1 Mr Vikram Nair asked\tthe Minister for National Development (a) what is the number of flats in blocks 685 to 690 of Woodlands Town that have reported their floor tiles cracking or popping from the time the flats were constructed to date; (b) what is this figure as a percentage of the total number of flats in the area; (c) what are the causes of these tiles cracking or popping; and (d) whether HDB will take any steps to assist flat owners who continue to experience such popping or cracking tiles in the coming years.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee) (for the Minister for National Development): Mdm Speaker, a question in almost identical terms was asked yesterday and a response was issued in written form. I would point Members to that. I would be happy to take supplementary questions.
\tMr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): I apologise because I have not seen the answer yet. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State what was the answer to the first two questions that I had: the number of units and, as a percentage of the total number of units in blocks 685 to 690.
Mdm Speaker:\tIf the Senior Minister of State can just summarise.
\tMr Desmond Lee:\tFor the blocks in question, because they were built more than 15 years ago, HDB does not keep track of the data.
\tMr Vikram Nair:\tAnecdotally, from what I understand from residents, I have been told that over the course of 15 years, more than 50% of the units have had their tiles popped. The view is that that is because of workmanship issues. I understand HDB has been very kind. It has actually been replacing the popped tiles for about the last 15 years.
Because I think this issue will continue to arise and continue to come up, if it is a workmanship issue and rather than HDB incurring the cost of replacing it each time, my suggestion would be for HDB to give a one-off grant to the residents to replace at their own cost and their own choice of the type of tiles. The issue, the residents tell me, is that when the same tiles are put in by the same contractors, they pop again. This may be one way to just close the issue off, for upcoming cases that arise.
\tMr Desmond Lee:\tMadam, as set out in the reply yesterday, there are many causes for popping tiles. Most developers would give a one-year Defects Liability Period (DLP), while others may give more, for example, three years of DLP, on a goodwill basis. HDB's practice goes way beyond that, to 15 years. We do so for all such cases that are surfaced to our attention within the 15-year period, without us necessarily looking at the cost of it. As for the Member's suggestion, we take note of it.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Large Air-con Ledges and Balconies at Non-Landed Residential Properties","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"2 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked \tthe Minister for National Development whether URA is (i) reviewing the rule of allowing developers to build large air-con ledges and balconies for non-landed residential properties without them being counted as part of the gross floor area and yet are allowed to be charged to buyers for such space and (ii) making it mandatory to state the floor areas dedicated for balconies, air-con ledges and other outdoor space in the floor plans of such properties during their launches.
\tThe Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong): Madam, URA grants Gross Floor Area (GFA) exemptions to achieve certain planning objectives. For example, air-conditioner ledges below one metre in width are exempted from GFA in order to incentivise developers to house air-conditioner condensers neatly in residential developments. Balconies, on the other hand, are, in fact, not exempted from GFA, and developers must pay development charge for them. The rules on what constitutes GFA are publicly available on URA's website.
Developers factor in strata area when pricing units in their developments. Strata area measures the amount of floor space to be sold to the buyer, on the basis that the space is for the buyer's exclusive enjoyment. As both balconies and air-conditioner ledges solely serve individual units, they are considered to be strata area and, hence, chargeable to the buyer.
It is already mandatory for developers to provide prospective home buyers with a drawn-to-scale floor plan of the unit and, a detailed breakdown of the area of the unit by various types of spaces, such as bedrooms, bathrooms, air-conditioner ledges and balconies. The Member had suggested making this mandatory; it is already the case.
This information must be given to prospective home buyers before they pay the booking fee for an Option to Purchase (OTP) for the unit. The floor area of various types of spaces, including air-conditioner ledges and balconies, must also be accurately represented in the show-flats. URA will not hesitate to take action against developers who have misrepresented such information to home buyers. Home buyers are advised to review the information in order to make an informed decision over their purchases.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong):\tMadam, I thank the Minister for the answer. As I understand it, there is this Balcony Bonus Gross Floor Area (GFA) scheme. It provides the developers a bonus to build up to 10% more than the allowable GFA. Because of this, the developers apparently build extra-large balconies, sometimes, one-third to half the space of the liveable space inside the apartment. That has caused some misery among the buyers. We hope that MND can consider regulating the size of balconies.
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Madam, just to be clear again, because the Member had asked about air-con ledges and balconies, air-con ledges are a separate issue. This was an issue that was publicised in the media recently. That is a separate matter from a Bonus GFA matter.
The Bonus GFA applies to balconies. Indeed, there is such a provision today. I think it has generally worked well in providing us buildings and residential developments that add to our physical landscape. Part of it is making sure that the information that is provided to buyers is very clear: what constitutes balcony space, what constitutes usable space.
As I have said, this information is mandatory and we will continue to make sure that developers publicise the information properly. We encourage home buyers to look at the prospectus carefully, especially if they are buying flats based on plans, and make informed decisions about their purchases.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Investment in Infrastructure to Support Social and Economic Development as Population Ages","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"3 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked\tthe Minister for Health what are the infrastructure investments that have been implemented or are being implemented to support our social and economic development in the face of an ageing population.
\tThe Minister for Health (Mr Gan Kim Yong): Madam, we take a whole-of-Government approach in preparing ourselves in the face of an ageing population. Launched in 2015, the Action Plan for Successful Ageing outlines the national blueprint to help Singaporeans age well and age confidently, with strong family and community support. The Ministerial Committee on Ageing oversees and coordinates these efforts.
First, to sustain our economic vitality and help Singaporeans adjust to the changing economy, the Government has been investing in continuing education and training (CET) infrastructure to help our older workers remain employable. Singaporeans can access heavily-funded CET programmes to upskill and reskill throughout their lifetime.
There are also professional conversion programmes to support mid-career switches for PMETs. Many new initiatives have been introduced under SkillsFuture, such as skills-based modular courses. The Government also supports ageless workplaces through the WorkPro scheme which provides funding support for companies to redesign jobs for older workers. In addition, workplace health programmes have been put in place to keep mature workers healthy.
Second, we are investing in infrastructure and programmes to cater to the social needs of seniors. HDB has provided more housing options for seniors, such as 2-room Flexi flats, and offered the Enhancement for Active Seniors (EASE) programme to make the home environment safe for our seniors. We are also setting up \"Active Ageing Hubs\", which are one-stop day centres for seniors which provide active ageing services for seniors.
Third, we have been expanding our health and aged care infrastructure as outlined in Healthcare 2020. Since 2012, we have added 2,500 hospital beds. We also expanded our nursing home and community facilities, by adding 3,400 nursing home beds and 5,600 home and centre-based care places.
Fourth, we are systematically refreshing our housing estates, transport system and parks to make our city senior-friendly. All new public housing estates already have barrier-free designs. A $40 million Accessibility Fund has been established to incentivise owners of existing private sector buildings to improve accessibility. We have enhanced road safety for seniors and improved access to public transport. We are experimenting with \"therapeutic gardens\" and we welcome seniors to our parks to enjoy the sunshine, the greenery and nature, and to stay healthy and active.
The Government will continue to plan ahead to ensure that infrastructure developments keep up with the needs of an ageing population. But preparing for the future involves not just infrastructure investments. We also need all citizens to work together to create inclusive workplaces and community to support our seniors.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Success Rate of Professional Conversion Programme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"4 Ms K Thanaletchimi asked\tthe Minister for Health (a) what is the current success rate of the Professional Conversion Programme (PCP) in the placement and retention of individuals who switch from another industry to the healthcare industry; and (b) what is the current success rate of individuals in the healthcare industry who have been able to switch to higher-end jobs through the PCP.
\tThe Minister for Health (Mr Gan Kim Yong): Madam, the Healthcare Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs) help mid-career Singaporeans to train and make a career switch to the healthcare sector. Today, we have PCPs for conversion to registered and enrolled nurses, physiotherapists and occupational therapists, diagnostic radiographers and dental surgery assistants. The Government provides significant funding for the course fees and allowances during the period of training.
We have admitted more than 400 Singaporeans from non-healthcare sectors into the Healthcare Conversion Programmes since 2009. For the 223 enrolled between 2009 and 2011, 82% completed their training and were successfully placed into a healthcare job. Among those successfully placed, 92% remained in their jobs after the end of the minimum service period.
Our public healthcare institutions also support suitable non-clinical healthcare staff to undergo skills conversion through the PCPs and similar programmes to take on clinical roles. For example, over the last three years, 54 training scholarships and sponsorships were provided for non-clinical in-service staff to convert into clinical roles as nurses and allied health professionals.
We also provide upgrading opportunities for in-services nurses to take on higher end roles. More than 750 enrolled nurses entered our Polytechnic nursing programmes over the last three years to undergo skills training to become registered nurses.
\tMs K Thanaletchimi (Nominated Member): Madam, I would like to seek one clarification regarding the PCP. Could the Minister share if the programme is standardised across all the institutions or is it very customised to individual institutions, as the career the Minister talked about aligns to all the institutions?
\tMr Gan Kim Yong:\tThe bulk of the PCP is standardised because they are based on the nursing modules or the specific Allied Health Professional modules. But in each of the PCP, it will also involve on-the-job training. On-the-job training would be catered more specifically to the institutions, in terms of their practices, team-based approach and so on. There are variations between institutions but the larger part of it is standardised.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Pervasiveness of Adapt and Grow Initiative in Healthcare Sector","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"5 Ms K Thanaletchimi asked\tthe Minister for Health how pervasive is the Adapt and Grow initiative, which helps workers to upgrade skills and adapt to changing job demands, in the healthcare sector.
\tThe Minister for Health (Mr Gan Kim Yong): Madam, in 2016, MOM implemented the Adapt and Grow initiative to support workers, especially mid-career Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians (PMETs), in finding jobs.
Some 300 jobseekers were placed into the healthcare sector through this initiative last year. Complementing this, the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) has also been organising recruitment fairs, through which about 400 mid-career locals were hired in 2016.
MOH will enhance the Professional Conversion Programme (PCP) to recruit more mid-career Singaporeans as nurses. We will increase funding support for employers of mid-career nurses for their professional conversion training and on-the-job training. In addition, we will offer overseas nursing Masters scholarships starting from 2017 for non-nursing degree graduates to pursue nursing studies.
Healthcare employers can tap on Workforce Singapore (WSG)'s PCP for Professional Executives to recruit mid-career administrators. In addition, those with managerial experience and are planning to switch to the community care sector can be placed on the Senior Management Associate Scheme (SMAS) and undergo training provided by AIC and the employers. MOH will also enhance its place-and-train programmes to recruit mid-career individuals into support care staff positions. On-the-job training funding support will be provided to public healthcare and community care employers for every newly hired support care workers.
We will continue to work closely with our partners, such as MOM, WSG, Employment and Employability Institute (e2i), healthcare employers and the unions, to reach out to mid-career job seekers and facilitate their shift to the healthcare sector?
\tMs K Thanaletchimi (Nominated Member): Madam, I would like to seek a clarification on the Attach and Train programme, the new initiative that was announced by MOM. Could the Minister enlighten if this Attach and Train programme can be more pervasive, now that it is being introduced across all institutions in healthcare, including the ILTC sector.
\tMr Gan Kim Yong:\tMadam, certainly, MOH will be very keen to work with the unions and healthcare employers to see how we can expand this programme to reach out to more healthcare professionals to encourage them to upgrade themselves, as well as for those from outside the healthcare sector to enter the healthcare sector to serve our patients.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Australia Government's Land Acquisition Policy Change on SAF Training Space","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked\tthe Minister for Defence given that the Australian government has backed down from compulsory land acquisition in Queensland to provide SAF troops with access to a bigger training area (a) how will SAF training be affected by the reduction in land size; (b) whether Singapore will be proposing any changes to the agreement with Australia; and (c) whether our proposed spending of A$2.25 billion will be reduced as a result.
\tThe Second Minister for Defence (Mr Ong Ye Kung) (for the Minister for Defence): Madam, the Australian Government has given assurance that it remains fully committed to the implementation of enhanced training access for the SAF as laid out in the 2016 Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP) agreement with Singapore. The Australian Department of Defence also stated publicly on 23 February 2017 that it would be able to achieve the training requirements for the Australian Defence Force and SAF under the terms of the CSP without compulsory land acquisition through enhancing existing training areas and a more optimal scheduling of training activities.
The costs of developments for SAF training requirements are still within the budget laid out in the CSP.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Funding Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Pursuing University Studies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"7 Mr Leon Perera asked\tthe Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills) what funding help is available to persons with disabilities who are pursuing their first degree but who do not qualify for scholarships by the Society for the Physically Disabled or grants due to age.
\tThe Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Education (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills)): Madam, the Government provides substantial subsidies to all Singaporeans pursuing their first degree in the publicly-funded Universities, regardless of their physical conditions.
Students who need additional support can tap on financial assistance schemes, such as bursaries and loans offered by MOE and the Universities. These will help to further defray the cost of their education, including tuition fees and cost of living. Similar assistance schemes are also available from community organisations, other Government agencies and other private or professional organisations.
Students can also use the balance in their Post-Secondary Education Account (PSEA) to pay for their degree education.
Together, these schemes ensure that no deserving student is denied an undergraduate education due to financial constraints.
Additional targeted measures are available to support students with disabilities in their educational journey. For example, the SkillsFuture Study Award for Persons with Disabilities targets persons with disabilities who have at least two years of work experience and demonstrated resilience and perseverance in pursuing learning, skills upgrading and skills deepening. The award quantum is up to $5,000 and can be used for Bachelor's degree programmes.
At the publicly-funded Universities, students with special educational needs may also seek financial assistance to procure assistive technology devices and support services to help them overcome the challenges of actively accessing and participating in classes.
The Member also made reference to scholarships awarded by SPD. While this does not come directly under MOE's purview, I understand that their scholarships are awarded based on merit, and not age.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Early Release of Draft Budget Statement for Public Consultation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"8 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Finance whether the Ministry will consider releasing a draft Budget Statement for public consultation one month before the delivery of the Budget Statement in Parliament.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Finance (Ms Indranee Rajah) (for the Minister for Finance): Madam, we agree that engaging and consulting the public are valuable to the Budget process. In fact, preparations and consultations for the Budget take place all year round. Throughout the year, the Government gathers feedback and studies data to formulate and implement better plans. This consultation effort goes beyond MOF and includes the outreach and consultations by other Ministries and REACH to Singaporeans, businesses, workers and various sectors.
The feedback gathering is intensified around the end of the year, typically by early December, in a more formal Budget feedback exercise. The process is structured along certain themes and questions, which, in a way, reflects some of the areas being examined for the coming Budget.
For Budget 2017, REACH had Listening Points across Singapore over 10 December 2016 to 8 January 2017 to provide accessible, open booths for Singaporeans to give their views for Budget 2017. REACH also hosted events, such as the Pre-Budget 2017 Conversation and Facebook Q&A Session, for Singaporeans to directly engage with policymakers and Members of Parliament. MOF ran engagement sessions with stakeholders, such as trade associations and grassroots leaders. This past year, through the work of the Committee on the Future Economy, there were additional engagement sessions with students, industry leaders, unionists and academics. Feedback received during these consultations had further contributed to the formulation of the Budget.
On the timing of consultation, we have found from our interactions with companies and stakeholders that many of them would prefer to give their views closer to the Budget as the economic situation for the coming year is clearer and business concerns become clearer.
The current spread of engagement opportunities during the year, growing more intensive nearer Budget Day, achieves the goal of engaging Singaporeans to think about our future, as Mr Louis Ng's suggestion intends.
The Budget is not a destination, but part of a journey of feedback-gathering, analysis, policy review and refinement, in order to improve Singapore and the lives of Singaporeans.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Thank you, Madam, I am aware that we are doing a lot of public consultations, but I think the question is: whether we can do public consultations when the public already knows what the Budget Statement is going to be. So, at least they can give feedback, meaningful ones which we can use to amend or improve the Budget. Because what we are doing now in a lot of our dialogues is explaining the Budget to people and we are not really getting their feedback on how we can improve it further.
\tMs Indranee Rajah: Mdm Speaker, I thank Mr Ng for his comments and clarifications. There are really two parts to the consultation. Mr Ng spoke about explaining. The explaining part comes after the Budget has been delivered. Prior to that, there is a great deal of consultations and the consultations take place not just in the month or two before the Budget Statement is delivered, but it sometimes takes a long time.
For example, the Pioneer Generation Package is something which had its genesis in Our Singapore Conversation which started in 2012. It was announced in Budget 2014. It was two years in the making from feedback from people about their concerns and also the feedback that they wanted to honour the elderly. So, it took two years to put together that particular package.
We also have, for example, in this year's Budget, the Global Innovation Alliance (GIA) and SME Go Digital programme. This was something that was borne out of the CFE discussions and recommendations. So, prior to the Budget, there were a lot of consultations, some of which were years in the making, some of which were in that year itself, some of it were in the months prior, or a month or two before. What we do is, rather than releasing a draft Budget in detail, as I mentioned earlier, we talk about themes. For example, on elder care, how we can assist for an ageing population.
These are themes that we float and discuss with people, and then we put them into the Budget. Because whatever it is, in any Budget Statement, there will always be different views. For example, if we were to put up a Budget and say, \"We want to raise worker levies\", what do you think the response would be? There would be some who may say, \"Yes, let us do it straightaway\". I suspect there would be a lot more who would say \"no\". And then, what do you do? The Government has to take a position. The Government must make a policy decision. The Government has to make that call.
So, we draw in ideas from the consultations. We put it together and then it is delivered at the Budget Statement. But the Budget Statement is actually still subject to the approval of Parliament. Parliament comes back and gives its final input and suggestions. That is why the Motion that is moved by the Minister for Finance, when we have the Budget debates, is that \"this Parliament approves the fiscal policy of the Government\".
So, the process is really designed to be as efficient as possible but, at the same time, taking on broad feedback, and to the extent that it is not possible to incorporate something in a particular financial year but if it is a good idea, we will see if we can incorporate it in the months ahead, or in the following year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Family Maintenance Cases and Investigations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"9 Mr Leon Perera asked\tthe Minister for Social and Family Development (a) how many Maintenance Record Officers (MROs) have been appointed to date; (b) how many cases of potentially recalcitrant defaulters have they investigated to date; and (c) whether the outcome of MRO investigations has succeeded in identifying cases where maintenance payments have been extracted from defaulters who were able but unwilling to pay and, if so, what is the number of such cases to date.
\tThe Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Mdm Speaker, the Maintenance Record Officer, also known as the MRO, pilot project had been initiated to assist the Court in its fact-finding process by obtaining information on parties' financial circumstances and identifying recalcitrant defaulters who refuse to pay maintenance even though they are able to afford it. Where appropriate, the Court can then impose harsher penalties against such defaulters.
The MRO is not part of the Court process and is only deployed in cases directed by the judge. To date, we have appointed two MROs and they have assisted the Court in four cases, with one pending. The respondents in these cases were assessed to be unable to keep up with their maintenance obligations due to financial difficulties, rather than being unwilling to pay maintenance. For such cases, further to providing a report on its findings to the Court, the MRO will also refer parties to the relevant organisations for assistance.
The MRO pilot is a recent initiative, having just been implemented a couple of months ago. We will continue to review its effectiveness so that the MRO is able to assist more litigants.
I would like to assure this House that we will continue to work with relevant stakeholders to improve our efforts to assist those who face maintenance-related issues.
\tMr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): I thank the hon Parliamentary Secretary for his helpful reply. Just a few supplementary questions.
Firstly, just to clarify: is it the case that the MRO will only investigate a case if ordered to do so by the Court? I believe that is what you said, but just to confirm that that is the case.
Secondly, would the Ministry consider providing some avenue or mechanism for spouses to request for an investigation of the MRO without having to go through a Court process to get the Court to make that instruction in cases where they suspect that their ex-spouse may be able, but are unwilling to pay?
Thirdly, in cases where spouses are unable to locate their ex-spouse who is supposed to pay maintenance to them, what avenues or recourse do spouses who are owed maintenance, have in such cases, if the person is just not contactable?
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. The answer to the first question is yes; it is only after the judge directs it and then the MRO will be activated.
With regard to the second and third questions, I think we need to look at a case, whether any divorce or even relationship issues, as a case where we want to see how we can facilitate relationships to still be connected for the sake of the children. It is important for us not to jump to conclusions too early. We want to give the opportunity for both parties to come to terms about how the maintenance can be agreed upon. At the same time, it is also important for us to ensure that sufficient avenue is given and we want to see how we can facilitate this. So, even after the MRO has been appointed, we realise that ex-couples or the parties involved are able to reach a common understanding, a common platform to see how maintenance can be paid or can be effected.
In essence, I want to assure the Member that we want to ensure that the connectivity is still there. We will try our best to get MRO available and work with other organisations to see how we can find the persons who do not pay maintenance.
As I have mentioned in my answer, it is still early days into the pilot programme. We will continue to review this to refine it in such a way that we will be able to have a positive effect on maintenance-related issues.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Surge Pricing by Taxi Operators","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked\tthe Minister for Transport (a) what is the Ministry's position on the practice of taxi operators adopting surge pricing during off-peak hours to reflect market demand; (b) what can it do to prevent overcharging; and (c) how can passengers be given prior information on when the taxi companies are imposing the surge pricing.
\tThe Second Minister for Transport (Mr Ng Chee Meng) (for the Minister for Transport): Mdm Speaker, several taxi companies had applied to the Public Transport Council (PTC) to implement dynamic pricing. They felt they had to make this move in order to compete against private hire car services like Uber and Grab. The PTC was conscious that some commuters are uncomfortable but, on balance, allowed it.
We should not prevent the taxi industry from adapting to meet stiffer competition. Livelihoods are at stake and the competition will drive the industry to deliver better services to commuters. Moreover, under dynamic pricing, it is not certain how fares will trend. Fares can potentially be higher during peak periods, but also lower during off-peak periods. Competition with fast-growing private hire car services will also keep fares in check. Metered fares will remain an option for commuters booking a taxi ride, if they are not so comfortable with dynamic pricing.
The taxi companies are required under the law to give commuters sufficient notice, at least one week, before commencing dynamic pricing. Grab had announced on 22 March their plans to implement dynamic pricing, which happened on 29 March, and ComfortDelGro had announced their plans on 17 March.
\tMr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister for the answers. I am glad that the Minister mentioned that he needs one week's notice from the taxi operators.
I just have one supplementary question. It is good that there are positive benefits from the surge and dynamic pricing. But let us, say, an example of a scenario where the prices surge in one day because of a certain event or activity. What would be the implications for a needy family, for example, which needs to send a family member to a hospital for urgent treatment especially at that particular moment when there is an extreme sharp jump in prices? Does the Ministry take that sort of situation into consideration, especially for needy families?
\tMr Ng Chee Meng:\tI thank the Member for the question. If it is really a critical situation, my advice would be to call an ambulance. That is the best way to get to treatment fastest. But if it is not a critical emergency, then traditional options like street hails, bookings via apps on a metered fare basis still available. So, even when there is surge pricing, there are other traditional options available for any family that may have an urgent need.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Noise Barriers for MRT Tracks at Khatib Station","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked\tthe Minister for Transport (a) whether the tender for noise barriers for MRT tracks at Khatib station has been awarded; and (b) when will the work commence onsite and when will it be completed.
\tThe Minister for Transport (Mr Khaw Boon Wan):\tWe will call the tender for noise barriers for Khatib and other areas under Phase 2 of the programme within the next couple of months. There has been a delay due to the need to review the effectiveness of Phase 1. After tender award, LTA will need some time to finalise the design for each of the locations under Phase 2. But more importantly, the timeline for installation needs to be closely coordinated with many other rail maintenance, improvement and upgrading works that compete for the very limited engineering hours. We should be able to start installation works around 2020 for completion by 2022.
\tEr Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Mdm Speaker, I would like to ask a clarification from the Minister. When I asked a similar question in August last year, the answer was that it would call the tender in the second half of last year and it would start in 2019. It will only be completed in 2022, that is, a few years' delay. I would like to ask the Minister: when we implement this stretch of noise barrier, can Khatib be put at the beginning of the project because I have quite a number of residents who have been requesting because their sleep has been affected by the noise?
\tMr Khaw Boon Wan:\tMadam, as I have explained, there was a delay by a few months because we were asked to do a post-Budget review because as is a huge project involving hundreds of millions of dollars. So, rightly, the Treasury required us to, first, break it up into two phases and to do Phase 2 after we have had a good review of the results of Phase 1. That is why there was this slight delay of a few months. That explains why 2019 becomes 2020. But, overall, I am sympathetic because my constituency is also within Phase 2 of this programme. We will do our best.
\tMr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee):\tMadam, I thank the Minister for the update. Yew Tee was covered under Phase 1. However, the project has not been completed because there are two sections and we are not the only one to have this where they require higher barriers. And we were told that this would then have to be covered under Phase 2 of the tender process, which means you now have a barrier system that is half complete under Phase 1. So, if there is a further delay for the tender for Phase 2, residents would be left wondering why is it that Phase 1 has been completed but is incomplete.
\tMr Khaw Boon Wan:\t In fact, one of the stretches in my constituency fitted that kind of description, too. So, I am very sympathetic to the plea. We will do our best.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increasing Numbers of Foreign Domestic, Healthcare and Childcare Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"12 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked\tthe Minister for Manpower whether the Government will allow more foreign domestic, healthcare and childcare workers into Singapore to meet the needs of an ageing population and increasing fertility rates.
\tThe Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong) (for the Minister for Manpower): Mdm Speaker, to meet the manpower needs in the healthcare and early childhood sectors, our priority is to nurture a pipeline of qualified Singaporeans to take up good jobs in these good sectors. For example, the intakes in local schools for medical, nursing and early childcare-related programmes have been expanded in recent years to attract more Singaporeans to join these sectors. We have also established Adapt and Grow Programmes to facilitate the transition of mid-career professionals who wish to take up these jobs. For example, there are Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs) for occupations, such as registered nurses and pre-school teachers.
However, we also recognise that time is needed to expand our local manpower pipeline for the healthcare and childcare sectors. Where there are shortfalls, companies will continue to have access to foreign workers to fill in the gaps in numbers, skills and timing.
Apart from institutional care, families that need help with caring for their young children or elderly family members at home can hire foreign domestic workers (FDWs). To provide support to such families, the concessionary FDW levy rate was lowered from $120 to $60 per month since May 2015. The Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) also provides a means-tested monthly grant of $120 to support families who need to hire a FDW to care for a family member who requires permanent assistance with daily living activities.
It is in the interest of employers to ensure that the FDWs they employ have the requisite skills, aptitude and supervision to perform their roles well. The AIC provides a Caregivers Training Grant (CTG) to help offset the cost of attending approved training for caregivers of seniors and persons with disabilities, including FDWs who support families in caring for such persons. Families should consider sending their FDWs for such training so that they can provide better care for the elderly and persons with disabilities in the family.
\tMr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio):\tI thank the Minister of State for the reply. My question is whether there will be a near future review of the manpower needs in view of the lead time that is required and also because by 2030, that is, in another 13 years' time, in fact, one out of four Singaporeans will be aged 65 and above. I think that is something that we always bear in mind. With that in mind, when will MOM review whether we would need some more manpower or whether the training programmes or the take-up rate will be sufficient to meet the demand?
\tMr Sam Tan Chin Siong:\tMdm Speaker, I thank the Member for the questions. The short answer to the Member's query is that MOM will constantly review the manpower needs for all the sectors, including the healthcare and childcare sectors. And particularly for the healthcare centre, the need for elderly care, we will also work closely with MOH to estimate and also to do a projection on the number of the elderly who will need such care and the number of workers needed by these institutions so that we will be able to revise and calibrate our manpower policies from time to time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Publication of Environmental Impact Assessments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"13 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked\tthe Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry can make public the results of all environmental impact assessments or studies done in relation to the development of Tengah; and (b) what are the plans for existing wildlife living in that area.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee) (for the Minister for National Development): Madam, Tengah is slated for new town development. As part of responsible development, HDB is conducting an environmental baseline study so as to better understand the existing topography, hydrology, flora and existing wildlife in the area. We will share the key findings of the study with the public in due course.
One key feature which HDB has planned is the Forest Corridor which is approximately 100 metres wide and 5 kilometres long and will serve as a wildlife connector between the Western Water Catchment Area and the Central Catchment Nature Reserve. The plan is also to replace the concrete canal with a naturalised stream and water body. NParks will separately study how to retain the existing greenery within the Forest Corridor, as well as to enhance it by introducing more native forest species. Over time, this Forest Corridor is envisioned to be a lush habitat supporting the rich biodiversity.
HDB will put in place wildlife management strategies, which will include shepherding wildlife to the adjacent forest areas that will not be developed in the short term. This is to minimise potential impact on wildlife within the development sites when works are in progress.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Madam, I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. Can I check if there is a timeline for the baseline studies that the Minister of State mentioned and will we actually be doing an EIA or EIS instead? Also, is MND or HDB working with any of the wildlife or nature groups with regard to this study?
\tMr Desmond Lee: First, with regard to the environmental baseline study, we expect it to be completed by the first half of 2017. Second, we are conducting an environmental baseline study because Tengah is made up of young secondary forests, scrubland, abandoned sundry cultivation like kampongs, farms and orchards, and old brickworks that were demolished in 2008. It was then used as a military training ground. Hence, we are conducting an environmental baseline study, together with other studies, as I have earlier mentioned. HDB is consulting various stakeholders, which include nature and animal welfare groups.
\tMr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member):\tMadam, just a few supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. In relation to this EIA, is it the case that, henceforth, all EIA or EIS studies will be made public if there are done, unless there are specific national security considerations that prohibit public release and, if that is not the case, then why is that not the case?
\tMr Desmond Lee: Madam, I have responded to the Member some time ago when we discussed the process for the Cross-Island Line study. It is the case that for these environmental impact assessments and, in this case, the environmental baseline study, the findings will be made public, unless there are specific considerations that require otherwise.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Decision to Cull Free-ranging Chickens at Sungei Api Api","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"14 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked\tMinister for National Development (a) how many residents have complained about the free-ranging chickens at Sungei Api Api in the last year; (b) how many chickens have been culled at Sungei Api Api; and (c) whether AVA will consider vaccinating all free-ranging chickens against bird flu instead of culling them.
\tThe Minister of State for National Development (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Minister for National Development): Madam, following feedback from residents on the presence of significant numbers of free-roaming chickens in Sungei Api Api, AVA did a check and found that there were more than 100 chickens in the area. Hence, AVA had taken actions to remove some of the free-roaming chickens to better manage the bird flu risk. This was done at around the same time as the operations in the Sin Ming Avenue area. And although there is a recent news report that gave the impression this happened after my reply to the Parliamentary Question, this was not the case.
The vaccination of free-roaming chickens alone may not be an effective solution to manage the bird flu risk. There are many bird flu strains and the virus has been known to mutate. While bird flu vaccinations can provide some partial protection against certain strains, the vaccinated chickens can still be infected by other strains that are not covered by the vaccination, particularly since the free-roaming chickens are free to interact and make contact with other wildlife. Moreover, the chickens will continue to reproduce in the wild and their chicks will not be protected by the same vaccination given to the adult chicken. Through research studies and public engagement efforts, AVA aims to enhance its management of animal populations, including the free-roaming chickens. AVA will involve stakeholders like academics, wildlife experts, the community and animal welfare groups in exploring various approaches and solutions to this problem.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Madam, I think the Minister of State did not reply to the first two parts of the question. How many people actually complained? How many chickens were culled? Thirdly, is AVA planning to engage the NCs in that area because I think they had some concerns? Fourth, whether any red junglefowls were culled. This time round, I have personally seen those chickens; there are red junglefowls there. Lastly, is AVA planning any further culling operations for chickens in any other areas?
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: Madam, I thank the Member for his concern for the chickens but let me just put things in context. We are in an area where we are at risk of bird flu and I think Members will remember the news last month, 5 March, that there was a bird flu outbreak close to home in Kelantan affecting six districts and 30-over areas within that district. To date, the Malaysian authorities have released a report to say they have culled 56,953 chickens. This definitely has an economic impact from the Malaysian side.
Being so close to home, AVA takes a risk-based approach to mitigate the risk to our own country, to our own people. In reducing the number of chickens, AVA takes an assessment on the ground, not necessarily based on the number of complaints or feedback per se. But if the numbers are high enough for us to take pre-emptive action, regardless of any number of feedback, we will have to take action to reduce the risk.
We have to understand that this is not just about the chickens, it is also about public safety and human health. At the end of the day, AVA also has a responsibility towards the health and safety of Singaporeans.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Global Schoolhouse Initiative Given Recent Private School Closures","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"15 Mr Leon Perera asked\tthe Minister for Trade and Industry (Industry) whether he can provide an update on the Global Schoolhouse initiative in light of the large number of private school closures in recent years.
\tThe Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Trade and Industry (Ms Low Yen Ling) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry (Industry): Mdm Speaker, in 2009, the Private Education (PE) Act was introduced to raise quality and standards in the PE sector and prevent egregious practices. There has been some consolidation in the PE sector after the introduction of the PE Act.
As at 2016, there were 295 Private Education Institutions (PEIs) registered with the Committee for Private Education, which was formerly known as the Council for Private Education. The number of registered PEIs has remained relatively stable over the past few years with some level of restructuring, as the PE sector continues to adapt to better serve the needs and interests of prospective students.
EDB launched the Global Schoolhouse initiative in 2002 to enhance the scope and diversity of Singapore's education landscape. It attracted leading institutions to set up in Singapore and collaborate with our local institutions to strengthen Singapore's talent ecosystem. These include global business schools, such as INSEAD and ESSEC Business School, which offer Master of Business Administration (MBA) and Executive MBA courses, open enrolment programmes for executives, as well as customised programmes that are tailored to companies' business needs.
As the quality and diversity of Singapore's tertiary education landscape have increased over the years, EDB has shifted its focus towards working with locally-based education institutions and companies to develop industry-relevant talent. Through these efforts, we aim to build a robust ecosystem where companies can readily access, develop and deploy talent.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Accidents Involving Heavy Vehicles Driven by S Pass and Work Permit Holders","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"16 Ms Joan Pereira asked\tthe Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many buses, goods vehicles and heavy vehicles have been involved in accidents in the last five years; (b) how many of these accidents have been caused by drivers holding work permits and S Passes; and (c) what measures are there to help bolster the efforts of our enforcement officers.
\tThe Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Amrin Amin) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): In the last five years, there were, on average, each year 791 injuries and 39 fatal accidents involving heavy vehicles, including buses and goods vehicles.
For accidents in which the heavy vehicle drivers were found to be at fault, around 45% of the drivers were foreigners, including work permit and S Pass holders.
The Traffic Police (TP) leverages technology, for example, speeding and red-running cameras, to bolster its enforcement efforts. Clear warning signs are erected before the TP camera enforcement zones to remind motorists to be careful and slow down. Next year, TP will be deploying Average Speed Cameras to detect and compute the average speed of a vehicle as it enters and exits the enforcement zones. These cameras will ensure that motorists drive at safe speeds along the entire stretch of the road.
TP will also conduct a tachograph trial on heavy vehicles this year. The tachograph tracks and records vehicles' speed and other driving information. Companies that are involved in the trial will be able to track their drivers' tachograph records and improve the drivers' driving behaviour.
Public education is also key to improving road safety. TP educates and engages heavy vehicle drivers on road safety and good driving practices. One example is the \"Use Your RoadSense\" movement, which was launched two years ago. Through regular dialogues and social media platforms, the movement encourages good driving behaviour and personal responsibility amongst different road users, including heavy vehicle drivers.
\tMs Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Madam, I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for his reply. I have two supplementary questions. First, what measures are in place to ensure our foreign drivers have the competencies to drive safely in Singapore? Second, why is there still speeding involving heavy vehicles, given that heavy vehicles have been equipped with speed limit devices?
\tMr Amrin Amin: I thank the Member for the questions. On the first point, starting from 1 January 2016, foreign vocational drivers are required to obtain a Singapore driving licence within six months of the issuance of their Work Pass as compared to one year previously. The licence will have to be renewed every five years. This ensures that foreign vocational drivers are subjected to the same requirements as locals before they are allowed to drive heavy vehicles here.
On the second question, speed limiters were introduced in Singapore in July 1999 to reduce the number of speed-related accidents caused by heavy vehicles. However, the TP has encountered cases where heavy vehicles travelled above the speed limit. This could have happened because the speed limiters of these vehicles were faulty or have been tampered with.
TP has been stepping up enforcement efforts by conducting operations to detect and deter the tampering of speed limiters in heavy vehicles and driving with a faulty speed limiter. Any person who tampers with speed limiters of heavy vehicles or who drives a heavy vehicle with a faulty speed limiter can be jailed up to three months or fined up to $1,000.
\tMr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member): Madam, can I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether driver fatigue has been identified as a major cause of the accidents for the foreign drivers? If so, what are the efforts to engage the workers as well as the companies, especially with the possibility that the workers may be working overtime to increase their salary before they go home.
\tMr Amrin Amin:\tThat is a very valid concern and we have a taskforce working with various agencies, including MOM, to see what we can do to engage the heavy vehicle drivers. The main causes of accidents involving heavy vehicles were failure to keep a proper look-out, failure to give way to traffic and failure to maintain proper control. It may have been a result of fatigue but it may also be other factors and that is where we have to target on a holistic basis.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"More Toilets along Park Connectors","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"17 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked\tthe Minister for National Development whether NParks will consider installing more toilets along the park connectors.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee) (for the Minister for National Development): Madam, over the next five years, NParks plans to build more new toilets across the Park Connector Network (PCN).
As the network is extensive, these toilets will be built at selected locations that are conveniently located where they can best serve park users and the local community.
\tMr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten):\tMay I ask the Senior Minister of State whether there are also plans for maintenance of the toilets to make sure that they are kept clean because building toilets are just part of the equation?
\tMr Desmond Lee:\tYes.
\tMr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member):\tCan I ask the Senior Minister of State is it possible to share what are the criteria for deciding whether to install a toilet in the parks, small or bigger parks, along the Park Connectors?
\tMr Desmond Lee: Madam, the planning guideline is to provide toilets at about 2.5-kilometre radius from any point along the PCN. There will be signs to direct users to the nearest available toilets located at places such as nearby parks, food centres and shopping malls. At areas where such facilities are not available, NParks will study the feasibility of building toilets.
