified between 14 November 2022 and 4 January 2024. The omission is in respect of the statutory requirement pursuant to section 12A(1)(a) of the Mental Capacity Act 2008, for an LPA to state expressly that it is intended to be a deed by the Donor.
Madam, inadvertent mistakes do occur despite best efforts and stringent safeguards against the same. The primary lesson in every such episode, is how we all can be better and actually take all the steps to be better. I appreciate that the OPG that they have been transparent in accounting for its mistake and swift in remedying the potential consequences. The electronic LPA was a laudable initiative and which has benefited numerous Singaporeans.
In our mission to be and do better, I seek several clarifications over the issue.
Firstly, has the OPG ascertained whether any of the 87,000 LPA Donors have since become mentally incapacitated? While this Bill negates the need for any remedial actions on the Donors' part, Donees could understandably be anxious and uncertain about the ramifications stemming from the error, coupled with the fact that the LPA Donor is no longer able to amend his or her LPA.
Next, has the OPG directly notified all affected parties? This would include but not necessarily be limited to the Donors and Donees but, perhaps, also the lawyers who may have assisted in the Donor's e-submissions of the affected LPAs. Additionally, how has the OPG, at the organisational level; as well as MSF, at the Ministry level, been assisting and supporting those affected?
As part of its rectification efforts and aside from this Bill, has or will the OPG and MSF consider enlisting the assistance of the members of the legal profession and other appropriate personnel? Our community is our greatest and most valuable resource and we have many who stand ready to volunteer their assistance.
It would also be understandable for the affected Donors and/or Donees to want to relook at the affected LPAs. In this regard, will the OPG consider permitting them to do so and if they choose to do so, also allow for them to make amendments at no charge?
Lastly, LPA Donors and Donees have been able to apply for a hard copy and certified true copy of the LPA through the OPG's portal. To assure those affected beyond a shadow of a doubt, would the Minister please confirm that the copies of the LPA ,which have been issued by the OPG, remain valid following the passage of this Bill and that there will be no need for any re-application or re-issuance?
I thank the Minister in advance for his response to my clarifications. I would like to also take this opportunity to encourage the officers at the OPG and MSF to take this lesson in their stride and continue the good work they have been doing for all Singaporeans.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mdm Deputy Speaker, in the event we lose mental capacity, an LPA allows us to appoint a trusted individual, called a Donee, to make decisions on our behalf regarding our finances, property and healthcare. This is an invaluable tool. It ensures that our wishes are respected, even if we can no longer express them ourselves.
The move towards digital LPAs is a welcomed step towards greater efficiency and accessibility. However, the recent discovery concerning the omission of a statement in electronic LPAs raises grave concerns. While I understand that retrospective action has been taken, I seek some clarifications.
First, what would have been the legal implications for holders of LPA documents missing the required sentence? Second, why was this oversight not identified earlier? What drafting and vetting processes failed in transporting the physical LPA to the online version? Third, have there been any Court cases challenging the validity of e-LPAs, due to this missing clause? How will this be resolved? If there is any legal cost involved resultantly, which party will bear the costs?
Moving forward, how does the Ministry plan to inform LPA Donors about the corrective changes made? Will they receive a hard copy letter outlining the necessary information? More importantly, what measures will be put in place to prevent similar situations from happening in the future? Will there be a system in place to check and ensure all essential clauses are included in future e-documents prepared by the Government?
In conclusion, Mdm Deputy Speaker, the Government must address these concerns promptly and effectively. The Government should not allow such concerns to cast a shadow of doubt over the overall benefits of adopting a digital system for Government services. Ensuring public trust and confidence in these systems require transparency and proactive measures to prevent future issues.
Let us continue to embrace technological advancements while safeguarding the legal validity and effectiveness of the use of electronic documents in Singapore. This is vitally important as we continue to encourage Singaporeans to plan for end-of-life issues early. I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua.
Mr Eric Chua: Mdm Deputy Speaker, I thank Members for the thoughtful questions raised and for their support for the Mental Capacity (Amendment) Bill.
With this amendment to the Mental Capacity Act, the affected electronic LPAs, made between 14 November 2022 and 4 January 2024, will be retroactively validated. Affected Donors do not need to re-make their LPAs and no action is required on their part. To date, MSF has not received any requests for electronic LPAs to be re-made.
Several questions have been raised by Members on the impact to those affected, as well as the support provided. Let me address these questions in turn.
Ms Hany Soh asked about how many of the 87,000 affected LPA Donors have since become mentally incapacitated and if Certified True Copies of electronic LPAs that have been issued would have to be re-issued.
Currently, there is no requirement for the Donee to inform the OPG when the Donor loses mental capacity or when an LPA is used. Nonetheless, according to our records, the vast majority of the affected LPAs have not yet been shared with third parties.
The Bill, once it comes into effect, will remove any uncertainty over the validity of these LPAs on the basis of the omitted statement. In addition, third parties who have transacted with Donees based on a Certified True Copy of the electronic LPA may continue to rely on these documents for the transaction. However, we recommend that third parties request for the online registered LPA rather than a Certified True Copy, to ensure that they obtain the most updated version.
Ms Hany Soh and Mr Don Wee also asked how affected parties will be supported and protected in the interim and if there have been challenges made against the affected LPAs. Since the issue was made public, MSF has not been made aware of any such challenges being brought against the affected electronic LPAs. Subsection (3) of the Bill provides that no legal proceedings may be instituted on or after 6 March 2024 over the validity of these LPAs by reason of the instruments or forms, used in the making of the LPA not being in accordance with section 12A(1)(a).
Ms Hany Soh, Mr Don Wee and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked if there will be notice given to affected Donors, to inform them that their LPAs will now be recognised as valid. As no action is required by these Donors, we will not send individual notices. Instead, a note will be affixed to the registration page of affected electronic LPAs to point to the retroactive validating provision, when the Bill comes into effect.
Queries were also raised by Members on measures to strengthen our processes, and on enhancing the LPA and deputyship regimes.
Ms Hany Soh, Mr Don Wee and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about possible measures that can be taken to ensure such an incident does not happen again, including enlisting the assistance of the legal profession. While no system of checks can be a 100% foolproof, MSF will continue to proof-read and vet all documents as thoroughly and as meticulously as possible. We will perform a final vetting of all documents prior to a system launch, to ensure compliance with operational as well as legal requirements.
Mr Don Wee has also raised several other queries relating to the LPA and deputyship regime.
On the safeguards to prevent the financial exploitation of Donors, the Mental Capacity Act contains several provisions to address potential cases of financial exploitation. For instance, if the court is satisfied that fraud or undue pressure was used to induce a Donor to execute an LPA, the court may direct that the LPA be not registered or revoked, amongst other things. The Public Guardian may also investigate any alleged contravention of the Act and may interview a Donor to ascertain whether he or she had executed an LPA under fraud or undue pressure.
In addition, financial exploitation of Donors may also amount to criminal offences, such as under the Penal Code. If any person suspects or believes that a person who lacks mental capacity is being financially exploited, they may report this to the Public Guardian and the Police. The Office of the Public Guardian promptly looks into such reports and works closely with the relevant agencies such as banks to take swift action and minimise harm done to the person who lacks mental capacity. In addition, the Public Guardian may also apply to the court to suspend or revoke the LPA or place the Donee or Deputy under closer supervision.
Today, before an application for deputyship can be made, the individual intending to apply for deputyship will have to obtain a medical report from a doctor certifying the individual’s lack of mental capacity. This medical report has to be dated no earlier than six months before the deputyship application, which ensures that the information provided is current. An assessment of mental capacity assesses an individual’s ability to take in information presented and demonstrate sufficient reasoning in order to make informed decisions. As mental capacity may fluctuate over time, a proper assessment of the current mental capacity of an individual cannot rely on historical health information in medical records such as the National Electronic Health Record (NEHR).
A deputyship application may also be filed on the simplified process if all relevant persons to the individual who lacks mental capacity consent to the application and where the deputyship application is for specific orders under the Mental Capacity Act, such as to withdraw up to $80,000 of P’s monies, where P refers to the person who lacks mental capacity or other common orders such as to consent to medical treatment. The simplified deputyship application typically takes four to six weeks, which is faster than the standard deputyship applications. We will continue to review how we can improve the process while ensuring sufficient safeguards against potential fraud or undue pressure.
Mr Don Wee has also asked about the LPA take-up rates. Indeed, making an LPA is an important step in planning ahead for ourselves and our loved ones. With an LPA in place, we can be better assured that our loved ones are empowered to support us and manage our affairs, should we lose our mental capacity. To date, close to 210,000 Singaporeans who are aged 50 and above, have made an LPA. The LPA Form 1 application fee is currently waived for Singapore citizens till 31 March 2026. Let me take this opportunity to also reiterate MSF’s commitment to supporting Singaporeans in their pre-planning efforts, and urge those who have yet to do so to make an LPA as soon as possible. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Any clarifications?
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Eric Chua]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Minister of State for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth): Mdm Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
Co-operative societies, or \"co-ops\" for short, are member-owned businesses that serve a social purpose. They operate on the principles of self-help and mutual assistance and are formed when individuals come together to address their common economic or social needs, or the needs identified in the community. We have a total of 79 registered co-ops today, broadly categorised as credit co-ops and non-credit co-ops.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
Credit co-ops promote savings and grant loans to their members who generally share a common bond. Members typically come from the same workplace, the same industry, or the same community. There are 22 credit co-ops serving 130,000 members. As of 31 March 2023, members’ deposits in credit co-ops amounted to $823 million, and loans to members amounted to $206 million.
There are also 57 non-credit co-ops that operate in various sectors from retail to social services. The public may be more familiar with NTUC-affiliated co-ops that moderate the costs of essential goods and services. These co-ops have become household names. An example is the NTUC Fairprice Co-op. However, there are many other smaller and less known co-ops that serve their members in their own respective ways.
Our co-ops help strengthen the social fabric of our nation. Co-ops are one of the earliest forms of community self-help organisations. With a history of almost a hundred years, our co-op sector has continued to evolve and adapt to society’s changing needs. For example, co-ops today enhance their programmes to care for and serve the vulnerable within our community or seniors in need. One such co-op is the Employment for Persons with Intellectual Disability Co-op, or E4PID for short. E4PID aims to establish and operate social enterprises that employ persons with intellectual disabilities. Another is the Silver Horizon Travel Co-op, which encourages active living and building friendships through customised travel programmes for seniors.
At the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY), we continue to see co-ops' inherent value in building social capital and a more caring and cohesive society.
The Co-operative Societies Act was last amended in 2018, to meet three key objectives: first, to strengthen the competency and governance capabilities of co-op officers; second, to enhance regulatory powers to enable swift intervention in distressed or errant co-ops; and third, to update regulatory requirements to better support co-ops' operations and development.
Following the Act amendments, subsidiary legislation was made in 2019 to prescribe a competency framework for key officers of credit co-ops. Our primary focus was on credit co-ops given their fiduciary responsibility for members deposits. Persons taking up specified roles such as Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer must have relevant work experience and educational qualifications – this is to ensure that they are suitably qualified. The requirements took effect immediately for new hires. Existing officers who did not meet the requirements were given a transition period to upgrade their skills and were supported with grants to do so. To date, most affected officers have met the competency and training requirements.
The Registry of Co-operative Societies (RCS) had also worked with the co-op industry body, the Singapore National Co-operative Federation (SNCF) to design a Mandatory Induction Course that all members of the Committee of Management (COM) and key officers of a co-op must attend. This training ensures a baseline understanding of regulatory requirements as well as best practices for good governance. Madam, 502 co-op officers have attended the course since its inception in January 2017.
MCCY continually reviews our policies to ensure they remain relevant and effective for our co-op sector. We receive feedback from the sector on the many challenges that they face and then we assess if and how we may update our regulations to address concerns raised. We have prioritised some of the more pressing concerns and seek to address them in this particular set of amendments.
Let me move now to the proposed amendments.
The Bill before the House aims to address three key objectives: first, to facilitate co-op operations so they can better serve members' interests; second, to provide greater clarity on specific legislative provisions; and third, to make technical amendments to update the Act in accordance with current practices.
Let me begin with the first objective of facilitating co-op operations. One amendment within this category addresses feedback we received in relation to co-ops' distribution of dividends from reserves.
Under the existing Act, a co-op may only declare dividends from the preceding year's surplus. If a co-op incurs a loss or makes lower profits in a financial year, members will either receive no dividends or lower dividends, even if the co-op has reserves and is financially robust. Hence, co-ops requested for flexibility to use their reserves in such circumstances.
Co-ops are generally advised to be prudent and to preserve their reserves so that they can meet their business needs, act as a buffer against unanticipated losses, and to ensure their long-term viability. However, we note that through their prudent practices over the years, many co-ops have accumulated healthy reserves. Hence, we propose to give co-ops some flexibility to tap their reserves to pay dividends to their members. We acknowledge that dividends are a key benefit for co-op members and are akin to interest on savings in the case of credit co-ops.
Similarly, we will give co-ops some flexibility to use their reserves to pay honoraria to their COM. We think that a co-op should be allowed to compensate its COM members for their contributions and services, despite incurring some losses or earning lower profits in a particular financial year, if it is financially strong and has been dutifully building its reserves.
The use of reserves for the payment of dividends or honoraria will be subject to the Registrar's approval. This acts as a safeguard to ensure that co-ops use their reserves prudently. The Registrar will, for example, assess if the dividend and honoraria rates proposed are reasonable. Co-ops must demonstrate that they continue to maintain sufficient capital buffer and healthy reserves for their long-term viability. Credit co-ops must also meet the minimum capital adequacy ratio (CAR), after the payments are made. The Registrar may, in addition, consider past compliance track records to ensure that the co-ops are well-governed to manage their reserves and in the case of credit co-ops, that they meet all prudential requirements.
The amendments will also expand the functions of co-ops' Annual General Meeting (AGM) to include considering and resolving the use of reserves for dividends and honoraria. While the payment of any allowance, honoraria or other benefit to the COM is already subject to members' approval at a general meeting, we are amending the Act to expressly state that it is a function of the AGM to consider and resolve such payments. These changes aim to promote co-ops' accountability and transparency to their members.
The Act currently allows a COM member to receive an honoraria or allowance, but not both. This may create a challenge for co-ops who wish to pay their COM members an honoraria, as well as incidental allowances in the form of, for example, a \"transport allowance\". We, thus, propose to remove this restriction. The principle remains that an individual should not be remunerated twice for the same role. However, the amendments will give co-ops more operational flexibility in designing benefits packages for their COM and their members.
Another amendment to facilitate co-ops' operations, is to remove the requirement to obtain the Registrar's approval for issuance of bonds and debentures. Issuance of bonds and debentures to raise capital is, ultimately, a business decision for a co-op's management and members to make, provided that its by-laws permit such issuance. A co-op will be expected to comply with the law and its by-laws in doing so. Should a co-op be found to have acted irresponsibly to the detriment of itself and its members, the Registrar may separately review and exercise his or her powers under the Act, to take appropriate action.