For regional parks that are meant to serve park users beyond the immediate vicinity, the planning parameter is to provide toilets at every 500-metre to one-kilometre intervals depending on other factors, such as terrain, availability of space, proximity to sewer lines and so on. For public parks where spaces are available and where there can be cost-effective connections to existing sewer lines, NParks will study the feasibility of providing toilets.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Coordination of Road Works to Minimise Inconvenience to Road Users","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"18 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked\tthe Minister for Transport whether the Road Opening Coordination Committee can improve its coordination among Government agencies to ensure that road works carried out are minimised so that other road users are not inconvenienced.
\tThe Second Minister for Transport (Mr Ng Chee Meng) (for the Minister for Transport): Mdm Speaker, the Road Opening Coordination Committee, comprising representatives from Government agencies and utility and telecommunications service providers, has been coordinating road works. While the Committee plans road works as far as one month ahead and as far as possible, some emergency works cannot be forecasted, such as repair of cable faults or gas leaks.
To further encourage agencies and contractors to more optimally plan their road works, LTA recently announced a new fee structure for road work permits that increases with the time taken for the works, the geographical extent of the works and if the works take place during peak hours.
\tMr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten):\tMdm Speaker, I get quite a lot of feedback from my residents that the roads are dug again and again and again. And it seems like the Road Opening Coordination Committee is really not doing its assessment well. May I ask the Minister whether is it possible to have a moratorium on digging up roads again unless it is for extreme emergency? That means once you have dug up a road, for the next four, five months, no digging of the road again unless it is for an emergency to be determined and approved by the Minister only.
\tMr Ng Chee Meng:\tI thank the Member for the question. LTA receives 12,000 or more applications a year for such road reconstruction or digging up for different purposes. The Committee that meets up includes members from agencies like HDB, PUB, NParks, JTC, Singtel, Singapore Power, LTA. So, it is quite a number of agencies that come together to coordinate and they do it a few months in advance. Where possible, they will make sure that it is not dug up repeatedly. Within a reasonable timeframe, the Road Opening Coordination Committee will optimise the road works.
Mdm Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Order of the Day.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Aspirations of Singapore Women","subTitle":"Motion","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question (3 April 2017), (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"That this House affirms the familial, social and economic contributions of Singapore women and its support for them to fulfil their family and career aspirations and to be future-ready.\" − (Ms Tin Pei Ling). (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Kok Heng Leun (Nominated Member): Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I stand in full support for this Motion put up by Ms Tin Pei Ling and the other Members of the House.
There has been much ongoing debate about women's rights all over the world and through the decades. Women have been held back from full and equal participation in their societies because of narrow definitions of gender roles that have not evolved with the times. Even today, the global movement for women's rights and gender equality continues the struggle to make progress.
In Singapore, we have, indeed, made some progress. We can be proud of our own notable women politicians, such as Chan Choy Siong, an activist for women's rights who was key to the creation of the Women's Charter, and Dr Kanwaljit Soin, the first female NMP. Today, young girls − just like young boys − must attend school, because of our longstanding commitment to compulsory education. Today, women take up 45.8% of our total labour force, based on MOM's report in 2016. Clearly, their importance as economic contributors of this country cannot be under-estimated.
Because of these achievements, there are people who believe that gender equality is no longer an issue here. Yale Prof Deborah Rhodes described this as the \"no-problem problem\", that is, the erroneous perception that the problem of women's rights has been solved because there is evidence of growing opportunities for women.
The fact is, women continue to be constrained by discriminatory attitudes and practices, preventing them from participating in public life as full equals. In 2015, the World Economic Forum predicted that it would take 117 years for women to completely fill the gender gap. Let that figure sink in − 117 years. In that same year, YouGov released a report that saw Singapore ranking 12th in gender equality amongst 24 countries − behind China and Hong Kong.
In the last two general elections, female candidates for Parliament faced sexist scrutiny. An example to demonstrate the pervasiveness of this bias is this: a newspaper introducing several candidates on the same day, described three men in its headlines as \"banking executive, engineer and professor\", while a woman entrepreneur became \"mother of two\". Being a mother is undeniably very important and deserves recognition. Yet, putting women in the same frame implies that women only belong at home and are defined only by their family.
Now, some may say that these choices of words are merely turns of phrases by the media. But words are never merely words. Our language reflects our socio-cultural mores, attitudes and relationships. How we describe women has a direct impact on how gender relations are socially constructed. When we resort to terminology about gender stereotypes, we entrench these same stereotypes into society; in short, we normalise them. The media play a crucial part in promoting positive gender roles and eradicating gender stereotypes.
We should not assume that gender stereotypes will automatically go away over time. One survey from AWARE spoke to over 1,300 respondents. Of those aged 18-29, 66% of men believed that men should be heads of households, compared to only 43% of women in that age group. Similarly, 58% of men in this age group believed that women should take care of household chores and caregiving, compared to only 38% of women. It seems that young women have much more equitable views than young men. What are we going to do to inculcate fairer and more progressive views in young men and not just in young women?
We often hear of \"traditional values\" being passed down from one generation to the next. These \"values\", however, are often rooted in patriarchal constructs. And despite most family units now being dual-income ones, there remains an inequality of roles in housekeeping and caregiving, which women are expected to take charge of.
In Singapore, because many families engage foreign female domestic help, men are further excused from doing household chores or tending to their children or elderly parents. There is also an unwillingness to let go of these \"traditional values\" because they are \"how things are meant to be\", or they are \"natural\". They are how things have always been, as dictated by religious and cultural beliefs. It is in the \"nature\" of men to be breadwinners and head of households, and of women to bear and raise children.
I work in Drama Box Ltd, a theatre company, and I am the only man in this company. The rest, all seven of them, are very capable women. At this moment, all the seven women are in Rotterdam, as the company has been invited to participate in the International Community Arts Festival, showcasing our work. Leading the team is a woman, Associate Artistic Director Koh Hui Ling and then, at the same time, she brought along her young toddler, three-year-old Eunice, with her. And the rest of the team would be there to help her to take care of Eunice whenever she is busy. And then, I wonder how many of us men here, who travel a lot, would bring our toddlers along?
There is, of course, no biological or behavioural science that can back up the assumption of gender stereotypes. Nobody \"naturally\" knows how to operate a washing machine, soothe a cranky newborn or help an elderly relative take medication at the correct time, or clean and shower them. These activities, like many, many others, transcend gender.
But the sad fact is, we educate girls and boys very differently, with gender stereotyping already taking place at the earliest age. Little boys are told how strong they are and little girls are told how sweet they are. They are told stories where their whole lives and fates are bound up in their gender, instead of being allowed to develop as individuals. I have heard anecdotes from a parent, who shared that her child's preschool teacher had bought presents at the end of the school term. The boys in the class received books about superheroes. The girls received presents, too − books on how to become a princess.
How can we change the education system, so that every child, whatever their gender, can develop in the way that is best for them? Can our pedagogical materials explicitly include gender equality, rather than imply stereotypes and biases, both wittingly and otherwise?
We see this sort of reductive stereotyping in state policy- and decision-making as well. One clear example is how there is much less paternity leave than maternity leave. This extends even to adoption leave being available only to adoptive mothers and not adoptive fathers, though there is no biological argument about recovery from pregnancy and childbirth or breastfeeding which can justify this.
In addition, the lifetime income and CPF accumulation of women are lower than that of men − despite women having longer lifespans. This means women actually have a higher risk of experiencing poverty at old age than men. In a greying society like Singapore, this, in itself, should be cause for great concern. Greater strides must be made to bridge this gender divide to ensure the well-being of our female citizens.
These policies reflect the gender stereotype that childcare belongs to women. This reinforces the idea that women can, and should, \"choose\" to \"focus on the family\", as opposed to furthering their careers. As a result, it entrenches a discriminatory attitude that rationalises income disparity between men and women, hiring policies and even promotion prospects.
Is it any wonder then that Singapore's female labour force participation rate is lower than that of countries of similar income levels? Is it also any surprise that women are under-represented on company boards, at only a mere 9.5% of directorships in all Singapore Exchange (SGX) listed companies as of 2015?
One of the markers of a first world nation is gender equality and, by that, I mean equality not just in economic terms, but also in social ones. In our efforts to galvanise national economic growth, how can we better harness the potential of over 50% of our population? Statistics from MOM show that women still earn less than men, never mind that they have the same working hours and qualifications. How can we strive towards parity, so that we can reward our best workers according to achievements, rather than their gender?
We celebrate when women are appointed to new positions of leadership – the first female Speaker of Parliament, Madam, the first female full Minister. We call this \"historical\", using phrases like \"big strides for women\". However, such a mindset is archaic. As it stands, only 24% of people in Parliament are women. Some say it is better than a decade ago. But equality should not be granted based on time. It should be expected right here and right now.
A society that truly embraces gender equality is one that offers protection from harm towards men and women alike. Yet, today, we allow for contentious legislation that permits domestic violence. By that, I mean our laws that exempt marital rape from the criminal offence of rape unless certain conditions are met. How can we turn a blind eye towards a brutal act of violence like rape simply because it is committed by a family member? How can we, as a society, or as policymakers, protect vulnerable members of our society?
Our conversation has not even begun to address the rights of the transgender community. It may be an uncomfortable topic for some but, nevertheless, an urgent one. Our stand as leaders and our actions as lawmakers impact how society views and treats the transgender community. The more we talk about these issues, the more embracing and positive we are about their rights, the better they will be treated in school, at work and in their own families.
I bring this up because, at some point, we should go beyond gender altogether and just look at human rights the rights of all humans, the equality of all humans.
As a forward-looking society, we must take active steps towards a strategy of \"gender mainstreaming\". This term, established by the United Nations (UN), as a strategy for promoting gender equality, involves \"ensuring that gender perspectives and attention to the goal of gender equality are central to all activities − policy development, research, advocacy/dialogue, legislation, resource allocation, planning, implementation and monitoring of programmes and projects.\"
In short, the state must take on a proactive approach in establishing policies, be they in terms of education, employment or social welfare that promotes a mindset shift towards gender equality. In doing so, we not only strengthen our economy, but also ensure that we help citizens, regardless of gender, to achieve their aspirations, develop a positive sense of self-worth, as well as ensure their long-term well-being. We, as policymakers, must advocate for change and take firm steps to eliminate this discrimination for the betterment of our nation.
Virginia Woolf wrote this thought-provoking line in chapter 1 of A Room of One's Own, \"Call me Mary Beton, call me Mary Seton, call me Mary Carmichael or any other names you, please. It is not a matter of importance\". Yes, women have many different identities, multiple voices and perspectives and cannot be seen only through work, one lens.
In the same way, we men have to do that. We have different identities and we can assume many, many different roles. Then, we have a much more enriched human experience. With that, I thank you, Madam.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Mdm Speaker, a woman living in this era, in this country, is very fortunate, compared to a woman living in another time or place. Here, a woman has access to education, healthcare and can make various choices. The fact that we have this opportunity today to speak about the aspirations of Singapore women, and are joined by the men, is a telling sign of our progress.
The reality, though, even in a country like Singapore, is that there is much still left to be done to improve the situation for women. My colleagues have addressed various issues. I would like to raise another aspect − financial well-being and retirement adequacy.
I was fortunate to have been involved in the drafting of the PAP Women's Wing paper issued in July last year and would like to share some insights. As we looked at some research and reviewed the milestones in a woman's life, we observed that various life circumstances lead women to make significant decisions and commitments which impact on her current and future financial well-being.
For example, as highlighted by several Members, women tend to be the primary caregivers for their family members. If she is working and she has children, there will, inevitably, be some impact on her career as she takes some time away for child birth, recovery and caring for the child. She would have to decide on the commitment she puts into her work versus the time she would spend with the child.
There may also be those who fall into the category of vulnerable women because of unfortunate life events like divorced women with children and single mothers. We also see that the current generation of retired elderly women tend to depend on their spouses and children for financial sustenance. The fact is that women generally live longer than men and may outlive her spouse. The children tend to have their own financial commitments. Therefore, some women may not be able to retire and need to continue working to earn income to sustain their expenses.
Yes, we have seen many women overcome these challenges and do well to balance their career and family life. The reality though is that various life circumstances result in many women being unable to fully exploit career opportunities. This takes a toll on her ability to work towards financial well-being and building her nest egg. Further, if a woman decides to stay home to care for her family, she should not be penalised and be financially disadvantaged because the work she does at home is equally significant to what she does in the office.
It is important for us, therefore, to look at certain measures to safeguard a woman's financial well-being and improve her retirement adequacy in the long run. There are three recommendations.
One, we should promote financial literacy and do this early. Financial education should be institutionalised and implemented as a core life skill to students. In this regard, we should look at embracing this life skill in MOE's 21st Century Competencies and integrate this into the teaching of other subjects, with increasing levels of sophistication as our students progress.
There is a slew of financial planning courses, mostly for adults. This is insufficient. MoneySENSE is a good platform and its efforts should be developed further. Outreach needs to be enhanced and more collaboration should be developed to implement more target-specific programmes.
Further, adding to the wish list for SkillsFuture, I believe we should also use the SkillsFuture platform to create intensive and meaningful financial literacy programmes which can help people plan their finances throughout life and to navigate difficult times.
Two, there is a need to promote retirement adequacy and this could be done through the CPF scheme. I note that there are already top-up schemes in place and, in this regard, I support the proposal made by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah yesterday.
A woman and her family members should be further incentivised to top up her CPF account up to the Basic Retirement Sum by offering a certain amount of dollar matching for the top-ups made. This would nudge women to work towards a target and, hopefully, develop a saving habit. In reviewing this, we should also look at how to further encourage and incentivise family members to recognise the efforts of unpaid caregivers or homemakers who are not in the workforce and to help them build on their retirement monies.
Three, a specific SkillsFuture package to be designed for mature or retired women who are seeking to return to work and in acquiring skill certification. In this regard, I echo the sentiments made by other Members and note that Minister Ong Ye Kung had yesterday touched on this in his speech.
I would like to highlight that many of these women may not have been engaged in any formal work and their expertise lies in caregiving. Typical situations we see are of homemakers whose children have grown up or long-term caregivers whose loved ones have passed on. Recognition should be given to their experience in long-term caregiving, household management and related skillsets. Back-to-work preparatory, conversion or certification programmes should be developed to help them monetise their skills and meet the national demands for caregivers. Mdm Speaker, allow me to say a few words in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Women in Singapore today are fortunate. Life in our country is so much better, compared to life in the past and in other countries. Our rights are protected and we have many choices to improve our lives and the lives of our families. However, women must possess a sense of self-responsibility, the motivation to continue improving their capabilities and be informed about programmes and assistance that are available, as well as of opportunities to upgrade themselves.
On this matter, one aspect that I feel we should pay attention to is the financial situation of a woman and her retirement adequacy. The ups and downs in a woman's life often compel her to make decisions that will have an impact on her financial situation, not only in the short-term, but also for the long run.
For instance, if a woman chooses to stop working to take care of her children or parents, her ability to be financially independent and prepare for retirement will be affected. We can also find elderly women who are dependent on her husbands and children. The situation is quite worrying, especially if their husbands are no longer around and their children cannot afford to take care of their elderly mother.
Therefore, I feel that it is important that we try to increase awareness and put in place certain mechanisms to safeguard the financial health of women in Singapore.
Amongst other things, I have proposed that financial education begins at an early age. The principle and awareness on the importance of taking care of our financial health should be inculcated in schools. This is important, especially in an increasingly challenging world. I also suggest that incentives should be given to women and their family members for topping up the women's CPF account. If the top-up is supplemented by the Government, it will encourage women to want to reach a certain amount in their CPF accounts and this will at least ensure that she has money for her retirement, especially if she is not working and could not receive CPF contributions from an employer. In addition, I also hope for SkillsFuture programmes tailored specifically for women who have not worked for a while to take care of family members who do not require their care any longer, perhaps, because their parents have passed on and their children have all grown up.
These are the things that I feel can help improve a woman's financial situation as well as her retirement adequacy. However, what is more important is a woman's awareness and desire to continue improving and to take care of herself so that she will not suffer when she faces challenges or when she is in her golden years.
I would like to take this opportunity to call upon the men within our community to also pay attention to this matter and support women to achieve their aspirations together. A woman who has confidence and skills will improve the lives of her family and the community around her.
(In English): Mdm Speaker, I am very privileged to have this opportunity to speak in this House, before you, a woman Speaker, and be amongst intelligent and inspiring women and men, doing our best to lend our voices to those whom we represent.
We have made much progress in supporting the aspirations of Singapore women over the years. We should continue in this effort so that women, regardless of their age, family circumstances and challenges, may continue to contribute towards the development of this nation. I stand in support of this Motion.
Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): \"Any woman who understands the problems of running a home will be nearer to understanding the problems of running a country.\"
These were words uttered in 1979 on the campaign trail by the late Margaret Thatcher, a trail that led to her election as Prime Minister of the UK and a trail that she then blazed as The Iron Lady.
The actress Meryl Streep who played The Iron Lady summed up her legacy as \"(having) given women and girls around the world reason to supplant fantasies of just being princesses with a different dream: the real-life option and possibility of leading their nation; this was ground-breaking and admirable.\"
The immediate past Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr Ban Ki-Moon, said recently that, \"Countries with higher levels of gender equality have higher economic growth. Companies with more women on their boards have higher returns. Peace agreements that include women are also more successful. Parliaments with more women take up a wider range of issues, including health, education, anti-discrimination and child support.\"
In our own local political sphere, we have many more women actively participating and contributing to the growth of our nation in recent years. Today, we have 21 female Members of Parliament and, amongst them, we have a Minister, four Senior Ministers of State and one Parliamentary Secretary, not to mention two Mayors, a Chairman of an opposition party and, of course, an enlightened and capable Speaker. We can and should have more in this august Chamber, but we are getting there.
Outside of this Chamber, the world is changing as well, but perhaps not as fast as we should. We live in a world almost evenly split between men and women, but women worldwide have been fighting for equal rights, equal opportunities and equal pay for long, and yet, regrettably, their efforts have yet to bear abundant fruit in many countries. Why is this so?
I would like to make reference to the recent position papers put up by the PAP Women's Wing titled \"Strengthening Gender Diversity in Corporate leadership\", which was submitted to the kind attention of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS).
Only one in 10 on our corporate boards is a woman. Even China, India and Hong Kong register a healthier growth in this index. And our female board members get less than half the remuneration of their male counterparts. This is deplorable, especially here in Singapore. In fact, recruitment specialist, Robert Walters, in a report that was published last year, stated that 75% of working women in Singapore feel that they are inadequately represented in leadership positions.
Mdm Speaker, 50 years ago, when this little red dot of a nation was formed, its people were its source and strength. It is still relevant today. However, it should sadden us that half of our population are not getting their just dues.
Women in Singapore are an inspired lot. They know what they want − as chief executives, as businesswomen, working women and also not forgetting some as homemakers and mothers. They aspire for the best and will not stop at anything lesser than that.
In this House we have many capable and inspirational women, talented in different fields and, in the course of the debate on this worthy Motion, much will be said about and suggested on how we can achieve better gender parity on corporate boards as we journey towards achieving the aspirations of Singapore women. So, I shall not attempt to make a weak attempt at claiming to have any solutions that are better than those already put on the table. Instead, I hope to raise three related points that need to be said amidst this debate.
Firstly, stay-at-home mothers and caregivers, mentioned by a number of speakers already. As we work on the top end of the ladder, strengthening the diversity of talent at the mid-level and also open doors at the entry level, we must not forget that there is one group that has decided not to be on the ladder, either temporarily or permanently. These are our stay-at-home mothers as well as family caregivers. Some make conscious decisions to take on a role that they feel very passionate about; others, perhaps through circumstance, have had to take on the roles and also put their hearts into being the best in their unique areas and responsibilities.
Their roles are, therefore, no less important in society, but the challenges that they face are also no less worthy of our solutions. Many make sacrifices on income, healthcare, personal aspirations, all so that those they are closest to can either have a good start or a comfortable end. Often, it is women who are expected to take on these roles.
So, firstly, I repeat my call made in previous speeches and echoed by many Members of this House for stay-at-home-mothers and caregivers to be provided the same grants and tax reliefs that working women are granted. We are a society today that is fast consumed by productivity and even our policies towards women are somewhat driven by that same desire. Thus, it is unfortunate that it appears that a working mother seemingly becomes more highly valued than a stay-at-home-mother or caregiver. It is not easy for working mothers and they should rightfully be supported. But the converse, that stay-at-home-mothers or caregivers have it easier, is a fallacy.
If we can all acknowledge that mothers in general have an important role to play in their children's development, so why should mothers be differentiated between those who are working and those who are not? We have come to the realisation that fathers, too, play an important role in parenting and we have made moves for fathers to be more involved. But again, if we do not make a distinction for them, why skew it for women?
Secondly, encourage husbands to top up their wives' CPF accounts so that they have retirement adequacy even if they are just stopping work for a short period. To encourage this, I urge MOM to consider raising the interest rate returns for voluntary top-ups and increase the CPF Cash Top-up relief from spouse to spouse, or from child to parent. There have been suggestions for a mandatory system of contributions but I think we should encourage a voluntary system first.
Thirdly, for those who wish to return to the workforce when their children are older or when their caregiving roles have evolved, then they should be provided sufficient support to reintegrate them into the workforce. It does not have to be only about re-entry into full employment as the transition can sometimes be very difficult. Promoting more flexi-work arrangements, part-time work, targeted at stay-at-home-mothers and returning caregivers, will make the transition easier.
On a separate topic, on mindsets. Even as we urge for greater meritocracy so that women have better representation in the workplace and leadership positions and in society, what is perhaps missing in the statistical equation at the moment is that we do not have a lot of concrete studies on current perception of gender equality in Singapore, especially amongst younger Singaporeans.
In the maelstrom of information out there, the UN Human Development Report ranks Singapore at the top in Asia for gender equality in 2015. Yet, we are also one of the worst performing when it comes to gender equality in the boardroom.
Just last month, recruitment firm Hays conducted a survey and released the result on workplace gender equality. This report also pointed out a very large perception gap − 83% of Singapore men think that there is pay equality between men and women at their workplace, but only 63% of women in the same companies shared that view. Seventy-nine percent, in the same survey, of men believed that meritocracy already exists in career opportunities regardless of gender; for women, only 65% believed so.
While there is not a lot of available perception surveys for young Singaporeans, the just released findings of the Gender and Millennials Symposium on Gender Equality perhaps is telling. Prof David Cotter and Dr Joanna Peppin looked at 40 years of gender surveys and since the 1990s, 17- to 18-year-olds have overwhelmingly endorsed the idea that men and women should be equal at work and in politics − 90% and higher − that is, 17- to 18-years-olds believed that gender equality is important. Yet, the same study found that the idea of gender equality at home had conversely slipped. Close to 60% of those who were surveyed believed that the best family arrangement is where the man was provider and a woman was the carer. This contrasts with only 40% of respondents holding this view in the early 1990s.
Therefore, addressing this perception gap is an important step towards better understanding of gender equality. We cannot talk ourselves into a vacuum. There needs to be better studies on gender perceptions in Singapore because this will allow us to make better decisions and also address the root causes of the lack of gender equality at the workplace. And perhaps also educate younger Singaporeans on the importance of gender equality.
On a lighter note, the last point I wish to make is that we also need to acknowledge that stereotypes do not just affect women. They affect men as well. When we fight gender stereotypes levelled against women, we also need to be conscious that we do not end up confirming male stereotypes.
We move rightfully away from the perception that women are not the weaker sex. I think it is important for us to also realise that men are often boxed into needing to appear to be tough, to always have no emotions, to be stoic and always not express their feelings.
Former US First Lady, Eleanor Roosevelt famously remarked, \"A woman is like a tea bag − you cannot tell how strong she is until you put her in hot water.\" Today, we have showned that women are strong and can rise to the challenge and excel above even men. Men on the other hand should be free to express their feelings and not just feelings of hunger!
Mdm Speaker, Singapore women, if accorded the opportunities, have risen to the top, as you yourself so worthily personify. Therefore, we, both men and women, must ensure the aspirations of Singapore women, as well as men, should be met. Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied):\tMdm Speaker, I will deliver my speech in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Madam, in discussing the Motion that is being tabled, that is, \"Aspirations of Singapore Women\", various integrated and collective efforts must be made to support Singapore women in achieving these aspirations. The Government, community, family and every individual must play their respective roles.
Madam, in my speech, I would like to discuss three matters on the efforts to empower Singapore women so that they will be able to fulfil their familial and career aspirations and be more prepared for the future. Firstly, I would like to touch on several policy changes which the Government should embark upon to help women who are categorised the \"vulnerable group\" or the single mothers facing life's trials and tribulations. Secondly, the role of husbands in nurturing a more favourable and supportive cultural value at home so that their wives are able to balance their familial and career responsibilities, and, lastly, regarding the aspirations of Singapore Muslim women.
Madam, as many are aware, the lives of single mothers are extremely challenging. They are both the caregivers and the breadwinners. The difficulties faced by single mothers should receive concern from all quarters, including the Government. Government policies should be more directed towards alleviating the burden shouldered by this group.
Madam, in April last year, the Government made two positive policy changes to assist and alleviate the challenges and burden of single unwed mothers. The Child Development Account (CDA) scheme was extended to children born out of wedlock and the 16-week maternity leave was also extended to these single mothers, similar to other mothers. This is a very encouraging change and is well-received by Singaporeans who are very concerned about single mothers. I hope that these policy changes made last year do not end there but instead represent an initial step for the Government to continue helping this group.
Madam, apart from alleviating their financial burden, many of these single unwed mothers also hope for a change to HDB's housing policy. A home is one of the basic requirements for every person. The lack of a proper dwelling will affect the quality of life and human development as well as the family's development. For this group of people, they are not allowed to buy a house under the family nucleus scheme as children born out of wedlock are not regarded as part of a family nucleus. They are only eligible to buy a house under the \"single\" scheme, which has an age limit of 35 years and above. Unfortunately, a majority of these single unwed mothers are not even 35 years old, and, hence, do not fulfil this age requirement. They are also not allowed to rent a flat under the Public Rental Scheme based on the same reason, that is, their children are not regarded as part of a family nucleus.
Madam, one of the conditions under the Public Rental Scheme is that renting of flats is not allowed for a period of 30 months following the sale of a flat, which then becomes a barrier to divorced single mothers seeking proper and affordable dwellings.
Lamentations of \"misfortunes seldom come alone\" are often heard amongst these single mothers. Not only do they have to bear mental and emotional stress while undergoing divorce and being abandoned by their husbands, they now have to strive relentlessly to fulfil their responsibilities as their family's caregivers and breadwinners. Stranded in these situations, single mothers should not be further burdened with difficulties to seek out proper and affordable homes.
Madam, many Members of this House, past and present, have voiced their concern on the impact of this criterion imposed under the public rental scheme and I believe this concern has prevailed for years. I shall not belabour this point as I believe that the HDB is aware of it.
Many hope that this criterion will be revoked and exemptions given to single mothers who have gone through divorce. It is also hoped that HDB will outline policies that are more inclined to help and empower single mothers in their efforts to meet their basic living needs, that is, a conducive and affordable home, especially while they and their children struggle through this challenging time. A more positive support from HDB will enable single mothers to fulfil their familial and career aspirations.
Madam, the second matter I would like to touch upon is the role of husbands in nurturing a more favourable and supportive cultural value at home for their wives so that they can balance their familial responsibilities and careers. I will share this perspective based on my experience as a family and marriage counsellor and also as a husband.
Madam, marriage is a life partnership where husbands and wives are partners looking to achieve a harmonious and strong family. The values that should be inculcated in order to achieve such a family comprises mutual respect, trust in one another and understanding. These values have to be nurtured, practised and instilled within a family. In facing a hectic and challenging life, couples must be prepared to help one another in bringing up their children, household chores and also personal development, for instance, pursuing further education, as well as advancement in their respective careers. Married couples, especially husbands as the head of the household, should fashion themselves as a counselling and motivational expert to their spouses so that they will be able to provide moral, emotional and spiritual support and be the motivator for their partners to strive with perseverance and confidence. Such husbands will help their wives become more motivated and positive in balancing and fulfilling their familial and career aspirations.
Madam, the last matter I would like to bring up is the aspirations of Singapore Muslim women. We have heard spirited speeches from hon Members to convince the House to unanimously support the Motion that is being tabled, that is, to affirm and support Singapore women in fulfilling their familial and career aspirations. I hope that Members in this House will not exclude Muslim women who wish to fulfil their career aspirations in line with their religious obligations, that is, allowing the use of the headscarf or tudung in the nursing and uniformed vocations, such as the Home Team and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF).
Madam, many countries like Australia, UK and the US allow the use of the headscarf for Muslim women in their uniformed organisations so as to allow their Muslim women to fulfil their religious obligations whilst fulfilling their career aspirations. My question is, when will Singapore take a similar step?
Madam, this House has repeatedly discussed about building an inclusive society in Singapore, where every community, despite living in a multi-cultural and multi-religious society, are able to feel that their concerns and aspirations are given due attention. As a Singapore Muslim, a husband as well as a father to a daughter, I appeal to the Government to make into reality this call for inclusiveness that is often heard in this Chamber. My hope is that the Government will reconsider the Muslim community's request for Singapore Muslim women to be given the chance to fulfil their career aspirations and, at the same time, meet their religious obligations.
Madam, I would like to end my speech with these words of wisdom: \"Women are the pillars of a nation. If the pillars are strong, so will be the nation. And if the pillars are weak, so, too, the nation.\" Madam, a country where family, social and cultural values, as well as Government policies are inclined towards empowering women, will produce a nation strong in every aspect − family, social and economy.
Ms K Thanaletchimi (Nominated Member): Mdm Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. In Singapore, human capital is our mainstay in attracting foreign investment and growing our economy in this first world era. Given that female enrolment at local Polytechnics is 89% of male enrolment and at university level for first degree is at 95% of male enrolment, the Government has been spending almost an equal amount on educating our young women as our young men.
Therefore, it is critical that investment in our people see good returns, that is, having its people remain in the workforce, remain economically active and contributing to civil society. With women labour force participation rate at 60.4%, 40% of women are not working, with family care being the main reason for dropping out of the workforce. I think it has been quite well-established that, given a choice, women want to have a career and still be able to fulfil their roles as caregivers in the family.
The Government has done much in supporting working parents through the Baby Bonus package, which comprehensively includes parental tax rebates, parental leave and cash support. The introduction of paternity leave is a bold step in the right direction in inculcating the culture of shared parenting. However, more can and needs to be done to level the playing field for women.
Until we have a pervasive family- and women-friendly work culture, two groups of women need to be supported if we are serious about tapping on the 40% of women who are currently out of the workforce − the working women in danger of dropping out of the workforce due to family-care reasons and the women who would like to return to the workforce after a period of intensive caregiving. We need to do more creatively to enable women to remain at work.
Now, I touch on flexible work arrangements to support women in the workforce as well as women returnees. We need to decisively plug the leak of experience out of Singapore's labour market by enabling women to remain in the workforce. This can be done through the implementation of flexible work arrangements (FWAs).
Flexible work arrangements are becoming an increasingly viable option for both businesses as well as employees as we move into the digital age and grow our pool of knowledge workers. With more workers in professional, managers and executives (PME) roles, job-sharing, where one full role is shared among two to three employees, is a viable role especially suited for PMEs who wish to scale up on their family-care roles while their children are young. Young working parents, especially mothers, can still have a meaningful career and contribute to the economy. On a lighter note, the last point I wish to make is that we also need to acknowledge that stereotypes do not just affect women. They affect men as well. When we fight gender stereotypes levelled against women, we also need to be conscious that we do not end up confirming male stereotypes while nurturing our young.
However, employers have been reluctant to offer such options, citing increased manpower costs when taking into consideration the whole salary package, for example, employees' insurance costs. Until they experience the tangible benefits of retaining their female talents, there will be inertia to move.
Is the Government able to defray part of the increased cost of rolling out flexible work arrangements, such as job-sharing, so that businesses are more willing to embark on exploring the viability of such working arrangements on a more permanent basis? This is more than Work Pro that is provided for FWAs.
Other than stopping the leak of experience, such flexible work arrangements, like job-sharing, can also attract women back into the workforce. After spending some time away from the labour market for family care, these women may want to step up gradually to help their families as well as themselves transit back into the working world. If the women can work in meaningful part-time or job-sharing roles, they will have more opportunity to reskill or update their skills while contributing economically.
We need to support women to return to work. Earlier this year, the National Trades Union Congress made a call for the Government to support women PMEs who wish to return to the workforce after a period of absence through a returnship programme where companies take in women PMEs with work experience for three to six months to help them to assimilate back into the working world. At the end of the returnship period, employers may choose to offer these women a position in the company and the women can decide if they would like to be part of the company. Can the Government support enlightened employers who are willing to embark on the returnship programme through funding and recognition, and handhold them in guiding these women returnees?
FWAs should not be seen as a privilege or entitlement for working women, but for all employees with responsibilities and aspirations outside of work. Perhaps it is timely for MOE to look into incorporating education on gender equality and shared caregiving between genders.
At the heart of the unlevel playing field is the issue of unequal caregiving roles between genders. Women may be better caregivers by nature. I am confident that men can also rise to the occasion if they were properly nurtured into the role and given the right support. This is especially important as our population ages and more working adults are called to provide caregiving to their elderly. Whether parenting or eldercare, it cannot be seen as a woman's job just because we are good at it.
Setting targets to enable more women to take on leadership roles is equally important.
Finally, I would like to touch on the topic of target-setting to improve women representation on boards. On 24 March 2017, BoardAgender and People's Action Party Women's Wing called for the 2020 target setting of working towards having at least 20% of women on boards of directors by 2020 as an aspirational goal. Looking at the lack of progress in getting women on board, I would urge the Government to adopt the recommendation.
Equally important is how we can adopt similar target-setting at different levels of the career ladder. This is to ensure that we will have a continuous stream of women talent being nurtured at different levels of leadership so that we will not be at a loss while finding women directors to make up 20% of the board. What can the Government do to encourage a more systematic inclusion of women at various levels of leadership so that more women may take on top leadership positions or boards of director than the current 9.7%?
One way is to include programmes or curriculum in tertiary institutions that will allow women to have a mock experience. While they are in employment, under talent management programmes, these women can be further identified and put through programmes that will enable them to further shine in their roles. We need to have deliberate means of providing women with these opportunities if we want to see real progress in the next 50 years.
Mdm Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng, do you have a clarification?
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Mdm Speaker, just one clarification. I listened to Mr Faisal Manap's heartfelt speech. As a fellow Singaporean, I would like to understand his views better and learn more. I was wondering whether Mr Faisal Manap feels that the tudung issue is the most important issue faced by women in the Muslim community today, in particular, whether it is a very significant and most important issue.
Secondly, I am also wondering what the Workers' Party's collective view on the tudung issue might be. I am hoping I could learn more about the Workers' Party's views and Mr Faisal Manap's views as well.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: Madam, I thank the Member for his clarification. First, I would like to answer his point on my personal view. As a Muslim husband and a father to a daughter, yes, it is an obligation for Muslim women to don hijab in whatever circumstances.
In terms of the Party's stance on this, the Workers' Party had actually issued a statement sometime in November 2013. The gist of the statement is that Workers' Party does not oppose wearing of tudung, but we call for more dialogues amongst the stakeholders as well as the larger community and it should be based on mutual understanding.
The Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M): I would like to start by applauding the unity of the women in our Parliament in coming together to move the Motion on Aspirations of Singapore Women. This is important because only in unity do we find strength. I am heartened that our men, too, have stood up to help lend their voice in support of this Motion, which is a positive and forward-looking Motion.
The speeches affirm the importance of the role of women in our multi-racial society and our economy. It is a far, far different cry from what we have heard maybe 50 years ago. They gave many practical suggestions to the Government on how to support all women in Singapore comprehensively: in leadership and social impact, employment and entrepreneurship, family and caregiving and financial well-being.
However, I find the approach of Mr Faisal Manap worrisome. He has used this Motion, which is focused on the aspirations of all women in Singapore, to raise again the issue of the tudung, to focus on differences instead of rallying people to be united. He dwells on issues that can injure or hurt the feelings of the community rather than to inspire them. In fact, Mr Faisal Manap has used many occasions to raise potentially discordant issues in this House.
I sat listening to him many times, championing divisive issues many times, like the need for halal kitchens in our naval ships and his perceived discrimination of the Malays in the army. Is it his or his party's position that these issues are the top concerns of the community? There are real socio-economic problems we have to deal with in our community − education, housing, jobs.
Mr Faisal Manap spent some time on these issues but he does not fail to leave behind a semblance, trails of these divisive issues relating to the community, everything from halal kitchens on ships to the issue of Palestine. He leaves behind to linger in the minds of our community not only to make them feel different, even to make them feel unjustifiably treated unequally.
The Government has responded to Mr Faisal Manap's queries on the tudung issue and other issues, and I will not elaborate today, except to emphasise that we are a multiracial society. And we all have a role to play to enlarge our common space. This is not to say that religious aspirations are not important. In fact, they must never be set aside. Religion is, indeed, important to many of us.
I assure Members that I, too, want to see progress on the tudung issue and religious matters that are dear to Muslims. I am also a father of a daughter. I am also a husband of my wife. That is why Government leaders and community leaders of all races and religions have been actively discussing such sensitive and deeply emotive matters in a number of closed-door platforms. It is not easily resolved, considering all the moving parts on this matter, but I am glad it continues to be under review.
The process entails understanding workplace requirements and operational needs in the wider scheme of things. I caution the Member against making this a state-versus-religion issue.
All these years, our approach has been to win people over slowly but surely, through mutual exchange and meaningful interaction to help Singaporeans understand one another, to understand every community's aspirations. We do this in the spirit of mutual respect, recognising that other communities, too, come with their own perspectives on how they want to live in these common spaces. And this will take time to accept.
There is a right time, a right place and a right way to discuss this. This approach has achieved for the community progress in recent years, which includes the extension of Edusave to madrasah students in 2013, waiving national examination fees for secular subjects taken by madrasah students in 2015 and better supporting madrasah teachers who teach secular subjects from this year. Likewise, the community can trust the Government and Muslim leaders to work together on the matter of the tudung.
The community and its religious leaders know that this is a religious matter best resolved and progressed naturally with the acceptance of our larger society. Our religious leaders do not choose to be strident on this matter. I wonder why the Member chooses to be so.
Mdm Speaker, the fundamental priority of this Government is to build harmony and trust among the races and religions and to protect this progress we have made so far. The issues of Malays in the SAF, tudung, even halal kitchen that the Member has talked about, are not issues of religion only. Even if they are put up that way, they are difficult issues to resolve. But, clearly, the way to make progress is gradually and quietly, working under the radar, to strengthen mutual trust and understanding among Singaporeans, so that we can move forward step by step. Indeed, that is how we have got here. Championing them in a high-profile way, which the Member does once in a while, using them to score political points, will not strengthen trust. It will only raise the temperature and actually make the problems harder to solve.
Mdm Speaker, we are fortunate because, by far, we have many among us who are clearly level-headed. Many of us, I understand and I believe, do not support the strident way to solve our problems. Indeed, even on the Internet, I have read about people who criticise Mr Faisal Manap for the way he has taken matters forward.
However, there are people who support Mr Faisal Manap. I saw a posting where he was posing at the \"Wear White\" campaign with Mr Zulfikar Shariff, who was arrested for his views and support for the ISIS terrorists in 2016, I think, for the \"Wear White\" campaign. It makes us wonder if Mr Faisal Manap is supporting Mr Zulfikar or is Mr Zulfikar supporting Mr Faisal Manap, or are they in together because of a common cause? But, indeed, are there common causes they are in together?
I would like to bring the discussion back to the core of the Motion. Many Members have spoken on this Motion and focused on how well we have done. Our women have achieved aspirations in education, supporting women at work and taking care of their families. These are things the Government will consider carefully, seriously. And these are matters all of us must work very hard on.
Indeed, many of these policies have helped Malay families tangibly. We are putting our efforts in education, raising the levels of achievement, helping to retrain and reskill older Malays, and getting Malay families living in rental flats to own them. There is a lot of work to be done but we have made steady progress.
Let me end by highlighting the great strides that Singapore Malay/Muslim women have made in a society that allows people of all races, all religions to make progress. One such example is Mdm Zuraidah Bte Abdullah, who is the Senior Assistant Commissioner of Police, the highest-ranking Senior Officer in the Police; Chairperson of the Malay Heritage Foundation and a member of the National Library Board. She is the Commander of the Training Command.
Another is Ms Rahayu Binte Buang, CEO of MENDAKI. Prior to this, she served as the Director in the Family Education and Support Division and Office for Women's Development, also took care of probation, family issues before she joined MENDAKI. Yet another is our colleague, Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef, a Senior Consultant at SGH Emergency Medicine. And let me not forget to mention yourself, Speaker, who has done so well. We are very proud of you, the community is very proud of you. You also led NTUC as the Deputy Secretary-General.
Mdm Speaker, in conclusion, I wish to once again thank Ms Tin Pei Ling and all the women present here moving this Motion which, I hope, will help women, regardless of their race, religious beliefs or practices, make a mark in our society. [Applause.]
Mdm Speaker: Mr Faisal Manap.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: Madam, I would like to clarify some of the points made by the Minister who is trying to paint a negative image of myself.
Madam, firstly, I disagree with Minister's claim that I am causing discord and divisiveness. My point is that I choose to use Parliament as a platform, an official platform as an elected Member, to voice out the community's concerns.
I did not choose or post any kind of comment, negative comment, on social media, even though I have my own Facebook page but I did not choose to do that because I know such matters are better discussed officially.
So, I believe that as a Member of Parliament, elected through the GRC system, I do have the right to voice the concern. Some of the concerns that I have voiced out, for example, the halal kitchen issue, was not initiated by me but was mentioned by Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen. I was just reiterating what he had mentioned and asked him for clarification on whether there would be effort made to address that issue.
As for the point that the Minister made on Zulfikar, I was there to support the \"Wear White\" movement. I just want to repeat one more time: I was there to support the \"Wear White\" movement. I am not so sure what is behind Minister's mind when he tried to link me to Zulfikar. I am a bit distraught by his effort to paint me negatively when what I was trying to do was to voice out the concerns of the community on an official platform and avoid myself from being entangled in this kind of discussion on the social media platform. So, I believe that I have explained enough and I would appreciate if the Minister would be more positive in his remarks towards me.
Mdm Speaker: Minister Masagos.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Mdm Speaker, Mr Faisal Manap is not repentant nor apologetic. He insists his strident approach is the correct way to do what he wants to do, he needs to do. Perhaps, it is the spirit of the first world Parliament. I put to Mr Faisal Manap that his strident approach is putting Singapore's multi-racial harmony at risk.
What we say about our religious rights, what we say is our right to do things in this multi-racial context may appease a part of our community, maybe it is even because we have to carry it out as a religious responsibility to voice it out. But remember others are listening, too. They are watching us. The Member may have spoken in Malay but everyone else understands the translated version, Members in this House and, later on, maybe he is posting to say that \"I spoke about this\".
Yesterday, the imam who made offensive remarks about Christians and Jews was found guilty by the Court and fined for the offensive remarks. Two others who traded barbs over the new media were given stern warnings. But I want to quote what the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Singapore told TODAY newspaper.
He said, \"Religious teachers must be aware that they are not just addressing their believers but also the world as well, and what they say can be heard by others, so they must be more cautious not to be seen as slighting other religions.\" This may not be about slighting religions but it also stirs emotions within our community and other communities who also have things and rites and rituals that they may want to do but may not be able to do because we value our common space. So, I believe this applies to all of us, all political leaders, when we raise issues on religion or race or language.
In Singapore, we have allowed large doses of freedom in our religious practices, especially those that do not impinge on others. But when we have to do something that is in the common spaces when we are working together, what we do as what we call our religious rights sometimes have push backs, uncomfortable feelings about what we do, by other communities, and we must recognise this.
Indeed, if each community pushes its own claims aggressively, there will be pushback, there will be animosity. Can we imagine that here we are campaigning for our Muslim ladies to put on their tudung, what are employers thinking? Do we also compromise the equal opportunity that these employers would have employed them on the basis of their competence, on the basis of their ability, and now they have to also consider whether they should be allowed other religious rights that they claim to be theirs?
Thankfully, all of us, most of us, are patient and rational voices and, unlike Mr Faisal Manap, I do not believe things like this should be discussed openly, publicly and then left hanging without answers. I believe that we should call for constructive engagements like he said. But we must not do it at a place that upsets social harmony. We must not do it among people who have other agendas who we may not be able to control and then may have consequences we never thought about.
Mdm Speaker, yesterday, like I mentioned, the imam was found guilty by the Court, two other fellows were given stern warnings but, today, there is calm in Singapore. I think if we put diary entries today, we would say \"nothing of import happened today\".
But not so in 1950 when the Court awarded custody of Maria Hertogh against the wishes of the Muslims who consequently rioted.
This calm that we have today is not, I believe, the level-headedness of Singaporeans. Yes, it is in a way, but it is because we have tended to our racial and religious harmony fastidiously. And, therefore, I will not take Mr Faisal Manap's tactic lightly and let him needle the community's sensitivity subtly and frequently. It leaves a lingering feeling of unsolved, unsolvable and impatience that, one day, I believe, will explode. Is that what Mr Faisal Manap wants?
Mdm Speaker:\tMr Faisal Manap.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: Madam, I would like to clarify the point made by the Minister.
Firstly, I am not hiding behind my usage of my national language. It is the Malay language, it is the national language and it is my mother tongue. I am proud to use my national language in my speech.
Secondly, I would like to again ask the Minister if he provide to me or explain or share with me or share with the House any specific, particular situation where I tried to cause discord or divisiveness. What I have been asking since I was elected in this House is for the Government to address the issue. I called for a committee to be formed, a commission to be formed to look into the concerns of the Malay community. How does that cause divisiveness and discord?
I have not imposed any of my thoughts and I did not mention even for the sake of the Muslim community we have to compromise the national or the social cohesiveness or integration. So, I would like to ask the Minister can he provide, can he explain any examples where I am sowing discord and divisiveness.
Mdm Speaker:\tMinister Masagos.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Member does not need to intend to sow discord. But the practice of subtly and frequently bringing issues that are sensitive to the community, knowing that these are not easy to resolve and cleverly turning it into a state-versus-religion issue. These are all very dangerous moves.
I actually wonder whether the \tWorkers' Party and its leadership are committed to the racial and religious harmony which underpins the security of this country. Do we want to go back to the politics of race and religion of the 1960s, the politics we wanted to avoid when we left Malaysia? If we do not want that, why do we let a Member constantly raise these issues to stir the community, to tell them \"you are different\", to subtly suggest to them \"we are not able to address your issues now because the Government won't do it\"?
Mdm Speaker: Mr Faisal Manap.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: The Minister has not answered my question of an example of where I have caused discord and divisiveness. On what Minister mentioned earlier about the issue faced by the community being not easy to resolve, hence, I have been asking persistently and consistently for the Government to address the issue. That is the point that I have been making since I was elected and I have even started to make this point after the Suara Musyawarah Report was made public, based on that concern voiced in that report, as a basis for my point that I bring up in Parliament.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: If I have not heard the Member, the Member also has not heard me. The Government does not address this in public forums, in debates, in places like this where sensitive matters can be discussed out of context, emotionally and, sometimes, because they are not easy to resolve, because they cannot be quickly resolved, leaves a lingering, unhappy feeling in a community. It may not be our community, it can be any community.
Therefore, the approach of the Government is to address this within closed doors, with the community leaders and people who are responsible to carry the message for us and with us.
Like I mentioned to Mr Faisal Manap, what is worrying me is not so much about whether he intends to sow discord. The imam did not intend to say anything to hurt the Christians or the Jews. But the Christians and the Jews, now that it is out in the open, do feel insulted.
It is not only our intention that matters. It is our action and how people interpret it. I met some students in Mecca at Medina very recently and they were unhappy. They were concerned that many people think people who study in Mecca, Medina would have what they call Salafi thinking, not moderate, very extreme. And they say, \"We do not do all these things. We say all the good things. We tell people to do only the right things as a Muslim.\" But I asked them, \"Have you ever checked what people think and what people do after what you said and what you teach them? Have you ever gone to the ground to check the impact of what you teach them?\"
As an example, I told them there was a divorce that happened after they got the wife to become very religiously observant. The wife, because the husband is not so religiously observant, divorced the husband. And what were they doing? Only telling good things.
And, therefore, as responsible Members of this House, I hope the Member just does not do this as a matter of course because it is a responsibility to do so, even if it is your right to do so, but do this responsibly because we have a context, we have a very precious social fabric to preserve. I ask the Workers' Party and everybody here, respect that, preserve that. Because this is something we can leave for our children. [Applause.]
Mdm Speaker: Mr Faisal Manap, please keep it short. We are running out of time.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap: Thank you, Madam. I just like to address one point that was brought up by the Minister. He mentioned that public consultations, including in this Chamber, are not the right places to discuss such matters. I believe that this is the best platform, an official platform for me as an elected Member of Parliament to bring up the issues.
Indeed, last November, we did mention a very sensitive issue regarding having a Malay or minority to be elected as the Head of State. I believe that is a sensitive issue that was discussed openly in Parliament. Again, the result was to proceed with the reserved Elected President based on, to brush aside the perspective that a Malay cannot assume the highest position in the state both by the Malays themselves as well as the non-Malays.
So, I believe this is the right platform for me to bring up. If not here, where else, can I, as an elected Member of Parliament, voice out the concerns of the community? Thank you, Madam.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Even when I was not a Member of Parliament, I could talk about this. I remember in 2002 – please look up the reports – when I was involved in discussions with the Government on a similar issue about uniforms in schools. What did I say? What did I do? I have a platform. Yes, I do. Did I have to go out and go and try and create havoc? No, I did not. I did not. This is exactly the spirit we want.
We do not need a place in Parliament to voice things out when we know that it is sensitive. I engaged the Government quietly. I met Ministers, Senior Ministers of State ─ at that time, it was Dr Aline Wong ─ to discuss the issue quietly. We had an agreement that there are things that we discuss here openly and do not share out there because there may be things that may be misunderstood and we have to move on.
Finally, the outcome of that particular episode was one where the Mufti, knowing very well what is the priority of our community, made a statement to tell us knowledge is more important for us to pursue, not just the covering of our heads. The community moved on. But why did the community move on? Because after that, the community leaders came together to calm the situation down and got everybody to move on.
I would bet you, a similar situation elsewhere will not happen. It will continue to rile the community. It will continue to make the community upset because nobody will cede what they think is their right.
Mdm Speaker:\tDr Intan, present your speech.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Madam. Mdm Speaker, I stand in support of this Motion. Policies and initiatives to support working women and women in general have been encouraging and have helped women better manage their multiple roles in the home, at work and in the community. However, there is still more that needs to be done.
In my speech, I would like to touch on three areas, that of (a) work support for women; (b) shared responsibilities; and (c) financial planning and retirement adequacy, all of which have also been put forward in the PAP Women's Wing position paper published in July last year.
Work support. For many women, the desire to work or stay at home is shaped by different reasons − personal goals, family responsibilities or the family's economic situation, among others. The choice is really up to each woman and in consultation with their significant others.
However, for women who have decided to stay at home to take care of their children or elderly parents or even family members with special needs, and who, thereafter, decide to return to work, they would need the necessary conditions and provisions to (a) choose between returning to full-time or part-time or flexi-work; (b) have adequate support for their caregiving responsibilities; and (c) learn and re-learn relevant knowledge and skills needed for the work they are returning to.
I am glad to see greater support for women for childcare and elderly caregiving, be it in terms of financial, social or emotional support. It is not yet ideal, but we are headed in the right direction.
I hope to see more provisions given to our women to have easier access to learn and re-learn relevant knowledge and skills that are needed for the work they are returning to.
To elaborate, under the SkillsFuture initiatives, specific course packages can be designed to help women in areas, such as information technology skills, effective use of social media, issues on cybersecurity, or even an overview of financial or social assistance schemes and policies that they need to know and can leverage on to help our women manage their multiple roles and responsibilities.
I would like to see more employers, including the public sector, design a returnship programme for women to ease back to work after taking some time off for child or elderly caregiving. This returnship programme can provide our back-to-work women with a flexi-work or part-time work arrangement in the first instance for a period of three to six months, before they decide to resume full-time work.
The returnship programme can also include a work placement support and internship programme for our back-to-work women to have enough time to learn about the company they are joining and the work they will be doing. I hope that our unions also will be able to support such a returnship programme for our back-to-work women.
In addition, I would also urge our public sector and private sector employers to make greater provisions for flexi- or part-time work for both mothers and fathers as well. For instance, flexi-work in the form of allowing several weeks of working from home when family exigencies come up, with no disruption to salaries or performance appraisals, would be ideal. Allowing working mothers and working fathers to work as a work-team will make it easier for flexi-work to be implemented and taken up, as teammates can cover office duties when a working mother or father needs to do flexi-work and work from home.
Such provisions allow for greater flexibility for couples to decide on child or elderly caregiving arrangements depending on the needs of their families and for them to share such responsibilities, which brings me to my next point on shared responsibilities.
Changes to maternity leave provisions, where mothers have 16 weeks of maternity leave, and the introduction of the two-week paternity leave from 1 January this year have been significant in helping young couples share the joy and responsibilities of parenthood. While I hope for greater provision of both maternity and paternity leave in future, as well as eldercare sick leave to be the norm, too, I recognise that shared responsibilities towards parenthood and the family are not just up to the Government to provide.
Our societal norms and traditions also need to evolve. For instance, we have to change our perceptions of mothers being the main caregiver for children or the home − for mothers to be the one to cook, clean, wash, teach and take care of our children.
Fathers have an equally important role to play in caring for our children and in keeping house that extends beyond just putting the children to bed. When our children see their fathers doing housework, lending a hand in changing diapers, or cooking meals at home, we shape our children's perceptions of societal norms and responsibilities and traditions. We broaden their minds and we help them see that both boys and girls have a part to play in keeping the family together and in taking care of the household.
Similarly, we also need to change how we perceive elderly caregiving. Traditionally, we expect daughters or grown-up children who are not married to be the ones to take care of our elderly parents. When this is not possible, we expect others to take care of them − this can be in the form of the Government, nursing homes, or even domestic helpers − to fulfil such responsibilities. This also needs to change.
Taking care of our elderly parents is a shared responsibility for everyone in the family − daughters or sons, married or otherwise. The Government, geriatric professionals or domestic helpers can be there to lend support and assistance, but not to assume the entire role of caregiving to the elderly.
We would need employers to make provisions not just for maternity or paternity leave, but also for eldercare leave. Providing for flexi-work or work-teams or shared work in the workplace, would help us fulfil our caregiving responsibilities. I look forward to greater support from our employers, including from the public sector, in this.
My third point is on financial planning and retirement adequacy. More of our women are now working − whether full-time, part-time or doing freelancing work to supplement the family income. I am heartened by this, where our women are increasingly more financially independent and are able to earn their keep, without having to depend on their husbands or children or on others. However, with our labour participation rate for women at around 60%, there are many opportunities for our women to be even more economically active. At this point, Mdm Speaker, please allow me to continue in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] More and more of our women are now working and are able to provide for the family. Compared to our grandparents' time, women today are more highly educated, possess 21st century competencies and skills and have more opportunities to work, to acquire knowledge and global experience and also to pursue their interests further.
Having said that, however, the proportion of Malay women who are not working is higher, compared to the other communities in Singapore. While the decision to be a homemaker is a personal one, I am, nonetheless, concerned about the ability of our women to, firstly, plan for their long-term financial needs and capacity; and, secondly, ensure their retirement adequacy in old age.
I respect the decision of Malay women when they want to be full-time homemakers or to work part-time while their primary responsibility is raising children and taking care of the household. But at the same time, I do hope our women will plan more carefully for their long-term financial needs and capacity.
For example, they should plan to save from a young age for their children's education − whether through a savings account in the bank or through an education insurance scheme for their children − as well as engage in financial planning for themselves. Our women should have personal savings for their own needs, too.
Furthermore, women should plan for retirement adequacy for the future when they grow old. We have to recognise that, in general, women have longer life expectancies than men and a greater likelihood of having to support themselves and be financially independent even in their silver years.
In the six years I have served as a Member of Parliament, I have often encountered our Malay women residents who are quite elderly, that is, more than 65 years, who have no income or savings of their own, no spouse because their husbands have either died or they have divorced and may have also been abandoned by their children. They have no family support, alone and helpless, and are dependent on public sympathy and compassion. I feel heartbroken whenever I meet them and I hope I will never see such a situation becoming widespread among our Malay women.
With due respect to our men, I urge and make this appeal to our women that they should not be too dependent on their husbands financially and for retirement adequacy in old age.
Regardless of whether our women choose to be full-time homemakers or to work part-time or work full-time, I hope they have clear plans that ensure their own financial independence and retirement adequacy. At this point, Mdm Speaker, I would like to close my speech in English.
(In English): Over the years, more provisions and support have been given to help women manage our multiple roles and responsibilities − in the family, at work and in the community. While such provisions and support have been encouraging, certainly, more can still be done to ensure that our women can continue to be the best daughters, best wives, best mothers, best employees, best leaders and important members of our community for now and the future. Sometimes, we can ask for changes to be made. But sometimes, we need to make those changes ourselves.
It has been said, \"There is no force more powerful than a woman determined to rise\". So, rise, mothers, daughters, sisters and let us be the change we want to see in our community and in the world. Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion.
Ms Sun Xueling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mdm Speaker, it is not uncommon to hear about four generations of women in a Singaporean family living lives and having experiences mirroring Singapore's developments. With grandma doing menial jobs to support her many children, mom having had some form of education and working in an SME or a factory, my current generation with greater access to education options and working in jobs that we desire and, finally, our children, having the possibility to be what they want to be and living lives that are meaningful and fulfilling.
At this point, given the progress that women have made in Singapore, what more can be done to ensure that we, the mothers, sisters and daughters of Singapore, can be the best that we can be and, in so doing, give the best to those around us? We aspire for equal opportunity – the opportunity to be recognised fairly for the work that we do, the opportunity to rise up in a corporate or in the community for the efforts that we put in.
A statistic that Minister Grace Fu brought up recently is disturbing − only 9.7% of board positions in Singapore corporates are filled by women. Given the increasing numbers of women as employees and as consumers, companies may be missing an important perspective on their products and services as well as the management of their company, by not tapping on the perspectives that women bring.
The Diversity Action Committee (DAC) has done important work in this area. With their database of suitable women candidates for board positions and a knowledge of the capability requirements to become a board director, corporates facing difficulties identifying suitable women candidates for board positions could interface more with DAC. The Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) and Trade Associations, with their network of employers, can also play an active role by putting these employers in touch with DAC. A little step every way can help us narrow this yawning gap in women in corporate leadership.
Women also aspire to positions in community leadership. Anecdotal evidence suggests that women community leaders at the Resident's Committee level number about 40% but women community leaders at the Citizens' Consultative Committee level number about 20%, if not less.
With increasing social spending from the Government on healthcare and childcare needs and a greater call for a whole-of-society approach to dealing with our society's needs, perhaps there can be more targeted recruitment, training and retention activities aimed at women volunteers. Women volunteers can bring in very different strengths and capabilities in community work and address the needs of special groups in the community.
At different junctures of our lives, women may have to make decisions to balance competing needs of their careers and their families. If we were to take a life-cycle approach to the decisions that women have to make, it may be easier to identify the pressure points that women face.
Firstly, young women leaving the school environment, about to embark on their careers could benefit from having women mentors and learning about business networking. The work of Young Women's Leadership Connection (YWLC) is thus important as its network of women mentors can help support young women leaders in their journey to fulfil their aspirations. Can we further support the work of YWLC?
The next juncture where women may face disruptions in their careers could be due to childbearing or the need to care for the elderly in the family. As Minister Ong Ye Kung pointed out yesterday, the employment rate for women shows a sharp drop after 25-29 years, which coincides with peak childbearing years. Can we go a step further and identify the industries that show the highest drop-out rate for women and tailor the engagement for these women to encourage them to stay in the workforce?
Flexible work arrangements are one way to encourage people to stay in the workforce who might otherwise have dropped out. This benefits both men and women. Just as there are industry transformation maps for technology, there can be industry transformation maps for HR practices. I hope that the tripartite partners can work together to identify which industries and which areas of work can be most easily flexi-ed.
Can there be more granular work arrangements so that flexi-work, flexi-place and flexi-load can truly be implementable? Jobs can be shared and, correspondingly, wages can be apportioned. With greater deliberation, we can try to customise work arrangements to bring in workers who otherwise might not be able to participate in the workforce.
Lastly, alleviating stress points around childcare can also help women and, in so doing, release constraints that potentially impede them from making optimal choices in their careers and family life. For instance, childcare options in estates with many young families have been a perennial bugbear. It would be helpful if MOE can consider setting up childcare centres, as young parents need full-day childcare facilities to take care of their toddlers while they are at work.
Further, the opening hours till 7.00 pm for most childcare operators create a huge stress point for young parents who are not able to reach the school on time to pick up their children. Most working adults I know finish work after 6.00 pm. Can we look at options to keep childcare centres open till 8.00 pm, so that parents have a reasonable amount of time to pick up their children after work?
A little step of the way can go a long way towards helping our women. We are responsible and stand by the choices we make in our lives. But do ensure that equal opportunities are made available to us. Ensure that our efforts meet just rewards. Help us make the choices we make easier as we are trying our best to be a good wife, a good mother and a useful citizen. By being the best that we can be, we can give our best to you. Mdm Speaker, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] At different junctures of our lives, women may have to make decisions to balance the competing needs of their careers and their families.
Firstly, young women leaving the school environment, about to embark on their careers could benefit from having women mentors to help them expand their social circle and learn about business networking. The work of Young Women's Leadership Connection is thus very important.
The next juncture women may face could be due to childbearing or the need to care for the elderly in the family. In this area, if we could take into consideration their needs and concerns, we will be able to better support them by providing training or flexible work arrangement (FWA), so that companies can retain or re-employ female employees.
FWA benefits both men and women. Just as we have Industry Transformation Maps for technology, there can be Industry Transformation Maps for HR practices. Can we all work together to see which industries and which areas of work can be most easily flexi-ed?
Lastly, alleviating stress points around childcare is also important for women. Would it be possible for MOE to consider setting up MOE childcare centres instead of just MOE Kindergartens? When it comes to opening hours, what options are there to keep childcare centres open till 8.00 pm so that parents have a reasonable amount of time to travel to pick up their children?
A little step forward can go a long way towards helping our women. Please help her by ensuring that equal opportunities are made available to her. Ensure that her efforts meet just rewards. Help her make the choices easier as she is trying her best to be a good wife, a good mother and a useful citizen. Your understanding will be rewarded by her giving her best to you.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin (Nominated Member): Mdm Speaker, I have heard of superstar women who managed to somehow do it all. They manage an amazing career, sew their own buttons, make home-cooked meals, tutor their brilliant children and somehow, still manage to look Instagram-worthy. And yes, these amazing unicorns apparently exist and I do not know how they do it.
On weekdays, I still struggle to leave office on time to be at home for my child. And on weekends or weeknights, I have unfinished business to clear, like writing this speech, for instance. I cannot do anything without my husband and domestic helper playing tag-team with me. The year that my father fell ill and my kid was just born was also the first year that I took up the Nominated Member of Parliament position, on top of all my other work. And I could only do what I do because I had supportive teams at work. I had state-subsidised infant care near my home, I had my mum and my sister taking turns being caregiver to my dad, and we could afford external part-time caregivers when my mom needed a break.
I love doing my work, but I know I would definitely have had to drop out of the workforce if I did not have access to an equal system of paid and unpaid help supporting me at the home level, as well as at the broader societal level. If we want to see more women keep their families together, keep contributing to the economy and keep rising to represent us on corporate boards and political positions, we do have to design an inclusive ecosystem of caregiving that all women can access and afford.
A few weeks ago, after Budget season, I received an online message from a woman whom I have never met. She was not asking for any answers and she was not requesting for any favours. She was just hoping for someone to feel her present struggle and care for her future story.
She wrote, \"I am a mother to four boys, married to a civil servant, but you have no idea how hard life has been for us. We keep on trying and striving and doing our best to survive, not for ourselves, but for our boys. I wake up every day at 4.30 am in the morning to cook because my children cannot eat the food from school, and I have been packing their lunches for more than 10 years. I rush to cook, clean and get my kids ready for school. We live far away, and my husband sends them to school each morning, but I will rush to my office to work. Then, I will fetch my kids home by bus. I cook lunch and sit down with my kids for revision, I check their homework. I am not well-educated, so I also have to engage tutors for the boys. But I can only do so much. My business does not earn very much, but I do it anyway just for the kids, to pay for tuition fees, to help my husband out. And yes, the story is long and boring and tiring, but that is how I feel, too. Sometimes, I will cry myself to sleep, and feel that I have failed as a mum who cannot provide enough for her children and as an only daughter who cannot provide enough for her own mother. Bills and more bills to pay, problems after problems. It gets very frustrating and I wish someone could listen to what I have to say and understand my plight, but sadly no one is there. And we only have our family, just us.\"
I wanted to bring her voice in this House so that we can get a sense of what at least one real woman on the ground might be thinking as she listens to us discuss in theory how to affirm every woman's contributions and support her aspirations. Her story is not representative of every Singapore woman's story, but I believe it does have enough threads within to bind it to a wider tapestry of even tougher tales out there. For many women, it is difficult to aspire about a faraway future, where the demands of the present feel so overwhelming.
Planning for the future is a luxury only those of us who have the privilege of time and mental bandwidth can afford. And yes, a woman who has cash to spare in her household budget can have the option of purchasing the spare time and mental bandwidth she needs in the present to improve her future prospects. She can hire a domestic worker to clean the house and cook the meals. She can pay for laundry to be pressed and groceries to be delivered. She can hire school buses to do the fetching and tutors to do the revising. She can engage the best live-in nurses for her parents and all-day preschools for her kids. And she can pay for financial planners to strategise the growth of her savings and investments. So, yes, theoretically, a woman can outsource all the jobs in her extensive portfolio of home-based work to an army of many to do, but many women do not.
Many women take on either the full or partial portfolio of caregiving work onto themselves. And for some women, it is a deliberate and happy choice. They may have the wealth to pay for external help and they are personally convicted that some types of domestic work, particularly caregiving for their ageing parents or young children, are too sacred to be outsourced to strangers.
They derive great personal satisfaction from being a full-time worker at home, rather than a full-time worker in the office. And they may take a financial hit for their choice, but they have enough financial reserves and social support to feel at peace about their future.
But for other women, it is not that simple. They may share similar values as the first group and embrace the meaning of caregiving as well, but their decision to be a caregiver may be driven more out of a lack of financial capital to engage paid help or a lack of social capital to engage alternative sources of unpaid help.
They may also have done their math and compared the income they would derive from working versus the cost they would pay for external help, and then they sacrifice the job they enjoy to be a caregiver because it is just the more affordable option. They do want to care for their loved ones and they do so either on a full-time or part-time basis, but they are also clear that they want to go back to office work someday, either because they have personal goals to fulfil or because they know they just need the income.
My focus today is on how we can better support the aspirations in future of this second group of women. Statistically, women tend to shoulder a significantly larger portion of the burden of unpaid invisible caregiving work, much more so than men. According to MOM Report on the Labour Force in Singapore for 2015, 80,848 women between the ages of 25 and 54 left the labour force due to family responsibilities, compared to just 4,439 men. In 2014, it was 70,060 women who left, compared to 3,564 men.
The number of women who leave the visible paid labour force to enter the invisible and unpaid labour force of domestic caregiving is a big deal because, firstly, the labour is not free. It comes at great individual cost. Presently, we have many older women today, widows or single unmarried women who currently face financial insecurity because they sacrificed their lifetime earnings and savings to care for dependants at the peak of their working years.
Dr Kanwaljit Soin observed in a 2012 interview with the Council for Third Age (C3A) that, usually, because women live longer than men, the women will be looking after her husband through his last illness, spending most of their savings on him. After he dies, she is without a spouse, with little material resources left and there are about five times as many widows than widowers in Singapore.
Secondly, there is also a great societal cost, particularly for a small country like Singapore. Our female labour force participation rate of 58.6% in 2014 was lower than in most other first world countries at similar income levels, like Denmark at 75% and Switzerland at 79%. In a tight labour market like ours, especially given our low birth rates, we do have to increase our female labour participation rate. But if we want more of our women to stay in the labour force or re-enter it after their time of caregiving, we must provide better systemic support for their work of caregiving.
I have three requests. My first request is on behalf of the financial future of full-time home-based caregivers. A 2015/2016 CPF Advisory Panel Recommendations Report expressed worry about the financial vulnerability of our female caregivers who leave the workforce and are completely reliant on their husband's CPF payouts for their retirement. Should these caregivers outlive their husbands, they will have no sustained income.
Currently, there is a system of voluntary CPF transfers from income-earners to non-earning caregivers that is incentivised by the Government. There were 86,198 top-ups made in 2015. But if we have an estimated 210,000 caregivers here, then it does imply that there are still many caregivers who do not receive CPF retirement savings for their work.
Member of Parliament Er Dr Lee Bee Wah has suggested having a system of automatic transfers with an opt-out option from an income-earning spouse to a non-income earning caregiver spouse's account under the Retirement Sum Topping-Up Scheme. If voluntary transfers do not climb significantly, then I think we have to consider this intrusive option.
I also wonder if we can encourage income-earning spouses, children, relatives or even friends to contribute to some kind of Caregiver Development Account. It allows the community to practically honour the work of the caregivers that they love as well as encourage the caregivers to take care of their own well-being and development. It could be something like how the Government currently encourages parents to save for their child's future through the Child Development Account. The state can offer a cap of one-for-one matching grant over a fixed time period and the money can similarly only be taken out by the caregiver for a select range of self-care or self-development activities, to ensure that claimants are true caregivers rather than opportunists. Claimants should be required to identify the range of activities of daily living that they do so on behalf of a care recipient. This initiative could also be limited only to claimants or care recipients who do not employ foreign domestic workers.
My second request is on behalf of the career aspirations of lower income mothers. It is really difficult to go on job searches or training workshops without first getting access to alternative caregiving help. I echo Member of Parliament Cheryl Chan's call to relook the chicken-and-egg situation some of these mothers are caught in where they need to be employed before receiving state subsidies for childcare. The barrier faced by some of these women in finding a job or keeping a job is, in fact, the lack of affordable childcare. I hope we can help them in their search for employment and removing the requirement of employment for women with household income lower than $2,500.
We could explore granting jobseekers from lower income households a limited number of months of childcare subsidies upon application. After that, they can show periodic proof that they are on a genuine job search by showing evidence of registration with job-matching agencies like e2i or job applications with potential employers. Such transitional support will be a valuable boost to their morale and motivate the search for stable work within the timeframe of the given childcare subsidies.
My third request is a long-term and more drastic one. I appreciate Minister of State Lam Pin Min's sharing yesterday of the Ministry's efforts to improve access to caregiving and respite services but still I believe that as long as we leave caregiving as a problem primarily for individual families to resolve, then we will continue to see individual women become the solution by leaving paid employment.
Given how fast our dependency ratio is rising and how much we need our women to stay in the workforce, I believe somewhere down the road, we will have to design a caregiving infrastructure that provides universal access to caregiving services for our elderly, children and people with disabilities. A national system of caregiving will not only allow women providing unpaid care at home to return to the workforce with more confidence, it will also be most impactful on the fortunes of the low-income and sandwich-class families who need these resources most.
I do not bring this up lightly because I know it is an extremely costly, complex and controversial venture and the staffing cost alone will be huge. I imagine such a system cannot be supported purely by tax dollar-paid professionals alone but by an army of unpaid volunteers as well.
At the risk of laying yet another burden of care on us women, there is a controversial solution I have heard before which I believe we will have to debate about in due course. In 2015, Mr Ho Kwon Ping argued in his IPS-Nathan Lecture that we should consider universal female conscription as a solution to the overwhelming flood of future needs we will soon face in community care. He proposed that while Singaporean men serve a two-year military regime, Singaporean women could serve a three- to five-month community conscription during their break between graduation and entering the workforce. He imagined female national service women as a force that could support our civil defence, Home Team community and healthcare institutions. He believed that female national service women could really make a difference in service to their country's oldest, weakest and poorest, providing support in caregiver relief, elder care or even childcare while lessening our dependence on foreign caregivers.
The possibilities for societal impact could be stunning and so will the personal cost. Young women will have to give up their time and opportunity and freedom but this is the very same price we have asked our young men to pay all these years for military conscription.
Universal female conscription may not be a popular idea for now but, in stark contrast, the idea that National Service is noble work and an excellent character-building opportunity for fathers, husbands, boyfriends or sons is. Given that, our men have sacrificed so much over the first 50 years to serve and defend our country. It only seems fair for us women to also keep an open mind and a willing heart for the next 50 years to answer the call to serve and defend the communities we love, should that request ever be made of us.
I do not know if female community-based conscription will ever be a reality but I do know that, if it ever does come to pass, I will be very glad to have my own daughter serve the nation that way. If I am not too old by then and this country will still have me, I will be equally glad to serve alongside.
I want to close my speech by bringing us back to that first woman's story. It was she who inspired me to speak on this Motion because reading her message, while I felt for her sorrows, I also felt great admiration for her strengths. Women like her wrote the book on hard work and resilience. No matter how hopeless things feel, how tired they are, how many tears they have shed, they know how to get up, wipe the mess and soldier on like the warriors that they are. She is struggling but she is not giving up − not yet.
Many women like her are already fighting for their aspirations and their families' futures. They just want to know whether we are in our own trenches fighting for them, too, because just knowing that we are together in this fight makes their fight feel a little easier.
I believe that many of us from both sides of the House do share the hope to help our women. We and the rest of this nation can be that larger family beyond their own that they need. There are very real barriers of time, bandwidth, privilege and bureaucracy that stand in their way that are very difficult for them to overcome by themselves. Let us give our fighting women a fighting chance at their dreams of the future by meeting them halfway and breaking down those walls for them a brick at a time. I support this Motion.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): Mdm Speaker, it may be difficult to imagine, but conceptions of a woman's place in society were very different just one or two generations ago. Both my grandmothers were homemakers and, in their generation, most of their female counterparts would similarly be at home. In my maternal grandmother's case, she came to Singapore from India in order to be educated. However, after Primary 1, World War II broke out and her education was stopped. After the war, her guardian told her that, as a woman, it was not good to be too educated because it would be difficult to get married and that was the end of her education.
However, post-Independence Singapore was a very different place. The PAP Government at that time governed on the premise that men and women should have equal opportunities. Education was made universal and compulsory. Both boys and girls had to have Primary education and school fees were nominal. The Women's Charter was passed in 1961, barely two years after the PAP came into power and even before Singapore's Independence.
My parents' generation saw the benefit of these changes. My mother and all the aunts had full education, unlike their own mothers, and joined the workforce after their education. Indeed, my maternal grandmother, whose own education was cut short, did the reverse with her daughters and would chase them out of the kitchen when they tried to help, telling them they should study instead.
These dramatic changes took place in a single generation since Singapore's Independence and have changed Singapore life completely. Women have become economically empowered and educated, which gives them a degree of independence the previous generations never had.
Even with these dramatic changes, it gave me some pride actually to read the Women's Wing paper on \"Singapore's future − women's perspectives and aspirations\". That was what inspired me to come forward and speak for this Motion. Because while we have made great strides to create equality, educational opportunities, there is, I think, still more that can be done.
It was with some pride that I read the Women's Wing paper where it started out by saying, \"Although Singapore enjoys high female labour force participation, women saw their social impact, not only through contributions at the workplace but also through performing multiple roles in the family, as daughters, sisters, wives and mothers. Though motivated primarily by intrinsic satisfaction, societal recognition of their familial and societal contributions remains important\".
My reading of the paper is that women's aspirations were really to try and do it all, far greater aspirations that I think many men would have. They want to be the ideal person at home; they also want to be the ideal person at work and have opportunities there; these are difficult to do.
There are many things in this paper which I would recommend everyone to read because, from beginning to end, it covers a whole range of areas from leadership and societal impact, employment, entrepreneurship, family and caregiving, financial well-being and the concerns women have towards the end of their life.
But I will focus on, perhaps, the two more optimistic areas, the happier ones. What I will call empowering women for the women who really want to try to have it all. What the crux of this boils down to is how women can get help when they come to the difficult part of their life. This tends to happen in their 30s because that is when female workforce participation drops relative to male workforce participation. In the 20s, it is about the same. But in the 30s, male workforce participation spikes from about 89% to 98%, whereas female workforce participation drops. This is largely attributed to playing greater roles in the family and at home. Many women do not see this as an imposition but this is a role that they seek to take up on their own.