Under the current Act, there are moratorium periods during which a member holding a bonus certificate or bonus share in a co-op cannot realise its value. Historically, these moratorium periods were put in place to prevent excessive distribution of a co-op's net surplus in the form of cash payments. They are, in fact, meant to help a co-op keep surplus monies needed for reinvestment within the co-op, where necessary. There is a limited carve-out in specific circumstances where the member is a foreign worker.
We propose to expand this carve-out to where the member is deceased or bankrupt, has a winding-up order made in respect of it where it is a co-op, or has been dissolved where it is a trade union. In these cases, the person authorised to administer the property of the member, such as the executor or administrator, Official Assignee, or liquidator, may receive from the co-op the value of the member's bonus certificate or bonus share. The proposed amendments take into account these unique circumstances and the immediate need for such payouts, balanced against the rationale of preventing excessive distribution of a co-op's net surplus.
We will also amend the Act to ease a co-op's application for registration of by-law amendments. Currently, such an application must be signed by the chairperson and two COM members. With the amendment, it will suffice for either the chairperson or secretary to sign the application, after the co-op has obtained members' approval for the amendments at a general meeting. This ensures that an individual with the appropriate authority signs the application on the co-op's behalf.
Mr Speaker, allow me to move on to the next objective, namely to provide greater clarity on the calculation of co-op contributions to the Central Co-operative Fund (CCF) or the Singapore Labour Foundation. Under the Act, a co-op must contribute 5% of the first $500,000 of its surplus to the CCF and 20% of any surplus exceeding $500,000 to the CCF or to the Singapore Labour Foundation. The CCF is used to promote and develop the co-op sector, including grants for formation of new co-ops, as well as building capabilities of existing co-ops. Co-op contributions to the Singapore Labour Foundation are, on the other hand, used to support initiatives in line with the Foundation's mission of furthering the development of a labour movement of unions and co-ops, and to promote the welfare of union members and their families.
The policy intent has always been to exclude certain capital gains in computing co-op contributions to the CCF or the Singapore Labour Foundation. These are gains from disposal of shares held by the co-op, or from disposal of immovable property owned by the co-op and used for the co-op's own operations. The policy intent is currently reflected in subsidiary legislation under the Act. But we propose to reflect it in the Act itself, with some edits to the wording for greater clarity.
We also propose to amend the Act to empower the Minister to exclude specified Government grants from being subjected to co-op contributions. The Minister may make these exclusions by order in the Gazette, as and when appropriate.
Sir, this brings me to the proposed technical amendments. Clauses 3 and 4 of the Bill are intended to remove the need for the Registrar to have a seal, which is affixed on the certificate of registration of co-ops. This is aligned with the trend towards digitalisation across Government, where it is now common to use digital signatures and certifications for authentication purposes.
Clause 6 will remove the requirement for a co-op to submit its financial statements to an auditor within six months after the close of the financial year, since a co-op must already submit its audited financial statements to the Registrar within six months after the close of the financial year. The Registrar will have the power to extend the time for a co-op to do so.
Finally, clause 7 seeks to amend the Act to clarify that a co-op must send a notice of a general meeting to each member at least 15 clear days before the date of the meeting. The by-laws can require a longer, but not shorter, notice period. This ensures that members are provided with sufficient time to review the materials and propose resolutions prior to the meeting.
Sir, we conducted a three-week long public consultation on these proposed amendments. Of the feedback received, many were clarifications and we have replied to the respective respondents. We also refined some of the proposed amendments for greater clarity. There were also suggestions on other matters, beyond the scope of this round of amendments, such as further changes relating to CCF contributions. These require more study, so we will include them in future policy reviews, along with other feedback from the co-op sector from our ground engagements.
Mr Speaker, Sir, the purpose of our co-ops is to serve their social mission and the community. They are businesses that do good and generate value for our society. However, like any other businesses, co-ops face challenges, such as rising business costs. Some co-ops are more successful at attracting members and customers, as well as expanding their range of services. There are also co-ops that decide to close, due to concerns of long-term financial viability, lack of manpower or the lack of succession planning.
Notwithstanding, we continue to see potential in co-ops and their ability to contribute to the community. MCCY will continue to work closely with the Singapore National Co-operative Federation (SNCF) to engage the public and continue to review our regulatory and administrative requirements, to ensure they remain facilitative towards the formation and operation of co-ops.
It is crucial, however, that co-ops are well-governed. They should prioritise strengthening their governance and building their capabilities, to protect their members' interests, which includes members' deposits in the case of credit co-ops.
To this end, MCCY also works closely with SNCF, as I have mentioned earlier, who is also the Secretariat to the CCF Committee, to provide resources and training opportunities for co-ops. MCCY also reviews and updates the CCF Grant Framework periodically, to ensure it remains supportive of co-ops' development efforts. Co-ops should continue to tap on CCF grants to constantly upskill their COM members, key officers and staff, to deal with the changing business landscapes and raise governance standards.
The Bill will provide our co-ops with more operational flexibility. Co-op's management and members should share responsibilities and ensure that the decisions are made in the co-op's best interests, so that they can continue to do their best, to serve their social mission and contribute to our thriving society. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Leader of the House. Minister of State Tan.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment of Debate","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister of State for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Alvin Tan): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the debate be now adjourned.
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the debate be now adjourned.\" − [Mr Alvin Tan]. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Minister of State Tan, resumption of debate, what day?
Mr Alvin Tan: Tomorrow, Sir.
Mr Speaker: So be it. Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Building a Culture of Gender Equality","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\"
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Razwana Begum.
Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, I stand today to talk about gender inequality. I am aware that a great deal has already been said in this Chamber about gender inequality. But, Mr Speaker, despite all of these words, there is still more that needs to be said and there is still more that needs to be done.
Singapore, like every other country, remains deeply divided by gender, with gender having a visible and invisible impact on how every one of us live our life. Gender has an influence on the careers we choose, how much we get paid, our role in personal and professional relationships; our role as parents and caregivers; our ability to participate in decisions that affect our lives; our status in society; our safety at home and on the streets; our health; our finances; and our housing.
Mr Speaker, it is almost impossible to think of an aspect of life that is not influenced by gender. This, however, is not all bad news.
Men and women are different. We are biologically different, and we are also different because of how we are raised and the roles, expectations and assumptions that society, culture and religion ascribe to gender. And, Mr Speaker, many of these differences are positive and need to be celebrated and reinforced. I do not want to live in a world where men and women are identical to each other, as that would be dull, unproductive and inconsistent with many deeply held social, cultural and religious beliefs.
Gender equality does not mean that men and women are the same. What it does mean is that a person's rights and opportunities do not depend on being male or female, but on their individual preferences, character and skills.
Mr Speaker, our Government's commitment to the equality of women can be traced back to 1959, when five women were elected to Singapore's Legislative Assembly. Since then, other significant milestones include enactment of the Women's Charter in 1961; establishment of the Singapore Council of Women's Organisations in 1980; accession to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women in 1995; launch of the Conversations on Singapore Women's Development initiative in 2020; Year of Celebrating SG Women in 2021. More recently, the 2022 release of the White Paper on Singapore Women's Development outlines Singapore's commitment to a fair, equitable and inclusive society for all women.
Mr Speaker, the above initiatives are commendable and clearly demonstrate Singapore's strong and ongoing commitment to the equality of women and receive my unwavering endorsement. And, as the Vice President of Singapore Muslim Women's Association (PPIS), an organisation that was formed in 1952, I have seen first-hand the transformative power of our efforts.
Mr Speaker, both men and women benefit from gender equality and both men and women suffer from gender inequality. And, importantly, both men and women have a role to play in addressing gender inequality. Women cannot solve gender inequality without men and men cannot solve gender inequality without women.
Mr Speaker, as many of us will recall, International Women's Day is celebrated every year on 8 March. This year, the International Women's Day campaign theme was \"Inspire Inclusion\". While I agree with the campaign \"that we need to understand and value women's inclusion\", I do not believe that we can inspire or achieve inclusion, for women, if we do not include men in the conversation. We need to talk with men and boys, about gender and gender inequality, and have them as equal contributors as we build a culture of gender equality. If men are part of the problem – and sometimes they are – it makes sense to have them as part of the solution.
Mr Speaker, failure to respectfully and effectively engage with men and boys about gender inequality means that their views, opinions and ideas remain unheard. This means that we are designing solutions with incomplete data. It can also lead to men criticising or undermining gender equality and to men being excluded, abandoned or left behind in the debate about gender equality.
Mr Speaker, failure to respectfully and effectively engage with men and boys about gender inequality means that their views, opinions and ideas remain unheard. This means that we are designing solutions with incomplete data. It can also lead to men criticising or undermining gender equality and to men feeling excluded, abandoned, or left behind in the debate about gender equality.
Mr Speaker, a recent survey by Ipsos, in collaboration with the Global Institute for Women's Leadership at King's College London for International Women's Day, showed that 48% of Singaporeans \"think that we have gone so far in promoting women's equality that we are discriminating against men\". Interestingly, but probably not surprisingly, 57% of Singaporean men echoed this sentiment, in contrast to 29% of women.\"
Mr Speaker, failure to respectfully and effectively engage with men and boys can also lead to a climate a culture of hyper or alpha masculinity, and dangerous notions of what it is to be a man. I am sure that many of my hon parliamentarian colleagues have heard of Mr Andrew Tate. Mr Tate is a 37 year old English-American influencer. He had over 8.5 million followers on X, formerly Twitter, and his TikTok videos have been viewed 11.6 billion times.
In his videos, Mr Tate says that women belong in the home, cannot drive and are a man's property; women deserve to be physically, sexually and emotionally abused; and that sexual assault victims share responsibility for their assaults. Despite claiming that many of his comments were intended as a joke and have been taken out of context, his popularity on social media clearly shows that people are listening to him. And, Mr Speaker, I strongly suspect that many of these people are men and boys.
Mr Speaker, much has been said and written about the negative impact of gender inequality on women, so I thought it might be helpful to also highlight some of the negative impacts on men. In doing so, I am not in any way shying away from the fact that it is overwhelmingly women who bear the burden of gender inequality. It is women who are constantly over-represented in data about disadvantage, prejudice and violence. The purpose of highlighting the impact on men is not to negate the impact of gender inequality on women, nor to excuse men for what can be appalling and dangerous attitudes and behaviour, but to let men know that they will also be better off if we address gender inequality.
Mr Speaker, according to the 2024 Australian Man Box survey, men have measurably higher mortality and morbidity rates than women. Men die younger than women, and have higher rates of heart disease, stroke and diabetes. Men have higher rates of alcohol and substance abuse, are more frequently the victims and perpetrators of violent crime, drive dangerously and die in car accidents more often, are less likely to seek personal or health support and engage in risk-taking behaviour both in public and at work.
Men also have far higher rates of self-harm and suicide. Data from the Samaritans of Singapore shows that in 2022 there were 476 deaths by suicide, of which 317, or just over 66%, were men.
Mr Speaker, harmful gender norms also have a profound impact on violent and abusive behaviour by men. Men who ascribe to patriarchal notions of masculinity are more likely to be hostile or violent towards women, both at home and in the community.
Mr Speaker, addressing traditional gender norms and the construction of masculinity, will have a positive impact on not only the health and well-being of men, but also on the safety and well-being of women and the broader community. This, in turn, will have a positive impact on Government and community spending on health, policing and associated welfare services. To address traditional gender norms and the construction of masculinity, we need to talk with men.
Mr Speaker, now that I have outlined some of the negative impacts of gender inequality on men, I will now outline some of the benefits to men of addressing gender inequality. I am doing so, because it is important that men recognise that they too will benefit from a culture of gender equality. At present, far too many men think that gender equality is only relevant to women, or worse, that gender equality is making things worse for men.
Mr Speaker, men benefit in many ways from a culture of gender equality and a reframing of masculinity. They benefit personally, through enhanced physical and emotional health and well-being.
Men benefit from more fulfilling and successful personal relationships with their wives and children. Greater flexibility with respect to gender-based roles, responsibilities and norms within relationships, assists relationships to become more egalitarian and more emotionally and physically fulfilling for both partners.
Mr Speaker, men also benefit when the girls and women they care about have fairer, safer and more fulfilling lives, careers and relationships. Most men want the women in their lives to be safe from harassment and abuse, to be able to pursue a career of choice and to be treated and paid the same as their male counterparts, and to find love in relationship that is based on mutual respect and genuine partnership.
We need to harness the inherent protectiveness that men frequently have towards women, without inadvertently reinforcing the unhelpful notion that women are helpless creatures who cannot survive without a man, or that women should be placed on a pedestal and treated as a possession.
Men also benefit from friendships, communities and workplaces with greater gender diversity and equality, and from the invaluable and unique perspectives and contributions that women bring to these systems. Men can learn a great deal from women, just as women can learn a great deal from men. And, of course, Mr Speaker, men benefit from lower rates of incarceration and criminal or social sanctions due to problematic or unlawful behaviour towards women, including physical and sexual assault and abuse, and domestic violence.
Mr Speaker, a culture of gender equality also brings significant benefits to Singapore as a nation. A culture of gender equality will assist to make Singapore's institutions, businesses and workplaces more representative, and therefore more productive and profitable. At the same time, a culture of gender equality will assist to create a society where relationships between all people, including between men and women, are based on respect, fairness and equity, rather than an outdated and dangerous power-based norms on stereotypes.
Mao Zedong is frequently quoted as saying: \"Women hold up half the sky\". In an ideal word this is true, however, in reality, I suspect that the ratio is not so equal or fair. Mr Speaker, in some areas of contemporary life, women hold up 100% of the sky, and in others almost zero.
Mr Speaker, I would like to conclude with four suggestions for a way forward.
First and foremost, we need to respectfully, effectively and comprehensively engage with boys and men. We need to talk with men, we need to listen to men and we need to support men to be part of the journey as we build a culture of gender equality. Men need to be and feel that they are equal and valued stakeholders in discussions and decisions about gender equality.
Mr Speaker, we need to engage with men from all cultural, social, racial and economic backgrounds. We also need to engage with boys. Boys are taught, observe and model gender stereotypes and norms at a very early age, while at home, at school, in sport and in public. If we want to influence how boys turn into men in Singapore, we need to start early. And I do not mean just telling boys about what is right and wrong but sitting down with boys and listening to them and learning from their views and opinions.
Mr Speaker, my second suggestion relates to men being role models. Gender equality is not the responsibility of other men, it is the responsibility of all men. We need more men, including men in positions of authority, influence and respect to be role models and ambassadors for gender equality. Business leaders, politicians, teachers, coaches, and sport and music stars – all can have a significant impact on shifting the attitudes and behaviours of other men and boys.
As part of being a role model and ambassador, we need more men to step forward and state publicly and proudly how they can do things differently. I call on my hon male colleagues in the Chamber today to step forward and be part of this campaign.
Mr Speaker, my suggestions may inaccurately suggest that I have let women off the hook. Far from it. While women are, without a doubt, at substantial and disproportionate disadvantage as a result of gender norms, they also have an important role to play in challenging and addressing gender norms.