Some of the suggestions in the Women's Wing paper are actually very thoughtful to meet this need. I would just highlight a few of those that I think are particularly useful. The first, of course, is flexible work, which I think has been bandied about quite often in this debate. This includes simple things: creating opportunities for women to work from home, telecommuting and more flexible hours. But, of course, at a theoretical level, this is very easy. To implement it is not always as easy.
The Women's Wing had previously taken a stronger position in 2013, saying that flexible work should be mandated; it should be made a legal right that employers have to observe. This new paper is more nuanced and recognises that having a legislation to that effect may actually cause problems or may cause fears for employers employing women.
What it has actually recommended instead is a tripartite arrangement − a tripartite workgroup to look into creating flexible work arrangements within industries. This is important because it has to be a nuanced approach that all parties, employers included, must buy into and agree with. Ultimately, it is my hope that employers will recognise that this is in the long-term interest of their business as well because they keep talented people in the workforce.
I should also add that flexible work should be open to both genders, both men and women. In many ways, this will also encourage more men to take up roles at home, if they know that such flexible work arrangements are available for all parties.
The second set of areas relate to caregiving facilities that are made available and the network of support that is available for women. Flexible work is certainly an aspiration and one which I think we can start working on a short measure through a tripartite workgroup. But in the meantime, just as I think many speakers have acknowledged, part of the reason women drop out of the workforce is because they take on the caregiving role. One of the suggestions in the paper is also to rethink how childcare and eldercare facilities are designed and situated. The key being that these should be situated in places that are easy for women and actually men as well to drop off children, seniors if necessary. These caregiving places can also not only surely be near where people stay but also near where people work.
The next is to develop a network of caregivers or what some other people might have called social capital. This can be done with an online directory created to help match supply and demand. It is a very simple solution but it involves creating awareness of where these caregivers are, whether it is in the neighbourhood, whether it is outside, whether it is near the workplace. As long as credentials of these people are available and somewhat regulated, this could be another alternative for caregiving.
Workplace appraisals are also important. There is a tendency observed that workplace appraisals sometimes depend a great deal on face-time. However, a fairer appraisal system should find ways to make sure that people are appraised on the quality of their work and not just the amount of time they spend at the office or the amount of say, childcare leave they take. Ultimately, if people are accessed according to their contributions, rather than the amount of time they spend at work, that could lead to fairer appraisal systems.
Also, one of our aspirations is to make sure that women are able to stay at work. I think it is also important to give back-to-work support for caregivers. If people take some time out of the workforce, they should be given as much opportunity as possible to come back. The Women's Wing suggestion was for subsidised courses in areas of interest to women where they could develop skills to assimilate themselves back into the workforce.
Let me just deal with one final issue and this was also mentioned by a number of my female counterparts but I should also give my support to this. This is diversity on corporate boards. There has been an extensive study that diversity, in fact, adds to the value of companies. There was a McKenzie study in 2015, which I believe the paper cited. This study talked about diversity in two respects: gender diversity and ethnic diversity.
It was a study of companies in London and what it found was that companies at the top quartile for gender diversity, performed 15% better on a return on equity basis than other companies, while companies with the top quartile for ethnic diversity performed 35% better.
But the point is this, this is a correlation, it is not really causation but there seems to be strong evidence that diversity creates more perspectives on the board, more viewpoints and more reach for companies. But diversity is sometimes not always easy to achieve because people tend to get onto boards together with others they are more comfortable with and, sometimes, if you take someone who is different from you, either gender or ethnicity, it may be a little unnatural at first.
That is why sometimes having some kind of quotas may be helpful. The Women's Wing paper has suggested that the SGX put some kind of requirements in place to ensure we have at least 20% representation of women in all companies by 2020. I endorse that. I think that may be a little bit unnatural at first but I think that it is something that will, in the long term, be in the best interests of all companies.
As this is also the Tamil Language Festival, let me just end with a little bit of wisdom in Tamil.
(In Tamil): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] She will make butter out of bought buttermilk and pay for her eldest son's wedding.
(In English): This is a proverb, which basically says, a mother will make butter from butter milk, which is the alternative to yoghurt and, with that, pay for the wedding of a son. Of course, this is from a different era but the idea of the proverb is the ingenuity of women. And even in that day and age, where there was something important to be done, the women would be able to do the impossible.
My own view is, given the amenities of today, they would probably be able to outshine us and do even more impossible things. Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Madam, I support the Motion. I am excited and encouraged by the initiative of the PAP Women's Wing to spearhead a project centred upon the empowerment of women to their fullest potential.
While inroads and improvements in this area are evident, building awareness and continued engagement must persist in order to enable our women to aspire without real or perceived inhibitions.
On organisational leadership, women remain under-represented. According to the United Nations, although women can vote and run for public office in nearly every country, in 2013, they accounted for only 21% of parliamentarians worldwide and serve as Head of State or Head of Government in only 24 countries.
In Singapore, as many of us have said, we only have one woman among 20 full Cabinet Ministers and about 20% of Members of Parliament are women.
Japan, a mature democracy like Singapore, has a target of women occupying 30% of the Japanese Parliament by 2020 pursuant to their White Paper on Gender Equality 2011.
Madam, I am supportive of Singapore setting a similar goal. The figure of 30% is not a figure without any basis. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women had stated that, \"Research demonstrates that if women's participation reaches 30% to 35%, there is a real impact on political style and the content of decisions, and political life is revitalised.\"
The General Recommendation essentially emphasises that it is not enough to say there is no formal barrier − active measures should be taken to substantially ensure equal participation.
According to the Diversity Action Committee which was established by MSF, it is increasingly common for women to be leaders in the boardroom, in addition to being a mother, wife and daughter.
If the private sector recognises that women are capable enough to take on onerous responsibilities, I believe we should also look out for suitable candidates and nurture them to take on portfolios in the Cabinet.
That is not to say the private sector is highly exemplary. According to the same Committee, due to the perceived shortage of qualified women and preferences for qualified directors who are men, progress is hamstrung.
The Committee further observed that Singapore lags behind the UK, Australia, Hong Kong and Malaysia in terms of female representation on boards of directors.
Surely, Singapore's number of qualified women should be similar to these countries, given our enviable quality of education coupled with high economic activities for all to participate in and prove their worth.
On this note, I would like to indicate my support for the 2020 target announced by Minister Grace. Surely, we can and we have, to have to ensure that at least 20% of female directors on boards by 2020.
Boardroom representation is not the only issue of concern. A few weeks ago, NUS released a study showing that female executive directors of Singapore Exchange-listed companies earned just 56.1% of what their male counterparts earned.
Madam, the figure given is disappointing at best. I sincerely hope that businesses will examine their remuneration policies and structures, and put forward new remuneration frameworks that better reflect the value women bring to the economy.
I strongly encourage businesses and not-for-profit entities, both big and small, to be on the look-out for capable women and provide them with opportunities to prove that they are just as good as, if not better than, their male counterparts.
A noteworthy corporate entity is one of Singapore's biggest law firms, WongPartnership, where 43% of the executive committee is made up of women. Ms Rachel Eng, joint Managing Partner of WongPartnership said, \"Our firm did not set a target to achieve gender diversity. Yet, by creating a culture that recognises and accepts that our talents, including female talents, may need special support during certain periods of their lives, we were able to create a conducive culture for our talents to thrive.\"
I hope that more corporate entities will create conducive cultures that recognise and accept all talents, regardless of their gender.
Besides creating a conducive culture at work, I believe the culture set at home and societal mindset must be reworked, too.
It is possible that unequal distribution of care plays a major role in explaining the disparity in representation. According to MOM, over 265,000 women are out of the labour force due to family commitments or responsibilities, versus around 9,000 men.
In studying the Age-Sex Specific Resident Labour Force Participation Rate, Singapore does not have the \"M\" curve of other developed economies, where women leave the workforce when children are young but return in significant numbers later in life. In Singapore, it is just a decline with time.
Women face barriers to full and equal participation in public life, including employment. The reason might start at home. Between 2012 and 2013, AWARE conducted a survey among 1,322 respondents as part of the We Can! Campaign, which aims to change societal attitudes that perpetuate violence against women.
The survey revealed that 52% of men think women are still expected to be in charge of caregiving and household chores.
Interestingly, the popularity of this view increased to 58% among men aged 18 and 29. This is worrying and I hope that we can change this mindset. We have to.
And perhaps, as many Members of this House have echoed the same view, it is time for us to review our maternity leave and paternity leave. We might be reinforcing the mindset that women are in charge of caregiving when women receive a significantly higher amount of leave as compared to men.
Madam, while big strides could still be made, I believe we should recognise those who are making concerted efforts to positively change the landscape.
In this regard, I wish to highlight the endeavours made by the Young Women's Leadership Connection that has a variety of programmes to support young women leaders to fulfil their aspirations.
I also note the efforts by AWARE which has constantly sought to support women from all walks of life. I urge businesses and organisations to connect with them and the Diversity Action Committee to find out how they may assist their women employees.
Finally, I am heartened by the initiative by the PAP Women's Wing and I stand in full support of their efforts.
Madam, my life has come full circle. I grew up with my sister Lynette and my two female cousins Gail and Grace. I grew up with three girls and playtime usually meant Barbie time. Well, it was either playing with dolls or playing alone and so playing with dolls it was. Ken, the Barbie doll, became my best friend.
Fast forward 30 years and playtime now for me is back to playing with dolls with my daughter Ella. I have to stress that she chose playing with dolls, not me. And she is now bringing her dolls to the hospital to introduce them to her sisters. And so, I am sure when my twins Katie and Poppy become bigger, it is going to be more dolls. Ken is already on standby in my drawer.
The aspirations of Singapore women are clearly very important to me on a very personal note. I have three daughters and I hope that they will be able to fulfil their family and career aspirations and to be future-ready. But beyond these personal reasons, this is important to me quite simply because it is the right thing to do. Madam, I stand in full support of the Motion.
The Minister for Manpower (Mr Lim Swee Say): Mdm Speaker, I thank the Members for their many constructive views and good suggestions. On behalf of our tripartite partners, I want to assure this House that we share their passion and commitment for Singapore women to fulfil their family and career aspirations.
When I was at the NTUC, about 10 years ago, I visited Denmark. I spoke with the union leaders in Denmark. They told me that they were very proud of three achievements of Denmark women. Three high: high education, high employment rate and high TFR of 1.7. But most of all, they enjoyed another high, the fourth high, which is its ranking on the Happiness Index. Denmark has got one of the highest achievements in the world.
So, I asked them, \"What is your secret to getting these highs?\" They said that the women in Denmark receive very strong support from the government, employer, community, as well as from the husband. For example, it is socially unacceptable for husbands not to spend their weekends with the family. Certainly, there is much we can learn from Denmark and we did. Over the last 10 years, through the concerted efforts of the tripartite partners, we have made steady progress.
Firstly, in terms of the employment rate for women aged 25 to 64, it has increased steadily from 63% 10 years ago to 67% five years ago, to 72% last year. If you were to compare our women employment with that of the OECD countries 10 years ago, we were ranked 23rd. We were outside the top 20. Last year, we progressed to number 12, just outside the top 10. In other words, we have made progress from just outside the top 20, to just outside the top 10.
Secondly, the median wage for women has gone up by 5.3% per annum over the last 10 years. This is similar to that for men, which is 5.5%. In other words, the median wage gap between men and women has not widened further over the last 10 years.
Thirdly, in terms of retirement adequacy, the average CPF balance for women has grown by 8.3% per year over the last 10 years. This is faster than the growth rate of 7.7% for men and closes the gap in terms of average CPF balances between men and women, from 16% 10 years ago, to 11% last year. The gap has narrowed.
Fourthly, the proportion of employees who work in companies offering flexible work arrangement has grown from 56% five years ago to 67% last year. Eighty-two percent of employees in Singapore also work in firms that offer ad hoc flexible work arrangement, and this is up from 72% five years ago.
Madam, building on this steady progress, we will continue to strengthen our support for Singapore women, as expressed by many Members of this House, in at least four key areas.
The first area is to improve our female employment rate further. Broadly speaking, the employment rate curve comes in three different shapes − single hump, double hump and no hump. Ours is the single hump. So, our employment rate peaks at the age of 25 to 29, and declines thereafter. So, just one hump. This is unlike the case of Japan and Korea where women re-enter the workforce from their mid-30s and they create a second hump in the employment curve at around age 50. So, Japan and Korea, they have the double hump. This is also unlike the case of the Nordic countries where women stay in employment for most of their adult life. In other words, they do not leave and re-enter. They stay in employment for most of their adult life so forming a very high and broad inverted \"U\" − so, no hump. Just an inverted \"U\" employment rate curve.
Our challenge is: how can we help more women who are working today to stay in work and, at the same time, for those who have left, to return to work? That is our challenge. We will, therefore, have to increase our efforts to raise the adoption of flexible work arrangement for both employers and employees. In fact, I was told that some employees hesitate to take advantage of FWA for fear of discrimination. And I think we have to change the mindset for both employers and employees. In particular, we will give our strong support to NTUC on its Returnship Programme. We will also encourage companies to offer more part-time and job sharing opportunities for those who are not ready to go back to work on a full-time basis.
Secondly, we have to help more women to stay more employable and be more future-ready. Under the Adapt and Grow initiative, we are doing more to help workers to learn new skills, to be more adaptable, so that they can keep pace with changes in the future economy. This is especially important for women who have taken a career break due to family commitment because, by the time they come back to work, the world may have changed due to disruption from technology, for example. Some of them, even if they want to go back to the same career, they need to update their skill. So, there is a lot more that can be done. For some of them, maybe going back to their careers is no longer an option. They have to take on new careers. So, they need to reskill themselves. Therefore, there is a lot more that we need to do to support women, both in terms of helping them to stay in their current employment or to return to the same career or to take on a new career. Members have made many good suggestions and this is certainly something that we will look into.
Thirdly, to enhance the retirement adequacy of Singapore women. The transfer of CPF savings between spouses is a personal decision. I think it should be left to the couple to decide. It would be, I think, intrusive for the Government to mandate such transfers. However, we do share Members' concerns about the spouses − whether they have adequate savings in their CPF for their retirement. And what we have done is to relax the rules for spouses' transfers and the response has been positive. Last year, we saw 70% more cases of spouses' transfers totalling $110 million. In fact, the amount doubled that of the year before. In other words, more families, more CPF members are taking the step to transfer their CPF savings for their spouses. This will enable more spouses to attain at least the basic Retirement Sum, which is our objective, to encourage more of such transfers so that more women will be able to have at least the basic Retirement Sum in their CPF savings so that they, too, can participate fully in the CPF LIFE scheme.
We have also introduced Silver Support last year for the bottom 20% of seniors who had low pay, low wages or no wages throughout their lifetime and currently have little or no family support. And this is especially helpful for elderly women who were primary caregivers in their younger days.
Fourthly, to strengthen the HR practices for fair and equal treatment, regardless of gender. Indeed, employers should set clear targets, conduct regular performance assessments and appraise employees fairly based on work outcome, regardless of whether these employees are on flexi-load, flexi-time or flexi-place work arrangements. This is advocated in the tripartite advisory on flexible work arrangements and further reinforced in the tripartite guidelines on fair employment practices. Of course, we are aware there are employers who do not observe these guidelines. So, for employees who feel discriminated against, TAFEP will look into their complaints and refer cases to MOM for action to warn them. At the same time, I am happy to say that there are many employers who do provide a conducive and supportive environment for their female employees − from flexi-load at Shell to flexi-place at DBS and flexi-time at KPMG − just to name a few.
Our next challenge is to grow this community of progressive employers and make such practices a common sight in Singapore. As announced at MOM's Committee of Supply this year, the tripartite partners will be launching a series of tripartite standards to spread this public adoption of progressive workplace practices and flexible work arrangements will be one of them.
In conclusion, Madam, overall, with our tripartite efforts, we have come some way in helping Singapore women to better manage their family responsibilities, work aspirations and personal needs. However, there is still much we can do. I thank Members for their many good and constructive suggestions. MOM, together with our tripartite partners, will study them carefully and incorporate them into the tripartite standards where relevant. At the same time, we will also sharpen our focus on supporting women in the implementation of the Adapt and Grow initiative and various CPF schemes. Women should not have to choose between family and career. We should support them to fulfil their aspirations in both.
Mdm Speaker:\t Minister Tan Chuan-Jin.
The Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Tan Chuan-Jin): Mdm Speaker, let me tell the story of 69-year-old Mdm Er Teck Gin who had been described as a woman born at the right time. When Mdm Er reached school-going age, Mr Lee Kuan Yew emerged as the leader of a fledgling nation, then still seeking its independence from the British.
He called on families to send their children − both boys and girls − to school, to forge the foundation of an educated and effective workforce. So, unlike her older sister, Mdm Er and her younger sisters went to school with their brothers. It changed the course of their lives. In fact, she is a fine example of lifelong learning because she kept attending classes to improve herself. She got better and better jobs over the years. She was a cold chef preparing non-cooked food in Raffles Hotel and, later, was an executive chef with Singapore Food Industries. Mdm Er shared, and I quote, \"I was always financially independent. With my extra money, I could give my four children a comfortable life.\" Was life easy? I am sure it was not, but she worked hard with the opportunities afforded to her.
Mdm Speaker, at the heart of all we have done and have been discussing in this session, it is really about building a fairer and more equal society. Men and women may have different perspectives, insights and instincts, but there is one clear constant. Whatever the differences, we are equal.
But, Madam, the fact that we have this Motion in the first place says something. This equality is still work-in-progress, but, thankfully, a work that remains very much alive and that builds on the achievements of our Pioneers. This is a unique opportunity for us to also present an overview of how the Singapore Government values women in our society. My colleagues from MOM, MOE and MOH have also shared in greater detail the efforts being undertaken in their respective Ministries.
We believe in helping every woman fulfil her potential and aspirations. To do so, we must ensure that the playing field is even and opportunities are fair between men and women. At the same time, we must also ensure that women have the right to choose and that we should respect those choices.
How do we translate this vision into reality? Well, we must, first, believe in the worth and potential of our people − both women and men. Let us start at the beginning more than 50 years ago, when we laid the foundation for our women to progress. The PAP's first election manifesto, \"The Tasks Ahead\", not only outlined its promises to build homes and schools, to reorganise the Civil Service and build a strong and united trade union movement, it also put across its policy on women's rights. There was a strong desire to uplift our womenfolk in our society. Five women were fielded in that election. Two of them, Chan Choy Siong and Ho Puay Choo, founded the PAP Women's League, the forerunner of today's PAP Women's Wing which is tabling the Motion today.
As Mdm Er's story shows, education was a fundamental driver of change. Mr Lee Kuan Yew said, and I quote, \"The key is education. Old-fashioned attitudes of teaching women enough to be literate and useful wives have undergone profound changes in the last 20 years. Societies which do not educate and use half their potential because they are women are those which will be worse off.\" So, we embarked on universal education for all children, regardless of gender. Today, half of our graduates are women.
In 1961, we passed the Women's Charter' a seminal legislation to protect and advance the rights of women and girls. Many of you would be familiar with this Charter as I had recently tabled amendments to it. Many of us actually take it for granted. What we enjoy today, we forget where we came from. It was never quite like that. But the Women's Charter was a powerful signal on how we viewed women in Singapore and how we were going to recognise and support them.
We have also made significant progress on the health and employment front. In a recent dialogue with Chinese journalist Yang Lan in February, I highlighted that our literacy rate for women is 95.4%. Our full-time employment rate for women aged 25 to 64 has increased from 63% 10 years ago to 72% last year. This brings us from number 23 previously to number 12 now, compared to other OECD countries. Our infant and maternal mortality rates are among the lowest in the world.
Our women also live longer. Life expectancy at birth for females is 84.9 years − more than men. In terms of gender equality, the latest UN 2016 Human Development Report ranked Singapore 11th out of 159 countries on the UN Gender Inequality Index.
Mdm Speaker, we are not there yet, but it is not bad and we have come a long way. We have established strong foundations but we must build further on them. More can and certainly must be done. I would like to highlight the changes we need on two fronts.
First, we must eliminate barriers in the public sphere, be they in the workplace or in the community, to ensure that women reach their full potential. Women have made and can make significant contributions to not only the economy, but also our society at large. So, it is important to remember that it is not just on the economic front and the economic value that we are looking at women. There is also a broader value that women provide, along with men. As a nation, we would be foolish not to value and to nurture them.
Second, we need to make changes on the domestic front, in keeping with the changing realities of our modern times, to recognise the evolving roles for both men and women at home and in their personal relationships.
Firstly, realising women's full potential in the public sphere. How do we provide more options for our women and, also, men? Like men, women are not a homogenous population with uniform preferences. Some prefer to focus on work, while others prefer to focus on family. Some want to do both.
There will always be trade-offs. Our job is to respect these choices and work them within the larger collective aspiration. We aim to put in place an environment that supports our women and men to be able to make these choices. I emphasise that we must never trivialise choices made by fathers and mothers to spend more time with their children. It is invaluable both for the family and for society.
For women, the need to balance career and familial commitments is usually more intense because of the way we view them. Some face discrimination in their jobs. Others take a less linear career path to focus on their family. They exit the workforce, they come back again. In doing so, they may find it difficult to return to the workforce. All these are real challenges, especially when you add on the economic uncertainties that we are facing today.
Ms Tin Pei Ling, Mr Alex Yam, Miss Cheryl Chan, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, Mr Louis Ng, Ms Sun Xueling, Ms K Thanaletchmi, Mr Leon Perera and Mr Desmond Choo pointed out that flexible work arrangements are vital. I totally agree. Minister Lim Swee Say has shared the range of efforts. The Government has promoted and implemented flexible work arrangements and progressive work practices over the years and we must continue to keep up these efforts. So, your suggestions and ideas are certainly valuable.
This also includes the Tripartite Standards on Flexible Arrangements which MOM has introduced. We want employers to offer these options to their employees. It is not good enough to present them and have them available but they must offer them to employees.
Secondly, we need to build capacity to support our women and men. Ms Tin Pei Ling argued for building capacity to help women juggle work and family priorities. Women who have taken a break from work to focus on their families may wish to return to the workforce after their children have grown up. Yet, they may find it difficult to start working again because, sometimes, after they exit the workforce, their skills may have \"expired\", especially at the rate at which technology is changing; some of us may become irrelevant.
Ms Tin Pei Ling, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, Miss Cheryl Chan, Mr Darryl David and Ms Rahayu Mahzam suggested having a customised SkillsFuture package to help these women update their skills to facilitate their return to the workforce. Minister Ong Ye Kung explained how we can and should offer guidance and support to help all the different groups to sieve out the relevant modules that are available. We need to create more modules that may be applicable to the different segments of society. Indeed, a more user-centric approach would be useful. We will see how to do that better.
Working couples who have just started a family may also need support in caring for their young children. On this front, as Members are aware, the Government has endeavoured to improve the quality, accessibility and affordability of preschool services.
To increase accessibility, the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) has increased the number of childcare places island-wide, especially in estates with more young families. We work closely with HDB on that. Since 2012, the number of childcare places has increased by more than 40% to about 140,000 places. We will add another 10,000 childcare places by early next year.
To support parents with childcare and infant care expenses and ensure affordability, all parents receive subsidies. Additional subsidies are also available to the broad majority of lower and middle income families. For non-working mothers who are retrenched, looking for jobs or undergoing training, we will consider their issues on a case-by-case basis, so that these subsidies are available to them as well.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah mentioned that working parents prefer to be near their young children during the work day. To address this, Ms Tin Pei Ling suggested having more care facilities near workplaces. You will be pleased to know that ECDA has worked with URA to set up childcare centres in commercial developments under the Community and Sports Facilities Scheme. Under this Scheme, the developers for selected Government Land Sale sites are also required to provide space for childcare centres. Last year, there were 450 childcare centres located in or near commercial and Government buildings − that is about one-third of all childcare centres.
Some parents work shifts and may require childcare services in line with their working hours. Ms Tin Pei Ling and Ms Sun Xueling suggested extending the operating hours of childcare centres. Currently, they are required to operate full-day services from 7.00 am to 7.00 pm daily on weekdays to cater to the needs of most working parents. Some centres have chosen to extend their operating hours to better cater to parents' schedules. Currently, there are already 52 centres offering extended operating hours island-wide.
Miss Cheryl Chan, Ms Joan Pereira and Ms Tin Pei Ling gave several thoughtful recommendations to better support those who are caring for their elderly family members. Minister of State Lam Pin Min addressed some of these recommendations yesterday. Caring for our elderly is a key focus of MOH in the years to come as we address the issue of ageing in Singapore.
Thirdly, how do we facilitate women in terms of leadership positions in industries?
Much of the effort I have addressed and elaborated on so far deals with the career progression of our women. However, this is not enough. As a country, and as an economy, we must not under-estimate the contributions that women can make at the apex of our corporates.
Mr Louis Ng, Mr Leon Perera, Mr Vikram Nair, Ms Jessica Tan and Ms Tin Pei Ling agree that having women in corporate leadership makes good sense for businesses and the economy. This is not about women's rights.
Today, our women are well-educated and contribute actively to our economy. The proportion of women in senior management roles in Singapore is about 21% − similar to other countries like Australia, the US and the UK. Yet, women's representation on our boards is about 9.9% as of December 2016, which is really less than half the representation rate in these countries.
To address this, my Ministry set up a Diversity Action Committee (DAC) in August 2014 to build up women's representation on boards of companies listed on the Singapore Exchange and to expand the pool of board-ready women. It comprises respected business leaders from the private sector like Singtel, CDL, Shell and IBM; entrepreneurial and professional firms; as well as representatives from the people and public sectors.
DAC has recommended that we enhance the Code of Corporate Governance (CG Code) to require listed companies to disclose their board diversity policy, including gender, and their progress towards achieving these objectives. PAP Women's Wing and BoardAgender have made a similar joint recommendation to revise the CG Code to require companies to disclose their board diversity, including gender, in their annual reports, on a \"comply or explain\" basis.
BoardAgender is an initiative under the Singapore Council of Women's Organisations, which aims to facilitate greater awareness of the benefits of gender balanced business, as well as the advancement of women into senior leadership positions and the boardroom.
MAS has formed a Corporate Governance Council to review the CG Code and we look forward to developments on this front.
I dislike the fact that Singapore ranks near the bottom behind other key developed markets like Australia and the UK in terms of women on boards, in fact, even behind our neighbouring countries. Other countries are progressing at a much faster rate. Globally, shareholders and institutional investors increasingly view women on boards as being important for board effectiveness. This is something that Singapore corporates should not ignore anymore.
I appreciate the other joint recommendation by PAP Women's Wing and BoardAgender. Minister Grace Fu recently announced a declared ambition for at least 20% of directorships on SGX-listed companies to be held by qualified women by 2020. This is timely and I support this target.
In fact, DAC discussed the same issue at its recent meeting in February 2017. For SGX-listed companies, DAC is suggesting a multi-tiered target: 20% by 2020, 25% by 2025 and 30% by 2030 because getting women on boards is a journey and not a destination. DAC will share more details separately. I want to see more women breaking the \"glass ceilings\" in the next few years.
Beyond business, it is also very important for us to look at the non-profit sector. The Centre for Non-Profit Leadership and the Charities Unit have carried out an inaugural study on non-profit board leadership. The study shows that more women are represented on the boards of charities, compared with businesses.
Helen Keller once said, \"Life is an exciting business and most exciting when it is lived for others\". We have many women who exemplify this. One sterling example is Mrs Leaena Tambyah, who retired as senior adviser to the Asian Women's Welfare Association (AWWA) in 2013 after many years of devoting her time and effort helping others, especially children with special needs. Another example, is Mrs Thung Syn Neo, a social work pioneer, whose key contribution is the concept of the Family Service Centres that we have today.
Women leaders in the non-profit sector have shown that a combination of \"heart and mind\" can go a long way in building up our social capital and help us to become a more caring and inclusive society. While women sitting on the boards of these charities make up about 31%, 13% of the charities still have no female representation. My Ministry and the National Council of Social Service will look into this. I believe we can improve on this figure.
While we provide support for women to balance their work-family commitments and excel in the business and non-profit sectors, we must not forget that there are also vulnerable groups of women who require more support. We must also help them to overcome particular barriers so that they, too, can realise their potential.
One such group is single mothers, which has been raised by Miss Cheryl Chan, Mr Leon Perera, Mr Faisal Manap and Ms Joan Pereira. Some talked about singles, referred to divorcees, to unwed mothers. For us, we continue to support parenthood within marriage but, whatever the circumstances, we remain child-centric. It is important for us to do that. Single parents' children get the same health and education benefits as any other citizen's child. We have also made policy changes in recent years to provide more support for parents to support their children. For example, we have recently extended the full 16-week maternity leave to unwed mothers and their children are now eligible for a Child Development Account (CDA).
I have also highlighted several times in this House about KidSTART which will help parents who need support for the development of their children. This is an extensive effort that will not just focus on the children but also link families with community resources if they have other social and financial needs. This programme precisely focuses on the groups that many of us here are concerned about. I believe it will make a significant amount of difference.
Ms Joan Pereira appealed to treat a single mother and her children as a \"family nucleus\" in HDB applications. It is very clear to us that housing is an important institution for children's well-being and development. Our housing policies aim to address the needs of the vulnerable without, at the same time, trying to undermine self-reliance, family support and parity with other families.
I would like to assure Ms Joan Pereira that single unwed parents are not without housing options. Depending on their age, they may apply for HDB flats themselves, or jointly with their parents. Let me state this again quite categorically. On a case-by-case basis, HDB makes exceptions to help single parents, whether divorcees or otherwise, with their housing. Do surface their cases to us and we will look at them.
While I specifically mentioned the Women's Charter earlier, something we often overlook is how our laws have also made Singapore a safer place for women. This is something we should not take for granted. It is not something that women in other countries necessarily have. At the same time, we need to make sure that we have to shape society's ideas about what is not acceptable. Violence against women is unequivocally wrong. Although married persons have conjugal rights over each other, such rights should be exercised within reasonable behaviour. Married women should have the same access to protection as unmarried women. We are thus actively reviewing the issue of marital immunity for rape and will give an update once the review is completed.
Mdm Speaker, let me turn to the home front. I believe that this is an important area where we can provide support for women to achieve their true potential. I think it is important for us to remember. The first line of support must surely be the family and that is something that cannot be mandated, that is something that all of us can play a part.
Dr Intan Azura, Mr Louis Ng, Mr Leon Perera, Mr Darryl David and Ms Tin Pei Ling reminded us we need to have a cultural shift and a mindset change, especially about the share of care responsibilities. Mr Kok Heng Leun also reminded us that eliminating gender stereotypes starts from young. What we do at home as mothers and fathers, husbands and wives is extremely powerful. By our example, we socialise our daughters and sons into their future roles when they set up their own homes. We can either help them move with the times and evolve more appropriate interpretations, or we can unnecessarily confine and restrict their understanding of the roles and duties of mothers and fathers, and of husbands and wives.
Even today, while women in Singapore enjoy equality in many aspects of society, including education and employment, the greater responsibility of caregiving within the family continues to fall on women. We need to change the paradigm relating to the roles men and women play. As husbands, fathers, brothers and sons, we should step up to play our part at home. Parenting responsibilities can and should be shared with our wives. Household chores should not be seen as only the purview of female family members, including the domestic helpers. Otherwise, how can our society progress? If the women around us continue to bear the disproportionate burden of family and caregiving responsibilities, it is less likely that they can achieve all that they are capable of.
Mdm Speaker, gender roles are certainly evolving. The 2012 Marriage and Parenthood study showed 99% of respondents, both men and women, either strongly agreed or agreed that \"Fathers and mothers are equally important as caregivers for children.\" However, in terms of division of labour within the household, day-to-day chores and childcare responsibilities mostly still fall on the women's shoulders. Only 13% of the respondents said that the role of cooking was shared equally between spouses, while only 23% said that this role of feeding young children was undertaken equally by both parents. We really need to begin walking the talk.
Marriage is an equal partnership. As husbands and fathers, it is important for us to share the household and parenting responsibilities with our wives. This would provide working women with the necessary support to alleviate the work-life conflict that they face. Research also shows that this brings about stronger and happier marriages, as both parties better understand and feel supported in managing day-to-day chores and concerns. This means stronger families. Stronger families mean a much better environment for our children to grow up in.
Studies have also shown that children with active fathers have better social skills, they do better academically and have less behavioural problems. Fathers, themselves, are more fulfilled as they are no longer the distant breadwinner and they are able to develop close bonds and ties with their children.
So, as much as is possible, we should start bonding with our children from birth. So, I urge fathers, please use the two weeks of paternity leave which have been made mandatory from this year and be present in the lives of your children. Fathers can also tap on four weeks of shared parental leave, with effect from July this year. During the Committee of Supply debate a few weeks ago, Senior Minister of State Josephine Teo announced that, from July this year, public servants will get an additional four weeks of unpaid infantcare leave per parent, as part of a three-year pilot. This is available to both mothers and fathers. Please use it.
Mdm Speaker, the Government can legislate these leave provisions to encourage shared parental responsibility and for fathers to play a more active role in their children's lives. But only families can decide what steps to take. We cannot walk that last mile for them.
A 2013 survey on Social Attitudes of Singaporeans indicated that men are changing their attitudes. Fifty-eight percent of men in 2013, compared to 44% in 2009, said that their work demands ate into their family time more than they liked. The point that more men are identifying a conflict between work and family commitments is also highlighted in the 2014 Employer Alliance survey, where men indicated an increasing desire to have flexible work arrangements so they can help out with the children and domestic responsibilities. So, that is a good indicator. Businesses must, therefore, realise that employees, including men, do not perform their best when they feel conflicted and are unable to juggle career and home demands. Enlightened businesses know that when they help both fathers and mothers manage their work-life balance, they are the ones that will succeed in retaining talent and recruiting new talent. Of the 500 bosses polled, over 80% said they felt work-life initiatives are important to improve employee satisfaction, raise productivity and retain talent. So, again, the survey looks positive but we need to really begin to walk the talk, across the board.
Members of this House will be familiar with the Dads for Life movement and the Centre for Fathering. Many have asked me why is there not a Moms for Life movement or a Centre for Mothering. Do they not have a role to play, too? My response is that actually moms are already for life and mothers are already at the centre of everything!
Today, the burden is truly uneven. Attitudes are changing and that is encouraging and home responsibilities, unfortunately, are disproportionately borne by women. Playing the roles as we should, as husbands and fathers, will help level the playing field for women in so many ways.
Mdm Speaker, even as we push for the elimination of gender biases, I hope we remember that this journey to ensure a level playing field for women in Singapore is really an ongoing one and it builds on the remarkable work done by our Pioneers. The lives of women in Singapore have improved significantly over the years through the various Government policies and initiatives, as well as more enlightened societal perspectives and practices.
But our work is not done. We must continue to remove the barriers faced by women in the public sphere. In this regard, we will seriously consider the many useful and insightful recommendations that Members have put forth these two days.
However, the fundamental societal change can never be achieved by the Government alone. The change also needs to take place at home, in our workplaces and in our communities. All of us have a stake, whether as employers or colleagues in the workplace, as civil society or as families. We must remove glass ceilings and give Singaporean women − our mothers or sisters, our wives or daughters − the opportunity to achieve their fullest potential. As Dr Aline Wong said in a book entitled \"Our Lives to Live\", \"True equality lies in a woman's ability to realise her full potential and be her true self in whatever she endeavours to achieve.\" Let us endeavour to make this happen.
Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson): Madam, this is the first time that this House debates on a Motion focused on the aspirations of Singapore women. I am heartened that many Members of this House have stepped forth to speak passionately on this important cause, and our Ministers and Ministers of State have also given so much of their time to address our concerns, recommendations and, very importantly, echo their support for the aspirations of Singapore women. And I certainly appreciate the interest and support from the Workers' Party and Nominated Members of Parliament in this Motion debate as well.
We have had two days of robust debate and it is clear that women have made significant progress over the decades. But that 18 Members of Parliament and five Ministers spoke over two days, it is also clear that there are still areas in which the nation can take pragmatic, concrete steps towards helping women achieve their aspirations, thereby benefiting families, increasing social capital and economic prosperity, and contributing to Singapore's long-term success.
Through the debate, colleagues and I have articulated and elaborated on the four strategies that we believe are critical to supporting Singapore women in their aspirational pursuits. Let me briefly sum up.
The first strategy is to create capacity. As we have all agreed that as of the current reality, the primary caregiving role is undertaken by women. Therefore, there is a need to give more support to our caregivers so as to free up the capacity to pursue their aspirations, whether it is in the social area or the career arena. In this aspect, I am glad that colleagues, such as hon Ms Joan Pereira, Miss Cheryl Chan, Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin and Ms Sun Xueling, have all alluded to it in their speeches. At the same time, we also need to refresh and build new capabilities in our women to help back-to-work women because, with new capabilities or refreshed capabilities, when they skill up, they also build and create new capacity as well. This was very passionately spoken about by hon Members Ms Jessica Tan, Ms Joan Pereira, Mr Darryl David, Ms Rahayu Mahzam and Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar.
The second strategy is to be able to provide options for women to choose. Those with career aspirations do not have to feel that they have to sacrifice or make trade-offs or even feel guilty about having to juggle two different roles and feel inadequate at any one point in time; or even for women who choose to want to focus their energy on their families, where their heart lies. And so, over the course of the two-day debate, we have made several recommendations, one of which is highly supported by almost all our speakers − flexible work arrangements − and this is echoed very passionately by our hon Members Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar, Ms Sun Xueling, Mr Vikram Nair, Miss Cheryl Chan, Mr Louis Ng and a few others. We also talked about how this needs to be complemented by having progressive HR policies and practices in place. This had been elaborated on and championed by hon Members Miss Cheryl Chan and Mr Darryl David.
For women who wish to focus our energies on family caregiving − to raise children, to take care of the elderly − there is often one thing that weighs very heavily on our minds and, that is, retirement adequacy. So, how can we help women who choose this path to free up their capacity, to free up their minds, so that they can focus on family caregiving a little bit more? This is where several Members, such as Ms Joan Pereira, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, Ms Rahayu Mahzam, Mr Alex Yam, Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar as well as Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin, have all talked about and, that is, to top up the CPF of women who have given up their careers to stay at home to care for their family members. This was also something that our PAP Women's Wing had in the past raised, that is, top up with love. So, these are the key points that our Members of Parliament, my colleagues, have raised very passionately about in terms of providing options for women.