One important aspect of this role is for women to be vigilant about either deliberately or inadvertently reinforcing the notion of toxic masculinity. While many men do need to change their attitudes and behaviour towards women, it is unhelpful if the only message that men get are that gender inequality is their fault and that everything they do is wrong or inadequate. It is also unhelpful for women to deliberately adopt or reinforce gender stereotypical norms. Just like men, women also need reflect on how they may be contributing to gender inequality and how they can do things differently.
Mr Speaker, my third suggestion relates to the empowerment of men. I understand that many may find this an odd suggestion, as it often quite often accurately said that men hold too much power and that they can sometimes use this power to the disadvantage of women.
Mr Speaker, the Canadian International Development Agency defines empowerment as \"empowerment is about people – both women and men – taking control over their lives: setting their own agendas, gaining skills, building self-confidence, solving problems and developing self-reliance.\"
It is with this definition in mind that I am arguing that we need to empower more men to step outside the dominant gender norm and to have permission to adopt attitudes and behaviours that may not be considered as traditionally masculine.
Consider the role of men as caregivers. Mr Speaker, in 2022 the National Council of Social Services \"Quality of Life of Caregivers\" study showed that only 30% of men are caregivers, compared to 70% of women. This is despite the 2023 State of the World's Fathers report that showed that both men and women want care to be central to their lives. These results suggest that men do want to play an active caring role as husbands, fathers and sons, yet are constrained from doing so.
While in Singapore the number of stay-home dads has increased, we need to do more to develop an environment that promotes men adopting caring roles within the family and community, and that such work by men is normal, acceptable and important.
Mr Speaker, two decades ago, there was a comprehensive global campaign to get girls and women interested in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, collectively known as STEM, and then traditionally considered male professions. This campaign has slowly and steadily produced positive results, and it is now quite common to see girls and women studying and working in STEM related disciplines.
There has been no similar push, either internationally or here in Singapore, for men to study or work in traditionally female professions, such as nursing, elder care, childcare, secretarial and social work. In fact, most people have not even heard of the \"HEAL\" professions: health, education, administration and literacy.
Mr Speaker, just as we empowered women to become interested in STEM professions and to work alongside men in these positions, we need to empower men to become interested in HEAL professions, and for men in those positions to be accepted as a norm. Doing so not only assists break down traditional gender roles, which is, in itself, a benefit, it also opens up a suite of currently unavailable career options and roles for men. This is a good thing for men; it is a good thing for women; and it is a good thing for Singapore.
Mr Speaker, for this to happen will require a concerted effort by men, women and the broader socio-political system. Traditional gender roles can be deeply entrenched and may take many years of coordinated whole-of-Government policy and practice guidance to shift.
Mr Speaker, this leads me to my fourth and final suggestion – a National Gender Equality Framework. A National Gender Equality Framework would articulate a clear roadmap to achieve gender equality across Singapore, underpinned by clear principles and measurable outcomes.
A national framework would complement existing policy commitments to women and contain whole-of-Government policy and practice guidance to combat unlawful or dangerous gender norms or stereotypes and empower women and men to achieve their full potential within an inclusive society. Importantly, the framework would also detail how men and boys, and women and girls, of all ages and backgrounds will be meaningfully involved the development and ongoing implementation of the framework.
Mr Speaker, Singapore proudly ranks as a global leader in many areas of public and social life, including law and order, efficiency of service delivery, levels of corruption, safety and security, and racial and religious harmony. Mr Speaker, it is now time for Singapore to be a global leader when it comes to gender equality. It is time for the men and women of Singapore to stand together to hold up the sky.
Mr Speaker: Minister of State Sun Xueling.
The Minister of State for Social and Family Development (Ms Sun Xueling): I thank Assoc Prof Razwana for moving a Motion on this important topic. Almost exactly two years ago, we had a nine-and-a-half-hour debate on the Motion on the White Paper on Singapore Women's Development. The White Paper, with its 25 action plans, was unanimously endorsed. Members shared their views and hopes for moving Singapore towards a fairer and more inclusive society.
I was very encouraged by what Member of Parliament Louis Ng said then, and I quote, \"that the action plans in the White Paper are good not only for women, but also for men, as they steer our society towards a healthier, fairer set of norms, cultures and practices\".
From the very start, the Singapore Government has treated women as the equal half of our society. The Women's Charter, which was passed in 1961, instituted the equal standing of men and women in marriage and ensured the welfare and protection of women and girls in Singapore.
Since then, our policies on education, housing, employment, healthcare, and access to justice have been and continue to be gender-neutral. Both men and women have equal access to opportunities and social support. Our laws on issues such as protection from violence and harm, and the upcoming Workplace Fairness Legislation, apply to both men and women. The Government believes in the fundamental equality between persons and strives to create a society where all can pursue their aspirations freely and fully.
Our efforts are reflected in the tremendous progress for Singapore women over the years: we have achieved very high literacy rates of over 95%; three out of four women between the ages of 25 and 64 are employed; in Parliament, we have 30% women’s participation, above the international average of about 26%.
We are doing well by international standards. Singapore was ranked for the first time last year as among top 10 worldwide and first in Asia Pacific for gender equality in the United Nations Human Development Report's Gender Inequality Index (GII). Singapore was ranked amongst the top 10 again this year. We are very proud of this recognition as the GII is a composite measure of gender inequality along three dimensions: reproductive health, empowerment – in terms of education and participation in politics – and the labour market.
However, we recognise that there is still work to be done. We embarked on the nationwide \"Conversations on Singapore Women Development\" in 2020 to hear Singaporeans' views on the challenges and aspirations of Singapore women.
Importantly, through the process, the Government made it clear that women's development and progress is not at the expense of men – but in partnership with men. Out of the nearly 6,000 Singaporeans who participated in these Conversations, one-fifth were men. I agree with Prof Razwana on the need to listen to men, and engage and support them to be part of this journey. Men are equally constrained by societal expectations of how they should behave or perform at home, or at work. We should recognise everyone’s individuality and intrinsic worth, so that more men and women can be empowered to realise their aspirations.
Last month, I delivered the opening remarks at the Singapore side-event on Singapore's whole-of-society partnership to transform mindsets at the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW). This is a key inter-governmental platform for UN member states and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) to come together to discuss important issues on women’s development. Mr Xander Ong, CEO of Centre for Fathering, was one of the panelists at the side event.
Xander’s participation at a CSW exemplifies the fact that in Singapore, we believe that changing mindsets on gender roles matters too and requires the partnership of both men and women. Xander spoke passionately about equal partnerships in parenting and sharing caregiving responsibilities in the family.
There are clear signs that men in Singapore are stepping up to play a role to make our society a fairer and more inclusive one.
I will share about further steps we are taking to build a culture for gender equality. The journey to shift mindsets towards gender stereotypes and roles starts from the family. Parents are our first role models and examples of partnership and respect between men and women. As parents, it is our responsibility to pass down and instil in our children the right values of respect between men and women, and be role models ourselves through our actions.
I am heartened that we are seeing positive mindset shifts towards active fathering. In the 2021 Marriage and Parenthood Survey, almost all married respondents, men and women, agreed that fathers and mothers are equally important as caregivers for children. Many studies, internationally and in Singapore, have also shown that children with more involved fathers have better developmental outcomes.
The Government is committed to helping fathers achieve their family aspirations.
Earlier this year, we doubled paternity leave from two to four weeks, with a clear message that we want paternal involvement and that, that should be the norm. I hope we can work towards a society where it is just as natural for fathers to take paternity leave and shared parental leave, so that both fathers and mothers can support their children in their early years.
With men taking a more active role in caregiving within the family, we hope that over time this will help to shift gender roles within the family. This would also encourage more equal sharing of caregiving responsibilities, towards elderly family members. We recognise that women are currently taking up a larger proportion of the caregiving burden. The Government is providing additional support to relieve burden on caregivers of seniors, both men and women through measures such as the doubling of the Home Caregiving Grant, from $200 to $400 a month from 1 March 2023.
The recently announced enhancement to the Matched Retirement Savings Scheme will also help boost the retirement savings of older Singapore Citizens, including caregivers, who have yet to accumulate the current Basic Retirement Sum in their CPF.
The journey of changing mindsets starts with the family, but does not end there.
In schools, the Government has enhanced our Character and Citizenship Education curriculum to address gender stereotypes and teach our children and youth the values of respect and appropriate behaviours in school to shape healthy social norms from young.
We also provide our students with Education and Career Guidance to explore a variety of education and career pathways based on their interests and strengths, and to not be limited by gender stereotypes. I am heartened to note that women comprise close to 40% of students studying STEM in our tertiary institutions. In 2020, women also make up 41% of our tech workforce, higher than the global average of 28%.
Prof Razwana spoke about empowering men to join the \"HEAL\", or the Health, Education, Administration and Literacy, professions. We are seeing a higher proportion of men in the nursing profession. The proportion of male nurses registered with the Singapore Nursing Board has increased, from 8.5% in 2011 to 12% in 2022. At the same time, the number of male preschool educators has increased by about 30% from 185 in 2021 to about 245 persons today. However, male preschool educators still make up less than 1% of the sector.
We will continue our efforts to attract talents, both men and women, into growing sectors such as healthcare and education. To quote Prof Razwana, \"It is a good thing for men, it is a good thing for women and it is a good thing for Singapore.\"
In the workplace, we must do more to facilitate equal opportunities for both men and women. We will strengthen workplace fairness through the upcoming Workplace Fairness Legislation. We are also encouraging flexible work arrangements (FWAs) as a workplace norm. This will make it easier for employees, both men and women, to request for FWAs.
To empower both women and men to better manage their family and work commitments, we have doubled the number of childcare places, and we recently announced the pilot infant childminding scheme, to provide parents with more options to care for their infants.
Beyond legislation and policies, each of us can do our part to foster fair, inclusive, and progressive workplaces.
Employers can implement corporate initiatives to empower women at the workplace and nurture qualified women to undertake leadership roles. It is heartening to see more corporate initiatives to nurture women talent, many of which are championed by men.
Managers and colleagues can support and help facilitate the re-entry of mothers back to the workforce after taking a break in their career. We must be equally supportive of fathers who need to take leave to care for their children.
In the community, we work with our partners and stakeholders to make Singapore a safe and empowering place for all. We note Prof Razwana's point that harmful gender norms can have a profound impact on violent and abusive behaviour by men. A Singapore civil society organisation, United Women Singapore, runs a \"Boys Empowered\" programme that creates a safe space for males to have conversations on healthy masculinity, male allyship, personal boundaries and the concept of gender stereotypes. It also equips them with skills to de-escalate and prevent situations of violence.
Next month, I will be leading an Inter-Ministerial Committee to present our 6th Periodic Report to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, or CEDAW in short. We will present the progress that Singapore has made since our last review in 2017. The CEDAW Committee, comprising 23 experts, will assess Singapore’s compliance with the CEDAW Convention to protect and empower women. We will put our best foot forward and present Singapore’s efforts, developments and achievements. We will not rest on our laurels and will continue to strengthen efforts towards gender equality.
The White Paper on Singapore Women’s Development is a 10-year roadmap and a framework to guide our whole-of-society effort; we will undertake a mid-term review in 2027 and report back to Parliament. But the intent of the White Paper exercise goes beyond policy and legislation; we cannot force a culture of gender equality through legislation. Rather, it aims to engender consciousness among Singaporeans on what all of us can do to help each other lead fulfilling lives, where a Singaporean, whether male or female, can pursue their aspirations freely and fully.
Changing mindsets on gender roles requires the partnership of both men and women. And this partnership starts in the family, continues in our schools, workplaces and in the community. We must work together across the whole-of-society, across all domains to change minds, change norms and change lives.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Pursuant to Standing Order 2(3)(a), I wish to inform hon Members that the Sitting tomorrow will commence at 12.00 pm, midday.
Adjourned accordingly at 6.25 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":"Matter Raised On Adjournment Motion","questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Referrals to Specialist Clinics by Polyclinics and GPs, and Difference in Subsidies Granted for Such Referrals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"17 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Health (a) in the past 10 years, what is the total number of referrals to specialist clinics at public hospitals from (i) polyclinics and (ii) general practitioners (GPs), respectively; (b) whether there is a difference in subsidies granted to patients referred by polyclinics and GPs; and (c) how many such patients referred by GPs have requested for and been granted further subsidies when hospitalised in Class C wards.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Over the last ten years, the total number of referrals from polyclinics and general practitioner (GP) clinics to specialist outpatient clinics (SOCs) in public hospitals are 3.9 million and 0.74 million respectively. Specifically, the number of referrals from GPs have increased significantly, from 65,000 in 2014 to 88,000 in 2023.
Patients who are Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS), Merdeka Generation (MG) or Pioneer Generation (PG) cardholders referred from CHAS GP clinics are eligible for subsidised care at public SOCs, based on their citizenship and means-test status, similar to patients referred from polyclinics. Should these patients be hospitalised subsequently, they are also similarly eligible for subsidies based on their citizenship and means-test status and choice of ward class.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures with Customs Authority to Prevent Import of Non-compliant Active Mobility Devices and Batteries","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"19 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport with regard to the ownership of non-compliant active mobility devices and its batteries, whether the Ministry will consider working closely with Singapore Customs to prevent or reduce (i) the import of such devices by individuals, retailers and wholesalers in Singapore and (ii) the orders of such devices from foreign sellers through direct Internet purchases by end buyers in Singapore.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: \tThe Land Transport Authority (LTA) takes a strong stance against the import, sale and use of non-compliant active mobility devices. Since June 2021, businesses and individuals must obtain approval from the LTA to import Power-Assisted Bicycles (PABs) and motorised Personal Mobility Devices (PMDs) into Singapore. These devices must meet the prescribed technical and safety requirements for use on our public paths and roads.
LTA works closely with the Singapore Customs and the Immigration & Checkpoints Authority to identify and enforce against offenders. As at end-2023, 51 cases have been investigated for offences under the Small Motorised Vehicles (Safety) Act 2020 and 48 non-compliant devices were forfeited. These included devices purchased online. For first-time offenders, the maximum penalty for importing a device without approval is a fine of up to $5,000 or imprisonment for up to six months, or both.
LTA also conducts operations against retailers and enforcement on public paths and roads to combat the sale and use of non-compliant devices. From January 2020 to December 2023, LTA detected about 5,100 offences involving non-compliant devices on paths and roads. In the same period, LTA detected about 100 violations from operations against retailers. For first-time offenders, the maximum penalty for using a non-compliant device on a public path is a fine of up to $10,000 or imprisonment for up to six months, or both; and the maximum penalty for retailer companies displaying a non-compliant device for sale is a fine of up to $20,000.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Planning Required before Public Announcement of Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"20 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for National Development (a) what are the different stages of planning for the Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS) that will be needed prior to the full details of VERS being made available to the public; (b) at which stage of planning is VERS currently at; (c) whether studies and consultations have commenced; and (d) if not, whether there are plans to do so.
Mr Desmond Lee: Planning for the Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS) involves detailed long-term town planning to ensure that we optimise our limited land resources in order to cater to the housing needs of current and future generations of Singaporeans.
It is an iterative endeavour rather than a straightforward, staged process. In planning the rejuvenation of our Housing and Development Board towns, we need to carefully and sensitively stage redevelopment in the older parts of each town, while minimising dis-amenities to the residents in newer parts. Existing roads, greenery, drainage, utilities and other infrastructure may also need to be upgraded to support town rejuvenation. At the same time, we will also have to ensure that there is sufficient construction sector capacity to support the pace of VERS and new housing demand.