The third strategy is to remove barriers, to remove the invisible barriers that are often stereotypical, as well as pigeon-holing women in Singapore. At the leadership level, we talked about how women have been under-represented at the board level, at the executive level, and also how we should also drive up women's participation and leadership within the community. These have all been very passionately talked about by Ms Jessica Tan, Ms Sun Xueling, Mr Vikram Nair, Mr Alex Yam and Mr Louis Ng. But to do so, we also need to acknowledge, recognise the stereotypes, the biases that are constraining women in these different roles. So, it is very heartening to hear that various Members, such as Mr Darryl David, Mr Louis Ng, Dr Intan Azura Moktar, Mr Leon Perera and Mr Kok Heng Leun, talk about the need to shift the care burden, to have a more equal sharing of care duties between men and women, whether it is at the workplace, in the family or even within the social setting. This is something that I believe we need to continue to work on and endeavour to achieve a more equal sharing of care duties. At the same time, as what Ms Jessica Tan had also elaborated on, to be conscious of our unconscious bias so that from recruitment to selection, women will not be inevitably disadvantaged right from the get-go.
The fourth strategy is to be future-ready, something that I feel very passionately about, to have smart women for a smart nation. As we look to the future, as we move towards a smart nation, as we leverage on digital technology, as we leverage on the smart solutions, we look at a world of great possibilities. For women to also exploit these, we need to look at STEM education to empower them, equip them, get them ready for the job opportunities in these new and exciting areas. These are also what Ms Jessica Tan and Ms Thanaletchimi had talked about at great length yesterday and today. We need to leverage more on technology to provide remote caregiving to enable flexible work arrangements so that we can create the capacity and provide the options that we have been talking about to help women to fulfil their different aspirations. This is something that is echoed by Mr Darryl David.
But underlying this, to enable both the future jobs as well as taking on the future jobs and being able to balance the different roles using smart solutions, digital fluency is a very critical success factor and a critical enabler. This is something that we must continue to look into, whether it is to prepare our new digital generations through formal education or through SkillsFuture where we encourage and equip our women to take on IT courses so that they can raise their digital fluency skills and close that gender gap. In this arena, it is important that we take a serious look at this.
I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the various Ministries for the very strong encouraging responses so far. I would like to thank Minister of State Lam Pin Min, who shared on behalf of MOH that there will be increased access to and availability of eldercare services, that there will be more leveraging of retired nurses to help support the caregiving of our elders at home and within the community. One thing that I thought was very encouraging was that the nursing profession had also taken the lead to adopt flexi-work arrangements so that our nurses are able to juggle their different roles in life very well. Of course, I am also heartened that MOH will be looking into social egg freezing, something that has been weighing on the minds of many couples who are concerned about their own future, their own families and wanting to raise healthy children.
Second, I would also like to thank Minister Ong Ye Kung who spoke on behalf of MOE. Thank you for also acknowledging our recommendations for a SkillsFuture package. We are very heartened that the Ministry will be customising the engagement to engage women more, to have a more user-centric way of engaging our workforce to help them through customised sets of courses and to help them to eventually, hopefully, match with real job opportunities.
Third, to Minister Lim Swee Say, for MOM. I am very heartened – and I believe all my colleagues are – that flexi-work arrangement is something that is on top of mind at the Ministry. That there will be strong support through NTUC to offer returnship programme with something very exciting and many women will definitely look forward to it. As well as strengthening HR practices, fair employment, the tripartite standards that the Minister spoke about, I think this is something that we are fully supportive of. In fact, for the PAP Women's Wing last year, in our position paper, we also talked about something very similar in concept, the industry's specific flexi-work arrangement standards. So, we definitely look forward to that. And the Minister also mentioned that the Adapt and Grow scheme will be customised for back-to-work women. So, these are all very encouraging to us and these are definitely relevant to the recommendations that we have put forth.
We thank Minister Tan Chuan-Jin for also taking the lead and talking about how women are equals in this society, that we need to eliminate barriers at work and in the community, that we need to recognise the evolving roles between men and women at home, that we need to also take care of our vulnerable women and that there is a need to look into the changing and reshaping of attitudes towards women. I am definitely very heartened to hear that ECDA will be working with URA to bring childcare facilities nearer to workplaces and that the Minister expressed his explicit support for our aspiration of 2020 − 20% female representation on boards by the year 2020.
All of these, taken together, demonstrate the willingness of the Government to support the aspirations of Singapore women. I definitely look forward to the Ministries implementing these recommendations and we look forward to the good news very soon. Madam, if I may just speak very briefly in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Speaker, I deeply appreciate this opportunity to discuss with my parliamentary colleagues on this Motion, which is to affirm the importance and strategies to support the aspirations of Singapore women. This Motion is unprecedented and meaningful.
Members have put forward many good suggestions with regard to the Motion. They are in line with the four strategies described in my speech. First, help free up caregivers so that they can better manage their multiple roles. Second, promote flexible work arrangements so that women can achieve both family and career aspirations without having to trade off one for the other. Third, encourage society and the private sector to value women's economic potentials and contributions. Fourth, encourage women to undergo technology skills training and be prepared for the digital era and the future economy.
More importantly, we all agree that we must have concrete actions to support Singapore women to balance their multiple roles and fulfil their familial and career aspirations.
I am especially moved by the positive response from the various Ministries. These positive responses affirm women's contributions towards the family, society and country. What is even more encouraging is that the Ministers have responded positively to Members' suggestions. This will undoubtedly strengthen Singapore's foundation and help Singaporean men and women achieve their potential and be future-ready.
I hope the Ministries can implement these recommendations soon.
(In English): Many, if not all, of the recommendations that my colleagues and I have put forth in this Motion apply to Singaporeans regardless of gender. Our support for women and men to balance their multiple roles should help them reach greater heights in our economy, in various professions and in many diverse frontiers.
Again, my colleagues and I have moved this Motion with the aim of building on the strengths of women, to recognise and close the gaps. And most importantly, we desire to make Singapore the best home for everyone − a home where regardless of background or gender, Singaporeans have the capability, the opportunity and the courage to pursue our family and career aspirations and to lead a full and happy life. As Singapore is transforming to be future-ready, we − as Members of this House and certainly the whole of Singapore − should also ride on the momentum and translate our words into real action. And for that, thank you, all. [Applause.]
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That this House affirms the familial, social and economic contributions of Singapore women and its support for them to fulfil their family and career aspirations and to be future-ready.\" (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker: I propose to take the break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 5.55 pm. Order. Order.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 5.37 pm until 5.55 pm.
Sitting resumed at 5.55 pm
[Mdm 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":"Strengthening Singapore's Fight Against Drugs","subTitle":"Motion","sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah): Madam, I beg to move*, \"That this House strengthens the fight against drugs by reaffirming Singapore's strong anti-drug stance and calls on the Government to continue (a) applying tough laws to deter the trafficking of drugs into Singapore; (b) investing in the rehabilitation of drug addicts; and (c) preventing a drug-tolerant culture from being established in Singapore.\"
[(proc text) *The Motion also stood in the name of Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar, Dr Tan Wu Meng, Ms Tin Pei Ling and Mr Vikram Nair. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker, increased drug abuse in Singapore is a matter of concern. Since 2011, more than 3,000 drug abusers are caught every year, out of which, about 1,000 are new. Among the new drug abusers in 2016, close to two-thirds were below 30 years of age. In 2015 and 2016, the Drug Rehabilitation Centre (DRC) admission increased when overall penal admission had decreased. Per the most recent statistics, almost one in three inmates is convicted again within two years.
The brokenness of drugs is more than statistics. I have felt that brokenness on the ground. Before entering politics, I volunteered at the Singapore Anti-Narcotics Association to work with youths-at-risk and speak about the havoc drugs can create in their young lives. Drug addiction, for many, is the death of their drive and ambition.
The Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) and the Singapore Prison Service are sterling institutions, staffed with dedicated and committed officers. Their effort in the fight against drugs is courageous. But, the fight is not only theirs to bear. All Singaporeans have a role to play.
The first point is that we need to deter drug trafficking in Singapore and into Singapore. Stemming the supply of drugs is a critical part of the fight against drugs.
As Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean said at an ASEAN Ministerial Meeting, I quote, \"We should also prepare well for the international debate on a new global action plan to tackle drugs. … We must not let softer approaches that allow the harm from drug use to spread...\"
Minister K Shanmugam correctly said in defence of Singapore's tough laws at last year's UN General Assembly, \"For us, the choice is clear. We want a drug-free Singapore, not a drug-tolerant Singapore.\" These positions, which support a tough stance on drugs, should remain. With your permission, Madam, may I display some slides and photographs on the screens?
Mdm Speaker:\tYes, please. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]
Mr Christopher de Souza: In 2014, the amount of cannabis seized spiked by 125% from 15 kg in 2013 to 35 kg in 2014. The next year, 2015, the demand for cannabis increased. For the first time, cannabis became the second most commonly abused drug among new abusers in Singapore. That year, there was about a 26% increase in cannabis seized from 35 kg to 44.3 kg. One year later, in 2016, the amount of cannabis seized continued to rise significantly. According to provisional statistics, during the first six months of 2016, the amount of cannabis seized was almost the same amount for the entire year of 2015. The data showed that over the entire year, the amount of cannabis seized increased by another 22% from 2015 to 2016. Therefore, muscular laws continue to be needed as they are both relevant and necessary.
Stopping drugs from entering Singapore is an important aspect of solving the drug problem. To stem the supply of drugs, we need tough laws to deter the potential drug trafficker. After all, drug trafficking is, for the most part, pre-meditated. It is a coldly calculated risk between potential profit and potential punishment.
What does one stand to gain from drug trafficking? Quick money. It is lucrative.
Driven by greed, the drug trafficker takes the plunge. He lines his pocket with money at the expense of the drug addict, the addict's family and society. These tough laws are needed to deter harm − to deter harm to the abuser and to society. We must hold the line of tough and muscular laws. Let no one weaken it. We must strengthen this line, defend it and protect it.
When a person becomes a drug addict, nothing else matters. He neglects his children, his parents, his job and his own health. For example, the severe condition of \"meth mouth\" is associated with drug use − multiple teeth decay, teeth breaking completely at the gum line, gum disease and bone loss. Paranoia may result. Even in low doses, permanent brain damage may result: using cannabis as rare as once a week may irreversibly lower one's IQ.
People characterise cannabis as a \"soft\" drug. What is a \"soft\" drug anyway? I completely disagree with the term \"soft\" drug. There is nothing soft about the ill-effects of drugs. Cannabis is harmful. Multiple studies have shown that cannabis can be a gateway drug to heroin and cocaine, especially among young abusers. Compared to the general population, there is a four-fold higher risk of mortality among those with cannabis-use disorder. So, you want to call cannabis soft? To do so is plain foolishness.
To escape the clutches of illicit drug taking, some addicts have to endure excruciating symptoms, such as uncontrollable vomiting and diarrhoea and an unstoppable feeling of insects crawling under his skin.
After overcoming addiction, the ex-addict would still need to battle the lure of drugs that will come back to haunt him throughout his life.
It is not only the drug addict who is harmed. His family and those around him are deeply affected. A drug addict's ability to communicate and maintain good relationships is impaired. His mother, father, husband, wife, son, daughter, employee or employer will be affected. The physically and emotionally absent addict puts a strain on the family unit he is in.
Last year, a picture from Ohio made its round around the world. It showed a four-year-old child left in a car with two adults overdosing and unconscious. A month later, yet another harrowing picture − this time, a 10-month-old infant in the backseat.
To drive the point further on the harmfulness of drugs, let us do some sums.
How many people does one think are affected by a drug trafficker who has trafficked the amount of drugs which may attract the death penalty? Two hundred and fifty grammes of meth feeds 185 abusers for a week and 15 grammes of diamorphine sustains about 180 abusers for a week. If one multiplies those numbers with the number of family members affected, the impact of drug trafficking is severely expanded. Let us say, for each addict, he has a spouse, a parent and two children. That means five people are affected − the addict himself and four family members. Multiplying 180 abusers a week by five, we get about 900 people affected. That is equivalent to about 30 platoons! If a person ran towards 30 platoons with a grenade, should not a lethal shot be fired to protect the 900 people?
We need tough drug laws to prevent the immense harm drug trafficking inflicts on Singaporeans. These families are psychologically crippled over weeks, months, years; slowly, insidiously.
Not only are the drug addict and his family affected by the actions of the drug trafficker, society is affected as well.
Drug addicts need increasing doses of drugs to feel normal or to feel the next high. As a result, many resort to crime to fund their addiction. With an increase in crime rate, the security and peaceful environment we enjoy and take for granted will become threatened.
It is for these reasons that I seek that the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA) be reviewed regularly so as to ensure that it contains the legal muscle it needs to deter the supply, that is, trafficking, and the demand, being the consumption − both elements of the drug offence.
I call for a regular overview of the MDA. Why?
Firstly, because of the spike in young drug abusers. The number of abusers arrested under the age of 30 has increased by about 20% since 2014. In 2014, the percentage of young abusers under the age of 30, compared to overall abusers, was 35.1%. In 2016, that percentage increased to 41.1%. Furthermore, in 2015 and 2016, the number of new drug abusers increased. Among the new drug abusers, close to two-thirds are below 30 years of age.
The second reason why I ask for a review of the MDA is that the supply of cannabis is on an upward trend. In 2014, 2015 and 2016, the amount of cannabis seized increased each year by 125%, 26% and 22% respectively. In fact, the provisional statistics for January to June 2016 showed that the amount of cannabis seized in that six-month period was almost the same amount for the entire year of 2015.
Another statistic of concern is the number of penal drug admissions. In 2011, the number of penal drug admissions decreased to an all-time low of 1,742. In 2012, the number jumped by almost 42% to 2,472. This was the highest in six years.
Drug trafficking looks to have increased recently. The reply to a Parliamentary Question in September last year seems to suggest that trafficking has increased from 2011 and that the present figures remain higher than in 2011.
Madam, why is it important to continue having harsh, muscular laws and having a regular review of the MDA? Because drugs kill lives. They destroy futures. Let me share how with real examples, examples similar to families each elected Member of this House has served, examples which show the destruction that drugs bring.
For several years, in the constituency I serve, we helped a grandmother raise her grandson. Her daughter got hooked on drugs and spent time in prison. On top of her work as a cleaner, this devoted grandmother saw to her grandson's needs. Her grandson would often visit us. When he did well in school, we all celebrated. When things got tough, we encouraged. A bond has been built. But there is a missing link − his mother. Why? Drugs. When his mother was going to be released from the DRC, I wrote a letter to her personally. We wanted her to know what her own mother had to go through because of her drug addiction. We wanted her not to return to her old ways. In that letter, we offered her a job − a job that was near her house. We wanted her to be able to support her family and be there for her son. In the end, she thanked us but found somewhere else to work.
I give another real life story. Just five days ago, at my MPS on Friday night, I met an aged grandmother. She requested assistance. Why? Because she was caring for her grandchild. Why? Because her son and her daughter-in-law are in prison. Why? Drug addiction. The grandmother needs to take care of her grandchild's schooling, sustenance.
Let us be completely clear. Drug traffickers destroy lives and such destruction can be inter-generational.
So, I ask this House, do we let the supply of drugs overtake us? Or do we fight back? Do we allow drugs to destroy the lives of Singaporeans or do we say, \"No, not on our shores!\"?
Therefore, Madam, I propose that we re-examine whether the MDA needs a further review to ensure that it is constantly equipped with the legal arsenal and muscle it requires to deter the supply of drugs into Singapore. It is suggested that we revisit the law regularly. Through such regular reviews, the benefits and possible gaps in existing laws should become more evident.
One aspect to re-examine under a review is whether the law, as presently encapsulated in the MDA, can be better calibrated to address the harmfulness of newer drugs or drug combinations. For example, drugs are often mixed with contaminants or with other illicit drugs. These contaminants may affect the potency and addictiveness of the drugs. One recent example in America was heroin mixed with elephant tranquiliser. This potent mixture caused many to overdose and die. This contamination is driven by greed − more effect, with lower cost to produce.
A common harmful contaminant is meat tenderiser. The meat tenderiser, which is normally used to \"pre-digest\" meat to make it tender, is mixed with the drug such that it \"dissolves muscle and flesh\" when administered.
Essentially, we need to look at the detrimental effects of drugs in the raw, in the flesh and without rose-tinted glasses. There is a drug called \"krokodil\". It is named after the side-effects, crocodile-like skin − green, scaly and bumpy. If it misses the vein, it eats the flesh. It has been described as destroying \"body tissue the way battery acid eats through plastic\". Yet, this harmful drug made of codeine mixed with lighter fluid, industrial cleaning oil or the like, is three times cheaper to produce than heroin.
This brings into sharp focus why we need to do all we can to ensure that drugs do not get a foothold, in particular. Hence, the MDA should not only be focused on the weight of the drugs trafficked but should also give due consideration to the potential harmfulness of the drug when mixed or cocktailed with available consumables.
The second suggestion is that we would need quicker incorporation of new drugs into the First Schedule. The \"First Schedule\" should be \"flexible\" enough to quickly incorporate new drugs not previously outlawed, especially since new concoctions are constantly being attempted at by syndicates.
This slide illustrates that it is important that our laws be able to keep up with New Psychoactive Substances (NPS). What is currently done by the Fifth Schedule which allows for \"restricted circulation\" is a good measure, but it is imperative for effective control of addiction that the move to make such substances \"First Schedule\" be prompt, that is, be prompt enough to frame a drug trafficking charge against it.
The third suggestion is to insert a new provision in the MDA, creating a unique offence of sale of drugs over the Internet, attracting a higher penalty.
Most commonly described as the Dark Net, more people are turning to the Internet to get their next fix.
Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean also mentioned at the 5th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Drugs that \"illicit dealers… used the Dark Net to attract new drug abusers. Our agencies have worked hard to catch such abusers and hold them responsible for their actions.\"
The number of people arrested for buying drugs and drug-related paraphernalia online increased significantly from 30 in 2015, to 201 in 2016. That is a 570% increase over the span of one year.
Due to the increasing number of youths experimenting with drugs and the huge potential of the Internet to facilitate sales to youth, we should consider specifically how an aggravated offence can be legislated where the trafficker uses any element of social media or the Internet to entice or procure sales.
For example, an aggravated offence could be created where any act in the series of acts leading up to the eventual sale or potential sale of the drug was performed through the medium of the Internet or any social media platform. This may deter drug traffickers from using the Internet to advertise sales, potentially leading to reduced drug sales to youth.
The fourth suggestion is to make an offence the act of recruiting, via the Internet, to traffic drugs using the Internet and to bring that new offence under an enhanced punishment regime similar to that for recruiting young offenders.
The fifth suggestion is to have another tier of punishment for drug traffickers who possess the aggravating factors of (a) targeting persons under 30 years and (b) using the Internet.
The sixth suggestion is that of defining Internet broadly in the MDA to include websites, social media platforms and applications. In particular, messaging applications, such as WhatsApp, often used by the younger generation, should be covered.
Madam, I have completed the first part of my speech of why we need muscular drug laws to deter drug trafficking in Singapore and into Singapore. Now, I move on to the second point which is why we need to invest in rehabilitation so as to reduce the recidivism rate.
Stopping the supply is one aspect. Helping those who have fallen into drug addiction to get out of it is just as important.
There are several reasons why rehabilitation is important.
First, we must distinguish between addiction and trafficking. Drug trafficking laws need to be tough − deterrence is the main reason for punishment. This is only right for a premeditated, greed-driven crime.
Drug addicts need to be rehabilitated. They need to get out of the clutches of drug addiction. Yes, it is right that we have the Drug Rehabilitation Centre to rehabilitate our drug addicts. Let us remember − it is the Drug Rehabilitation Centre. We have already chosen to subscribe to the philosophy of rehabilitation. For those six months to three years, we have chosen to take custody of the drug addict in order to rehabilitate him.
It is only proper that we give the drug addict the best shot at turning over a new leaf.
Each addict saved means another husband, wife or child saved. Each addict saved means one more valuable contributor to our society. Each addict saved is a life saved − a life saved from misery, self-harm, lost potential. Madam, with your leave, may I ask for the distribution of the handouts?
Mdm Speaker:\tYes, please. [Handouts were distributed to hon Members.]
Mr Christopher de Souza: In order to rehabilitate well, we need to look surgically at our recidivism rate. The current recidivism rate for DRC is 30.1%, almost one in three of our inmates is coming back through the door within the first two years. Furthermore, each year, more than half of the drug abusers arrested were repeat drug abusers.
In 2011, a Task Force on Drugs was formed to \"tackle the drug abuse situation.\" Through its recommendations, the Singapore Prison Service implemented the Community Rehabilitation Centre (CRC) and the Enhanced Drug Rehabilitation Regime. These are all good initiatives and recommendations, but there is a lot more we can do.
Rehabilitation is, by its very nature, always a work in progress and I acknowledge the good work the Prison Service does in this regard. I also accept that there must also be a strong desire on the part of the drug addict to want to rehabilitate. I hope the following suggestions could be taken into consideration, with the mind of developing and adding to the Prison's good work.
The first suggestion is to increase access to effective rehabilitation for lower risk inmates. We should make full use of the window of opportunity while an addict is low-risk. Lower risk inmates have a higher chance of recovery. If that opportunity is not grasped and he did not have the best chance for rehabilitation, he will soon relapse. By then, it may be too late.
This is even more important for young drug abusers. Youthful years are meant to develop a good circle of friends and good peer support. That is why investing in the rehabilitation of young drug abusers is so important. But how can we do this effectively for the young drug abuser, as well as the older drug abuser? The answer lies in reconditioning.
A key method of reconditioning is pleasure replacement. When drugs are used to escape from difficult situations, it is important for rehabilitation that ex-drug addicts experience that there are other healthier ways of getting relief. For instance, physical activity and games help re-write the circuit and show that, yes, there can be relief outside drugs. Such activities also foster motivation through goal-setting and working towards a drug-free life.
One example is Phoenix Multisport in the United States, where recovering, like-minded drug abusers who want to stay sober do exhilarating physical activities together. The idea is pleasure replacement − replacing the pleasure derived from drugs with more healthy activities. We should study to see how such models can be transferred into a DRC setting.
With that, let me move on to reintegration, which is another key factor in lowering recidivism, which is a key component for rehabilitation. In the DRC, counselling on resisting the temptation to take drugs is head knowledge. But once the addict is released, he is plunged into a world where the temptations lurk about. The ex-drug addict needs to have counsellors available to him, post-release, to help him.
One such support mechanism is the Serigaya Methamphetamine Relapse Prevention Program (SMARPP), a work-book based counselling exercise, in Japan. Research on the effectiveness of the Japanese programme found that it \"increases a drug abuser's awareness of problems, their motivation for treatment and serves as preparation for group therapy.\"
In 2016, researchers attempted to develop a web-based version, which included videos adapted from cognitive behavourial therapy, websites linked to addiction support services and self-monitoring colour-coded calendars, to enhance motivation. Would the good Minister consider issuing a self-teaching workbook to each ex-drug addict upon release as a resource to help him resist the urge to do drugs?
Family, Madam, plays an important role in the reintegration of an ex-drug addict. Families need to be equipped and empowered to fulfil their roles as the anchors they can be. A proactive family may ask these questions: how best to help the ex-offender? How best to interact with him? What to watch out for? Families need to be equipped with the answers. There may be shock, denial, hurt, a sense of betrayal. But, ultimately, who would not want their husband, father, son, or wife, mother or daughter back? Many would.
The suggestion here is that DRC inmates be given more visitation time to facilitate the reintegration process. Family therapy is an initiative that could be looked into seriously within the DRC, attended by the inmates and their families.
Another idea is for more families to attend family-focused workshops, like those conducted in 2006 by the Family Resource Centre. Topics were based on inmates' needs, as identified by their personal supervisors in prison, including parental, marital and reintegration issues. The suggestion here is to have a larger number of joint sessions involving the inmate and his family.
For those with little or no family support, positive peer support can come in the way of Community Befrienders. The volunteer's role is important, especially since a new social network is critical for disengaging from the web of drugs.
Madam, let me now move on to the last and third topic − the third part of the Motion, which is, preventing a drug-tolerant culture from setting root in Singapore.
While muscular laws and effective rehabilitation are needed to combat the supply and demand elements of drug offences, we must also ensure that the overall national attitude or the cultural perception towards drugs remains strongly anti-drugs. We, as a society, must view drug trafficking and consumption with suspicion and disapproval. We cannot afford to slip into a pro-drug culture. We must remain, strongly, anti-drugs.
Many countries have lost the war on drugs. In a defeatist narrative, these countries now proclaim the usefulness of \"soft\" drugs, such as cannabis. Such a narrative paints these soft drugs as harmless. Such spiel may sound attractive, but what it really indicates is that those countries are on the back foot in their already-weak fight against drugs. That narrative, though false, has permeated through the globe, such that a culture more tolerant to recreational drug use is setting root. Singapore could fall prey to such a culture. We cannot allow that to happen.
We should reveal drugs for what they really are − harmful, addictive, destructive. The drug endemic in America is a prime example of what we should not allow to happen on our shores. There, drugs are not just tolerated but also promoted. Drug usage becomes the new normal. Lives are wasted, potential is wasted − all because of higher tolerance, which blossoms into the acceptance of a drug culture.
In 2015, in the United States, overdoses on prescription and illicit opioids multiplied by four times since 1999. Since the legislation of cannabis, there has been an increase in traffic accidents and fatal traffic accidents in Washington state and Colorado, which have legalised cannabis. Please look, in particular, at the line that extends all the way to 2015 − the percentage of traffic accidents in Washington where drivers have been tested positive for the active ingredient in cannabis. That has steadily increased since 2012 and has climbed rapidly upward. This is something we should not risk.
The prevalence of drug abuse has also impacted the economy of Colorado. Large businesses now have to recruit out-of-state residents to find employees that can pass a pre-employment drug test. As a pre-construction company told The New York Times, \"to find a roofer or a painter that can pass a drug test is unheard of.\"
This slide shows an increase in calls, relating to cannabis, to the Poison Centre in Washington state. This means that even with restrictions on buying cannabis, more people unintentionally ingest cannabis. This is true even among those under 20.
Colorado is also inflicted by this trend. In 2016, the Journal of the American Medical Association Pediatrics reported that \"the rates of cannabis\" exposure in young children, many of them toddlers, have increased 150% − this is for toddlers − since 2014 when recreational marijuana products went on the market legally.\" All of these are totally preventable. Most of the time, the cannabis came from family or friends. Attractive edible cannabis caused half of the known exposures. The pictures on this slide show edible cannabis and they give you an idea of how children can be so easily attracted to it. Do we want to expose our children to this on our shores? We need to expose these pro-drug lies for what they really are − out for profit.
The pro-drug camp wraps lies in a palatable way, with phrases like − \"right to do recreational drugs\", \"victimless crime\", \"harm reduction.\" The shift in drug policy around the world is not driven by truth about drugs. Rather, in my view, a drug-tolerant culture is fuelled by those who stand to profit. Cannabis is touted to be \"the fastest growing industry in America\". It is projected to grow from $3.4 billion in 2015 to more than $10 billion by 2019.
Harm reduction is a subversive slogan that calls for a permissive attitude towards drugs. It is touted as pre-emptive, not punitive, not deterrent. But in reality, it is a mere surrender on the war on drugs − it was exceptionally difficult in those countries to substantially stem the supply of drugs into their borders. This must never happen in Singapore.
How do we ensure this? The first suggestion is that we include clear and informative learning material in our MOE Science syllabus, which should detail the host of ills and harmful effects of experimenting with drugs. Make it examinable material. We need to start young and reinforce it regularly by putting it in the Primary and Secondary school syllabus. Students have to be convinced. They need credible answers. We must address counter-arguments.
Another important aspect of exposing propaganda is not just telling the truth, but also teaching how to find the truth. This is especially important as young people increasingly turn to the Internet as a source of information. Hence, it is important that students be equipped with the skills to (a) find credible sources of information and (b) be alert to the rhetoric used by the pro-drug camp. Pro-drug rhetoric says that drugs will solve problems, but is there another solution? People need to know that there is another solution. They need to be shown this.
Started in Sweden, Mentor International, \"provide(s) support, best practices and evidence-based mentoring programs that offer young people the inspiration, empowerment and motivation they need to make healthy life choices and view their futures more positively.\" The idea behind it is for students to have a guide to navigate through life − this increases the propensity to stay clear of drugs.
Parents play a big role in drug prevention. There are two things that people, generally, and parents, in particular, in my view, need to know even before they are ready to hear any information they need to on drugs. They need to know that: (a) it is a matter that they should be concerned about; and (b) that they matter − that parents matter.
Essentially, family is key. Where the family is dysfunctional, a good peer group is key. If no good peer group exists, then the at-risk youth needs to equip himself with ways to disbelieve that drugs are good. I have given some examples of how the at-risk youth can equip himself. Ultimately, the anti-drug culture must win the war against pro-drug propaganda. The mindshare of Singapore's youth is a key battleground − the pro-drug camp must be defeated there.
Madam, in conclusion, we should fortify the arsenal and weaponry of Singapore in her fight against drugs. We should be at liberty to use the best weaponry for this crucial battle on our shores.
We can build and share a common prosperity or we can disintegrate into a common poverty of spirit, a potential social abyss, which drugs can bring, insidiously, stealthily. The choice is ours. I hope, today, this House will fight against the pro-drug propaganda.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): Mdm Speaker, I stand in support of this Motion. The drug scourge in Singapore, while numbers are relatively low compared to many developed countries, still remains a cause for concern.
According to our Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) 2016 report on the drug situation in Singapore, there are two trends that merit serious concerns.
First, the number of new drug abusers arrested in 2016 increased by 3% compared to the year before. In 2015, there were 1,309 new drug abusers arrested. This number increased to 1,347 in 2016. Almost two-thirds of these new abusers are below 30 years old. In addition, out of the total of 3,245 drug abusers arrested in 2016, slightly over 40% of them are below 30 years old.
Second, CNB has also seen an increase in online drug peddling last year. The number of people arrested for buying drugs and drug-related items through online means increased significantly from 30 in 2015 to 201 in 2016. This is a five-and-a-half time increase in numbers. The majority of them are between the ages of 20 and 39.
These numbers are worrying, especially when a survey conducted by the National Council Against Drug Abuse (NCADA) in 2016 found that young people below the age of 30 were more open-minded towards drugs, compared to similar findings in 2013.
Such liberal attitudes towards drug use cannot be tolerated. The harmful effects of drugs may not be fully understood by the young people who are using drugs, who may believe that recreational use of drugs is well within their control and that they will not be addicted to it, or that there will not be any damaging long-term effects on their physical or mental well-being.
While CNB may have stepped up its youth outreach efforts through the use of technology and social media, a more targeted approach framework needs to be found to specifically reach out to Primary and Secondary school students and students studying in our post-Secondary institutions, starting with those who are in their early to mid-teens.
My 18-year-old son, who is studying in a local polytechnic, shares with me about two of his friends who are not just smoking cigarettes, but also taking drugs. They are quite nonchalant about it and seem to think it is no big deal. They even offered my son to smoke weed or join them in taking a puff to get high, to which he sensibly and thankfully declined.
One of his friends, also a polytechnic student, smokes weed or marijuana in the polytechnic itself. Another of his friends is an ITE student who was caught for smoking weed. While he is undergoing follow-up checks through routine urine tests, he continues to take synthetic weed, which he claims cannot be detected through the urine tests.
While I must state that these are only two of his many friends who otherwise lead drug-free and healthy lifestyles, I am calling for CNB, the Police, the Health Promotion Board and our Institutes of Higher Learning to go all out to stop such drug use and abuse in our educational institutions, even if the numbers are small and seemingly insignificant.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Charles Chong) in the Chair]
This outreach, engagement and targeted public education against drug use and abuse should also be done concurrently with the fight against smoking. To me, the addiction to smoking and drug use is one and the same, and should be done in tandem, since the smoking habit seems to create a propensity towards smoking or taking drugs as well. In addition, I hope CNB and Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) can find ways to curb online peddling of drugs more effectively and take tougher enforcement actions on those who are buying drugs online. Never mind that the amount of drugs is small, and never mind that the perpetrators are committing it for the first time, but that they are young. The message must be clear. We do not tolerate drug trafficking and use. At this point, Deputy Speaker, Sir, please allow me to continue in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The war on drugs is a joint effort by all of us. We need pervasive approaches so as to reach out to and educate our young on the damaging and irreversible effects of both smoking and drug use. Support and assistance from influential personalities and positive role models that our young look up to, strengthen this approach. I understand that local personalities, such as Taufik Batisah and Irfan Fandi, have joined in this fight against drug abuse by offering their time and energy. I look forward to more support from such personalities and positive role models for our young.
At the same time, support from home is also important in shaping positive mindsets among our youths in this fight against drug abuse. We need parents to be positive role models for their children − not just by advising them to stay drug-free or smoke-free − but to also role model positive behaviour and healthy lifestyles, free from addiction of any sort.
This reminds me of one of my residents. Ms Lydia is still relatively young, barely 40 years old. But each time I met her, she looked haggard and worried, as though she was over 50 years old. Her husband is incarcerated because of drug abuse even though he is already in his 50s. And this is not the first time he had been in prison because of drugs. They have three children − two studying in primary school and one who is three years old.
Throughout the time Ms Lydia is married to her husband, she did not work and depended on him for financial support. With her husband's recent incarceration, Ms Lydia finds herself with no source of income. We tried our best to help her by providing her with temporary financial assistance. At the same time, we also helped Ms Lydia find part-time work and get a place for her youngest child in a childcare centre so that Ms Lydia can work. Although Ms Lydia is a strong woman who remains undaunted, the social and emotional impact on her and her children, who are now unable to see their father, is quite deep and cannot be easily forgotten. Their family relationship has definitely been affected.
Support from the family is much needed, not just when our children or family member have succumbed to drug addiction or smoking, but even before they become a slave to addiction. Developing positive habits and a healthy lifestyle − such as doing sports as a family, spending time on a common hobby with family members and close friends, or by volunteering and doing meaningful work for our community − will help each and every one of us to keep addiction at bay.
(In English): I must admit that the drug scourge in Singapore is not isolated or that only our local agencies have to step up in terms of outreach, education and enforcement. The drug scourge is certainly a global one.
What is equally worrying is the callous claims by some pro-cannabis and pro-marijuana proponents that small amounts of cannabis use is perfectly alright, or that there are medical conditions, such as glaucoma or Parkinson's disease, that can be managed through daily doses of cannabis or marijuana or ganga, whatever name it is known as. We would also need the help of medical professionals and research experts to verify such claims and, more importantly, to curb the incorrect perception that small doses of drug use on a daily basis are perfectly fine.
Sir, the drug situation is far from rosy and the fight against drug use and abuse is far from over. We would need all parties to come together to do this to help ourselves and our future generations − parents, schools, the Government, popular personalities − all have important roles to play. We need to do this together.
Getting rid of an addiction is certainly not easy. It takes a lot of courage, discipline and inner strength and, of course, support from our loved ones. But it is not impossible.
When it comes to addiction: \"I can choose to let it define me; confine me; outshine me; or I can choose to move on and leave it behind me.\" Thank you, Sir. I support the Motion.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Exempted Business","subTitle":"Motion","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the proceedings on the business set down on the Order Paper for today be exempted at this day's sitting from the provisions of Standing Order No 2.\" – [Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien] (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Strengthening Singapore's Fight Against Drugs","subTitle":"Debate resumed","sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mr Deputy Speaker, like most Singaporeans of my generation, having been born here and socialised to uncompromising anti-drug messages throughout my growing years, I have not experienced the reality commonplace in other countries where drugs are available to teenagers in schools, or in bars in university campuses without too much difficulty. Singapore's small size, tough laws and the dedication of the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) to their mission have made this possible.
But Singapore is an outlier. The reality of governments in other parts of the world is very different. At best, this has to do with being a larger polity and the difficulty in ensuring that the writ of the state extends across hundreds and thousands of kilometres, different political cultures, different social circumstances and different norms that govern individual freedoms and liberties. At worst, it is a self-evident reality that the world-wide war against drugs has failed.
Whichever perspective one takes, these realities have precipitated a new and different approach now taken globally to deal with the drug problem. A major plank of this new approach calls for the legalisation of drug use, particularly in medical marijuana on health grounds and, in some jurisdictions, the legalisation of recreational drugs per se.
As many Americans went to the polls in 2016 to decide between Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton as their next President, a parallel vote took place on the legalisation of marijuana. This resulted in nine states in the US, including California, Florida, Massachusetts, passing laws that allowed for either regulated medical or recreational marijuana use. Today, 44 states in the US have legalised some form of drug use. In 2001, an Economist article titled \"The Case for Legalisation\" argued that a legal market for drugs would be the best guarantee that drug-taking would be no more dangerous than smoking and drinking, even as it acknowledged that legalisation would not be easy. Fast forward just about 15 years and the first sentence of a piece on the legalisation of drugs in the same publication went like this: \"The argument for the legalisation of cannabis has been won.\" In so far as global trends are concerned, the movement to legalise drugs is now effectively mainstream.
Mr Deputy Speaker, there is a belief that the movement towards legalisation is a western phenomenon. But such an assumption would be wrong. Closer to home, attitudes are shifting, too, mainly with a view to get a better handle on the drug problem and to undermine organised crime. The Senior Vice-Chairman of the Malaysian Crime Prevention Council, Tan Sri Lee Lam Thye, in a piece titled \"Consider Less Severe Punishment\" in the New Straits Times last year, noted that despite punitive laws against illicit drugs, capital punishment and spending millions to address the problem, the number of addicts in Malaysia was growing. He called on the Malaysian authorities to consider \"the road less travelled\" and to decriminalise drug use and possession and to treat drug addiction as a medical problem. The writer also reflected on countries like Portugal, which adopted less punitive policies towards drug possession more than a decade earlier and, in doing so, had not experienced any significant increase in drug use, drug-related harm or crime, compared to countries with punitive laws.
Separately, late last year, the Thai Cabinet approved the proposal to allow hemp, a plant which is part of the cannabis family, but with lesser amounts of the psychoactive substance tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) to be grown as a cash crop as part of a project to use narcotic plants for medicinal purposes.
Prior to the Cabinet decision, Thailand's Justice Minister General Paiboon Koomchaya was quoted in the Thai media as saying that he was firm in his aim to remove marijuana from the narcotics drugs list and to treat it as a medicinal herb.