We are also working through the package for VERS and the detailed mechanics and processes for polling and relocation. We want to ensure that residents' needs are taken care of, that there will be sufficient new homes at the right time for them and a range of housing options to meet the needs and aspirations of Singaporeans at different life stages.
As shared at the recent Ministry of National Development Committee of Supply debate, we are working through the details and will share them with Singaporeans in due course. [Please refer to \"Committee of Supply – Head T (Ministry of National Development)\", Official Report, 5 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 130, Budget section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Further Close Gender Pay Gap","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"21 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Ministry will consider (i) introducing measures to further close the gender pay gap (ii) issuing guidelines for pay transparency and (iii) establishing a Gender Pay Equality Alliance For Action to address this issue.\n
Dr Tan See Leng: The gender pay gap in Singapore has narrowed from 16.3% in 2018 to 14.3% in 2023. When we compare men and women with similar characteristics in age, education, occupation, industry and usual hours worked, the gender pay gap is lower at 6.0%. This adjusted gender pay gap is comparable to that of US and Canada where equal pay legislation or pay transparency legislation have been introduced.
One key reason for the gender pay gap in Singapore is occupational differences. In other words, there tends to be a lower share of women in higher-paying occupations, such as those in science, technology and engineering. The gender pay gap in Singapore is also affected by other factors, such as the effects of parenthood and caregiving responsibilities, which women tend to shoulder more than men, as well as workplace discrimination. Addressing the gender pay gap will therefore require a multi-pronged approach.
Firstly, we need to encourage more women to enter and stay in occupations related to science, technology and engineering and sectors where there's good potential for salary growth and career progression. The Government has focused efforts on addressing gender stereotypes about careers, starting from schools and by organising career fairs and mentorship programmes. For example, the Government has been working with schools, industry and community partners under the SG Women in Tech movement to attract, retain, and develop female talent in the tech sector.
Second, we need to encourage a more equal sharing of caregiving duties at home and create workplaces that enable caregivers to continue working as much as possible. To encourage fathers to take on a greater share of caregiving responsibilities, Government-Paid Paternity Leave has been increased by an additional two weeks on a voluntary basis in 2024, to a total of four weeks. For workplaces, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) continues to work closely with Tripartite Partners to encourage family-friendly workplace practices that help both male and female employees better manage their work and caregiving responsibilities. For example, we will be introducing the Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement (FWA) Requests this year, which will establish norms for employees to request for FWAs and have these requests be properly considered by their employers.
Third, we must ensure that women have equal opportunities in the workplace. The Government will be introducing the Workplace Fairness Legislation later this year, which will strengthen protections against workplace discrimination on the basis of sex, marital status and caregiving responsibilities, among other protected characteristics.
Issuing guidelines for pay transparency, as suggested by the Member, may not be effective if we do not tackle the underlying causes of the gender pay gap in Singapore. Instead, such guidelines could be counter-productive in the long term if they affect how firms choose to hire their employees.
MOM and the Tripartite Partners will continue to work closely with the business and HR community, on initiatives that will contribute to reducing the gender pay gap. MOM had set up an Alliance for Action on Work Life Harmony in 2021 to co-create tangible solutions to improve family-friendly workplace practices, which benefit employees with caregiving responsibilities, empowering more women to pursue their careers. If there is strong interest among employers and unions to lead similar initiatives, MOM would be happy to support these efforts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Requiring Attorney-General's Chambers to Indicate Plea Offer and Sentencing Position Early","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"22 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Law in respect of the Guidelines on Reduction in Sentencing for Guilty Pleas, whether the Ministry will consider (i) requiring the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) to indicate its plea offer and sentencing position by Stage 1 of court proceedings and (ii) for the 12-week timeline to commence only upon AGC’s indication, to better assist accused persons in making decisions and defence counsel in advising their clients.\n
Mr K Shanmugam: The Guidelines on Reduction in Sentences for Guilty Pleas (PG Guidelines), which were issued by the inter-agency Sentencing Advisory Panel, are intended to encourage accused persons who intend to plead guilty, to do so early. This is done by setting out the ranges of reduction in sentence that a Court may consider granting, based on the stage of proceedings at which an accused person pleads guilty.
Under the PG Guidelines, Stage One ends 12 weeks after the hearing when the Prosecution informs the Court and the accused person that the case is ready for the plea to be taken. The Prosecution will indicate its plea offer, if there is any, at this hearing. This would allow accused persons to consider if they wish to take up the plea offer and plead guilty.
The PG Guidelines, including the 12-week timeline under Stage One, were arrived at after consultation with key stakeholders. The 12-week timeline under Stage One is intended to provide accused persons sufficient time to consider if they wish to plead guilty, as well as to engage a lawyer and seek legal advice on their plea, if they wish to do so. An accused person who wants to take advantage of the maximum PG reduction under Stage One, can take these steps and indicate his position within 12 weeks.
In cases where an accused person takes more time to indicate that he wishes to plead guilty, the PG Guidelines provide that the Court may consider the reasons for any delay – for example, whether the delay was due to matters outside the accused person’s control, whether the accused person had taken timely steps to obtain legal advice, and so on – in deciding on the appropriate reduction in sentence to be applied.
Where possible, the Prosecution will communicate its sentencing position to the Defence ahead of time. However, the Prosecution may not be able to indicate its sentencing position in all cases, at an early stage. The Public Prosecutor ought to have flexibility to deal with cases, which may be more straightforward or highly complex. The Ministry of Law cannot mandate that the Public Prosecutor provide the sentencing position in Stage One in all cases. The Public Prosecutor should be allowed to exercise prosecutorial discretion.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Companies that Provided Extra Two Weeks of Government-paid Paternity Leave Announced in Budget 2023","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"24 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Prime Minister (a) how many companies have provided the extra two weeks of Government-paid paternity leave announced in Budget 2023; and (b) if this data is not available, whether the Government will consider collecting this information.
Ms Indranee Rajah (for the Prime Minister): The additional two weeks of Government-Paid Paternity Leave currently provided on a voluntary basis came into effect on 1 January 2024. Fathers have up to one year after their child's birth to use the leave and employers have three months after that to submit their claims. As such, the data requested is currently unavailable. We are monitoring the utilisation of the voluntary leave provision and will collate the data when available.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Training Providers Applying for SG Enable's Capability Development Grant","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"
25 Miss Rachel Ong asked the Minister for Education (a) since 2017, how many training providers have applied for SG Enable's Capability Development Grant to develop customised training programmes for people with disabilities; and (b) how many of these training providers are from the disability or social sector.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Since the inception of the Capability Development Grant in 2014, eight training providers had used the Grant to make course accommodations for persons with disabilities, of which five are training providers in the disability or social sector.
Notwithstanding this Grant take-up, the number of customised courses for persons with disabilities has increased from about 10 in 2014 to about 50 in 2023.
SSG and SG Enable have and will continue to enhance course offerings for persons with disabilities. This includes encouraging training providers to apply for the Capability Development Grant to make course modifications or incorporate the use of assistive technology where applicable to suit different learning needs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Accounting of Singapore's Official Foreign Reserves and Reserves Management Government Securities Assets","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"26 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether Official Foreign Reserves and Reserves Management Government Securities assets are fully counted as net assets that are part of Past Reserves for the purposes of calculating the Net Investment Returns Contribution, in view that section 22 of the Currency Act 1967 which provides that the Monetary Authority of Singapore’s assets must not be less than the face value of currency in circulation, is still in force.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The Ministry of Finance had previously responded to questions on Official Foreign Reserves (OFR) and Reserves Management Government Securities (RMGS).
When the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) intervenes in the foreign exchange market in response to capital inflows, it accumulates foreign assets or OFR. The rise in MAS' OFR assets is matched by an increase in bank deposits with MAS, which are MAS' liabilities. Hence, there is no increase in MAS' net assets.
We have also explained in this House, that RMGS facilitates the transfer of OFR in excess of what MAS requires to conduct monetary policy and support financial stability from MAS to GIC for longer-term management.
There is no change in MAS' net asset position when MAS subscribes to RMGS. Essentially, the reduction in its foreign assets or OFR is matched by a corresponding increase in its holdings of RMGS. There is also no change in the Government's net asset position, as an increase in the assets managed by GIC arising from the OFR transfer is matched by an increase in Government RMGS liabilities.
To illustrate with an analogy, there is no change in your net asset position when you move your savings from your bank account to a fixed deposit to earn higher returns. This is similar to the situation when MAS transfers OFR in excess of what it requires to GIC via RMGS to earn higher returns. We do not magically create new net assets out of thin air via the use of transfer mechanisms like RMGS.
In addition, the relevant assets for the purpose of calculating the Net Investment Returns Contribution would have accounted for MAS' assets including OFR and RMGS, and MAS' liabilities including currency in circulation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enhancing Detection and Prevention Mechanisms in Government Financial Aid Schemes to Safeguard against Fraudulent Activities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"27 Mr Mohd Fahmi Aliman asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what are the steps undertaken by the Ministry to enhance the detection and prevention mechanisms within its financial aid schemes to safeguard against instances of fraudulent activities; (b) whether there are vulnerabilities or loopholes identified within the welfare mechanisms that may facilitate deceptive practices; and (c) if there are, how does the Ministry intend to address these systemic challenges to ensure the integrity of the social support systems.\n
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: MSF adopts a multi-layered approach to guard against possible abuse by applicants for financial assistance. All applications are first checked against the eligibility criteria by our Social Service Office (SSO) staff, who are trained to look out for signs of fraud, such as inconsistencies in information provided and tampered documents. This is complemented by backend checks with relevant agencies like CPF, IRAS and HDB, as well as employers, to verify the accuracy of the information provided by applicants.
Applicants are also made aware at the outset that any false declarations will subject them to strict enforcement and legal action. There are mechanisms to ensure that assistance given to applicants who are subsequently found to be ineligible, can be appropriately recovered.
Post disbursement, we also use data analytics to pick out higher-risk profiles for more detailed investigations. MSF takes cases of cheating and fraud seriously. We will continue to take strict enforcement and legal action against those who abuse the system.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Universal Service Obligations Set for SingPost","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"28 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) what are the quantitative and qualitative Universal Service Obligations set by IMDA for SingPost, including the provision and maintenance of posting boxes and post offices throughout Singapore; and (b) following SingPost's completion of its strategic review, whether IMDA's Universal Service Obligations and Quality of Service standards are expected to be lowered.
Mrs Josephine Teo: As the Public Postal Licensee, SingPost is required to deliver letters to every addressable place in Singapore, provide and maintain a network of posting boxes and post offices to serve postal needs and meet the Quality of Service (QoS) standards for letter delivery.
These obligations and standards have not changed as a result of SingPost's strategic review of its business. SingPost must continue to provide sufficient postal services through its network of postal touchpoints and postal agents. However, as I explained in previous Parliamentary Questions' responses, IMDA is working with SingPost to review the existing requirements for post offices and posting boxes as it transforms. [Please refer to \"Increase in Postal Rates despite Profitability Recorded by SingPost\", Official Report, 4 October 2023, Vol 95, Issue 114, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
In doing so, we will (i) take into account the adequacy of SingPost's plans for alternative touchpoints and service models, and (ii) ensure that regulatory requirements are relevant in the context of the changing post and parcel landscape. We will share more details in due course.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Continued Affordability and Accessibility to MediShield Life for All Singaporeans Despite Rising Premiums","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"29 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health in view that premiums for MediShield Life look set to increase, how will the Ministry (i) ensure continued affordability and accessibility to the scheme for all Singaporeans (ii) balance expanding coverage on ground-breaking treatments with maintaining affordable premiums and (iii) enhance public awareness about the various health insurance schemes, including private insurers' options, to help Singaporeans make informed decisions on healthcare coverage.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The main purpose of the MediShield Life (MSHL) review is to better protect Singaporeans against large and unexpected medical bills. Claim limits for MSHL will therefore need to increase, even substantially. This is the main driver of premium increases.
Ground-breaking treatments like Cell, Tissue and Gene Therapy Products (CTGTPs) are likely to be very expensive. However, because of infrequent usage, it is a minor factor in driving up premium increases. We should start to include them in MSHL because it is a fast-evolving medical field, which is likely to become mainstream treatment in time to come.
As a society, we want to ensure that Singaporeans have a chance to access these potentially effective treatments. MSHL can play a useful role, as it works by sharing the financial burden of high-cost, low-incidence treatments through risk pooling. To ensure the scheme remains affordable and sustainable, coverage may only be extended to treatments that are assessed to be clinically and cost-effective. The MSHL Council is reviewing this and will share more details later this year.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) will also study how to help policyholders cope with MSHL premium increases and ensure that these remain fully payable by MediSave. There includes premium support for those who are in financial need and who may not have enough MediSave, as well as MediSave top-ups for certain segments of the population. No one will lose MSHL coverage due to a genuine inability to afford the premiums.
We will continue to support individuals in understanding their premiums, coverage and support available under MSHL. Those who wish to purchase additional optional coverage in the form of Integrated Shield Plans (IPs) may also access a comparison of benefits and premiums across IP insurers on MOH's website.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Domestic Disputes Involving Use of Knives or Other Weapons and Where Minors Were Present","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"30 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) in the past three years, how many incidents of domestic disputes have involved the use of knives or other weapons; and (b) how many of such incidents have involved a child or a minor.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Police do not track the figures of domestic disputes that involved the use of knives or other weapons, nor how many of such incidents involved a child or a minor.
31 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for National Development whether it remains a policy goal to achieve a House Price-to-Income ratio of four for HDB BTO flat buyers since the Ministry's announcement of this goal in 2013.
Mr Desmond Lee: As explained before in this House on multiple occasions, the Government tracks a holistic range of indicators, such as the Home Price to Income Ratio (HPI) and Mortgage Servicing Ratio (MSR), and adjust our subsidies as necessary to ensure that Build-to-Order (BTO) flat prices remain affordable across different income levels. Compared to the HPI, the MSR is a better reflection of the proportion of income used to service a housing loan and takes into account more details, such as the housing loan amount, loan tenure and mortgage loan interest rates.
Our commitment to ensuring housing affordability has not changed. For instance, when we looked at First-Timer families who collected keys to their BTO flats last year with a Housing & Development Board housing loan, more than nine in 10 had an MSR of less than 25%, which means they can service their mortgage payments using their Central Provident Fund contributions with little or no cash outlay.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Busking at Food Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"32 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth whether the Ministry will consider allowing busking or singers at food centres to provide a conducive environment for diners at the food centres.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: The National Arts Council (NAC) actively explores partnerships with venue owners interested in offering their spaces as busking locations. Venue owners would have to consider if busking fits the venue's identity and if it would be well-received by existing stakeholders.
Presently, there are over 80 designated busking locations across Singapore. These include spots next to Fengshan, Telok Blangah and Changi Village food centres. In December 2023, NAC partnered with the FairPrice Group to offer a busking location in Lau Pa Sat.