The movement towards the gradual acceptance of some drugs, chiefly cannabis, for medical purposes is a powerful catalyst in the case for the legalisation of drugs. Even if medical authorities have not ruled definitively in this area and medical practitioners argued that there are realistic alternatives to medical marijuana, nevertheless, an international industry has already taken form and a stronger lobby is likely to follow.
Late last year, the international New York Times reported that Israel has been a leading player in medical marijuana research as early as the 1960s and that 25,000 of its citizens today hold permits to use medical marijuana to ease symptoms of cancer, epilepsy and other diseases, with the number expected to grow rapidly. In fact, the Guardian has reported research in Israel will transform the medical marijuana industry into, and I quote, \"a serious endeavour of pharmaceutical research producing new strains and drugs able to alleviate the symptoms of cancer, Parkinson's disease, insomnia and other conditions.\" With the advances in technology, many Israeli companies are working to develop medicine that can deliver precise doses of THC so as to allegedly regulate its psychoactive effects, with the view to bring relief to those in chronic pain.
What is repeated around the world where fierce debates about legalisation are taking place and have taken place, is the emotionally powerful argument that medical marijuana has eased the suffering of those in pain. It is also fathomable that the research into medical marijuana will have a direct bearing on the use of recreational marijuana for which precise doses could also correspondingly be marketed as a safer means of drug consumption. To that end, a recent Business Monitor online article notes that with the growing legalisation of marijuana for recreational use, entirely new industries for consumer-related companies will be created, including transport and through social media. It assessed that while medical marijuana will be an important part of the market, recreational use of marijuana will create new opportunities for consumer industries, especially food and beverage, with derivatives of marijuana potentially added to beer, chocolates and candy.
What is likely to accelerate the legalisation of drugs worldwide is the potential of regulation and taxation, with recreational usage potentially effectively killing off the profits earned by drug cartels and moving them into state and corporate coffers. The challenge, of course, is setting the appropriate tax rate in many jurisdictions. I would hazard that the attraction of taxation may prove irresistible for those governments that have not been able to successfully keep drugs out of mainstream society in the same way Singapore has been able to.
What the global trends suggest, and I turn to the language in the Motion, is that Singapore will find it even more difficult to keep drugs out of the country and in the consciousness of our children and people, in view of the seismic cultural shifts in attitudes towards drug use for medical and recreational purposes in many jurisdictions around the world. Our tough laws will continue to serve as a deterrent for some drug traffickers but I am concerned we will find it increasingly difficult to persuade younger Singaporeans, particularly those who venture overseas for studies or business, about the dangers of drug abuse. The somewhat emotionally persuasive argument of medical marijuana in spite of a currently more established medical opinion will make this even harder.
At this point, Singapore can and should stick to its time-honoured position of a strong anti-drug policy, in view of the still evolving global environment, our unique circumstances and because we have been able to get a handle on the drug problem and successfully kept drugs out of our schools. However, with a large population of foreigners, many of whom are transient residents, living and working in Singapore, and a significant number of overseas Singaporeans who may have a very different cultural attitude towards drugs, the argument for a drug-free Singapore may also increasingly come under strain.
Nonetheless, we should and must begin preparing for a much tougher environment in the immediate term. This is not only if the research on medical marijuana turns decidedly positive for some reason. As drug syndicates are put out of business because of legalisation, some of them, some drug traffickers or abusers, may paradoxically choose to target Singapore from the confines of other countries if there is money to be made here. Those who will fall foul of our tough drug laws will not be the kingpins but the couriers, many of whom seek to make a quick buck.
We may also expect to see a rise in the number of marijuana abuses. In fact, a Facebook page titled \"Singapore cannabis awareness\" has already generated close to 4,000 likes. It makes a point to track changing norms about the legalisation of cannabis around the world, recently posting a story about the state of New South Wales in Australia funding the world's first clinical trial for the use of cannabis in alleviating chemotherapy inducing vomiting and nausea. This is not fake news, for such trials are indeed ongoing, but the practical effect of such developments around the world, I fear, will likely result in a more relaxed attitude towards the usage of cannabis.
The rise in the arrest of cannabis abusers, as reported in the CNB's drug situation report of 2016, may portend such a trend. For those who believe that a more permissive environment for recreational consumption of drugs in Singapore would not necessarily be hazardous, I would say, be careful what you wish for.
The research-based evidence is sobering. According to Lancet Psychiatry, in a 2015 article, which revealed annual and repeated cross-sectional surveys on medical marijuana laws and adolescent marijuana use in the US from 1991 to 2014, almost a 25-year period, it found territories which decriminalised illicit drugs or where the laws were generally permissive, saw an increase in drug abuse among teenagers and young adults. And that prospect, should there be arguments made about the drug tolerance regime in Singapore, is scary and wholly unwelcomed. As it stands, the argument for the legalisation of drugs in Singapore, in particular, is not compelling or persuasive at all.
To conclude, Mr Deputy Speaker, strict laws can only do so much, even if they host a deterrent effect. Stepping up rehabilitation is the right thing to do. However, in view of the new global approach towards drugs, the Government will have to significantly step up education about the slippery slope of drug abuse and drug abuse per se.
In my ward of Eunos in Aljunied GRC in years past, I have worked with the Central Narcotics Bureau and conducted preventive education talks at our local mosque with the permission of the mosque community and I thank them for their support.
At schools and tertiary institutions, in particular, we will have to significantly step up preventive education and to prepare our children and young adults for the world of tomorrow where access to drugs will be more commonplace than ever before and in our mindshare. The Government would also have to focus more squarely on the permissive attitudes that are hardening in favour of supposedly softer drugs like cannabis. There is nothing soft about cannabis. It is harmful to one's health and not every citizen will have ready access or support from family members to rehabilitative resources. As it is usually the case with illegal drugs, the poor and the low-income will be the hardest hit. We must all say no to drugs.
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of this Motion. I remember, many years ago, as a young junior doctor, looking after a young mother, whose life had been ruined by drugs.
She had been abusing her drugs, injecting herself. Germs got into her blood. Germs went to her heart, eating away one of her heart valves, so her heart could not pump properly. The germs from the injection continued to spread, to her lungs and the rest of her body. That is what drug abuse did to her. A young mother, young children, their future taken away. That is what drugs did to them.
Mr Deputy Speaker, she had no second chance. The drugs did not give her a chance. The person who introduced her to drug abuse, he did not give her a chance. Every person who continued to sell her illegal drugs for abuse, they never gave her a chance. She had no second chance.
And we can also look to other countries like America, to see the extent of the problem. If we look at the statistics from the US National Institute on Drug Abuse, in the year 2015, there were over 50,000 deaths from drug overdose in America.
It has been getting worse over time. In America, the death rate from overdose has more than doubled from 2002 to 2015. This does not even count the rate of drug-related crime: gang violence, robbery, murder, crimes under the influence.
If we look at countries that have taken a soft approach, there is no straightforward way for these countries to roll back the situation because drugs have become so entrenched. You can see it in the United States. You can see it in parts of the West. You can see it in many countries around the world.
And this has deep lessons for us in Singapore because policy choices at the beginning can set the tone for decades afterwards. What we decide today shapes the course of a generation to come. It means a bad choice, an unwise choice, if it cannot be rolled back, will cast a very long shadow for what comes after, for our children and our grandchildren.
We need to care and that means we need to be careful when people call upon Singapore to be tolerant of drugs, to condone drugs. We need to care and we need to be careful when certain propagandists, when certain lobbyists put forward what they claim to be scientific evidence, we need to ask ourselves to evaluate these reports critically, ask ourselves who is funding the research, who stands to benefit from the so-called research. Is there a certain narrative or a certain conflict of interest when these lobbyists claim that drugs are safer; when they claim that harm should be reduced; when they take a stance that it is soft on drugs rather than hard on the dangers that they pose to our people and our children? Because tolerating drugs also means tolerating the harm that drugs do to Singaporeans' lives. It means tolerating the damage to families − husbands and wives, sons and daughters. So, we have to be careful. And it also means we have to care.
Mr Deputy Speaker, for Singaporeans whose lives have already been damaged by drugs, we have to bring hope, in particular, the hope of a future, especially for the children of parents whose lives have been damaged by drug abuse.
At my Meet-the-People Sessions, I have met young mothers, trying to find work − very difficult. Juggling looking after their children, trying to find a job, husband in prison because of drugs.
I have met middle-aged men, released from prison. Because their lives were blighted by drugs. Looking for employment, trying to rebuild their lives and families. Again, disadvantaged by drugs; drugs promoting inequality, poisoning families, damaging the next generation.
So, even as we take a tough stand to prevent drug peddlers poisoning our fellow Singaporeans and their families, we also need to look very carefully at how we can help these families recover, ensure their children still have a fair start in life. So that even as we protect our borders from the scourge of drugs, even as we protect our fellow Singaporeans, those hurt by drugs and their families still can find their way to a better future. I stand in support of this Motion.
Mr Kok Heng Leun (Nominated Member): Deputy Speaker, Sir, first, I would like to thank the hon Members who proposed this Motion. It has allowed me to learn a lot and to understand people on the drug issues. And I agree with the Members on the need to be even more proactive in dealing with drug problems in Singapore.
I would also like to pay tribute to officers in CNB for the work that they do in keeping Singapore safe. Our officers often place their personal safety on the line in the course of their work and I think we ought to put on record our appreciation for their sacrifice and bravery.
This Motion covers three important points but I will only address two of them. The first one on the Motion of applying tough laws to deter drug trafficking into Singapore. The second one would be my suggestion for rehabilitative work with drug offenders, traffickers and users alike.
Sir, the first point of this Motion proposes that this House calls on the Government to continue applying tough laws to deter drug trafficking into Singapore and, by that, it would include the retention of capital punishment for drug offences in the form that it presently takes.
First, let me state my position. I do not support the death penalty. It is against my own personal philosophy that I do not believe in a life for another life. I will not want to impose my moral position on this, but I think there are also issues with regard to this matter that I hope we can have more discourse on.
I agree that it is important to have tough laws, but I do not believe that capital punishment, as a demonstration of the tough laws and resolution to fight against drug problems, is something that I can support.
Sir, capital punishment, as we all know, when it takes place, cannot be remedied. Ian Callinan, a former Australian High Court Judge says, \"The criminal justice system is fallible. Mistakes occur. Any system that retains the death penalty will inevitably, even if infrequently, cause an innocent person to die. It is not within our capability to avoid the possibility of error. In my experience, the phenomenon of human fallibility is irrefutable and, in my view, must be accorded primacy when weighing the arguments in favour of, and against, the death penalty.\"
Sir, any criminal justice system in the world, however advanced, will make mistakes. It is not a question of having professional, honest and upright judges, Police officers, prosecutors or defence lawyers. However much trust we have in our system, however much faith we have in the people that operate our system, mistakes are unavoidable because humans do make mistakes and, sometimes, genuine mistakes.
In a capital case, once the execution takes place and the life of a person is terminated, any mistakes made cannot be corrected. The person's life is lost forever. And as the saying goes, \"You can release innocent people from prison, but you cannot release them from their graves\".
The criminal justice system has itself demonstrated that it is never 100% sure that the person it is sending to the gallows is, in fact, guilty. Secondly, because of the risk factors in the system, even with a very good and disciplined Police force that we have now, mistakes may happen.
In normal cases, our criminal justice system requires a person's guilt to be proven beyond reasonable doubt before he or she can be convicted and, in the context of capital cases, sentenced to death. The law has always made it clear that \"proof beyond reasonable doubt\" does not mean proof beyond all doubt. But because the death penalty is irreversible, nothing less than proof beyond all doubt would suffice if we are serious about ensuring that no innocent person is wrongfully executed.
Sir, if our judges themselves can disagree over the question of whether the accused persons in some cases were guilty or innocent, we have to ask ourselves whether we can be absolutely sure that we will always send the right people to the gallows. The answer to me is that, no, we cannot.
Just a few weeks ago, our Court of Appeal overturned the conviction of Mr Harven Segar, who was found guilty of drug trafficking by the High Court. But the Court of Appeal was not unanimous. Two of the three judges thought that the Court should acquit the accused, while the third judge thought otherwise.
On top of this, there are various procedures within the criminal process, which increases the probability of wrongful executions that can happen or may happen.
Firstly, a person charged for an offence of drug trafficking or importation is automatically presumed guilty, once the prosecution shows that the accused was merely in possession of the package containing the drugs. As a result, accused persons have to instead prove that they are innocent, and they have to do this without the resources available to the Police. As Prof Michael Hor has pointed out, \"where the presumption is employed there can be no doubt that an accused person can be found guilty and executed in the absence of proof beyond reasonable doubt\".
Prof Hor has also pointed out that where there is no access to counsel immediately upon arrest, which could affect the ability of the accused person to defend himself against a capital charge, especially since incriminatory statements obtained by the Police can form the sole basis of conviction, without corroborating or supporting evidence of any kind.
While there is, indeed, a rule that involuntary statements are inadmissible, proof of exactly what happened in the interrogation room and of exactly how statements are obtained depends entirely on witness testimony of the Police and the accused. There is no requirement of recording of any kind, even where no defence counsel is present.
Furthermore, what goes on during the investigation process is especially important because the statements of the co-accused persons can be used against the accused and can also form the sole basis of a conviction without corroborating evidence, even if the statements are subsequently retracted at the trial by the co-accused.
So, in Prof Hor's view: \"all these rules and practices taken together must at least cast some doubt on whether there is sufficient due process for the conduct of capital cases.\"
Sir, if every other advanced criminal justice system in the world has convicted the wrong person, there is no reason to think that Singapore is immune to the problem. Miscarriages of justice have been found in systems, such as Canada, Australia, Norway and many others. Why should we think the situation in Singapore is any different?
Of course, one may ask: have there been any proven cases? Sir, in my view maybe that is really not the right question. Maybe the right question is whether we should wait until someone is wrongfully executed before we decide to change our position.
I would like to speak on the humanity of the families of those executed and those who have their loved ones on death row. While we do not see it, the reality is that our criminal punishment, especially the death penalty, creates a new class of victims in the families of the death row inmates. These family members are innocent people. They found themselves having their loved ones taken away from them through no fault of their own. Most of them are mothers and sisters who have done all that they can to make a decent living for themselves and their families.
In a conversation with a former death row convict who was acquitted by our Court of Appeal, I was struck by the poignancy of how he described the impact of the death penalty on his family. He told me this, \"When you sentence me to death, you sentence my family to death too\".
Sir, I do not wish to play down the impact of drug abuse on family members of drug abusers. But just as it is important to recognise and address the impact of drugs on the families of drug abusers, I hope we also consider how capital punishment impacts the families of the condemned. Both groups of family members are equal victims in this process.
But if we cannot sufficiently show that the death penalty yields more than a marginal deterrence effect or provide any objective data and evidence, we also have to ask ourselves whether it is necessary, or indeed fair, for us to create a whole new class of victims by carrying out those punishments.
So, do we have good and conclusive data and information that can prove beyond doubt that the death penalty and, by extension, such tough laws, would deter drug trafficking.
In fact, Sir, it appears, and is accepted by CNB itself, that it is active enforcement, both internally as well as joint border operations by our efficient CNB, that remains the best strategy towards disrupting the activities of drug syndicates and in reducing the supply of drugs from entering our borders as much as possible.
Let us also not forget that the reality is that the ones who are being severely punished are largely the drug mules. Drug kingpins that operate beyond our borders, who are well sheltered through a complex network chain, are not going to be the ones personally affected by the harsh drug laws put in place and will continue to send individuals, who are often desperate, to supply drugs into our country.
As such, would the death penalty for drug trafficking yield only a slightly higher deterrent effect than alternative punishments?
Let us be clear here − drugs are a menace to our society and its use should be eliminated as much as possible. Let us also not ignore the fact that the question of drug use is not just a criminal justice issue but a social, political and economic one.
It is a question of the sufficiency of our social and economic structures to ensure that individuals have the social and economic means and support to enable them to lead a dignified and meaningful life such that there is little incentive for them to abuse drugs.
It is most telling when in 2015, out of the 1,400 individuals that were placed in the various drug rehabilitation centres (DRCs), 821 individuals had only Secondary school education, 308 individuals had only Primary school education and six individuals did not have any education at all.
Perhaps the profile of drug abusers might give us some indication that it is in the inadequacy and gaps in our social and economic institutions, rather than the failure of not having implemented more punitive punishment on drug consumption and drug trafficking that the problem lies.
Ultimately, the issue of supply needs to be addressed through the demand lens as well, which I agree with the Members. It goes without saying that if we are unable to effectively reduce the demand for drugs, the supply of drugs will continue to creep into our borders.
Sir, I agree that we must invest in the rehabilitation of drug addicts. I also want to raise another point − that rehabilitation should also be for drug traffickers and not just for the users.
We should also be mindful that many traffickers themselves battle addiction, poverty, unemployment and mental illnesses. In many cases, as recognised by our Courts, they are simply people driven to desperate measures to earn money for their families. They, too, are ordinary people who have fallen through the cracks and are equally capable of rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
Let me now speak of the rehabilitative work. Addiction is really very complex. It is not an illness that can be remedied through medication. It is mental, emotional and then it affects the physical being. Once, my company, Drama Box, did a work with inmates in a DRC. In fact, in the work there, what struck us most was their concern, the inmates' concern, of how to find a good support system when they move back to society. In one performance when we moved the play out of the DRC and had it performed by performance actors, an audience member from the public shared his experience of how he helped his relative out of the drug problem. He sent this relative who just left the DRC to work in a logging firm in Brunei, deep in the forest. Over there, the relative learned about discipline which took him away at the same time from his previous social circle. When the relative came back to Singapore three years later, he had enough money to start his business.
The rehabilitative process is a very, very long one.
Visual artist Ms Shirley Soh, who worked with some women drug offenders in her Seeing (from) The Other, a work for the Singapore Biennale 2013, noted this, and I quote, \"The most important challenging work with the women inmates was to encourage self- expressions in discovering their own stories of growth, change, inspiration and agency that were equally crucial for these women, many of whom had very low self-esteem and were often poorly educated.\"
At the end of the process, Shirley noted, \"Ultimately, what surprised the women inmates was how much the art process was about life and their own life experience and aspirations that were worthy of sharing with the outside world.\"
I saw a performance performed by inmates in the prison centre just last year. It was one of the most beautiful performances I had ever seen. The sincerity and commitment, but importantly, when you look at the faces and hear the voices of these inmates, when they first appear on stage, slightly embarrassed but as the performance went on, you know that the experience of working on the performance had made them stronger, more confident, more aware of themselves.
According to Ms Peggy Ferroa, the Arts Educator who worked with them, \"Inmates on the programme spend at least six hours a day on week days rehearsing, planning ahead for performances or reflecting. If their minds are occupied with things that require concrete outcomes that they know they can do well in, it is likely that they spend less time thinking of ways to beat the system. When their time is meaningfully spent and they are able to reach their personal goals, they gain confidence and start to think about what they can do for others. Some inmates in the programme have come up with educational workshops using drama for other inmates.\"
Yes, Arts is powerful in helping the rehabilitative process, of building that resilience in them; to face change, to make change, to be the change themselves. For this to happen, it really needs the Prison Service to be able to invite more of these works. I hope we can look at more of such co-operation as proposed by fellow Members, and, of course, managing the process to allow artists to work with these inmates.
I would like to stress that it is not about making them an artist, so that they can get a skill. Of course, if they are very talented and want to do so, we will be so happy to have more additions to our artistic and creative community. But the programme builds very important soft skills, as well as resilience, which will serve them well when they go back to society. These programmes must not be short workshops but sustainable ones that would focus on the process.
Finally, let me be clear again, Sir, my position on the death penalty is not a dogmatic one. It is not cast in stone and, just as I hope Members who disagree with me would keep an open mind in this discourse, I, in turn, promise to keep an open mind to any new arguments or evidence that my hon friends and other members of society may bring forward. I sincerely hope that the Government would do more to facilitate a more informed public discourse on this subject. I hope to continue this conversation with Members in this House and with my fellow Singaporeans at large.
Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson): Deputy Speaker, I would like to first share some stories which I have come to observe and witness first-hand while serving the community. The first story was when I was serving as a grassroots leader in Ulu Pandan. I remember I was still a tertiary student in my second year in University and I was at a Meet-the-People-Session (MPS). It was a very eye-opening experience for me in general but there was this one story that I will always remember and have repeatedly shared.
One night, a young mother came with her children, very young. They were all crying. They were crying because they were hungry. The family had not the financial means, the money, to buy the daily supplies that they needed; that is because the husband, the father of the young children, was a drug addict; he could not hold down jobs, could not even start a job. The young mother, because of her young children, had no choice but to stay around to take care of them. She could not go out to work and, yet, because of the circumstances, they had no savings, no income, no nothing. They managed to somehow make their way, probably by borrowing money, to the MPS to ask for help because of the bills, the arrears, the debts that they had built up.
Fellow volunteers and I were very struck by this. Some of the volunteers immediately took the kids to the McDonald's outlet nearby to buy them a simple meal, so that they can have a full stomach. The rest, some of us stayed back to write letters of appeal and try to find different ways to help her solve her financial distress.
At one point, the then Member of Parliament of Ulu Pandan, none other than Dr Vivian Balakrishnan himself, made a point and I also remember this, that we can give them as much help as we can but we can never be real fathers or real husbands to them. That was something that I walked away with, thinking about it.
As the Government, as a society, there are many things that we can do to help them but, in the end, if someone has been taken down by drugs because drugs have poisoned this person, this person is no longer functioning normally, what we see is a debilitating effect on the innocent lives of people around them, their loved ones, the young ones. This was a very sobering instance. To date, it is something that still sticks with me.
Even within the current community that I serve, I have also met quite a number of drug abusers. A number of them, at least two men I have met, after abusing drugs, even though they are now back in the community, they still suffer psychosis. They are unable to be self-reliant, they are unable to hold down jobs, they have to rely on their siblings or their elderly parents, really aged parents, to still help them, to subsist them. Again, we try to give them financial assistance but there is only so much that we can do. Here we are, we see two able-bodied men basically unable to do anything more productive than just living the days out.
As shared by hon Member Mr Christopher de Souza, we have all seen the photos and the videos that went viral sometime last year in the United States where young toddlers were left to fend for himself or herself at the backseat of the car because the parents were overdosed on drugs. Another one, a little toddler, just sitting next to her mother who had had collapsed because of heroin overdose; just crying, so lonely, so helpless.
As a parent and as any responsible parent in this House and outside of this House, we can all agree that such scenes are simply heartbreaking and we would not want to see it on our own children or, for that matter, on any other child out there because we feel for them. These are real stories of how drugs destroy the lives of those who abuse them and of the innocent people around them.
Illicit drugs remain a scourge of all societies. In the 2016 World Drug Report published by the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, it was estimated that one in 20 adults, or a quarter of a billion people between the ages of 15 and 64 years, used at least one drug in the year 2014 alone.
This is an alarming figure. Drugs never just affect the abuser alone. It is like a voracious vortex pulling family members and the community in a downward spiral. Real harm is inflicted upon the abuser, his family and the wider community. In fact, I can never really understand how the choice of certain individuals in wanting to use illicit drugs can be allowed to destroy the lives and future of so many innocent people out there.
Beyond this, drug abuse and addiction also impose a high cost to the economy, estimated at close to $200 billion annually by the National Institute of Drug Abuse. This includes costs related to crime, loss of work productivity and healthcare expenditures. From an economic perspective, a drug-tolerant society is too high a cost for any society to bear.
We know that drugs destroy families in drug-tolerant countries. Many people started experimenting with illicit drugs to satisfy their curiosity towards the perceived thrill and exhilaration. Often, it is also a result of peer pressure. However, because of the insidious nature of such addictive drugs, users who thought they were just using drugs recreationally may find themselves unable to escape addiction.
Worse, the diminishing effects of illicit drug abuse drives the abuser to consume a greater amount each time just to achieve that same euphoric sensation. And if they do not get that \"fix\", they suffer terrible withdrawal symptoms. This means that more and more money is needed to finance the drug habit. This can lead to financial exhaustion and, more tragically, death from drug overdose.
It is not uncommon to hear the sad plight of families when the sole breadwinner becomes entangled with illicit drug and is addicted. I described one earlier. We have heard many in this House.
Sometimes, families of drug abusers find themselves trapped in huge debt taken to feed the abuser's drug habit. The families are constantly harassed by creditors and, more heartbreakingly, families get broken up.
The most pitiful victims are none other than children. The United States is a drug-tolerant country. Because of that, over 2.2 million children live with a parent who is dependent on illicit drugs. This is 2.2 million lives that we are talking about. Harrowing to imagine this happening in Singapore. If we are not careful, such heartwrenching scenes as the ones that we have described about toddlers being left alone to fend for themselves, or even like the little toddler in pink pyjamas sitting there crying next to her mother who had collapsed, will become commonplace in Singapore.
Singapore is not invulnerable. Illicit drugs can creep in insidiously and poison young lives. Hon Member Mr Christopher de Souza shared a lot of statistics on drugs and the situation of drugs in Singapore and how drug use among youths is at risk of creeping up further.
Youths are especially vulnerable because, at an adolescent age, they are still developing judgement and decision-making skills. Some get the wrong impression that taking drugs can help to enhance athletic performance or ease anxiety problems. Some are impressionable and give in to peer pressure to feel accepted.
What is also very worrying is that based on reports from the National Library of Medicine, young people appear to move more quickly through the stages towards addiction than adults.
In today's context, it is no longer youths with disadvantaged family backgrounds who abuse illicit drugs. There are now more cases of youths from privileged backgrounds experimenting with illicit drugs. This is supported by the findings in the World Drug Report 2016 that individuals belonging to higher socio-economic groups tend to have a greater propensity to initiate drug use than lower socio-economic groups.
Furthermore, with growing affluence and connectivity to the Internet, there are now more available options to obtain drugs online. Being Internet-savvy, some youths are able to obtain illicit drugs through the Internet called the \"Dark-Net\". The \"Dark-Net\" is a remote part of the Internet which is often used for illegal activities. It has been reported that these websites even offer free samples to bait curious youths into experimenting, knowing fully well that the return on investment from giving a free sample is a very high chance of addiction and subsequent demand for drugs.
Furthermore, with the perceived \"anonymity\" of the Internet, youths may be less fearful of obtaining illicit drugs. With all interactions made virtually, without physical interactions with the drug traffickers and usage of sophisticated cashless transactions, like bitcoin, youths may feel more at ease to obtain drugs.
A global survey, entitled Global Drug Survey, has surveyed more than 100,000 Internet users, 75% of whom had taken illegal drugs, in 50 countries in late 2014. This survey suggested that the proportion of drug users purchasing drugs via the Internet had increased rapidly from 1.2% in 2000 to 4.9% in 2009, then to 16.4% in 2013 and, most recently, 25.3% in 2014.
An update to the global survey in 2016 showed an increase in users obtaining drugs using online platforms, of which the United Kingdom has the highest rate of novel psychoactive substance purchased among the countries surveyed. What is also startling is that 5% of respondents stated that they did not consume drugs prior to accessing them through these online platforms.
In Singapore, statistics provided by CNB showed an increase of about 600% in people arrested for buying drugs and drug-related paraphernalia online, from 30 people in 2015 to 201 people in 2016. This may be low level compared with other countries, but its rapid rise is the one that should worry us. So, we must ensure that our laws and enforcement are kept up to date to prevent our Singaporeans, especially our young Singaporeans, from getting their hands on drugs via the Internet.
Sir, I have talked about how drugs harm individuals, families and the community. I have also talked about drug addiction continuing to be a clear and present danger, especially with the emergence of online sources. To combat the scourge of drug abuse, we need to focus our concerted efforts on education, deterrence and rehabilitation. A strong system of laws with stiff penalties may be an unpleasant but crucial element in our battle against drug abuse.
I believe that the tough penalties strongly and clearly signal Singapore's zero- tolerance stance towards the use of illicit drugs and we should continue to apply tough laws to deter illicit drug use. To be clear, I hope nobody will ever need to be subjected to such stiff penalties because that will mean that everyone is healthy and is leading a full and happy life but, given how addictive drugs are, hoping for that is simply wishful thinking. We need tough laws and penalties to act as a powerful deterrent.
In addition to creating stiffer deterrence, I have also mentioned how rehabilitation and education are equally important. We need to bear in mind that there are still Singaporeans who have fallen prey to the poison of drugs. We must rehabilitate them and help them to reintegrate into society.
Successful rehabilitation outcomes often depend on the drug user's tenacity and resilience in staying in treatment long enough to reap its full benefits. The two-year recidivism rates of persons released from DRCs fluctuate close to 30%, based on statistics provided by Singapore Prison Service (SPS). It is also important that we help drug users to eventually reintegrate into society.
Firstly, we need to break the social stigma and marginalisation through right public education and messaging. We must help former drug offenders battle the demons of addiction through strong community support.
Secondly, we need to empower these individuals to step forward to speak of their personal experiences in taking drugs and become role models or mentors to struggling drug users who need help. A study conducted for the Swedish National Council of Crime Prevention showed that mentoring at-risk individuals can help to reduce the likelihood of recidivism by about 4% to 10%.
Sir, it is equally important to increase preventive education. The phrase \"prevention is better than cure\" holds a lot of truth, especially in our fight against drugs. We must also consider teaching the dangers of drug abuse at an early age. It was reported that kindergartens in Germany have started an innovative way of strengthening children against addictive behaviours through a toy-free project, in which children will be placed in a toy-free environment for a short period in the day. It is in a way strengthening mental resilience, conditioning them to be stronger. Perhaps MOE can study the feasibility of such an approach to be used in our local context.
Sir, based on CNB's statistics, the total number of drug abusers arrested has hovered around 3,000 over the past five years, which works out to be a relatively low 0.08% of our entire resident population. Thankfully, this figure is also much lower than many other countries, but we must not be complacent and we must keep this figure as low as possible, in fact, if we can, towards zero. We must do so through education, rehabilitation and, inevitably, deterrence, which means retaining the stiff penalties that we have in Singapore.
Members of this House are aware of the harmful effects that drugs can cause to the live of an individual and to society. As a mother of a 20-month-old toddler, every day, as I watch him grow, as he learns new words, learns new things and the excitement that he derives when he gets praised for little achievements, I rejoice with him. It is my greatest desire and wish to see him succeed in life, to see that he has a healthy life, that he is able to pursue his aspirations and make the best out of the time that he has in this life.
I believe that all parents out there wish the same for their children. And so, I feel a sense of responsibility – and, indeed, I think so, too, the Members in this House and members of society out there – that we must make sure that we create the most conducive environment for our younger generation so that they can grow up with the right values, with good health and have the best opportunities to go forth in their lives and pursue their dreams and aspirations. Therefore, I would like to echo my support to go towards a 100% drug-free Singapore − one that does not tolerate drugs. I stand in full support of the Motion.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin (Nominated Member): Deputy Speaker, Sir, I will focus specifically on the call to invest in drug rehabilitation. Frankly, I am not that well-versed on the drug issue. So, to prepare to speak on this Motion, I talked to former hard-core drug addicts, as well as people in the social sector who have been helping to rebuild their lives, post-incarceration.
The older ex-offenders confirmed for me that it is much harder for a drug addict today to stay clean because there is an oversupply of drugs in the market and it is true that they have many more avenues, online and offline, to purchase their drug of choice and prices have, indeed, fallen. So, consequently, many of them have seen friends fall back to taking drugs and going back into prison.
I asked them what they personally thought of Singapore's laws on drugs and one former hard-core drug addict put it this way, \"The laws are tough and cruel but it is necessary. It scares the crap out of us. We are afraid to go back. If we get a lighter sentence, no second thoughts, sure go back to drugs.\"
The recovering addicts were not naive about the depths of self-destruction they were willing to go through to feed the beast within. They had come to accept the need for tough rules to help them draw boundaries on their behaviours. I asked them and social workers for insights about what could help former addicts stick to the straight and narrow path of rehabilitation. I will list the top five issues they brought up, as well as their requests and proposed solutions.
The first and most consistently brought-up issue was the need for stable accommodation and a supportive community. This is perhaps the most important factor to pay attention to if we are serious about rehabilitation, because extensive international research does show that early access to stable housing is one of the most critical factors that reduces re-offence.
The tough reality for many recovering addicts when they exit prison is that they may not have family or friends willing to give them a home. They often lack financial resources to purchase a flat and while the option of rental flats is open to them, the waiting list is long. As a consequence, many have no home to go to and end up staying way longer than they expected in halfway houses.
One former drug addict said, \"I have many friends who are stuck in halfway houses. Some of them are in their 40s and 50s and still working as a house remover. How long can they do house removing jobs considering their age? If they have their own house, maybe they can move on and explore various career paths.\" Feeling like you are in personal and professional limbo for too long can be really demoralising and actually raise the risk of these ex-offenders backsliding back to addiction for comfort.
But easier access to rental housing is only one part of the issue because, even for those who do get one, there is another problem. Rules currently require two people to share one rental flat and, as circumstances will have it, a former drug addict will often end up rooming with another former drug addict. Without a community of accountability around them, when one roommate falls back into drugs or crime, it is not uncommon to hear of the other roommate rapidly following suit. So, this simple problem of unstable housing without a supportive community can thus potentially erase years of costly investment into the rehabilitation process.
We need to invest in an innovative public housing solution for our ex-offenders that marries the system of accountability of halfway houses together with the space to live independently within society.
There is already a great model in the social sector that we could learn from − the AWWA Senior Community Home in Ang Mo Kio is Singapore's first seniors' home embedded within two levels of an existing HDB rental block. It is the only one of its kind and only one of its scale, housing 140 people. It has been around since 1976 and is one of the most inspiring public housing innovations I have seen here.
Two to three seniors live in each 1-room rental flat and interspersed in the units, are purpose-built spaces like recreation rooms, laundry rooms, nursing stations and a community kitchen. It even once explored having a retail space for the seniors to sell their products.
This holistic housing solution has allowed people without family support to live within an existing HDB neighbourhood, affirming they still have a place in society, while preserving their desire for independence and providing a supportive community to look out for their needs.
I hope HDB can consider partnering with VWOs with an established track record of rehabilitating ex-offenders to pilot a smaller scale community home. Like the AWWA example, the prototype community home could zone out a few floors in an HDB rental block for ex-offenders to have housing, a supportive programming and a system of strong accountability, all rolled into one.
The second most brought-up issue was on the effects of long-term imprisonment. For hard-core drug abusers who cannot break the habit after going through repeated DRC treatment, they are subjected to long-term imprisonment laws known as LT1 of between five and seven years, and when they re-offend, LT2 of between seven and 13 years.
While the social workers and recovering addicts understood the punitive need for tough laws, they maintained that these long periods of incarceration also produced significant social side-effects that undermined the rehabilitation process.
Extended and repeated periods of incarceration are a time of great vulnerability for offenders and their families, and it is during this time that spouses grow apart, divorce happens and children start to exhibit even more dysfunctional and distancing behaviours. On top of that, given the speed of change in Singapore, five to seven years in prison is a very long time for someone to be taken out of market. So, those who get incarcerated younger have a better chance of making something of their lives. But for mid-life offenders who emerge out of prison in their late 40s to 50s, their relevance and marketability of skills would have significantly diminished.
To come out of prison to such personal and professional failure again is crushing and some do turn back to drugs and return to prison because they feel they really have nothing left to lose. The stated objectives of the Long-Term Imprisonment laws are to (a) provide greater security and safety to the rest of society; (b) deter individuals from continuing to abuse drugs; and (c) reduce the crimes committed by drug addicts.
If the length of incarceration is a non-negotiable due to the first objective of security, then can we consider investing in a lot more targeted rehab solutions for long-term prisoners to help them achieve the second and third objectives of deterrence? We must increase the outreach and frequency of family-bonding programmes that help keep parent-child relations resilient throughout the long period of incarceration.
There is the VWO New Life Stories where volunteers help incarcerated mothers record themselves telling bed-time stories so that their pre-schooling kids can listen to it at home and maintain connection. There is also the Reading with Dads programme run by the Centre for Fathering. In the first run in Changi Prison, eight fathers had the rare chance to just sit on the floor with their kids and hug them and read books with them. One of them, a father of five shared that it was the happiest day of his life and it was like a dream. Grown men were crying − and I am not talking just about the inmates − but the prison officers watching.
We should also consider investing more in arts-based programmes as well. I do not think enough credit is given to how the arts does do deeply healing work, helping people surface the deep stories and emotions that do lie beneath their behaviours. One arts educator who works with prisons told me of a young offender who told her very sternly, \"Madam, don't ever stop this programme. I kena rotan many times I never cry. I get scolded I also never cry. But in your class, I cry because you make me feel something again.\"
In our line of empathy-building work, I can tell you tears are one of the most powerful KPIs we pay attention to because they tell you something in the heart has shifted.
A lot of change can happen in five to seven years, especially for prisoners with young children. Incarcerated parents, fathers especially, must be given more bonding time, so that both parents and children do not lose faith that they are still wanted and still loved. The last thing we want is for kids to grow up motherless or fatherless, which, in turn, increases the next generation's risk of falling into similar patterns of drug abuse and incarceration. There is much we can gain if we invest in creative, innovative programmes that help to rebuild trust between long-term prisoners and their families. The strong punitive element of the LT1 and LT2 schemes must be counter-balanced with equally strong restorative elements.
The third issue they raised was length of detention time spent in halfway houses. The Prisons Halfway House Scheme currently allows offenders without strong family support to spend their last stage of detention at a halfway house and offenders only spend an average of the last six to eight months of their detention there.
Some of the halfway houses I spoke to believe that this period may be too short to yield sustainable results. They have requested that, for better rehabilitative outcomes, it might be more useful to consider extending the period of detention that offenders can serve out in halfway houses to one-and-a-half, and even two to three years.
The fourth issue is the lack of publicly available statistics on rehab issues. There is a desire among halfway houses and other VWOs involved in rehab work to design better solutions. However, many of them are going only by a mix of gut instincts or learned experience. They do not have the resources to commission or conduct base-line research into how well various rehabilitation efforts and programmes are working out in Singapore. Follow-up studies tracking how housing needs, Prison School and other in-prison programmes impact employment rates and recidivism rates can give useful feedback to the VWOs.
So, the request from the ground is for the Government to commission studies that can provide the social sector more information to design better interventions. Fresh and openly available data will help us better figure out what is working, what is not working and where change is most needed.
The last issue has to do with quality of in-prison education programmes. I saved this for last because I wanted to end this on a strong affirmation to Singapore Prisons that there is much good being done on this front.
Prisoners actually love the learning and employment opportunities they have been getting. Many look forward to the academic, vocational training and arts-based programmes that have been brought in. So, the issue here is more of a happy one. They say, \"Can we have more of the good stuff please?\" We should encourage their hunger to learn.
Is there a SkillsFuture vision and roadmap for our lifelong learners in our prisons and halfway houses because I believe there are unique strengths and talents that our former drug addicts and ex-offenders do bring to the table? I asked ex-offenders for vocational training programme suggestions and one of the most intriguing suggestions I got was this: \"Why can't we train up more ex-offenders to take leadership in halfway houses?\" This was his brutally honest take: \"Social workers in this field are not effective at all. A drug addict only listens to a drug addict. Halfway house leaders must be an ex-convict, not just a highly educated psychologist.\"
I personally believe there is definitely still a place for educated social workers and psychologists at halfway houses. But he is also right in pointing out there is a unique career opportunity here for ex-convicts. It might be worth considering a leadership programme that talent-spots high potential former drug addicts and ex-offenders to pick up social work-based skills that can enable them to support rehabilitative work in the future. What was once the ex-offender's greatest weakness on his resume − his experiences of incarceration and addiction − could then become his unique asset.
I also want to flag up the voice of another key stakeholder in the rehab process: external vendors who run programmes in prison. The best of them love the charges that they work with and are deeply passionate about partnering with Singapore Prisons to work on the rehab process. That is why some of them struggle greatly with seeing how the GeBIZ procurement process sometimes ends up awarding programmes to the lowest bidder or a new bidder for the sake of trying out a new vendor. Some share that it hurts to see meaningful projects gaining ground with the inmates get derailed simply because of what they saw as a procurement process. They felt that contracts sometimes ended up going to vendors that did not have a genuine interest in rehabilitation.
Those who do rehab work seriously do not want to be treated or accessed as short-term vendors but rather long-term partners in a healing process. Their request is for the Government to consider refining the procurement process for prison programmes to guard against fly-by-night vendors who may pitch on programming contracts because it is another way to make a buck, rather than an opportunity to change a life. These programming providers believe that it is counter-productive to put high-stakes human-centric programmes at the mercy of an open call tender on GeBIZ. As one programming provider stated very passionately to me, rehabilitative work that impacts so many lives should not be judged by the same matrixes of cost-effectiveness and novelty for change that we use to decide between contractors for chairs and tables.
I believe, for rehab programmes, it would be far more impactful to invest our taxpayers' money on long-term re-collaborative partnerships with providers that have a heart to commit to long-term rehab goals with the Singapore Prison Service.
Madam, I do support the Motion to reaffirm Singapore's strong anti-drug stance. But I also believe we will gain more ground in the fight against drugs when we become equally known for the things we are for, rather than just known for the things we are against.
A strong anti-drug stance paired with an equally strong pro-rehabilitation stance is an unusual policy combination in the world. It challenges us to hold both punitive justice and restorative mercy in tension. It is a difficult position but I believe it is also the most useful way forward.
I say so not based on theory but because that is how I have seen it play out in the transformed lives of people I know who have done their time in prison and walked down that hard road of rehabilitation. Our former drug abusers can be so much more than their past mistakes.
Preparing to speak on this Motion actually reminded me that I happen to be friends with a few recovering addicts and ex-offenders. It took me a moment to remember because I had long gotten used to just seeing them as loving husbands and kind fathers, humble pastors and compassionate counsellors, successful entrepreneurs and talented creatives.
I have seen the evidence of investment in rehabilitation in ordinary lives. It is arduous and it is costly but it works. There is gold in each of us, even the worst of us, that can be revealed through grace. The cure for addiction is not condemnation. It is connection. Let us do what we can to help our recovering addicts stay connected to their families and their hopes for the future.
Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Deputy Speaker, the recent United Nations Committee on Narcotic Drugs (CND) meeting in Vienna in the middle of March threw up several interesting perspectives on how the East and the West view drugs and laws regarding its consumption and trafficking.
The facts are on the table. Drug trafficking is a multi-billion dollar global illicit trade. According to the World Drug Report, heroin consumption alone amounts to a staggering 340 tonnes and it is estimated that a total of almost 246 million people between the ages of 15 and 64, use illicit drugs.
This dependence on drugs places a heavy burden not only on the individual but also their loved ones, public healthcare systems and security agencies.
At that same meeting, it was galling to note the nonchalance towards the drug menace displayed by some countries. Some European countries took turns to conflate drug use with human rights. Such lofty words and ideals!
At the same conference, Russia talked about compulsory drug tests for teenagers while the US and Canada talked about reconciling the legislation and legalisation of marijuana with UN's drug conventions. Canada and Uruguay even spent long hours discussing the important issue of quotas for how marijuana bushes should be allowed to be grown per household!
There are those who justify that softening the drug stance is because current drug control policies are failing and the rising numbers of drug consumers − you cannot even call them addicts anymore − drug consumers. But I say, just because your system has failed does not mean your next solution is something everyone else should accept.
In Singapore, our strict laws against drug consumption and trafficking have kept us safe over the years. Our streets are safe from drugs and crime. And, so, I add my voice to the many Members, including the hon Member, Mr Christopher de Souza, in calling on the Government to continue to apply tough laws to deter drug trafficking into Singapore and combating the scourge of drugs.
While we are relatively safe from drugs, I am still worried. The idea of soft drugs, as many Members have mentioned, recreational drugs, as some people call them, I think we must acknowledge drugs cause harm, whether they are soft or hard, whatever name you call it, they are drugs.
The National Council Against Drug Abuse reported that many more of our younger Singaporeans below the age of 30 are now open-minded about experimenting with drugs as opposed to a few years ago. You look at programmes, you look at drama series from overseas, the glamorisation of a lifestyle filled with drugs, perhaps that is affecting mindsets as well. The increase in the number of new drug users attests to this as well. Therefore, I do not believe there is a difference between hard drugs and soft drugs. There are only drugs. They both cause harm and should be prevented with equal measure and equal vigour.
In our open data age, availability of drugs online and its ease of shipment are something we should really be concerned about. Many have spoken about the Dark Net and, therefore, I hope that the Government will be able to look more at the measures to stem this rot to prevent more younger Singaporeans from taking the easy route in obtaining drugs.
Another cause for concern is the trafficking and consumption of synthetic drugs, including stimulants like amphetamine, methamphetamine and ecstasy-types of substances. Their proliferation and easy availability have made them the second most widely used drugs in the world, with levels exceeding those of heroin and even cocaine, so says the World Drug Report.
Although some say that they are not considered as dangerous as heroin or cocaine, sustained consumption still causes damage to oneself and loved ones. Many of us would have come across drug addicts, drug abusers in our communities and the damage that it causes to them and their health, as well as to their families. Therefore, we should have more prevention and education measures, especially for our young, to stem the tide of synthetic drugs as well and tighten the regulations.
Justice is important. It is important that there is just punishment for those who traffick drugs for those who use drugs that they have an opportunity to recover.
While I urge the Government to be firm in maintaining deterrence, I also believe that justice must be tempered with mercy. Many traffickers, for example, are far down the hierarchy of crime syndicates and some are forced by circumstances. I, therefore, urge the Government to do whatever is in its power to combat the drug problem at the source and also step up efforts to target the drug barons, the people who truly benefit exclusively from this illicit trade and yet are unremorseful at the fate of their helpless and often hapless runners who take on all the risks.
I must state very clearly at this point that I believe that capital punishment has been one reason that has kept us free from the worst of the drug problems that have plagued other countries, but I also have a strong personal moral dilemma in not wanting capital punishment to be enforced, especially when the ultimate perpetrators of the crime are often not the ones standing frightened at the gallows. As the trap doors open, the absoluteness of this punishment cannot be turned back.
When you look at the jurisdictions that mandate the death penalty for drug crimes, I think we can also conclude that it is not just the threat of capital punishment that prevents drug trafficking and reduces drug crime in a country. But in Singapore's example, it is a strong, trustworthy and effective Police force, an incorrupt system of Government, a general intolerance of drug culture and a fair society where no one needs to resort to drugs as a first recourse for problems they face in life. Other countries have capital punishment, too. But they are still plagued.
I, therefore, welcome the 2012 amendments to our laws such that the mandatory death penalty for those convicted of drug trafficking or murder was lifted under certain specific conditions, with discretionary powers provided to judges to sentence such offenders to life imprisonment.
I also, therefore, urge the Government to do more to rehabilitate our drug addicts and free them from this new form of slavery. Many of them are wounded by circumstances or bad choices in life and, therefore, the most important reassurance we can give to them is that they have a place at the table, that they are not abandoned by society, cast aside because of a bad choice.
At the recent Narcotics: Problems and Solutions of this Global Issue Conference, Pope Francis was the keynote speaker, he said, \"Every addicted person brings with them a distinct personal history, which should be listened to, understood, loved, and, where possible, cured. We cannot fall into the injustice of classifying them as if they were objects or broken junk; rather, they should be valued and appreciated in their dignity in order to be cured. They continue to have, despite their crimes, more than ever, dignity as persons.\"
There is a lot of good work done by the Youth Enhanced Supervision Scheme, community rehabilitation centres, drug rehabilitation centres and our halfway houses, but society itself must be able to see our drug abusers beyond their mistakes and ensure that they do not just recover but also reintegrate into society and, therefore, have no reasons to return to drugs.
Examples, such as Asher Quek, who recovered from an early life of drugs. His first encounter with drugs was at the age of 13, spent time in prison. But because he was inspired and challenged by counsellors in prison, he now volunteers himself as a counsellor to other drug abusers. This perhaps is one example of how a good rehabilitation and support system can work.
Deputy Speaker, Sir, watermelons. Not related to drugs. But in 2014, I met three young children in my estate. One very young girl, just started Primary 1, her brother was in Primary 2 and older sister was in Secondary 1. I met them because their uncle came to approach me, asking for a job.
I realised that these three children were not his. Probing deeper, it was revealed that their parents, both mother and father, were incarcerated because of drug offences. The older sister took it upon herself to look after her younger siblings. Although the mother is out of prison today, she feels and suffers from withdrawal symptoms and we do what we can. But the thing that really inspires her is her younger daughter who has never given up on her parents. And when I last met them, she simply said to me, \"There are many things I love in life. Sweet red watermelons and my parents, whatever they have done.\" Family support is important. A society that accepts them for their weaknesses is important. A society that tempers justice with mercy is also important.
Singapore has remained relatively drug-free and we should endeavour to remain so and do whatever we can to do so. What works elsewhere would not necessarily work here. Tough deterrent measures have kept us and our families safe. But we must continue to do more to break the supply chain, ensure that we do not go soft on drug use, reminding our young Singaporeans that drugs have a tremendous negative impact on them. Targeting international criminal gangs and ensuring the uplift of vulnerable communities outside of Singapore and coupled with a robust rehab and reintegration regime – these will continue to keep us safe for the long haul. Sir, I support the Motion.
Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, after hearing the hon Members who have spoken before me, I am reminded that we live in a scary world. An addictions specialist − his name was Dr Munidasa Winslow − recently noted that an increase has happened in clients buying drugs on the Internet and receiving them by postal mail. He suspects that the numbers of persons purchasing synthetic drugs online will rise in the coming years. Drug abuse should not be taken lightly. I support the hon Members' suggestion of including new offences within the Misuse of Drugs Act which are aimed at these new ways for kingpins to peddle in drugs and to take decisive action against them.
I would, however, Sir, like to add a note of caution when it comes to young Singaporean offenders. They deserve not only to be seen through the battle-hardened prosecutor's lens of specific deterrence, but also with a keen eye towards rehabilitation, which is why I am happy that rehabilitation is also a part of this particular Motion.
This Motion has been characterised as involving different imperatives. Mr Christopher de Souza spoke of the importance of law and order; of weeding out a transnational scourge: drug addiction; of having muscular laws. At the same time, young first-time drug offenders deserve to be treated fairly and, in appropriate cases, compassionately as well. It is the duty of the sentencing judge in a Misuse of Drugs Act case to assess and balance these competing concerns and to strike an appropriate balance between the two.
In the final analysis, the public interest to be tough on drug crimes and the interests of young first-time offenders are not mutually exclusive. Our Courts give special regard to cases involving young offenders and it is about this that I would like to speak about today.
First, I recall that as early as in 1999, the Singapore High Court held that, in cases of a young first-time offender, there can rarely be any conflict between his interest and that of the public's. The public have no greater interest than that he become a good citizen. For young, first-time offenders, inclusive of drug offenders, rehabilitation should often play a dominant role in determining the appropriate sentencing option.
Rehabilitation does not only mean sending an offender to the DRC. In deserving cases, it can and should involve, Sir, probation or reformative training. A decade ago, I had the privilege of being the defence co-counsel in one such case. We represented Mr Ridzuan bin Hanafi on a pro bono basis against his charge of trafficking 20 tablets of ecstasy.
A 20-year-old NSF at that time, Ridzuan took responsibility for his mistake. We met his family at the hawker centre where his mother ran a nasi campur stall. We learned that Ridzuan's eldest sister had been diagnosed with cancer and that, to supplement his NSF stipend, he worked two other odd jobs. His unwavering care and support for his family was clear. He saved this money prudently and contributed in whatever way he could. After realising that this was not enough to take care of his sister, he slipped.
His heart was set on equipping himself to provide a good future for himself and his family. Despite not having completed his course of study at ITE, he had expressed a genuine wish to further his studies in the field of audio engineering upon completion of National Service. Ridzuan then obtained a deferment and enrolled in the Singapore Audio Engineering Institute. As a filial son to his mum, Ridzuan's greatest concern had been to ensure that his ageing mother, who has sacrificed the better part of her life to take care of her children, did not have to continue to work so hard at her nasi campur stall and, therefore, jeopardise her health as well in supporting herself and her daughter.
Ridzuan loathed the idea of depending on his mother and his family. He confessed to selling the ecstasy pills for cash and we learnt all of this from several visits to his home, to Queenstown Remand Prison, where he was also serving pre-trial detention at the place and we asked in Court for probation as the appropriate sentence for the sentencing judge to consider and to sentence him.
When determining whether or not an order of probation is required or appropriate, a sentencing judge may call for a pre-sentence or probation report, as the judge did in Ridzuan's case. A probation report provides a comprehensive profile of the offender and is obtained mainly from interviews with the offender, his family, significant people which, in this case, included people he was working with in National Service, his superior officers, social service agencies and so on. It gives a picture of that drug offender so that the drug offender is not just a digit, not just one person accused of a crime of consumption or trafficking, but there is a larger contextual, social and historical nature to the offence and the offender.
Sir, probation is not a gesture of leniency. It provides the Court with an alternative method of dealing with that first-time young offender who may otherwise have to be committed to a corrective penal institution. It involves the conditional suspension of punishment when the offender is released under supervision and the personal care of a probation officer. A probation order imposes on the probationer certain obligations in the form of conditions. If any of those conditions are not met, the probation order lapses and the probationer has to face real jail time.
Ridzuan's Probation Officer found his family members were willing and stable to assist in his rehabilitation. His youngest sister was willing to defer her overseas education just to take care of him. The Probation Officer also looked at the unwavering reports from his superiors in National Service. Ultimately, Ridzuan was convicted and sentenced by the District Judge and placed under two years' probation, six months of which were intensive, 18 months of which were supervisory.
The prosecution, of course, appealed against this decision at that time. I draw attention to this not because the prosecutors were doing something wrong. It was their job to appeal against it because it was the first time probation had been awarded against a drug trafficking charge. But I take issue with the way in which the sentence and the offender were characterised. In the Magistrate's Appeal, this is what the prosecutors said and these were their words, not mine, Mr Deputy Speaker:
\"The drug menace still abounds in Singapore even though our drug laws are enforced vigorously. Drug trafficking is the scourge of our society, family and the individual drug abuser. As such, peddlers in this evil trade must be dealt with severely to alert those in this pernicious enterprise that they too will be prosecuted and punished severely.\"
By itself, there is not something too greatly wrong with that paragraph. But the next paragraph is stark:
\"[Ridzuan] has a dismal academic track record. He shows excessive indulgence in clubbing, has sold cigarettes in his army camp to his friends in order to support his clubbing habit. There is hardly any evidence that he has a bright future ahead of him unless a fledging interest in sound engineering (which is a euphemism for being a music disc-jockey) constitutes a potentially sound career or a safe life choice that would not throw him back into the clubbing culture.\"
This was how the prosecution had characterised him. It was just not the prosecutors. It would be the investigators and everybody who was part of the criminal justice system looking at one young first-time drug offender who was standing before them.
I take issue with this, Mr Deputy Speaker, with conflating the crime, as reprehensible as it may be, with the prospects of the young offender. Unfortunately, once you label a crime as being \"evil\", it is a short step before you demonise the criminal as well, regardless of his young age. Should the young offender's prospects of reform and rehabilitation be a foregone conclusion that prosecutors alone can make? My response would be an emphatic \"no\".
We must be wary, Mr Deputy Speaker, of what the Judge of Appeal Chao Hick Tin cautioned just last month in a case that Mr Kok Heng Leun referred to earlier. In a Court of Appeal case, Judge of Appeal Chao held that \"it was vitally important not to view the actions and words of an accused person in a case like this in the lenses of someone who is familiar with the practices of the drug trade, unless there are facts warranting that conclusion.\" With young first-time Singaporean drug offenders, we cannot assume that all of them are familiar with the practices of the drug trade.
That was only one of two cases just held last month by the High Court and the Court of Appeal where the charges were found to be unsubstantiated and the cases were ultimately found to be unwarranted. Both of them were acquitted after lengthy trials.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister a few questions.
How will young potential offenders be better encouraged to abstain from resorting to drugs in the first place and before the criminal justice system itself is involved?
Two, how should options for rehabilitation, including but not limited to the drug rehabilitation centre, be approached? I note that Mr Christopher de Souza has some very intelligent ideas in the paper that he has provided. I would like to ask whether we would actually be using this very soon.
Third, would the Ministry support a \"rehabilitate-first\" approach towards drug trafficking for young first-time drug offenders? If there were refinements to the Misuse of Drugs Act, could we also involve lawyers who have represented these young first-time drug offenders from the Law Society, from the Association of Criminal Lawyers and other organisations and law firms? Will we be able to invite social workers and probation officers to also be involved in how these amendments are being included or proposals being put forward?
Three, should CNB investigators and misuse of drugs prosecutors be sent for sensitisation training and diversity management training so that when they first meet or deal with young offenders, they take a \"rehabilitate first\" approach instead of an approach which tends towards \"prosecute at all costs\"? Will they be required to spend time conversing with under-privileged people and those who are most prone to substance abuse?
Finally, Mr Deputy Speaker, I note that academics at NUS and SMU have recently, on the basis of empirical research, asked whether capital punishment should remain on the books and whether that ultimate deterrent should still be relevant for every case for which it is put forward.
Allow me to conclude by saying that as we examine the Motion which asks us to think harder on being tough against drug crimes, we must also think of humanising those people who are drug offenders, especially those who are young, first-time Singaporean drug offenders. I support the Motion and hope that the hon proposer as well as the Ministry will take these comments into consideration as the law is amended.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): Mr Deputy Speaker, given the lateness of the hour, I am just going to give a short speech to say that I agree with everything Mr Christopher de Souza has said. But maybe, I will just add a few brief points.
The first is this. I am glad that in this House, we have not really had a debate on one issue and, that is, the seriousness of the drug threat. Everyone here has agreed that drugs are a menace and we have to find a way to deal with it.
Before we look at what we want to change, I think we need to look at what Singapore has done well. The incidence of drug abuse in Singapore is one of the lowest in the world. As a percentage of the population, I believe it is below 0.001% of the population.
In contrast, if we look at the latest UNODC report, it said one in 20 people in the world has used drugs and that translates into a quarter of a billion people. So, if you talk about overall statistics, Singapore is doing very well.
My own view – and I suspect this is shared by many others in the House – is that this is not because of any one measure. There is no silver bullet, but rather the suite of measures. So, if we look at the big picture, I think Singapore is doing a good job in its fight against drugs and the low incidence of drug rates contrast favourably with many other countries. In fact, the rates of drugs are so low that many people may not even have encountered drug addicts in their lives.
My first encounter was after I started as a Member of Parliament and I met a gentleman who came to the Meet-the-People Session (MPS) who was telling me very badly why he needed cough mixture. I did not really understand why he was having difficulty getting cough mixture until he told me that he had actually been banned from buying cough mixture and his name was with several doctors. That was when I realised, as he told me more and more, he also asked me to write a letter to excuse him from urine tests. As I spoke to him more, his thoughts were disjointed but, basically, it finally emerged that he was actually an addict and he was an addict who had served his sentence. He had come out but he was in danger of re-offending and very likely had re-offended which is why he did not want to go for his upcoming urine test. Later on that evening, he brought his wife along to help make the argument for him. But when he moved away, his wife said, \"please make sure that he does not get any more cough mixture.\" So, it is quite clear the families of addicts suffer along with the addicts. But there were many more stories after that.
In my community, we have a programme where we reach out to ex-offenders just before their release from prison. And one of the things that strikes me is that ex-offenders who have the biggest difficulty coming back in are those who have drug antecedents. These are also the ones who are most likely to have offended before and to have committed other offences.
These are the ones that we really have to make a special effort to reach out to, to try and make sure their families still accept them which is also a difficulty because, in some cases, the family is outside, may have divorced the inmate, may have moved on. These are all the challenges that I think drug addicts face.
The biggest issue, of course, is that they became addicts in the first place. I think we should do everything we can to prevent that happening and I believe the tough measures we have taken have achieved that effect.
In this regard, there are just two points I would address. I do not wish to address the whole system, but the two trends of concern that the CNB raised in its latest report.
The first is that of the rising number of young drug users below the age of 30. This was a bit different because the typical profile of many of the other drug offenders who use heroin – and many of the other offenders are from the lower income groups – and they use drugs like heroin and meth which are a lot more damaging. But the young users tended to be from a different social profile, including more affluent people, and they are using more cannabis.
Cannabis has developed a reputation in some other countries or, at least, it has been marketed in some countries as being a perfectly harmless drug and has been legalised. I would not make the argument Mr Christopher de Souza has made earlier. I think he has quite comprehensively covered the programmes in these countries where it has been legalised and shown that it actually has caused harm. It is not really a harmless drug.
The tough measures that we have against cannabis are actually generally quite helpful and relevant.
There is one additional suggestion I have and I think this also relates to the point about rehabilitation of young offenders. One of the countries that had a very successful programme on rehabilitating of offenders which we can learn from, I believe, is Iceland.
Between 1998 and 2016, Iceland ran a programme specifically for youths. And there are two things to observe. I will just read the figures first. This was a study of Icelandic youths between the ages of 15 and 16. Over the course of the 20-year study, the rate of alcohol abuse fell from 42% to 5%. The rate of cigarette smoking dropped from 23% to 3% and the rate of people who use cannabis fell from 17% to 5%.
I would make two points about this. First of all, of course, Singapore's figures are nowhere close to these. We do not have addiction rates of 17%. I think it would be quite shocking if we hit that. The point is that we should not adopt everything they have done wholesale, but I think their rehabilitation programmes specifically probably have things that we can learn from.
The main thrust of their programmes involves promoting alternative recreational facilities, strengthening family ties, improving self-sufficiency and building social competency for youths who were identified as being at risk. The key purpose was to reduce delinquency. I understand that we have a lot of programmes targeted at this by different agencies. But I believe that there might be something useful to learn from these programmes. The main focus of these programmes is to keep at-risk youths occupied, usefully engaged and socially involved.
The second issue which the CNB highlighted was online drug peddling. This has risen from 30 arrests in 2015 to 201 in 2016. Although the numbers are still small, the total rise is very significant. I agree with Mr Christopher de Souza's suggestions for stronger penalties and enhanced penalties if drugs arer peddled online. This would add an additional deterrent.
I also note from the CNB report that most of the arrests were against people who were buying drugs. I would suggest that CNB take additional steps against those who are selling drugs, maintaining websites and are in any way part of this dark net. They are difficult to detect but, once detected, I think harsh penalties should be taken. Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Motion.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, I rise in support of the Motion. In particular, I would like to focus on how we need to improve our rehabilitation process and how we need to strengthen our focus on family support during the rehabilitation process.
While we strengthen our fight against drug consumption and ensure that people do not consume drugs in the first place, we must remember that almost 60% of drug abusers arrested are repeat offenders. That is almost two-thirds and, if we can improve our rehabilitation process, then we will effectively solve two-thirds of our problem.
I raised this previously during the COS debates and I said that, and I quote, \"A significant focus of the rehabilitation process is to ensure that inmates are able to secure a job when they are released. However, I feel that an equally important factor is whether they have family support when they are released.\"
Parliamentary Secretary Amrin Amin replied that, and I quote, \"Singapore Prison Service (SPS) partners with Fei Yue Family Services and Lakeside Family Services to provide structured family programmes for inmates − workshops to help better understand the impact of their crimes on their families and build their parenting and communication skills.
The Prison Service also works with community partners like Salvation Army to conduct family sessions in prison. During these sessions, family members are allowed to enter prison to spend time with the inmates and they are designed to encourage bonding between inmates and their children and they serve as powerful reminders to inmates that they need to turn their lives around. These family sessions are also held during special occasions, such as Mother's Day, Father's Day and Children's Day.
Other than helping inmates, Singapore Prison Service also helps their families. The grassroots-led Yellow Ribbon Community Project (YRCP) was established to help the families and children of inmates cope, by connecting them to the national social support networks. They have assisted more than 5,000 families. They recognised that family ties are vital to inmates' rehabilitation and family support is especially important after the inmates' release, and thus, the community's long-term involvement is vital to ensure continuity in these efforts.\"
We are currently indeed emphasising the important role of family support in rehabilitation. But the statistics show that there is still a problem and there is always room for improvement.
From 2014 to 2016, only about a third of DRC inmates received two family visits per month. I understand that additional requests for family visits by DRC inmates or their family members are rare. The lack of visits by family members is a tell-tale sign that there are problems. If the family bond is strong, then, surely, there will be more family visits.
Drug consumption might be the symptom of the problem. So, while we focus our efforts on tackling the symptom of the problem, we also need to remember to tackle the root of the problem. The lack of strong family bonds might be the reason they consumed drugs in the first place.
The other even more worrying statistic is that the more times we incarcerate someone for drug offences, the higher the chances he or she will be incarcerated again. In 2013, the recidivism rate for DRC inmates was 28.3% and for LT2 inmates, it was 42%. In 2014, the recidivism rate for DRC inmates was 30.1% and for LT2 inmates, it was 36.5%.
It should be the other way around where the recidivism rate should be higher for someone incarcerated once as compared to someone incarcerated for the fourth time. I understand that one of the reasons for the higher recidivism rate for LT2 inmates is that they find it harder to reintegrate back into society. I am certain that one of the other factors is again the lack of family support.
I completely understand how difficult it is for family bonds to be strengthened during the rehabilitation process, considering that these bonds would have been further damaged as a result of the incarceration.
I completely understand how lost someone must feel when their loved ones are incarcerated. I have met many residents who come to my MPS, appealing for help after their loved ones were incarcerated. I recently met a mother of five who had to now single-handedly support the whole family while her husband is in the DRC. She was thrown into the deep end and this will not be an easy chapter in her life.
I completely understand the immense guilt a drug offender must feel when he or she leaves their family behind to fend for themselves. We need to do more to strengthen our rehabilitation process and we need to view the rehabilitation process more holistically and focus on how we can rebuild the broken family bonds and focus on a more family-oriented rehabilitation process.
As mentioned earlier, Singapore Prison Service is already providing workshops to help inmates better understand the impact of their crimes on their families and build their parenting and communication skills. However, can we do more workshops where it is attended by both the inmate and their spouse or loved ones? I appreciate the possible security and logistics concerns but I believe the pros outweigh the cons.
Can we also look into developing more counselling programmes for families of inmates even before their release from prison, to help their families to be better prepared to receive them upon their release and to support them in leading drug-free lifestyles?
With regard to the family sessions conducted in prison, can we increase the number and duration of such family sessions? As I have suggested during the COS debates, can we consider introducing a programme where children get to spend a whole day behind bars with their parents? This is perhaps the most powerful rehabilitation tool.
In my earlier speech, I said, and I quote, \"I watched fathers in tears as they realised how much they missed their children and perhaps how their actions have hurt their children. I saw in the eyes of the fathers a resolve to be rehabilitated so that they can reunite with the children − not just for a day but for the rest of their lives. And I also saw what that one day meant for the children, as ultimately the children are indeed the real victims.\"
Can we also be more proactive in reaching out to the families and children of inmates? I understand from the mother of five children whom I mentioned earlier that nobody reached out to her. Do we have the resources to ensure that we reach out to them during the first week of incarceration of their loved ones? That is the crucial period and the help we can provide will be essential.
We already recognise the need for family support. There are, in fact, individual anti-addiction programmes for ex-offenders at halfway houses, such as HighPoint, Pertapis, Green Haven, just to name a few, and at hospitals, such as the Raffles Counselling Centre and the National Addictions Management Service.
These programmes do bring in family support at some stage of the rehabilitation process. However, the extent to which the family is brought into the rehabilitation process depends on the individual programmes. It also requires the ex-offenders taking the initiative to first enrol in these programmes. Will MHA consider spearheading a unified national approach towards a family-centric rehabilitation process?
I believe we should draw inspiration from the Taskforce on Youth and Drugs in 2014, convened then by Mr Masagos Zulkifli. The Taskforce had recommended developing more targeted strategies to address youth drug abuse, such as toolkits for parents, educators, counsellors and NS commanders and introducing rehabilitation programmes for youths.
This led to CNB developing a guide for parents of children recovering from drug abuse titled \"Staying Drug-Free\". A similar targeted national action plan should be drawn up towards rehabilitating all drug-offenders.
Sir, our prison officers, our Captains of Lives, do amazing work and I have seen this first-hand when I visited our DRC last year. I must end this speech by saying that I completely understand how disappointing it must be for them when they see a drug offender return to prison again and be under their care repeatedly.
It must not be easy for them and I sincerely hope we can help break this cycle, strengthen our rehabilitation process and strengthen family bonds. Sir, I support the Motion.
Mr Deputy Speaker:\tMinister Shamnugam.
The Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Law (Mr K Shanmugam): Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I thank Mr Christopher de Souza for moving this Motion and the Members for giving their views and supporting generally the very strong stand that we take. This Motion is a timely reminder for us to remain vigilant, continue to be tough on drugs and make this a national priority.
As we debate the way forward, what do we do next? Mr Pritam Singh talked about international currents. Others talked about the mood within Singapore, young people. As we assess how we move forward, I think it is useful for Members to understand a little bit about how the history of our fight against drugs evolved and really look at the period between the 1960s and 1980s. In a snapshot, what did we have then? We had high crime rates. We had abusers stealing, committing crimes to feed their addiction. We had traffickers exploiting the abusers' dependence. We had broken families. If I give some numbers, I think Members will be shocked and I will give some numbers in a minute.
To tackle this, CNB was set up in 1971. It does not pre-date 1971. We saw it as a menace and we said we had to fight it; which is why in every speech I make, I emphasise it is not a single solution, not just the death penalty. It is a whole suite of factors. CNB was set up, empowered. The legislative framework was put in through the MDA in 1973. And then Operation Ferret was launched to reverse the momentum. You can guess from the name what it meant. So CNB, the Police Force, they coordinated their efforts, flushed out the abusers. If we had not done that, the law and order situation today in Singapore that we take for granted would be very different.
In the early 1970s – mark this – we were arresting less than 10 heroin abusers a year. We could have kidded ourselves and believed that that was the true situation. But after we set up CNB and after we started Operation Ferret, by February 1978, 26,000 abusers had been arrested. That is the picture before and after. So, for people outside this House and for the hon Nominated Member of Parliament who advocates a softer approach, suggests that our laws are too tough, remember these figures. When you do not enforce, you get one picture; and 26,000 people by 1978.
In the 1980s, we still had more than 8,000 in DRC. In 1993, our DRC recidivism rate was 73%. That is where we were and, today, everyone accepts, even The Economist accepts, that we have the drug situation under control, perhaps the only country to be able to say that openly and directly and backed up by the facts.
We set up a committee to improve the drug situation in November 1993 with a comprehensive anti-drug strategy − preventive drug education in the schools, tough laws backed up by tough enforcement, rehabilitation, aftercare. It is a whole context of factors. That is the background. We have had a good run for 20 years but now consider the global situation and how that might impact on us.
UNODC estimates in 2014 that there are nearly 250 million drug abusers in the world. And 200,000 died from drug-related causes. That probably does not include the type of cases that Mr Christopher de Souza talked about, where people under the influence of drugs caused traffic accidents and killed others. These are people who died as a result of drug abuse − 200,000.
Mr Pritam Singh is right that global conversation is about a softer stance on drugs, seductive arguments using pseudo-science and glamorising drugs, and they do create a challenging environment for us to keep Singapore drug-free.
If you look at the evidence, you look at the US, opioid abuse, the prescriptions went up three-fold since 1999, fuelled by people relying on and accepting questionable evidence that these are benign pain remedies. Going into diversions and misuse, thousands get hooked on to it, and then guess what happens? They moved on to heroin. Now, New York Times reported that there were 33,000 deaths per year.
For those with bleeding hearts who talk about inmates on death row, I think they should think about these 33,000 deaths. What percentage do you want in Singapore? What about their families, the children? Why not spend some time with them rather than just crying with the people in the death row? This is, as Mr Christopher de Souza pointed out, a trafficker engaging in a crime of cynicism or crime with cynicism for profit. He knows what he is doing, he is coming in for money and there is nothing on the spur about it.
The same arguments that were used to try and get opium allowed are now being used for cannabis legislation. The arguments, if you look at them, are evocative but little clinical evidence. There is some suggestion – Mr Pritnam Singh talked about it, others talked about it – about how people are now going into medical marijuana and medical cannabis and so on.
I said at the United Nations I do not want human rights groups preaching to me about the medical value of cannabis. If a respectable medical association is prepared to tell me that this ought to be prescribed as medicine, we will look at it. What does the American Medical Association say? That there is no proven record for this. There can be no objection to any substance being prescribed by a doctor based on scientific evidence. I think there is every objection to a blanket legislation allowing free use of cannabis or opium on the basis of some questionable medical suggestion which no medical association worth its salt is prepared to back up.
Mr Pritam Singh is right: legalisation around the world is gaining ground. He quoted Malaysia, Thailand and Israel, but my point is, a large majority of Singaporeans stand by what is right, stand by our position. Even internationally, when I went to the UN, we brought along a doctor who had pored through a substantial amount of medical literature on substance abuse, cannabis abuse, in particular, and was prepared to stand up and present that this is the impact cannabis has on your brain structure and it makes you dependent. Stacks of medical evidence.
Science is always evolving and if science evolves to a different stage, we are practical people and we rely on facts. But, today, this is the science. I thank Mr Pritnam Singh for the strong stand he took in terms of supporting the position we take in Singapore against drugs.
Mr Christopher de Souza pointed out how drug abuse has worsened in Colorado since they legalised cannabis. It is serious. And who is pushing it? The pharma companies are pushing it. Why? It is obvious why. Even when we go to these international conferences, the NGOs which support legalisation come out with brochures which are glitzy, which are very attractive, evocative. They are all financed by the pharma companies. Those who oppose legalisation, those who take a stand similar to Singapore's, if you look at the material, you would not want to look at them again because no one is financing them. There is a huge commercial motive for legalisation and that is driving this in many countries.
There are other factors. Many countries have lost the fight. They cannot control domestic drug abuse. So, after having lost tens of thousands of lives, they move to focusing on public health issues, HIV. So, you get an alliance with a commercial interest and countries saying we cannot handle this anymore. They are now saying let us create a new international norm. Well, I do not have a problem if they change their rules; but I do have a problem if they want to change international norms and say every country should follow that. We will not be pressured.
That is the international situation; that is the background. What is the local situation? We have some challenges. The first challenge is increased supply. I have said this before, we are near the Golden Triangle, which is the second largest opium source in the world. Afghanistan has become a major producer. In order to get its stuff on to the West, sometimes or quite often, they seem to want to take the road through Southeast Asia.
Our region is the fastest growing meth market. We are a major transport hub, 200 million people go through our airport, shores, land checkpoints. Because of the wealth factor, our people can pay, therefore, it is an attractive destination, both for transhipment and as a destination source. That is one major challenge.
The second major challenge is drug peddling sales online. You can have anonymous transactions, you can have parcels coming in from any part of the world; that creates a challenge.
We also face a challenge from new drugs, new psycho-active substances, where people take drugs and mix them with contaminants to lower the costs. We have real chemists who modify pharmaceuticals.
CNB, for example, in the past two years, has seized more than 3.5 kilogrammes and 4,000 tablets of new psycho-active substances, which have been falsely marketed as both being legal and safe.
Another separate challenge is the new attitudes of our young people. There is a certain perception, glamorised through media outside of this country, that drugs are cool and cannabis are non-addictive. If we are not careful, they can become our next generation of abusers. There is a changing profile of abusers. Last year, 40% of those who were arrested were abusers, were less than 30 years old. The mix − the students, professionals, people who are well-educated, good jobs and a new group of Singaporeans trying drugs.
Parents may think it is not their children but, in the past three years, we have picked up 350 students, all levels from Primary school to tertiary and all backgrounds, as well as without a background of substance abuse in the family. Last year, for working professionals, more than 70 professionals, managers, including accountants and engineers. And the drug abusers committed 12% of other crimes. That is another worrying statistic.
Eighty-three percent of those in our prisons are in there either for substance abuse or they have a history of substance abuse even though the particular crime they committed was not related to drugs. So, you can see how much drugs can impact our lives. It destroys you. These are all statistics, facts.
Let me give you an example – what it does. We call him Edy, a young boy, six years old, both parents were jailed for drugs. He happened to be in the care of another person called Johan. Johan was also a drug abuser, forms an ecosystem, a separate subculture. Johan slapped around Edy, stomped on him repeatedly, on the six-year-old boy, killed him and dumped his body by the Kallang River.
You know there are thousands of such cases, not in Singapore but around the world. Most Members might have heard of Noinoi. She had a stepfather, Mohd Johari, abusing cannabis, cough syrups, brought her home as a shield to hide his own abuse, thought that having her there, bringing her with him will prevent detection. She was only two years old. She was crying, he could not take it, he dumped her in a pail and killed her.