NAC will continue collaborating with interested venue partners to designate and expand the number of suitable busking locations, including areas offering F&B.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extension of Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty Deadline to Developers","subTitle":"Factors for consideration and for Cuscaden Reserve","sectionType":"WANA","content":"33 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether an Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) deadline extension was granted to the developer of the Cuscaden Reserve and, if so, what is the reason for the extension and the terms and conditions associated with it; and (b) what is the number of residential projects with ABSD deadline extensions granted since the implementation of the remission of ABSD rules for developers, excluding that granted to all developers during the COVID-19 pandemic
Mr Lawrence Wong: My response will cover Oral Question 33 by Mr Louis Chua and Written Question 8 by Mr Sitoh Yih Pin on today's Order Paper. [Please refer to \"Extension of Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty Deadline to Developers\", Official Report, 2 April 2024, Vol 95, Issue 133, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section; and \"Criteria to Grant Deadline Extension for Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty for Cuscaden Reserve and Other Projects\", Official Report, 2 April 2024, Vol 95, Issue 133, Written Answers to Questions section.]
Today, housing developers purchasing residential sites can qualify for an upfront remission of Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD), if they meet the specified timelines for commencement and completion of the housing development and the sale of units within the residential development. These conditions for ABSD remission for housing developers ensure the timely commencement and completion of development and sale of residential units and encourage housing developers to bid for land prudently.
Requests for extensions to the specified timelines are considered by the Government on a case-by-case basis. I would not comment on individual cases, as the details include confidential taxpayer-specific information.
The vast majority of housing developers have met the sale timeline for ABSD remission, after taking into account the extension provided under the COVID-19 Temporary Relief Measures. A small group of developers have applied for an extension.
Excluding generally available extensions provided under the COVID-19 Temporary Relief Measures, 44 projects or 12% of projects with a sale deadline within 2021 to 2023, received an extension to their specified sale timeline. These appeals were approved as they involved extenuating circumstances, such as the developer facing site-specific delays that were unforeseen and beyond its control.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Foreign Nurses who Received Permanent Residency and Their Employment in Public and Private Healthcare Sectors, and Voluntary Welfare Organisations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"34 Mr Mark Lee asked the Minister for Health (a) of the approximate 700 foreign nurses who were granted permanent residency (PR) each year between 2018 and 2022, what is the breakdown of the number who worked in (i) public and (ii) private healthcare sectors, particularly in voluntary welfare organisations; and (b) in the period leading to 2030, whether the Ministry plans to progressively increase the percentage of nurses who are granted PR status as a measure to mitigate the turnover of nursing staff in both sectors.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: From 2018 to 2022, about 85% of nurses granted Permanent Resident (PR) status were from the public healthcare sector. The remaining were from private healthcare providers, including voluntary welfare organisations.
The Ministry of Health values and appreciates the dedication and contributions of all our healthcare workers. Our healthcare workforce comprises a sizeable majority of Singaporeans, complemented by foreign manpower from many countries who have become an integral part of our healthcare team. They serve patients alongside each other and go through crisis together. For those who become valued members of our healthcare community and demonstrate commitment to Singapore, we will continue to grant them PRs and anchor them in our healthcare system.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Government Advisories on Funding by Private Developments for Sheltered Walkways that Connect to Nearest Bus Stops","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"35 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Transport whether LTA issues letters or advisories to residential Management Corporation Strata Titles informing them that they are expected to fund the construction of sheltered walkways that link their developments to the nearest bus stop when requested by their residents, even if such walkways are located on land that is managed by LTA.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: When commercial and residential developers request the Land Transport Authority (LTA) to build covered linkways which do not fall under LTA's provision guidelines, LTA has worked with these developers to fund their own covered linkways beyond their developments to existing linkways or to transport nodes. Some LTA officers had erroneously applied this practice to condominium \tManagement Corporation Strata Titles (MCSTs) without considering the provisions of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act and had advised a number of MCSTs incorrectly to fund covered linkways outside of their strata boundary in response to their requests. The officers should not have done so and LTA has implemented measures to avoid such errors in future.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Appeals to Authorities for Purchase of Insurance Coverage for People with Disabilities, Individuals on Autism Spectrum and People with Mental Health Issues","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"36 Miss Rachel Ong asked the Prime Minister for each year since 2015, how many appeals have been made to the Monetary Authority of Singapore relating to issues with getting insurance coverage by (i) people with disabilities (ii) individuals on the autism spectrum and (iii) people with mental health issues.
Mr Lawrence Wong (for the Prime Minister): Over the past three years, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) received fewer than 10 consumer appeals or complaints relating to issues with getting insurance coverage by persons with disabilities, on the autism spectrum or with mental health conditions. Prior to this period, MAS received an average of less than one case per year of such nature.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Use of MediSave for Root Canal Treatments for Seniors above Age 55","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry will consider allowing the use of MediSave to cover the costs of root canal treatment specifically for seniors above 55 years old.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Singaporeans requiring root canal treatment are eligible for subsidies at Public Healthcare Institutions and under the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) at participating dental clinics. Furthermore, Pioneer and Merdeka Generation seniors enjoy additional subsidies. Subsidised patients who cannot afford their dental treatment after government subsidies can approach medical social workers to apply for financial assistance, such as MediFund.
Despite this, there have been calls for the Government to allow the use of MediSave for root canal treatment. We will review this suggestion. However, extensions of MediSave use need to be considered carefully, to strike a balance between increasing affordability and ensuring that our seniors have enough MediSave to meet their healthcare needs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Topics for MINDEF's Platform to Deepen Commitment to Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"40 Mr Neil Parekh Nimil Rajnikant asked the Minister for Defence (a) as part of the National Education programme, what have been some of the latest topics which Nexus, a platform that seeks to deepen Singaporeans' commitment to Singapore, has developed as resource packages; (b) who are the beneficiaries of these resource packages; (c) whether any resource package has been developed about the current on-going conflict between Israel and Hamas; and (d) if so, what are the key messages conveyed in this resource package and whether they are conveyed to National Servicemen.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: The National Education office in the Ministry of Defence, or Nexus, works across Government agencies to develop resources to help Singaporeans better understand Singapore's challenges and interests. These resources are used by national education partners and practitioners to deliver programmes and activities, such as educational talks and games and learning journeys. The resources are also publicly available online through the SG101 website (https://sg101.gov.sg).
The topics covered in the resources include Singapore's nationhood journey; our common identity and shared values; our challenges; policies and national initiatives, such as Total Defence. They also include contemporaneous issues in Singapore and around the world. Recent examples of contemporaneous issues covered include the Russia-Ukraine conflict, food and energy security and the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Specific to the Israel-Hamas conflict, the content covered our national position on the conflict as well as key reflections for us with regard to our preparedness for crises and disruptions and the importance of maintaining our social cohesion and racial and religious harmony amid external events that can divide societies.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Framework for Assessing Suitability of Planned Overseas Destinations for School and Institutes of Higher Learning Trips","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"41 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Education with regard to the Global Education Programme (a) whether there is any standard framework that is applied to assess if the planned overseas destination is unsafe or no longer suitable; (b) what support is given to Institutes of Higher Learning and schools in determining whether the destination poses a security risk; and (c) what other measures are taken to maintain the safety of students while they are taking part in the programme.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The safety and well-being of our students and staff are a top priority in the planning and management of overseas trips. Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) and schools undertake risk assessment and consider information like travel advisories and guidance from the Ministry of Education and other Government agencies. IHLs and schools also conduct staff recce trips, where necessary. When there are adverse developments on the ground, IHLs and schools will adjust, postpone or cancel their plans as needed.
IHLs and schools also obtain travel insurance, establish contingency and crisis management plans and provide students administrative and pastoral support prior to and during trips, including briefing them on safety precautions. All overseas trips organised by schools, polytechnics and the Institute of Technical Education have accompanying staff to oversee the safety and well-being of students. Older students who go on overseas exchange programmes and internships of longer duration can consult on-site staff from the host institutions or companies. All trips are also e-registered with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), so that participants can receive timely updates on the ground. IHLs and schools work closely with Singaporean embassies and consulates in cases of emergencies.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Building Owners Applying to Accessibility Fund to Offset Cost of Construction of Lactation Rooms","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development (a) for each year in the past five years, how many building owners have applied for grants under the Accessibility Fund for the construction costs of (i) lactation rooms and (ii) lactation pods; and (b) if the data is not available, whether the Ministry will consider collecting this information.
Mr Desmond Lee: Since the implementation of the Code on Accessibility in the Built Environment (Code) 2013, it has been mandatory for certain building types to provide at least one lactation room. This requirement applies to new buildings and existing buildings undergoing major retrofitting works, where the buildings plans are submitted for regulatory approval on or after 1 April 2014. For private buildings constructed before the implementation of the Code 2013, the Accessibility Fund may provide co-funding of up to 60% of the construction cost of Universal Design features, including lactation rooms.
Since 2019, two building owners have applied for the Accessibility Fund to retrofit their buildings with lactation rooms. We strongly encourage more building owners to tap on the Accessibility Fund to improve the inclusiveness of our built environment. Tenants and users, who require these facilities, can also urge building owners to tap on this fund.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reports of Deepfake-related Scams","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"44 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many deepfake-related scams have been reported in 2023; (b) what kinds of media type are the scams conducted in, such as live video, voice, uploaded video, etc; and (c) what measures will the Ministry undertake that is specific to the elderly population to educate them against deepfake-related scams.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Singapore Police Force (SPF) has not been tracking the number of such cases. While we have received some reports where the complainants had alleged that deepfake techniques were used by the scammers, the number is not high.
The SPF works closely with the People's Association, the Agency for Integrated Care and grassroots organisations to alert residents, including the elderly, about the latest scam trends, tell-tale signs of scams and steps the residents can take to protect themselves.
In June 2021, the SG Cyber Safe Seniors Programme was launched to raise awareness of cybersecurity and encourage adoption of good cyber hygiene practices among the elderly. The programme reaches out to the elderly through a mix of physical and online platforms, including tutorial sessions that teach the elderly to learn how to use mobile applications safely. With online scams being a growing threat, the curriculum has been updated to include more tips for the elderly to safeguard themselves against scams. Under the programme, digital ambassadors from the SG Digital Office are trained to engage the elderly on cyber hygiene practices. A handbook in the four official languages has also been produced for digital ambassadors to hand out to the elderly.
In addition, whenever there is an emerging scam variant, such as deepfake-related scams, the SPF works with relevant agencies to promptly alert the elderly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Requirements on Licensed Taxi Rental and Private Hire Companies with Significant Market Share to Provide Call Options for Non-technology Savvy Passengers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"45 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Transport whether he will consider imposing licensing conditions on companies with a significant market share of the taxi and private hire transport sectors to offer telephone booking and cash payment options so as to cater to passengers who are not technology-savvy.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Call-booking trips currently make up about 1% of all point-to-point trips. As announced at the Ministry of Transport's Committee of Supply, ComfortDelGro will continue to offer call-booking services as it currently fulfils more than 99% of these trips. [Please refer to \"Committee of Supply – Head W (Ministry of Transport)\", Official Report, 5 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 130, Budget section.]
All taxi and ride-hail operators already accept cash payment for street-hail and ride-hail services.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Retaking GCE A Level Examinations as School Candidate Rather Than As Private Candidate","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"46 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Education (a) whether there are plans to allow students who have passed their GCE A-level examinations but fare poorly to retake the examinations as a school candidate instead of a private candidate; (b) whether one or more pre-University institutions can be designated as a school where such students can opt to study for and retake their GCE A-level examinations; and (c) whether the Edusave account can be expanded to fund the retaking of such national examinations.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: We do not encourage students who have passed their A-Level examination to retake the examination in schools. After passing the A-Level examination, the students would already have a range of options in tertiary education, such as to courses in Autonomous Universities, as well as in Polytechnics, where they can be granted module exemptions.
After entering the workforce, they also have opportunities to upskill and reskill through Continuing Education and Training programmes which are heavily subsidised.
If a student wishes to retake the A-Level examination as a private candidate and requires financial support, he or she can approach the Social Service Office or other community organisations to explore if assistance can be offered.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Auditing Preschools for Compliance with Incident Reporting Policies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"48 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Social and Family Development regarding recent incidents involving intimidation, physical, emotional and mental abuse of young children in certain pre-schools (a) whether ECDA audits the compliance with the incident reporting policies required of all preschools; and (b) whether ECDA will look into cases of staff dismissals for potential abuse cases.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: When the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) conducts unannounced licensing visits, it will check if preschools have clear processes in place to report serious incidents within stipulated timelines. ECDA also checks that the preschool complied with these processes. ECDA will take the preschool to task if they have failed to do so.
We do not require preschools to report cases of staff dismissal or termination because doing so does not get to the root of the problem. The termination of an employment contract can be due to several reasons, such as underperformance of the staff and not that they have broken the law. At the same time, employers do not always dismiss a staff; sometimes for compassionate reasons, they may choose to allow the staff to resign.
ECDA's chief concern is whether, in the interest of child safety, the former staff should be allowed to work in the sector. To address this concern, the law requires preschools to report all serious incidents to ECDA within a stipulated timeframe. The preschool has to do this regardless of how it chooses to discipline its staff. Where serious child mismanagement has occurred, ECDA will bar the errant staff from working in the preschool sector. ECDA's regulatory actions are therefore independent of the preschool’s decision whether to dismiss the staff and provides a stronger assurance for child safety.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Increase Capacity of Assisted Reproductive Treatment Centres at Public Hospitals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"49 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Health (a) whether there are plans to increase the capacity of assisted reproductive treatment centres at public hospitals; (b) if so, what is the timeline and the expected increase in capacity; and (c) if not, why not.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: In 2022, the National University Hospital renovated its in-vitro fertilisation laboratory, to increase its capacity for Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) treatment.
There are also upcoming plans to increase ART treatment capacity progressively at KK Women's and Children's Hospital and Singapore General Hospital, over the next few years. When completed, the ART capacity at these public hospitals would have increased by about 20%.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Determining Allotment of Red Seasoned Parking Lots in Multi-storey Car Parks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"50 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for National Development what is the policy guiding HDB's decision-making on (i) whether to have purely red season parking lots in a particular multi-storey carpark (MSCP) and (ii) the number of lots or decks of purely red parking lots to be allocated in a particular MSCP.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Housing & Development Board (HDB) parking lots are provided primarily to serve the parking needs of residents. In deriving the number of parking lots in HDB estates, HDB considers factors, such as the number of dwelling units, flat types and parking demand.
Parking utilisation rates vary across car parks as these depend on residents' and visitors' parking patterns. In circumstances where there is sustained high demand for both season and visitor parking, HDB will assess the need to designate some lots as red parking lots for season parking holders only. The number and placement of these red parking lots in the car park depends on the utilisation rate, car park size and layout.
About 70% of the HDB multi-storey car parks do not require red parking lots as there are sufficient white parking lots to meet the demand for visitor parking, as well as bi-coloured parking lots that are generally reserved for season parking holders from 7.00 pm to 7.00 am, Mondays to Saturdays; and whole day on Sundays and public holidays. HDB monitors the utilisation rate of HDB car parks to ensure that there is a good balance between providing season parking lots for residents and having sufficient capacity for visitor parking.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Healthcare Costs Do Not Rise Proportionally Despite Expansion of MediShield Life Coverage","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"52 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) in view that MediShield Life coverage is set to expand, how will the Ministry ensure that healthcare costs do not rise proportionally; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider implementing audits in public hospitals to assess the prudency of recommended medical treatments, especially those requiring advanced technologies like robotic surgery.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: MediShield Life (MSHL) coverage does not cause healthcare cost to rise proportionately. The logic is the reverse. That means healthcare cost is rising, largely as an external trend; and to protect Singaporeans against large and expected medical bills, we intend to expand the coverage of MSHL.
Nevertheless, the Ministry of Health has implemented several measures to ensure overall healthcare costs remains sustainable. This includes greater emphasis on population health, implementing value-based care in healthcare institutions and encouraging right siting of patients to reduce the demand for acute hospital care. Health Technology Assessment also ensures that subsidies and insurance coverage extend only to clinically- and cost-effective treatments.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Drivers Who Refuse to Take Traffic Police's Breath Evidential Analyser Test for Alcohol Consumption","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"53 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) in the past 10 years, how many drivers have refused to take the Breath Evidential Analyser (BEA) test for alcohol consumption when stopped by the Traffic Police; and (b) what alternatives and recourse does the Traffic Police have if such drivers delay taking the BEA test in the hope that their breath-alcohol readings will be reduced when checked later.
Mr K Shanmugam: Drivers may be required to take a preliminary breath test for alcohol consumption when they are stopped by a police officer. They may also be required subsequently to take a Breath Evidential Analyser (BEA) test, for further investigations into drink-driving offences.
On average, over the last 10 years, there were 22 and seven drivers per year who failed to provide a breath specimen for the preliminary breath test and BEA test respectively, when so directed. These are offences under section 69(4) and section 70(4)(a) of the Road Traffic Act.
Drivers who delay taking the BEA test will be investigated for failing to provide a breath specimen for the BEA test. The driver may be arrested without a warrant. On conviction, the offender is liable to a fine of not less than $2,000 and not more than $10,000, or to imprisonment for a term of up to 12 months, or to both. In the case of a second or subsequent conviction, the offender is liable to a fine of not less than $5,000 and not more than $20,000 and to imprisonment for a term of up to two years. The offender may also be disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence. These punishments are the same as those prescribed for drink-driving.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Use of Private Development's Management or Sinking Funds for Construction of Sheltered Walkways to Nearest Bus Stops","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"54 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development whether management corporations of strata title developments are allowed to use management or sinking funds for the construction of sheltered walkways from their development to the nearest bus stop for the safety and convenience of their residents.
Mr Desmond Lee: \tA Management Corporation for a strata development may use its funds to construct sheltered walkways within the boundary of the strata-titled development. There are no provisions in the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act for a Management Corporation to use its funds for works located outside its development boundary.
For the construction of sheltered walkways outside of their development boundaries, Management Corporations may approach the Land Transport Authority, which will evaluate such requests on a case-by-case basis.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Government's Financial Literacy Initiatives for Young Persons","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Ms See Jinli Jean asked the Prime Minister (a) what are the initiatives introduced by the Government to guide young persons to develop financial literacy, including the sensible investing in digital assets; (b) what is the percentage of young persons participating in these initiatives; and (c) what are metrics that the Government is monitoring to evaluate the initiatives' effectiveness.
Mr Lawrence Wong (for the Prime Minister): Financial literacy education is incorporated into the curriculum from the primary to the tertiary level. Students from the Polytechnics and the Institute of Technical Education take financial education modules that encourage sound financial habits and cover the fundamentals of investment literacy. At the Autonomous Universities, students can access course modules to build up their investment literacy, or participate in various campus activities, workshops and talks to learn about good money management and financial planning. The Ministry of Education regularly reviews its financial literacy programmes to keep up to date with the evolving financial landscape.
Beyond schools and tertiary institutions, MoneySense supports youths with access to financial literacy messages that supplement what they have learnt in school. These include talks on how to invest, and the virtual My Money@Campus carnivals that feature interactive learning and game booths. MoneySense, the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth, and the National Youth Council (NYC) has also collaborated with social media content partners to engage youths on topical issues such as overspending on luxuries. Together with the NYC, MoneySense also organises regular engagement sessions with youths to discuss issues, such as good financial habits, investments and scams. The MoneySense National Financial Capability Survey (NFCS) 2021, which seeks to better understand behaviour in dealing with financial matters, attitudes towards financial planning issues and general financial knowledge, found that compared with the general population of Singapore, youths generally had higher levels of financial literacy.
Regarding digital assets, MAS has consistently warned the public against trading in cryptocurrencies given their lack of intrinsic value, volatile prices and highly speculative nature. MoneySense regularly amplifies these warnings to youths on social media, including through collaborations with content creators.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Policies and Strategies to Address Singapore's Low Fertility Rate and Their Impacts","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Prime Minister (a) what strategies and policies is the Government planning to implement to address Singapore's low fertility rate; and (b) how will these initiatives support families and encourage higher birth rates.
Ms Indranee Rajah (for the Prime Minister): Singapore's low fertility reflects a global phenomenon where individual priorities and societal norms have shifted. We will continue to work with stakeholders to build a conducive environment where Singaporeans feel supported along their marriage and parenthood journey. The Member may refer to my speech at the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) Committee of Supply Debate on 28 February 2024, where our strategies have been outlined. [Please refer to \"Committee of Supply – Head U (Prime Minister's Office)\", Official Report, 28 February 2024, Vol 95, Issue 126, Budget section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Workforce Size and Demographics in Insurance Industry","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Prime Minister (a) for each of the years from 2021 to 2023, how many people in the labour force are working as insurance agents; and (b) what is the breakdown for such persons in terms of full-time employment, part-time employment, educational qualification, age, gender and nationality.
Mr Lawrence Wong (for the Prime Minister): The number of insurance agents declined over the past three years. The number of life and composite insurance agents was 15,205 in 2021; 14,546 in 2022; and 13,934 in 2023. The number of general insurance agents during this period was 4,105, 3,915 and 3,777, respectively.
Age, gender and nationality breakdown are only available for life and composite insurance agents. The majority are 40 years and below, please see the Table below. There is an even distribution of male and female agents. About 90% of the agents are Singapore citizens and the rest are mostly permanent residents.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore and the General Insurance Association of Singapore do not make a distinction between full-time or part-time employment insurance agents and do not collect information on academic qualification, but all agents have to meet the minimum education qualification requirements.
4 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Prime Minister as at 31 December 2023, what is the breakdown of civil servants employed as permanent full-time staff in the Ministries and Statutory Boards respectively whose ages are (i) below 40 years old (ii) 40 to 49 years old (iii) 50 to 59 years old and (iv) 60 years old and above, respectively.
5 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Prime Minister as at 31 December 2023, what is the breakdown of civil servants employed as permanent full-time staff in the Ministries and Statutory Boards respectively who are past their retirement age and are re-employed.
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister): As at 31 December 2023, the breakdown of public officers in the Ministries and Statutory Boards whose ages are (i) below 40 years old; (ii) 40 to 49 years old; (iii) 50 to 59 years old; (iv) 60 years old and above is 47%, 29%, 17% and 7%, respectively. The breakdown is largely similar across both Ministries and Statutory Boards.
The proportions of officers on part-time work arrangements and on contracts of less than 1 year are around 1% respectively.
There are about 2,300 and 3,400 re-employed officers above 63 years old, respectively, and almost all are working full-time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on CPIB Investigations into Seatrium","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Prime Minister in view of Seatrium's announcement that it has reached in-principle settlement agreements with the Brazilian authorities, whether an update can be provided on the CPIB investigations into Seatrium and individuals of the company for alleged corruption offences that occurred in Brazil.
Ms Indranee Rajah (for the Prime Minister): The Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) has completed its investigations into Seatrium Limited (formerly, Sembcorp Marine Limited) (the Company) and individuals from the Company.
In the Joint Press Release by CPIB and the Attorney-General’s Chambers dated 28 March 2024, it was announced that:
(a) two individuals have been charged with corruption offences involving the payment of bribes for the benefit of persons in Brazil; and one of those individuals has also been charged with obstruction of justice. Details of the individuals and the charges can be found in the Joint Press Release; and
(b) the Public Prosecutor is in discussions with the Company on a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) in respect of the alleged corruption offences that occurred in Brazil. Under the proposed DPA, the Company will be required to pay a financial penalty of US$110 million. Of this amount, up to US$53 million may be used to offset the settlement payment totalling R$670,699,731.73 under the in-principle settlement agreements that the Company has reached with the Brazilian authorities. Any concluded DPA will be subject to the approval of the General Division of the High Court.
The Member may wish to refer to the Joint Press Release for other relevant information.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Enhanced Pre- and Post-Transaction Safeguards Undertaken by Financial Advisers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Prime Minister when will the enhanced pre- and post-transaction safeguards to be undertaken by financial advisers for Selected Clients be implemented.
Mr Lawrence Wong (for the Prime Minister): The Monetary Authority of Singapore will publicly consult, by the middle of this year, on legislative amendments to enhance pre- and post-transaction safeguards for clients of financial advisers meeting specified criteria1. We aim to issue the revised standards by Q4 2024, for implementation by the industry no later than 2H 2025, after a nine month transition period.
There are existing safeguards for such clients that have already been implemented by the financial advisory industry. These include performing pre-transaction client call-backs to ensure that these clients have understood the features and risks of the products they have been sold. The proposed amendments will further strengthen these safeguards by, among others, requiring a trusted individual to be present during the financial advisory process and audio recording the client call-back.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : “Selected Client” is one meeting any two of the following criteria: (a) Is 62 years of age or older; (b) Is not proficient in spoken or written English; (c) Has below GCE “O” or “N” level certifications, or equivalent, academic qualifications."],"footNoteQuestions":["7"],"questionNo":"7"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criteria to Grant Deadline Extension for Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty for Cuscaden Reserve and Other Projects","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether Cuscaden Reserve is the first residential project in which the developers have been granted an Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty deadline extension besides extensions that are granted as part of the temporary relief measures due to the COVID-19 pandemic; (b) if so, what are the reasons for granting the extension; (c) if not, what are the other projects which have been granted a similar extension; and (d) what are the criteria which IRAS applies in deciding whether to approve such a request.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Today, housing developers purchasing residential sites can qualify for an upfront remission of Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD), if they meet the specified timelines for commencement and completion of the housing development and the sale of units within the residential development. These conditions for ABSD remission for housing developers ensure the timely commencement and completion of development and sale of residential units and encourage housing developers to bid for land prudently.
Requests for extensions to the specified timelines are considered by the Government on a case-by-case basis. I would not comment on individual cases, as the details include confidential taxpayer-specific information.
The vast majority of housing developers have met the sale timeline for ABSD remission, after taking into account the extension provided under the COVID-19 Temporary Relief Measures. A small group of developers have applied for an extension.
Excluding generally available extensions provided under the COVID-19 Temporary Relief Measures, 44 projects or 12% of projects with a sale deadline within 2021 to 2023, received an extension to their specified sale timeline. These appeals were approved as they involved extenuating circumstances, such as the developer facing site-specific delays that were unforeseen and beyond its control.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Develop and Improve Diplomatic Staff in Countries Important to Singapore's Economic Development","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Mr Neil Parekh Nimil Rajnikant asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs regarding key countries which Singapore has partners in for Singapore's economic development, what steps is the Ministry taking to improve the quality and breadth of its senior diplomatic staff in these countries to ensure that they are well equipped with the knowledge of economic, financial and trade issues in a deglobalising world so that Singapore’s interest remains paramount at all times.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: The Ministry provides professional training and development at various stages of our officers' careers. This is to ensure that they have the competencies, skill sets and knowledge on various issues needed to operate in a complex, ever-changing global environment. MFA Diplomatic Academy organises developmental opportunities including briefings, workshops by senior diplomats, political office holders and subject matter experts on management and policy-related topics including economic, finance and trade issues. Some of our officers are seconded to relevant Government agencies and relevant agencies also second their officers to MFA, to deepen their understanding of the whole-of-Government (WOG) priorities, hone their competencies and facilitate the cross-pollination of ideas.
In preparation for an Overseas Posting, our officers will be briefed by the finance, economic and trade agencies. While overseas, our officers work closely with experts from MTI, EDB, ESG and MAS on more technical issues in areas of trade and finance to ensure that Singapore's interests are upheld. Our officers also collaborate closely with the EDB and ESG representations in key overseas markets on trade and investments issues.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Screening and Data of Singapore Citizens' and Permanent Residents' Participation in Foreign Legislatures and Political Organisations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"
10 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) as of 1 March 2024, how many Singapore citizens have declared their membership in foreign legislatures and political organisations respectively under section 79 of the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act 2021; and (b) whether the Immigrations and Checkpoints Authority screens applicants for permanent residency and Singapore citizenship for participation in foreign legislatures and political organisations.
Mr K Shanmugam: As of 1 March 2024, five Singapore citizens have declared their memberships in foreign legislatures or foreign political organisations to the Registry of Foreign and Political Disclosures.
Singapore Citizenship and Permanent Residency applicants are required to declare their membership in professional societies, clubs, associations and other organisations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Ensure Re-domiciled Previously Foreign-Owned Companies Adhere to Singapore's Laws and Regulations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Home Affairs how does the Government ensure that foreign-owned companies that have re-domiciled in Singapore and are now known as Singapore companies adhere strictly to Singapore's laws and regulations even as they continue to operate in their home countries and elsewhere in the region.
Mr K Shanmugam: All companies domiciled in Singapore, whether local- or foreign-owned, need to comply with the laws and regulations in Singapore.
Members know the process. States promulgate laws and enforce these laws when breaches come to their attention. There are various ways in which breaches can come to a State's attention. For example, information on breaches can come to light through systemic overviews, through complaints by informants, through victims themselves coming forward and in a variety of other ways.
This applies both to individuals and to companies. In the case of companies, there are also requirements for companies to register and to file information, on several aspects – including with ACRA and other agencies.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Regulating Lane Splitting and Addressing Growing Problem of Aggressive Road Culture","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) why is lane splitting by motorcyclists allowed on our roads; (b) whether there are plans to ban or regulate lane splitting in the interest of road safety; (c) what measures are being taken to encourage defensive riding practices among motorcyclists; and (d) whether there has been any study done on the growing problem of aggressive road culture.
Mr K Shanmugam: Making lane splitting an offence may not be practical and it is also very difficult to enforce.
A better approach is to enhance the safety awareness of motorcyclists and encourage them to practise safe riding habits, including defensive riding and avoid weaving in and out of traffic. It is also important for other motorists to pay attention to the presence of motorcyclists and check their blind spots and signal their intent before making lane changes or turning. Road safety must be a shared responsibility amongst all road users.
Defensive riding courses are available in all driving centres in Singapore. Defensive riding knowledge and tips are also incorporated in safe driving advisories, which are frequently used in the Traffic Police's engagements with road users and during road safety campaigns, such as the Singapore Ride Safe campaign.
There has not been any study conducted on road culture. Our current regime is designed to deter irresponsible and aggressive behaviour on the roads. The member may wish to refer to past replies to Parliamentary Questions on measures to curb road rage and aggressive driving behaviours. [Please refer to \"Cases of Road Rage and Aggressive Behaviour Involving Motor Vehicles in Past Three Years\", Official Report, 15 February 2022, Vol 95, Issue 48, Written Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criteria on Permissibility of Membership in Foreign Entities by Singaporean Citizens and Permanent Residents","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether membership by Singaporean citizens and permanent residents in foreign entities such as the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference and Chinese Overseas Friendship Association are permissible so long as (i) they register with Singapore authorities and (ii) their activities are deemed as not directed toward a political end in Singapore.
Mr K Shanmugam: There is no prohibition on membership by Singapore Citizens (SCs) and Permanent Residents (PRs) in such foreign entities, per se.
Under the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act (FICA), all SCs (but not PRs) are required to declare their membership in foreign legislatures or foreign political organisations to the Registry of Foreign and Political Disclosures. Failure to declare is an offence.
This requirement allows the Government to have oversight (for purposes stated in FICA) of SCs who are members of foreign legislatures or foreign political organisations. SCs who join such bodies or are thinking of joining such bodies will need to be discerning as to whether their participation could potentially go against Singapore’s interests.
For individuals who are Politically Significant Persons (PSPs) under FICA, we need to be even more mindful about their foreign affiliations, including memberships in foreign legislatures or foreign political organisations.
There is no prohibition against such membership per se. However, as Members will know, FICA allows the Registrar of Foreign and Political Disclosures to issue a directive to any PSP to end an arrangement with any foreign principal, including membership of any foreign entity. The Registrar can do so if he is satisfied that the PSP is undertaking, has undertaken or is likely to undertake an activity on behalf of a foreign principal, and that it is in the public interest that such a directive be given.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trend Analysis of Women Involved in Substance Abuse and Measures to Tackle Substance Abuse among Young Women and Young Mothers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether there are any common trends among women who resort to abuse of drugs or use of illegal substances; and (b) what is the approach by the Central Narcotics Bureau to tackle the increase in use of illegal substances especially among young women and those with children.
Mr K Shanmugam: The trends seen in arrested women drug abusers are similar to those of men drug abusers. The majority are Malays and between the ages of 20 and 39 years old. The top three most commonly abused drugs are methamphetamine, heroin and cannabis.
The Singapore Prison Service (SPS) adopts a gender-responsive and trauma-informed approach when working with women drug abusers who are detained for treatment and rehabilitation in the Drug Rehabilitation Centre (DRC).
Under this approach, the staff are trained to take into account the women abusers' past traumas, as well as tailor the programmes to address their specific risks and needs relating to drug abuse. For example, the Psychology-based Correctional Programmes delivered at the DRC help women abusers gain insights on how their relationships, such as intimate relationships and past traumas, may impact their drug use. They also learn to identify and replace maladaptive thinking about their relationships that led to substance use, as well as learn how to apply emotion regulation and self-management skills to better cope with challenges. This is in line with research which show that relationships are crucial for many women in both their pathway to drug abuse and to prevent re-offending.
This is in addition to other general interventions for all abusers, such as family programmes, to enhance their pro-social ties with their family; and education programmes, to increase their employability.
SPS also provides upstream intervention for newly admitted women inmates with children under the age of 18 years. This programme, the Initiative for Incarcerated Mother and Children, is administered by the Singapore Aftercare Association and reaches out to women inmates whose children lack care or whose family is in need. With the inmate's consent, trained social workers will conduct assessments of the family and refer them to appropriate community resources for assistance.
SPS also works with community partners like New Life Stories (NLS) and Women In Recovery Association (WIRA) to support women offenders. Strengthening the prosocial identity of women inmates as mothers is crucial for empowering them to take ownership of their rehabilitation and desistance. In partnership with NLS, SPS offers programmes to equip inmate mothers with positive parenting skills and strategies and aid them in rebuilding their relationships with their children. WIRA runs support groups for women offenders in the DRC and also follow up with them in the community to support their reintegration.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Migrant Workers Who Have Been Scam Victims and Measures to Raise Awareness of Scams Among Migrant Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether the Ministry tracks the number of migrant domestic workers who have fallen prey to scams; and (b) what measures have been taken by the Ministry to raise awareness of such scams to these workers during their training prior to their commencement of work in Singapore.
Mr K Shanmugam: In 2023, 500 migrant domestic workers fell prey to scams, an 18% increase from 423 workers in 2022.
The Police have been working with the Ministry of Manpower to raise migrant domestic workers' awareness of scams. As part of the Settling-In Programme, which all of them must attend when they first arrive in Singapore, they are educated on measures which they can adopt to protect themselves from scams.
In addition, agencies regularly conduct anti-scam education for migrant domestic workers already working in Singapore. They are educated on the latest scam trends, so that they are equipped to detect scams and become advocates for scam prevention within their own community. For example, the Ministry of Manpower runs an anti-scam campaign which leverages social media and out-of-home media, such as bus stop ads. The Police run the Domestic Guardians Programme to train migrant domestic workers in preventing crimes, including scams.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Showcasing Products by Local Visual Asset Creators and Artists, and Boosting Their Economic Opportunities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Ms See Jinli Jean asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Ministry will consider showcasing products and merchandise by different Singaporean visual asset creators and artists on its platforms for Singapore's heartland businesses; and (b) what are the Ministry’s plans to boost economic opportunities for these visual asset creators.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Agencies, such as the DesignSingapore Council, Enterprise Singapore, the National Arts Council and the National Heritage Board, work with local visual creators and artists to showcase their work. These include platforms for heartland businesses, such as the upcoming “Rasa Gombak Day Out” festival, as well as events, such as the Craft X Design initiative, Singapore Design Week and FIND – Design Fair Asia.
These opportunities enable visual asset creators to showcase their work to potential clients, such as local and global brand owners.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Companies Being Re-domiciled to Singapore and Related Risks to Singapore's Reputation with Major Trading Partners","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Ministry keeps track of companies which re-domicile to Singapore to operate their headquarters out of Singapore rather than out of their countries of origin; (b) whether it has assessed if this practice presents any risks for Singapore with regard to its reputation and relations with major trading partners; and (c) if so, what specific measures the Government is taking to mitigate this risk.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: All companies in Singapore have to be registered with the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA). However, the Government does not keep track of whether a company has re-domiciled its headquarters to Singapore.
We welcome legitimate companies to conduct substantive business activities in Singapore. We have upheld our reputation as a stable, trusted and well-connected hub with strong rule of law by acting firmly and decisively against those which violate our laws. We work closely with our partners and honour our international obligations. This has enabled us to attract businesses from different industries and geographies.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Profitability of Companies in Singapore Over Past Three Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the proportion of companies in Singapore that are profitable over the last three years; and (b) how has the profitability of the companies changed over the same time period.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Based on the latest available data, 66% of firms on average were profitable over the period of 2020 to 2022. The median profitability rate, or profits divided by revenue of these firms, was stable at around 17% over the same period.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Ensure Accurate Representation of Nutritional Content of Food and Beverage Products in Advertisements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"19 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what are the measures in place to ensure that food and beverage companies accurately represent the nutritional content of their products in advertisements; and (b) how does the Ministry detect and enforce misleading advertisements in the food and beverage sector, particularly those related to health and nutritional claims.\n\n
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The Sale of Food Act sets out requirements for food labelling in Singapore. The Singapore Food Agency (SFA) requires all prepacked food and beverages for sale in Singapore to carry a label with the product's name or description and its ingredients. Companies must also abide by the Health Promotion Board's (HPB's) Nutri-Grade measures for beverages, which covers labelling requirements and advertising restrictions.
SFA and HPB monitor the market and conduct checks to ensure the accuracy of information provided to consumers. Enforcement action will be taken under the Sale of Food Act against any person who makes false or misleading claims.
The Advertising Standards Authority of Singapore administers the Singapore Code of Advertising Practice (SCAP), which promotes ethical advertising and sets out guidelines to tackle false or misleading claims. Those who contravene the SCAP could face sanctions by the industry or investigations by the relevant authorities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Considerations and Consultations Made In Decision to Include Gaza Conflict in Character and Citizenship Education Lessons","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Education (a) what are the considerations when the Ministry decides to update the Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) materials to cover the conflict in Gaza; (b) whether there are any organisations or entities outside the Ministry which are consulted on the proposed new materials before they are taught to students; and (c) what are the learning points regarding the manner and process of incorporating sensitive social issues into the national CCE syllabus.\n
Mr Chan Chun Sing: This question has been addressed in the response by the Minister for Education on the Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) Lesson on the Israel-Hamas Conflict at MOE's Committee of Supply Debate on 4 March 2024, which can be found on the Ministry of Education's (MOE's) website. The Member may refer to Paragraphs 13 to 21 on MOE's considerations when updating the lesson materials and incorporating sensitive issues in CCE lessons. [Please refer to \"Committee of Supply – Head K (Ministry of Education)\", Official Report, 4 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 129, Budget section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reducing Class Sizes to Increase Teachers' Effectiveness and To Empower Students","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry will consider reducing class sizes to increase teachers' effectiveness and empower students.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Reducing class sizes across the board would require a significantly larger teaching force and come at the expense of quality. This would not be sustainable given Singapore's local workforce constraints and growing demands in other sectors, such as healthcare.
The Ministry of Education adopts a needs-based approach where more teaching resources are deployed for students with greater needs. This allows for smaller class sizes where it is needed. For example, the Learning Support Programme for lower primary students is conducted in pull-out classes of 8 to 10. With Full Subject-based Banding, Secondary school students attend different subject classes of between 20 to 40 students, depending on their learning needs and the number of students taking each subject. This targeted approach ensures we use our limited manpower resources prudently.
We are leveraging technology to complement the capacity of our teachers and provide more focused support for students with different needs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures Taken to Monitor and Reduce Cyber Bullying in Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"22 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Education how is the Ministry monitoring and reducing cyber bullying in schools.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Schools monitor the school environment and student discipline closely; and take educative, preventive and intervention measures to address bullying incidents. To manage bullying, schools emphasise and explicitly teach pro-social behaviours. This includes students learning to be respectful and responsible users of technology; to look out for their peers and to speak up against any form of bullying.
Schools also teach and facilitate the reporting of bullying. When bullying is reported, schools will investigate and mete out appropriate disciplinary actions. The process involves helping students to learn from the incident, correct their behaviours and restore relationships. Parents are engaged and students involved are provided with the necessary counselling support.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Steps Taken to Meet Increased Need for School Counsellors","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"23 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Education what efforts are being made by the Ministry to meet the increased need for counsellors in schools to assist students with non-academic struggles.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Ministry of Education trains and deploys School Counsellors based on our students' counselling needs. Students with milder needs can be supported by teachers and peers. Schools also tap on resources in the community, such as the Response, Early Intervention and Assessment in Community Mental Health (REACH) teams and Family Service Centres.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Total Fees Paid by and Total Subsidies Given to Local and International Students in Local Universities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Education for students studying all types of degrees at our local universities in 2023 (a) what are the total fees paid by local and international students respectively; and (b) what are the total subsidies including allowances and stipends given to local and international students respectively.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Tuition fees in our Autonomous Universities (AUs) are differentiated by citizenship, with international students paying higher fees than Singapore Citizen students for the same course. The annual tuition fees can be found on the AUs' websites. Students pay fees to the AUs and the total amount of fees paid is dependent on the student enrolment in an academic year. The Ministry of Education (MOE) does not collect this data.
The bulk of MOE's $2.65 billion budget for AUs in FY2024 will go towards supporting the education of Singapore Citizens. International students at the AUs receive lower subsidies than Singapore Citizens. International students also form a small proportion of the total undergraduate student population (about 10%1 ) at our AUs. [Please refer to \"Full-fee Paying vs Tuition Grant-receiving Non-Singaporean Students in Government-funded Autonomous Universities\", Official Report, 12 September 2022, Vol 95, Issue 67, Written Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The Member can refer to the reply on the proportion of international students enrolled in our AUs (at the undergraduate level) at the Parliamentary Sitting on 12 Sept 2022."],"footNoteQuestions":["24"],"questionNo":"24"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Ensure Educators Are Not Involved in Illegal Activities such as Drug-related Offences","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"25 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Education (a) whether there are any measures in place to ensure that educators are not involved in illegal activities, such as drug consumption and possession; and (b) how do public educational institutions collaborate with law enforcement agencies to prevent and address drug-related offences within the education community.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Ministry of Education (MOE) expects our educators to uphold the integrity of the profession and live up to the trust placed in them. MOE will not hesitate to take disciplinary action against those who fail to adhere to our standards, including dismissal from service.
Beginning teachers are reminded about MOE's zero tolerance approach to drug-related offences before they start teaching in schools. In the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs), staff are briefed about their institutions' Codes of Conduct and regulations, which include respect for the rule of law. Teachers are also regularly reminded that they are expected to comply with MOE's Code of Professional Conduct for Educators, which includes reporting colleagues whom they suspect of abusing drugs.
MOE works closely with the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) on outreach efforts to our educators in our public education institutions. In schools and IHLs, staff are appointed as DrugFreeSG Champions to advocate against drug abuse. CNB and MOE have also been engaging school leaders and educators through various Preventive Drug Education platforms to strengthen anti-drug abuse messaging.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Working Years Required to Recover Cost from Recipients of Government Tuition Grants for Polytechnic and University Studies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education what is the respective estimated number of years that a recipient of the Ministry's Tuition Grant Scheme for (i) polytechnics and (ii) universities will have to work and pay taxes before the costs of the grant are recovered.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Tuition Grant Scheme supports international students to study in Singapore, by defraying part of the cost of the school fees. Tuition Grant recipients nevertheless continue to pay fees which are higher than that for Singaporean students. As students, they contribute to the vibrancy of the learning environment and student life in our Institutes of Higher Learning.
In return for the Tuition Grant, recipients are bonded to work in Singapore after graduation for three years to contribute to our economy. A proportion of them go on to contribute to Singapore as Permanent Residents and naturalised Singapore Citizens. For those who eventually leave Singapore, they continue to be part of our valuable global network, through friendships and economic links forged here.
The contributions of Tuition Grant recipients to Singapore as well as to our students are both qualitative and quantitative.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Using PayNow as Payment Method for Child Development Account Transactions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"27 Mr Don Wee asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Ministry will consider incorporating PayNow as a payment method in addition to the current NETS-only method when parents make payments from the Child Development Account to approved institutions.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Ministry of Social and Family Development will consider alternative payment modes as part of our regular review of the Child Development Account (CDA) scheme. Such payment modes will need to be convenient for parents and trustees, while providing adequate safeguards against erroneous or unauthorised usage, since the CDA monies are only to be used for specified expenditures.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Enhanced Care and Protection Orders Issued by Youth Court","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"28 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development for each year in the past five years, how many Enhanced Care and Protection Orders have been applied for and ordered by the Youth Court respectively.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Since the Enhanced Care and Protection Orders (ECPOs) came into effect in July 2020, an annual average of about 27 ECPOs have been applied for; and about 26 ECPOs were ordered by the Youth Court.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enhancing Home Caregiving Assistance for Caregivers of Elderly with Dementia and Alzheimer’s Disease","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Health whether more support can be given by increasing home caregiving assistance for caregivers of elderly with dementia and Alzheimer's disease.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Government has enhanced support in recent years for caregivers of seniors, including those with dementia. For example, the Home Caregiving Grant was enhanced in 2023 to provide more help with caregiving expenses. The Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) has also expanded the range of training courses for caregivers. We expanded dementia day care and home personal care services for custodial support, allowing caregivers to take breaks. This includes the Night Respite service which provides night-time care for seniors with dementia.
Specifically, for caregivers of seniors with dementia, since 2021, the Post-Diagnostic Support Community Outreach Teams have provided dementia-related resources to newly diagnosed seniors and their caregivers, equipping them with coping skills and linking them to other services. The Community Resource, Engagement & Support Team – (CREST)-Caregivers – provides self-care advice to dementia caregivers who have or are at risk of developing burnout and link them up with support networks.
We will continue to review support measures to meet the needs of caregivers of seniors with dementia.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increasing the Number of Dentists in Public Healthcare Institutions to Meet Singaporeans' Dental Care Needs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"30 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Health whether the Government can increase the number of dentists in public healthcare institutions by 2030 to meet the dental care needs of Singaporeans.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Ministry of Health regularly reviews our demand for dentists, considering factors, such as demographic changes and oral health trends, to ensure adequate access to dental care for all Singaporeans.
The number of dentists in the public healthcare sector grew by about 40%, from around 400 in 2013 to around 540 at the end of 2022. Going forward, we will continue to increase the number of dentists in public healthcare institutions to meet growing demand.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Government Expenditure on Public Healthcare, Subsidised Medical Care for Citizens, PRs and Foreigners, and Healthcare Spend by Government and Individuals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"31 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Health in the last three years, what is the breakdown of expenditure on the key components of public healthcare, such as drugs, manpower, medical technology, research, administration and real estate.
32 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Health in the last three years, what is the total expenditure by the Government on subsidised medical care for (i) Singapore citizens (ii) permanent residents and (iii) foreigners.
33 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Health for each year from 2021 to 2023, what percentage of patients' healthcare expenditure was paid by (i) the Government (ii) employers (iii) MediSave (iv) MediShield and (v) individuals, with a breakdown by citizens, permanent residents and foreigners.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Tables below provide the breakdowns for the financial years where data is available:
34 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether he can elaborate on the rationale behind the current limitations on cast application at polyclinics and general practitioner (GP) clinics, including backslabs, which can only be done at the accident and emergency (A&E) department; and (b) whether there are plans to extend cast application to polyclinics and GP clinics, equipping them with the relevant resources so as to reduce waiting times at A&E departments.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Fractures vary in their severity. Simpler fractures are already managed in polyclinics, for example, through splints, arm slings and appropriate medication to relieve pain. More complex fractures may require additional investigations and specialised procedures to manipulate the fracture and restore bone alignment, before casts are applied. These cases are managed at the Accident and Emergency departments or Urgent Care Centres, where specific equipment and materials are available and healthcare professionals are trained for such conditions.
The polyclinics have in place, guidelines for management of fractures. This includes protocols for referring patients to a specialist or emergency services.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Shingles Cases by Age Groups and Monitoring Shingles' Vaccination Numbers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"35 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health in each of the last five years, how many cases of shingles have been recorded for those aged (i) under 50 years old (ii) between 51 to 75 years old and (iii) over 75 years old.
36 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry tracks the administration of vaccines available for shingles; and (b) if so, how many doses have been administered to patients in each of the last three years.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Shingles is not a notifiable disease and the Ministry of Health (MOH) does not track shingles cases. MOH also does not actively monitor the uptake of shingles vaccination, as the vaccine is currently not on the National Adult Immunisation Schedule's list of recommended vaccines.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Slowing Down Increase in Kidney Failure Cases and Assessment of Adequacy of Dialysis Care Infrastructure","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"37 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Health (a) what are the Ministry's plans to slow down the growth of kidney failure cases; and (b) whether the existing dialysis care infrastructure is sufficient for the number of cases.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Kidney failure cases are driven mainly by Singapore's ageing population and risk factors, such as diabetes and hypertension.
Hence, to slow down the growth of kidney failure cases, we need better preventive care. In this regard, Healthier SG is now a national priority, which promotes healthier lifestyles, participation in screening for diabetes and hypertension and improves the management of diabetes and hypertension.
To cater to patients with kidney failure who require dialysis, the Ministry of Health has been working with providers to expand our national capacity. We are also encouraging suitable patients to opt for peritoneal dialysis, which can be administered at home and accords patients greater independence.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effectiveness of Sniffer Dogs' Detection of Wildlife Trafficking at Border Checkpoints","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"38 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development whether he can provide an update on (i) the effectiveness of the use of sniffer dogs to detect wildlife and wildlife products trafficking at border checkpoints and (ii) the number of illegal shipments of wildlife and wildlife products which the sniffer dogs have detected thus far.
Mr Desmond Lee: In 2021, the National Parks Board set up a K9 Unit at Singapore's border checkpoints to detect illegally traded wildlife and wildlife products. Since then, the sniffer dogs and their handlers have aided in the detection of illegal shipments of wildlife and wildlife products. For example, in 2022, they played an important role in detecting 34kg of smuggled rhinoceros horns, our largest seizure of rhinoceros horns to date.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Total Number of Multi-storey Car Parks in HDB Estates and Proportion of Red Season Parking Lots","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"39 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the total number of multi-storey carparks (MSCPs) in all HDB estates currently; and (b) how many of these MSCPs have at least one or two decks of exclusively or a majority of red season parking lots.
Mr Desmond Lee: As of February 2024, there are 1,094 multi-storey car parks (MSCPs) in HDB estates.
Currently, about 30% of MSCPs have designated red parking lots. The majority of MSCPs do not require red parking lots as there are sufficient white parking lots to meet the demand for visitor parking, as well as bi-coloured parking lots that are generally reserved for season parking holders from 7.00 pm to 7.00 am, Mondays to Saturdays; and whole day on Sundays and public holidays. HDB monitors the utilisation rate of HDB car parks to ensure that there is a good balance between providing season parking lots for residents and having sufficient capacity for visitor parking.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trends in Monthly Incomes of Young Couples Applying for BTO Flats and Considerations for Income Limit Adjustments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"40 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry is tracking the trend of the combined monthly income of young couples between the age of 20 and 35 years old who are applying, whether successfully or otherwise, for a HDB BTO flat over the recent years; and (b) whether HDB will consider increasing the BTO housing income limit to allow for more of these young couples to be able to apply for BTO flats.
Mr Desmond Lee: HDB is committed to helping Singaporeans own their home. The income ceiling to buy a flat from HDB helps to ensure that the limited supply of new flats and significant subsidies that come with such flats are prioritised for those who need them most, such as young couples who are buying their first home.
Currently, the monthly income ceiling for families of $14,000 covers about eight in 10 Singaporean households. The income ceiling is $7,000 for singles and $21,000 for extended families. Between 2018 and 2022, the median monthly household income of couples between the age of 21 and 35 who had a chance to book a Build-To-Order flat was fairly stable and ranged from $5,200 to $5,800.
The income ceilings for the purchase of subsidised HDB flats by families and singles are reviewed regularly. HDB considers a range of factors in such reviews, including the household incomes of Singaporeans and prevailing housing market conditions. In considering whether to raise the income ceilings, we are very mindful of the impact on lower-income households and the market competition they would face from higher-income households.
We will continue to monitor the housing market closely, to ensure that public housing remains affordable and accessible.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Retention Period of Livestreams of Parliamentary Sittings and Considerations for Permanent Archiving","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"41 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) for how long will the livestreams of parliamentary sittings be retained on MCI's YouTube channel; and (b) whether MCI will consider permanently retaining all livestreams of parliamentary sittings on its YouTube channel and, if not, where will they be archived.
Mrs Josephine Teo: As mentioned in the Ministry of Communications and Information's (MCI's) reply to a similar Parliamentary Question in January 2021, the full video of each Parliamentary Sitting livestream will remain on MCI's YouTube channel for six months after the end of the Sitting. [Please refer to \"Livestream of Parliamentary Proceedings\", Official Report, 4 January 2021, Vol 95, Issue 14, Written Answers to Questions section.]
The key purpose of livestreaming the Parliamentary proceedings is to allow members of the public to view the Parliamentary proceedings real-time, without the need to be physically present in Parliament. Thereafter, the full records of Parliamentary proceedings are documented through the Hansard and accessible to all online.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Editorial Policy Guidelines and Content Reviews for Guest Writers who Produce Work for SPH Media Trust Publications","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"42 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) whether the Ministry sets guidelines for the editorial policy of vernacular news media pertaining to guest writers; (b) whether there are any reviews done on the content produced for the \"Crossroads\" series of articles in Lianhe Zaobao; (c) whether the Ministry is aware of the content produced by Mr Philip Chan Man Ping for the \"Crossroads\" series of articles; and (d) whether public funding of SPH Media Trust will be tied to a criterion of not encouraging foreign interference.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The Ministry of Communications and Information does not set the editorial policy for news media outlets.
As previously shared with Members, Government funding provided to SPH Media is intended to support its talent, technology, and vernacular capabilities. This funding is hence tied to key performance indicators tracking SPH Media's reach and engagement and is not conditional on its editorial decisions.
The Government has been consistent in safeguarding Singapore and Singaporeans from foreign interference in our domestic affairs, including through our local media. For instance, the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act prohibits SPH Media from receiving funding from foreign sources for any purpose, without prior approval from the Minister.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Background Checks and Code of Conduct Requirements for People's Association Grassroots Appointments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"43 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether the People's Association conducts any background checks on individuals that it plans to appoint to grassroots positions such as patrons of Committees; (b) whether there are code of conduct requirements for individuals holding such grassroots appointments; (c) whether such requirements preclude an individual appearing at a foreign country's political event or organising events to promote specific political causes.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: This question has been addressed. I refer Member to the reply to Parliamentary Question No 5 of Parliament Sitting No 123, on 16 February 2024. [Please refer to \"Vetting Process for Potential Grassroots Leaders, Key Appointment Holders and Patrons for Susceptibility to Foreign Influence\", Official Report, 16 February 2024, Vol 95, Issue 123, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Active CPF Special Accounts for Children Under Five","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"44 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how many children under the age of five years old currently have active CPF Special Accounts; (b) what proportion of the parents who topped up such accounts live in HDB flats; and (c) what is the median sum of money in such accounts as of 31 December 2023.
Dr Tan See Leng: As of 31 December 2023, 3,400 children under the age of five years old currently have balances in their Central Provident Fund (CPF) Special Account (SA). The median sum of money in these children's SA is around $1,000.
Most of these children's SA were topped up through the Retirement Sum Topping-Up Scheme and they can receive top-ups from anyone, not just parents. CPF Board does not keep track of, whether the top-up to these children's SA comes from their parents. Among all givers who had topped up these children's SA through the Retirement Sum Topping-Up Scheme, around eight in 10 live in Housing and Development Board flats.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increased E-gate Usage by Travellers at Checkpoints and Its Impact on Median Waiting Times for Cross-border Bus Services","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"45 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Transport (a) with more Singapore and Malaysia cross-border travellers allowed to use e-gates, whether LTA has observed an increase in median waiting times for cross-border bus services in line with the increased speed at which travellers are clearing immigration checks; and (b) whether LTA will consider increasing the frequency of cross-border bus services during peak hours (including weekends) to reduce congestion caused by travellers waiting for buses at the checkpoints.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Land Transport Authority and Immigration & Checkpoints Authority have worked with bus operators to add more trips and facilitate shuttle services between the Singapore and Johor checkpoints during peak periods. In March 2024, we added more trips for services 160, 170X and 950 on weekends; and reduced the average scheduled headway for Service 170X from eight minutes to five minutes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Average Ridership of Bus Service 405 during Qing Ming Period and Potential Direct Access Re-routing to Choa Chu Kang Columbarium","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"46 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Transport (a) what is the average daily ridership of Bus Service 405 during the current Qing Ming period; and (b) whether Bus Service 405 can be re-routed to provide commuters with direct access to Choa Chu Kang Columbarium.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Service 405 is a special service linking the cemeteries in Lim Chu Kang with Boon Lay Bus Interchange; it only operates during specific festive periods. During the Qing Ming period in 2023, buses on Service 405 were generally less than 40% filled, peaking at 60% to 70% during the busiest hour on 7 April 2023, which coincided with Good Friday.
Choa Chu Kang Columbarium is about 500m away from the nearest bus stop served by Service 405. It is not feasible to reroute Service 405 closer to the columbarium as the roads in the vicinity are too narrow for buses.
47 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Transport (a) what are the conditions required for vehicles to be registered as Goods-cum-Passenger Vehicles; (b) whether there is a way to prevent those driving high-end vehicles of this nature, such as Jeeps, from being registered as such, thus depriving legitimate drivers of commercial vehicles of Certificates of Entitlement.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: There are three types of Goods-cum-Passenger Vehicles (GPVs) – station wagon constructed for the carriage of seven passengers or more, excluding the driver; panel van; or twin-cabin goods vehicle. These can be used to ferry passengers and goods and are registered under COE Category C. Many Jeep models do not belong to any of the categories above and cannot be registered as GPVs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Implementation of Sustainable Aviation Fuel Mandate and Levies for Business Aviation Flights","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"48 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether business aviation flights are required to use 1% Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) from 2026 and pay SAF levies; and (b) what is the basis for this levy being charged.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Sustainable Aviation Fuel levy will apply to all flights departing Singapore from 2026, including business aviation flights.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Minister for National Development","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WS","content":"[(proc text) The following statement was made by the Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee) during clarifications for Question Nos 7 and 8 on the redevelopment of Gillman Barracks at the Sitting on 2 April 2024: (proc text)]
The Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): On lease, as I have said, the site had been made available for interim use since the 1990s. The existing tenancies will progressively expire by 2030. Thereafter, we will plan for the entire site, including residential as well as the commercial uses of the site. And so, at that point in time, we will engage the tenants, engage future tenants as far as the commercial use of the site is concerned. [Please refer to \"Factoring in Findings from Environmental Impact Studies for Development of Former Keppel Club and Gillman Barracks Sites\", Official Report, 2 April 2024, Vol 95, Issue 133, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
[(proc text) Written statement by Mr Desmond Lee circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5): (proc text)]
I wish to make the following factual correction to my reply made during the Sitting of 2 April 2024. My reply should read as follows:
The Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): On lease, as I have said, the site had been made available for interim use since the 1990s. The existing tenancies will progressively expire by 2030. Thereafter, we will redevelop the site, including residential as well as commercial uses. In the meantime, we will continue to engage the tenants, as far as the commercial use of the site is concerned
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":6071,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Don Wee","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240402/vernacular-Don Wee Mental Capacity 2April2024_Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Don Wee Mental Capacity 2April2024_Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6072,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240402/vernacular-Louis Chua Law Enforcement 2April2024-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Louis Chua Law Enforcement 2April2024-Chinese.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}