Those who think we should go soft on drugs, on punishment, what is your solution to the thousands of \"Edys\" and \"Noinois\" around the world who are neglected, abused and suffering?
If you look at the trend, if I give a summary, you have a new generation of abusers. They are younger, they have different profiles, backgrounds and the situation can again become more troublesome, even if it does not get out of control. Our primary duty must be to protect our society and our people and stand up together as a country.
Most Members' suggestions are in line with where we want to go. And I agree with Mr Christopher de Souza as well as the others who spoke. We will maintain a tough stance and we will step up. We will review our strategy for the new challenges. It will be targeted. It will differentiate between those who supply and cause harm versus those who are abusers and, where possible, we will employ a data-based, science-based approach.
Our first line of defence has got to be education, preventive drug education. We have worked for decades with MOE − school talks, lesson plans, so that our young people will understand. A Member mentioned Iceland. Coincidentally, we have also looked at Iceland. Our people are going over to Iceland to look at how they send their messages across, because this is a generation that when you tell them \"do not do this\", they might go and do it. So, you need different approaches and Iceland does seem to have an approach that seems to work, but their problems are different, the scale is different. But we never believe that we have found the ultimate solutions for anything. We will always seek to learn.
And we have to work with parents because the parents are key influencers.
The NCADA survey shows that if a parent interacts with the children, they talk to their children, the risks that the child will take drugs is much lower. We have produced a parents' toolkit for that. Young people are also heavily influenced by peer and environmental influence. So, we need to grow a pool of anti-drug advocates amongst their peers, amongst young people's peers. And we need volunteers, we need more individuals, we need more organisations, civil societies, interest groups, businesses. CNB will launch United Against Drugs Coalition later this month and also review the way it puts across messages. We need to mobilise the ground.
Second, effective enforcement and tough laws are part of it. Last year, CNB crippled 23 drug syndicates. We will have to increase partnerships with overseas counterparts and we will have to tackle the new online supply menace, as Mr Christopher de Souza and others have mentioned. We will partner ICA, we will partner courier companies, postal companies, and we will move quickly.
Last year, ICA detected a suspicious parcel and alerted CNB. Within a matter of hours, CNB arrested the intended recipient and seized more than one kilogramme of cannabis. Without that, that one kilogramme would have flowed on to the streets and destroyed more lives.
Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan talked about the recent acquittals and how it will affect sentencing approach. Keeping our laws effective for deterrence, enforcement is a top priority. We will relook at the comments made in those cases. We have started doing it and will ensure that investigations are conducted thoroughly and impartially. AGC will help us study the Grounds of Decisions on that.
The NCADA survey that I referred to also shows a very strong support for our tough laws. People want us to be tougher on those who harm society, those who bring drugs in, those who provide it to others, especially young people, and those who encourage others. We will have to study how we deal with the issue of new psycho-active substances, how we amend the Schedules and what we need to do.
Members spoke about the amendments in 2012 to the Mandatory Death Penalty Scheme, in the context of drugs and drug trafficking, and whether they have been helpful. We gave the Courts more discretion, where the trafficker is certified to have helped CNB. It has been helpful. The information provided has contributed to the arrest of almost 90 drug traffickers.
What role does the death penalty play in this? It is an important part in our comprehensive anti-drug regime. And as I have said, part of an overall approach, which will not work on its own but it is a part of an overall set of measures − good judicial process, rule of law, enforcement, tough laws, education, rehabilitation and also DRC and LT.
Remember, this fight is never won. We are in a difficult situation, being close to drug-producing countries and we have maintained the death penalty as deterrence against trafficking. The quantity of drugs that you need to have in your possession before the death penalty kicks in, presumptions kick in, is enough heroin to supply 180 people for seven days. That is a large amount of drugs. That is a large number of people that you are going to destroy the lives of. And you multiply that by the number of family members.
What is the regional situation? In Malaysia, the registered drug abusers numbered 280,000, as reported by the New Straits Times. In Indonesia, there are 5.9 million drug abusers. What is the nature of the drug trade today? The finance comes from one country, could be manufactured somewhere in some terrace house, somewhere nearby Singapore, and couriers are easily available because they want to make some money.
Do you believe that the death penalty has deterrent value? If you knew and you are outside of Singapore, you are in Malaysia or Indonesia, and if you knew that the likelihood of being caught is pretty high and that if you are caught with that amount of drugs, that you are most likely to face a death penalty, does that or does not amount to a deterrence? It is a matter of common sense. Why do you think the drug kingpins are not in Singapore? Mr Kok Heng Leun wants me to prove; how do you want me to prove? Go and ask them, \"You will not come into Singapore because of the drug death penalty?\"
Just remember that trafficking is a cold calculated offence. It is a transaction. The person decides to take a risk with his life, when he comes to Singapore for the sake of money. So, do not tell me they are poor, impecunious and desperate. They made a calculation. They do not mind impacting the lives of 180 people each time.
Mr Kok Heng Leun suggested that we change some of our laws. As we consider how we proceed, why not consider the countries which have adopted your approach? And then compare and contrast. Why not look around? Let us not argue this in a vacuum. See what is happening in countries which have poor enforcements or have legalised drugs. I entirely accept Mr Kok's good intentions and the honesty of the views he has put forward. But frankly, they will lead to the loss of many more lives and they will lead to more tragedy and serious grief for thousands.
Let me back that up. In the early 1990s, we were arresting between 6,000 and 7,000 people per year. Today, we are arresting between 2,000 and 3,000 per year; over a 20-year period. Even if you take the lower end of those figures, say, 3,000 now and 6,000 then. That is 3,000 less per year, over a period of 20 years and assuming it came down, you are talking about tens of thousands, maybe 40,000, 50,000 lives saved because our enforcement ability has not gone down but we are arresting less people. That means, our drug situation, that demand for it has gone down. Every person not arrested who has not become an abuser is a life saved. So, we have saved maybe 40,000 or 50,000 lives or maybe more.
If all things were equal between the 1990s and today, we were arresting 6,000 to 7,000 then, the number should be higher now, because we are wealthier now. The drug production has increased, it has become more of a multinational enterprise, so perhaps, it should have been doubled; we should be arresting 15,000 people or maybe 18,000 people. But we are actually arresting fewer people. We have saved lives. How do you argue against that?
If you look at what you have said, first, you said that a person charged for an offence of importation is automatically presumed guilty once the prosecution shows that the accused was merely in possession of the package containing the drugs. Do you really believe that, Mr Kok?
Because that, as a statement of law, makes no sense. It is an incorrect statement. I do not know whether you wrote the speech, but that is simply not correct.
You have also suggested: there is a rule that involuntary statements are inadmissible but we do not really know what happens in the interrogation room; how statements are obtained on witness' testimony; and there is no requirement of recording of any kind. In a drug case, Mr Kok, what needs to be proven? Possession. What the drug is is a matter of scientific evidence; quantity is a matter of scientific evidence. So, what are you suggesting would happen in witness' rooms that might lead to these suggestions that you have implied in your speech?
I do not know if you know how it works, but the prosecution will have to prove those things. The defence will have to prove that the person did not know what it was, which is usually a defence that is run by many people, and you complained about that as well in your speech, because you say the onus must be on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt all the ingredients of the offence.
Let me tell you what the difficulties are in going down that route, because these people come from overseas. The usual variety of defences and let me read out to you a couple. A person was arrested at Woodlands checkpoint. He has got 145 grams of diamorphine. He said he travelled to Kuala Lumpur to look for job opportunities. He was introduced to a man known as \"Uncle\". \"Uncle\" then passed him 10 packets of substances and taped these on to his body. This chap then claimed he asked \"Uncle\" what they were for, but \"Uncle\" showed him three fingers in reply. And he accepted it. He was not aware of the contents, and he came here. Now, you want the prosecution to rebut this? This is why our first Prime Minister, who was a lawyer, knew what the problems would be and reversed the onus of proof. You talked about an \"Uncle\" you met in Kuala Lumpur; you show to the judge that there is such an \"Uncle\" and the \"Uncle\" told you all these things; and what was in your mind? So, again, I do not know whether you drafted this part of the speech or some lawyer drafted it for you, but you got to look at it in context. How does CNB go and prove?
Let me give you another example. This chap, convicted in 2008. He was asked by one \"Maren\" to deliver items in Singapore. He was told that it was medicine. He was told that it was rare and expensive, that it was wrapped up so that it could not be spoilt by coming into contact with air. And so he went to Johor, met \"Maren\" and brought it over. You want CNB to disprove this? You think it is possible? Or do you think it is fair that the accused should prove it?
I have a favourite term for defences of this nature. I call them as someone saying it is a shampoo for my pet toad that I got and I brought it into Singapore. So, if that is what you want to say, go and prove it. We are dealing with lives here. The life of a trafficker, yes. But we are also dealing with thousands of Singaporean lives. And the person must get a fair trial. Prosecution must prove what was the substance, how much was it, and possession, and any other evidence they can find. If the person has a defence, it is only fair that he proves it.
So far, all these points, while I may disagree with the Member, I can see where he is coming from. But the next point he makes, and let me quote him, he said he would like to \"speak on the humanity of the families of those executed and those who have their loved ones on death row. While we do not see it, the reality is that our criminal punishment, the death penalty, creates a new class of victims in the families of the death row inmates. The family members are innocent people. They found themselves having their loved ones taken away from them. In conversation with a former death row convict who was acquitted by our Court of Appeal, I am struck by the poignancy of how he described the impact of the death penalty on his family.\"
But should not our hearts also go out to the victims, the \"Edys\" and the \"Noinois\", the girl who was four months old that Mr Christopher de Souza described, who was in the car locked up while her mother was dazed by drugs? Now, you spoke with someone who was in this situation. I have spoken with many of the victims and their families − a lot of them. And I do not want them to suffer and I do not want more people to suffer as a result of someone making a cynical calculation between his life and getting a few hundred ringgits.
And everyone has families. Victims have families, too. So, for every one person who brings in the drugs, there are several hundred people who suffer. The Prof Michael Hor that Mr Kok Heng Leun quoted was my classmate. And he knows and he has said – in the same conference that Mr Kok referred to – he knows this Government and he does not see that it will change its position on drugs. He knows me.
The question then is: do you want to take the risk of dismantling one key part of the deterrence that we have and take a chance? You also say in one part, Mr Kok: is the approach really to put in tougher laws? But at the same time, you also say you accept that the current enforcement is good and the current legal framework is good, other than the death penalty. Again, it appears contradictory. So, I am not sure quite exactly what you mean. And you tell us, of the 1,400 individuals that were placed in 2015 in DRC, 820 had Secondary education, 300 had Primary education, six no education. And you said this gives some indication that it is the inadequacy and gaps in our social and economic institutions, rather than the failure of not having implemented more punitive punishment on drug consumption and drug trafficking that the problem lies.
What are the inadequacy and gaps in our social and economic institutions that lead to this drug abuse? I hope you will clarify exactly what social institutions you are referring to, what economic institutions you are referring to, and what gaps and, causatively, how they relate to the drug problem. I think you should, when you make a statement like that. And I mean causatively. Tell me what the gaps are in the social institutions, which ones, what are the gaps in economic institutions and how do they really lead causatively to these 821 people getting into drugs.
I told you the backgrounds vary, their education backgrounds vary. There are professionals being picked up. And if you go and look at the backgrounds in other countries, you will see a whole strata of people getting into drug abuse. It is not restricted. You go soft, that is what will happen.
Mr Deputy Speaker:\tMr Shanmugam, you are close to your time limit. Deputy Leader, would you like to move the exemption?
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Time Limit for Minister's Speech","subTitle":"Suspension of Standing Orders","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Deputy Leader (Mr Desmond Lee):\tMr Deputy Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move, \"That the proceedings on the item under discussion be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 48(8) to remove the time limit in respect of the speech by the Minister for Home Affairs.\"
Mr Deputy Speaker: I give my consent. Does the Deputy Leader of the House have the general assent of hon Members present here to so move?
Hon Members indicated assent.
[(proc text) With the consent of Mr Deputy Speaker and the general assent of Members present, question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the proceedings on the item under discussion be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 48(8) to remove the time limit in respect of the speech by the Minister for Home Affairs.\" − [Mr Desmond Lee]. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Strengthening Singapore's Fight Against Drugs","subTitle":"Debate resumed","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mr K Shanmugam: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Now, if I put together the points that Mr Kok has made: first, it is the fault of the socio-economic gaps; second, we should make our laws less strict; third, we should do away with the death penalty; and, fourth, we should give a lot of empathy to the drug abusers and their families.
Pray tell me where that will lead us and how that will solve the drug issues. You think the drug kingpins who want to make millions out of bringing drugs into Singapore will then be deterred? The couriers who want to make money by bringing it into Singapore, they will be deterred because we show them a lot of empathy? And the abusers in Singapore will be transformed as well? You just have to look at the example of other countries.
In all of these, in public policymaking, you need a soft heart; you need compassion and that is what defines a civilised human being. But you can never have a soft head. If the heart alone rules policy, you are done for. I will say this: as a parliamentarian, you have a right to make these points. But as Minister for Home Affairs, I do not have the right to give effect to any suggestion which I believe will harm thousands of people and ruin our society. In fact, it is my duty to do the reverse.
Support for our penalties amongst our population, as Members know, is very high. When REACH did a poll last year, 80% supported retaining the death penalty, 10% wanted to abolish it, 10% had no position or refuse to answer. Also, 82% agreed that it was an important deterrent to keep Singapore safe from serious crimes.
NUS conducted a survey on public opinion in 2016. Again, even in their survey, public support for the death penalty was very high − 70% of the respondents were in favour. But asked specifically what the penalty should be for intentional murder, trafficking in illegal drugs and discharging a firearm, the proportion in favour of the death penalty was even higher, ranging from 86% to 92%. But the NUS survey also presented a nuanced picture of public support for the death penalty. The support dropped when this question was asked, that if it can be shown that the death penalty was no more effective as a deterrent to others like life imprisonment, or a very long prison sentence, that means it is not effective and you can substitute it with something else; if you ask people that question, yes, the support then drops. If it is suggested that innocent people could have been executed, then the support drops.
If a certain framework is put into the question and then you get a number and you come to the Government and say, \"Therefore, change your policy\", we have to look at the questions you asked. But in any event, this is one of those areas where the Government has the duty to assess the facts carefully, the data carefully, and come to the best judgement that it can.
As I have said in public, no Government glorifies in having the death penalty or imposing it on anyone. How can anyone be happy about it? If they do it, they do it with a heavy heart. But you do it because of the greater public good. And you do it based on your best judgement and assessment, not on the basis of advice given by people who argue from an ideological point of view. We are not dogmatic about this. We will listen to arguments. We will listen to people. We will listen to anyone with a good point of view, and we will make up our mind.
Next, we move to rehabilitation. Abusers, as Mr Christopher de Souza and others have said, must be committed to kicking the habit. As Nominated Member of Parliament Kuik Shiao-Yin said, can we consider shortening the incarceration period because of the impact it has on the families? The incarceration periods are looked at regularly, whether it is for DRC, or whether it is for LT1, LT2. There is a set of reasons why we have structured it as DRC and then LT1 and LT2. There is some methodology behind it and we continuously review the methodology.
But in the end, it has to, first, serve as a deterrence; second, keep society from being harmed by that individual; and third, what is necessary for that individual to rehabilitate him. The environment that is chosen will depend on what the individual needs, and I will explain that in a while.
Every abuser has different risk levels and different motivational factors. Our Prison Service tailors rehabilitation accordingly. Other programmes include family programmes, skills training and religious services. For lower risk inmates, they have a day release programme, they go for work or study during the day, minimises disruption. They are placed on community-based programmes to reconnect to the community, to help them transition to normal life. Some are at halfway houses, some go home and community support is instrumental, we recognise that.
Since 1995, 15,000 DRC inmates have gone through the community-based programme with an 85% completion rate. Some Members mentioned rehabilitation for young people, including Asst Prof Mohan. Again, we look at the young people, if they are lower risk, then they go for what we call the youth enhanced supervision scheme which involves counselling and case work. Others go to the Community Rehabilitation Centre (CRC) which I have just talked about.
But we will also look at some of the suggestions that Members have mentioned.
Mr Kok Heng Leun suggested Arts programmes. Rehabilitation is something the Singapore Prison Service is very passionate about, as can be seen from the Yellow Ribbon programme. We think we should try to pick them up even before they commit an offence based on some profiles and we should try to change behaviour before. If we fail in that and they come in, we should try to change behaviour inside. But when they go out, we should also try to support them. And anything that works, based on science, based on evidence, we will be prepared to consider.
People talked about family and community support. I accept it is crucial to help abusers stay strong when they come out. There are structured family programmes in prisons, skills to strengthen the bonds, joint sessions with the family. I am not saying by any means that it is perfect and that it cannot be improved or that we are where we want to be. But we have thought about these things, we have introduced these and they continue to be refined, changed, worked on.
Families may also need help. So, the Singapore Prison Service has set up a Family Resource Centre, it has got the Yellow Ribbon community project to encourage families to visit abusers in DRCs. Family relationships are complex, different families, different types of relationships. It requires long-term effort, even after release. We have volunteers who continue to follow up via the Yellow Ribbon Community Project. We have talked to the Association of Muslim Professionals who have said they will come in to provide family casework in their new rehabilitation programme.
Let me share a story, this is in the context of what Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin said about halfway houses.
Salim started abusing substances in his teens, 20 years, two decades. He abused heroin, ice, alcohol. At one point, he lost his family support. He could not even face himself. Then, he went to Pertapis halfway house. Things changed. He was moved and struck by the unwavering support from the staff of Pertapis. He has now been clean for more than 10 years. He is paying it forward as Chairman of the family support group for Pertapis. He strongly believes in not giving up on abusers even when their families have given up on them. He himself has experienced how community support can change lives.
Asst Prof Madhev Mohan said rehabilitation is important. I think I have made the point. It may be that, in Singapore, our message on deterrence and our tough laws have been so strong that the fact that we put a lot of emphasis on rehabilitation probably has not come through. But you can take it that we put a lot of effort on rehabilitation.
He also referred to a specific case where he felt the prosecutors made submissions which were perhaps not appropriate or a bit too harsh. The Member knows that I do not control prosecutors' submissions; nor should I, nor would you want me to. But I will certainly pass on what you said to the AGC.
For young drug abusers, the emphasis has to be on rehabilitation, so that they can have a drug-free life ahead of them. We have a variety of programmes. If they are below the age of 21, they undergo counselling and casework management for a period of six months, and that is non-residential. If they are of moderate risk, they are then sent to the Community Rehabilitation Centre. We call them CRCs. They started operations in 2014 and that allows them to continue with their education and employment in the day with minimal disruption. Higher risk young people will require more intensive rehabilitation, they will be in the DRC. Even in there, we have split them into low risk, moderate risk and high risk with different types of treatment for the three categories.
We also started the Anti-Drug and Counselling Engagement or ACE, programme which was started last year for young drug abusers who have confessed to drug abuse but, for one reason or another, they have tested negative in the urine test. This is a three-month programme and includes counselling and we equip them with skills to cope with their addictions. We get their parents involved. But two hands need to clap. Often, we find that the parents are not willing to come forward. I have asked my people to consider whether, legislatively, we can do something, that the parents also have a duty.
Coming back to some of the points that Members have made, on the international front, we do not want to be isolated. Within ASEAN, yes, members, in their domestic situation, may take different approaches. But they sign up to refusing to accept the legalisation of drugs. They continue to support criminalisation and there is an ASEAN coalition supporting it and there are a few other countries which adopt the same approach. We cooperate together in the international arena. We have to have a sensible dialogue with others of a different persuasion and perhaps agree that they have their viewpoint and we have our own viewpoint. Different countries should be allowed to have different viewpoints.
In conclusion, if I may say so, Sir, we face international challenges, we face different types of local challenges, we will step up our efforts, we will review our drug strategy. But we need the community's support and it must be a national priority to keep drugs under control.
Today's Motion and the speeches of the Members, even Mr Kok Heng Leun's speech, give me considerable comfort because I think we are on the same page, that this has to be taken seriously and you reflect the perspectives in the world of the people in many ways. Given that there is a broad variety of viewpoints that have been expressed, almost everyone consistently supporting a strong stand, save for some difference on the part of Mr Kok relating to specific penalties. I think that shows where the weight of public opinion stands on this. [Applause.]
Mr Deputy Speaker:\tMr Kok Heng Leun.
Mr Kok Heng Leun:\tI would like to thank the Minister for the response to my points. I would like to now then also respond.
Mr Deputy Speaker:\tPlease seek your clarification and not make another speech.
Mr Kok Heng Leun:\tYes, but I think some things I need a bit of time to articulate.
Mr Deputy Speaker:\tMr Kok, that would be out of order.
Mr Kok Heng Leun:\tYes, okay, can. I think I did articulate in my speech that I do think that a strong stance is important in dealing with drug issues. My personal experience when I was young living in Geylang in the 1970s where the back alleys had so many gangsters and drug problems. I have gone through the experience with my mom telling me not to go out by the back alley because it is dangerous. So, those experiences are real for me to say —
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Kok, you are making another speech.
Mr Kok Heng Leun: Yes. Secondly, I would like to also affirm that from the speeches that I get and the Minister's response that vigilance is very important and the vigilance of our Police force has helped a lot to actually contain the drug problems.
Thirdly, I want to address also the issues about the social gaps which I mentioned in my speech. I want to clarify that it was not a statement to critique the system that we have. However, we have heard in the House quite a lot of times that even with all the social nets that we have put in, all the systems that we have put in, there will be people who have fallen through the nets.
In this particular case, a lot of them because of their experience and in that condition, that makes them very susceptible to take up addictions, like drug addictions or alcoholic addictions. So, I am referring to that rather than a critique on the system.
What I am concerned is then, in the end, how can we help these abusers and that is why rehabilitative work, for me, is so important. I want to also reiterate that I have equal and not any lesser empathy for the families of the drug abusers. Again, my experience has told me − I have seen a lot of them − it is that philosophical stand, especially in terms of the death penalty, that I have problems with, personally.
With regard to all the rebuttals that the Minister had in terms of the whole criminal investigation process, I take the Minister's point. I will go back and do more homework. I think that is very interesting, that is something that I am learning. I will take that and go back and work on it. When we have enough time, we can probably have another discussion.
Mr Deputy Speaker:\tThank you, Mr Kok. Minister, would you like to respond to that? Please keep it brief.
Mr K Shanmugam: I will. Vigilance, Mr Kok, is not a substitute for other things. We need vigilance, we also need the other aspects that I spoke about. My particular point was on what basis do you conclude that it is the social economic gap that leads some people to go into drugs? If so, what do you think we can do about it or what more do you think we can do about it. But that is a discussion we can have some other time. I note your difference in philosophy on the death penalty. People are entitled to have different viewpoints on that.
Mr Christopher de Souza: Sir, I would like to thank the 11 Members, including the Minister for Home Affairs, for speaking on this Motion and for their support. What they have shared is insightful and appreciated.
As Dr Tan Wu Meng has expressed, \"policy choices… set the tone for decades… and shape the lives of a generation.\" We have to stay vigilant for the sake of those who fall prey to harmful drugs and their families. It is important that the laws send a strong signal to those thinking of trafficking that it is not worth the transaction. As Minister Shanmugam has highlighted − this is a battle − it is regional and it is organised. That is the nature of what we are facing. As Ms Tin Pei Ling has shared, stiff penalties are not something anyone would wish to see applied and yet they are necessary, necessary for deterrence.
Mr Vikram Nair and Mr Alex Yam touched on the importance of our laws which deter the supply of drugs. While they may differ on how the laws should be carried out, there is something in common that binds − the need to ensure that our drug supply laws are relevant enough to stem the supply of drugs. To that end, I had suggested a regular review of the Misuse of Drugs Act.
My first suggestion is to calibrate the punishment of drug trafficking to take into account the harmfulness of cocktailed drugs. Some contaminants increase potency and lower the cost to produce. The consequences of a cocktailed drug can be more devastating to the drug user.
Secondly, as Mr Alex Yam and Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar's points illustrate, it is important that our laws are able to deal effectively with synthetic drugs. It is for this reason that I suggested that the First Schedule be flexible enough to deal with the influx of new psycho-active substances and that the move from the Fifth Schedule to the First Schedule be prompt enough to frame a drug trafficking charge. This does not just restrict but also deter the supply of such drugs before they can gain a sizeable demand.
Thirdly, Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan and Mr Alex Yam highlighted the need to stem the \"route\" of drugs being shipped in through the Internet. This is why I proposed that a new offence be created with an enhanced punishment regime to tackle trafficking and recruiting through the Internet.
Technology transcends geographical boundaries and, in this instance, it has turned dark. Through the Dark Net, drugs have become accessible. In a BBC documentary, a journalist ordered drugs online. It was an eBay-like user experience, it was in quick order processing time of mere hours and there was a delivery in ordinary-looking packages containing the drugs.
Our region is not spared. This is a headline from the New Straits Times. It reads: \"Drug pushers using WhatsApp, WeChat to sell, recruit school kids\". This was dated just two months ago, 2 February 2017. We must be wary that social media can turn into a Trojan horse if left unwatched.
Besides the Internet component, the other suggestion is the need to tackle the upward trend of drug abuse among those under 30. This trend has been raised by Ms Tin Pei Ling. As Dr Intan Mokhtar has highlighted through her stories, this is, indeed, a worrying trend. Look at the top graph. Please look at the top of the graph. The top bright blue line snaking out at the top, way above the rest − that is what we should be concerned about. That line shows that the number of drug abusers arrested from between 20 and 29 years of age hit the 1,000 mark and over in 2015 and 2016. This is the situation we are dealing with. We need to do something about it.
To this end, the thrust of my third to sixth suggestions was to introduce new provisions in the Misuse of Drugs Act to deter trafficking and recruitment via the Internet, especially among those under 30 years of age.
Our strong deterrent laws garnered support from Mr Vikram Nair, Ms Tin Pei Ling, Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin, Mr Alex Yam and Dr Tan Wu Meng. They agreed that strong deterrent laws continue to be important and have played an important part in Singapore's relative success. While they look at the need for deterrent laws to the drug abuser to stay away from drugs, they also recognised the need to rehabilitate, reintegrate and restore the drug abuser into society.
As Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin puts it quite nicely, we are holding \"both punitive justice and restorative mercy in tension\", \"a strong anti-drug stance against the traffickers paired with an equally strong pro-rehabilitation stance for the addicts.\"
An integral part and an important part is the family − this is because the family and the children suffer, too, when the drug abuser is put into incarceration for extended periods of time. As Ms Kuik has put it, \"The last thing we want is for kids to grow up motherless or fatherless which in turn increases the next generation's risk of falling into similar patterns of drug abuse and incarceration.\"
Mr Louis Ng expressed the importance of reaching out to the family within the first week.
An important initiative, as mentioned by Minister Shanmugam, is the Yellow Ribbon Community Project. In the second phase of the project, grassroots volunteers reach out to the new inmates' families by visiting them and grafting them into the community through events. They also connect them with much-needed resources and practical support. Accountability and effectiveness are enhanced through regular communication and updates.
Mr Louis Ng had also an interesting insight to share: \"The drug consumption might be the symptom of a problem… The lack of strong family bonds might [be] the reason they consumed drugs in the first place.\"
Supplementing the hon Member's point, I would like to share one example of a type of family therapy that addresses these problems. There is a family therapy intervention exercise described in Friedman and Granick's book entitled Family Therapy for Adolescent Drug Abuse. It seeks to restructure the maladaptive aspects of the family system, such as, crisis management, guilt and the burden of redemption and, thereafter establish a method for controlling or eliminating substance abuse. It also includes education about the effects and dependence process of drug use.
Mr Louis Ng and Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin have given moving examples of how bonding with children may be the best motivation for rehabilitation. One, in particular, that stood out for me is inmate mothers recording bedtime stories for their children. This just shows how a small gesture can go a long way. We should move beyond increased visitation time and increase such precious bonding opportunities to form a cornerstone of rehabilitation.
Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan has highlighted the need for rehabilitation. Perhaps something that could be looked into, alongside what Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin raised on art-based rehabilitative programmes, is reconditioning, the over-writing of old thought patterns by new ones.
One example is Healing Broken Circles in Ohio, which does rehabilitation programmes in an incarceration setting. \"Offered in a safe environment where participants feel they belong, learn concepts [and] master skills\", its strength-based programmes provide participants healthy ways of expressing themselves, through art and courses of higher thinking and higher learning. These are important qualities to overcome the hurdles of reintegration. Again, we need not be so liberal in terms of the freedom provided, but it is nonetheless worth a study whether their programmes can fit into an incarceration model like DRC.
Positive peer support can be facilitated. Ms Tin Pei Ling, Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin and Nominated Member of Parliament Mr Kok Heng Leun touched on the importance of accountability even through art − a key component, in my opinion, to good peer support and rehabilitation.
One example is Japan's Drug Addiction Rehabilitation Centre (DARC). It is staffed mostly by those who have recovered from drug dependence. It was reported in 2006 that three quarters of the previous users maintain sobriety. One of the reasons for the high rating from the users is \"the companionship from recovered addicts and flexible frameworks to enhance drug addicts' motivation to recover.\" This is just one example of how positive peer support can be facilitated.
The message to the former drug addict should be, \"We want you to come back into the community\". As Mr Alex Yam movingly shared, \"the most important reassurance to recovering addicts is that they have a place at the table, that they are not abandoned by society.\"
To have a place at the table, the former inmate must receive post-release support. A good local initiative is Singapore Anti-Narcotics Association's anonymous live chat service on its talk2sana online portal launched just last month. This looks to be widely accessible, yet personalised. More such ground-up initiatives can be encouraged.
On the third point of the Motion, culture, there was broad support to resist pro-illicit-drug propaganda. Mr Pritam Singh emphasised the need for preventive education to deter the pro-drug culture from embedding itself here. I thank Mr Singh for his contribution to the debate. It is significant that we have bipartisan support for this important, collective battle against a pro-drug culture.
Dr Intan Mokhtar, when we heard her talk about her son and what he faces in school, I was reminded again of how close to home this problem of drugs is. It must not have been easy to share, but thank you for sharing.
To add on to Dr Intan's point on the need to reach out to students and post-Secondary institutions, I think that it is important that students be taught the host of ills about drugs from a young age, but not just why they should stay away from drugs but also how to stay away from drugs.
The National Council Against Drug Abuse Youth Perception Survey in 2013 showed that while \"96.5% of youths whose parents had spoken to them about drugs and drug abuse reported that those conversations have deterred them from taking drugs\", only \"less than half of the youths had conversations with their parents on drugs and drug abuse.\"
This battle for the mindshare of young Singaporeans is not something we can under-estimate. As Dr Intan Mokhtar's account of her son has well illustrated, this battle is not far off. We need to be vigilant. Parents need to know that: (a) it is a matter that they should be concerned about and (b) that they matter − that parents matter.
Mr Vikram Nair raised an important query whether the amendments in 2012 have caused a perception in the minds of potential drug traffickers that we have softened our stance. It is a valid query. Will MHA study this? And if, indeed, MHA forms the view that the discretionary punishment mechanism has caused an increase in drug trafficking, we should seriously consider removing that discretionary mechanism and reverting back to the mandatory punishment regime. Given the consequences of drug trafficking to innocent victims in society, it is a legitimate query and needs to be responded to.
Within this Motion, Nominated Member Mr Kok Heng Leun has questioned capital punishment. As mover of the Motion, I am prepared to tell Mr Kok what I believe in and why.
Firstly, I am not here baying for blood. Nobody here cheers the idea of putting another person to death. Nobody here wants to have to pronounce the death penalty on another person. But I also care about the victims of drug trafficking. We must also speak up for the innocent children of addicts who endure weeks, months, years of emotional neglect, physical neglect and abuse. I also care for the addicts who suffer slow and lingering deaths and the victims of violent drug-related crimes. Introducing people to drugs through drug trafficking results in slow and agonising deaths for them and years of pain for their families.
In response to the Nominated Member, let me provide an explanation on practical grounds first. Then, I will explain the principle and justifications following that. I do not disrespect the Nominated Member's view. It is just that I do not agree with them.
First, the practical explanation. Any discussion on capital punishment must start with a query whether our legal system offers the environment needed to ensure that capital punishment does deter future drug trafficking crimes or, at least, reduces the incidence of such future crimes. No system is perfect. But I believe our system does have the attributes required to ensure that punishments meted out by the Courts, including capital punishment, do deter future crime.
Why do I say this? It is because we are a society governed by the rule of law. What does this mean? Firstly, we have an effective judicial service and an efficient one. Second, the investigative body in the form of the Singapore Police Force and the Central Narcotics Bureau is impartial and efficient. In short, investigations are carried out professionally.
With regard to the insightful point raised by Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan, I would respond that where the investigations do not meet the standards required by the Courts to meet the burden of proof, then the conviction is not meted out. Rather, an acquittal is given. This was so in the recent case of Harven vs Public Prosecutor decided just two weeks ago. Two Judges in the Court of Appeal found the burden of proof was not met − Justice Chao Hick Tin delivering the majority decision; Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon concurring. One judge, Justice Tay Yong Kwang found it was met. This is the merit of our system − an independent assessment of the facts by three independent judges. The result, an acquittal.
Developing the ethos behind Asst Prof Mahdev's points, I am open to further safeguards, such as having three judges sit at first instance for capital trials and five judges sitting in the Court of Appeal for all capital appeals. That would make the process even more thorough for the sake of the trafficker. And I hope the suggestion will be considered.
Third, within that rubric of rule of law, the potential offender, in this case, the potential drug trafficker, knows that if he is caught in Singapore, the law will be applied against him. He cannot bribe or manoeuvre out of the reach of the law. So, if the case is proven against him, he will receive the relevant sentence. In that sense, the law is predictable.
Fourthly, when punishments are meted out, they are publicised so the potential drug trafficker knows that if he commits a certain crime, he will be punished. That awareness is important to deter future crime, or diminish the incidence of future crime.
The Singapore legal system is possessed with all of these attributes and so it is a conducive environment for the sentencing rationale of deterrence to operate in. Furthermore, drug trafficking is a rational crime. The drug trafficker weighs profit to himself compared to punishment. And because of the attributes of our legal system, he knows that he will receive the punishment if he is caught and the case is proven against him.
It is not in every country in the world that you have all those positive attributes at play within a legal system and we must work hard to keep those positive attributes.
So, my practical conclusion is that capital punishment can and does deter future crime in Singapore. It is a system that works well now and, until and unless a better and more effective system can be set up, I say we keep the present raft of muscular laws. If we take it away, there is every chance that the deterrence against future crimes will be removed or diminished. I cannot speak for other countries. But as for Singapore, in my view, it deters.
Let me now move on to the explanation based on principle. I first had to analyse the issue of capital punishment as a judicial officer assisting the Court of Appeal and as a prosecutor in the Attorney-General's Chambers when I first started legal practice. I had to deal with capital cases. They were never easy cases. We had to search our minds; we had to search our inner selves, to do what was right by society and the individual alleged offender.
In the AG's Chambers, I remember prosecuting a capital case. The offender had murdered his landlord. Why? Because he wanted to steal money from his landlord to fuel his drug addiction. Drugs and drug trafficking destroy lives. Let us be completely clear about that. In this case, drug trafficking supplied a man with drugs and he eventually killed, murdered to fuel his addiction. He received capital punishment. So, I have been there. I knew that the consequences of a case proven will lead to capital punishment. It is never easy but it is required.
As a judicial officer, I worked closely with the Court of Appeal, then-Chief Justice Yong Pung How and Judge of Appeal Chao Hick Tin. Capital appeals would go up for hearing and I would support the judges by analysing the arguments on appeal with them. I remember one case clearly where the capital punishment decision was reversed and the offender was given 10 years' imprisonment. In other cases, capital punishment was upheld. In each instance, all those individuals, all those involved, had to think deeply about what was right in each case.
From those experiences, I now know the importance of what we discuss and debate in this House when we make laws for our land. I am convinced that we should not remove a needed legal weapon, in the form of capital punishment, in our fight against drug trafficking. To remove it, in my view, would be to harm even more innocent victims.
Fifteen milligrammes of diamorphine sustain 180 abusers for a week. Assuming four members per addict, that is 900 people affected. As regards my example of 900 people, for how long are they affected? If the drug is highly addictive, that addict would be on it for years, psychologically killing himself and his family, slowly, over weeks, months, years. Nine hundred people. That is equivalent to 30 platoons.
The real question we have to ask ourselves today is whether we, as a society, want to risk a potential increase in the supply of life-destroying drugs into Singapore, higher number of addicts, higher number of innocent families destroyed if we remove capital punishment for drug trafficking.
Protecting the hard, muscular position against drug trafficking protects even more innocent victims plunging into the horrendous clutches of addiction. As Deputy Prime Minister Teo mentioned in the 2012 Misuse of Drugs Amendment (MDA) debate, and I quote, \"We know that the mandatory death penalty has a deterrent effect because drug traffickers deliberately try to keep the amounts they carry to below the capital punishment threshold.\" So, for these principled reasons, in addition to the practical reasons that I have laid out, I do not think it wise, for the sake of the innocent victims, to go soft against traffickers.
I would also like to ask a few questions. What if drugs were offered to your children in the playground, any of our children in the playground? What if drugs were offered to your or our children in school? Once they consume them, there is every chance their health, their mental well-being, their futures will be destroyed.
How many of us have actually seen a drug addict, met with a drug addict? I have. I have visited the DRC on more than one occasion and seen addicts desperately trying to overcome addiction.
In the DRC, one addict shared with me that he started consuming drugs when he was 13 years of age. Compassion for the trafficker who trafficked to him − a 13-year-old? He was nearly 20 years old when we spoke. You want to have compassion against a trafficker who trafficks to potentially 13-year-olds?
When I studied in England and when I took a train from King's Cross, St Pancras, I saw a drug addict on the sidewalk. Her fingers were bitten through. Flesh was present where her fingernails should have been. I saw her offering herself as a prostitute so she could fuel her drug addiction. It left a deep impression on me to see a life of promise so devastated by drugs.
In the constituency I serve, in Singapore, just on Friday night, I met a former drug addict. He came to my MPS. He wants to stay off drugs and pass his urine test. He showed me a photo of himself in his youth, full of promise and health. He now looks a totally different picture − tired, worn.
So, you want to have compassion? Yes, compassion for society, compassion for innocent children of addicts, compassion for families.
In closing, Sir, drug trafficking is a coldly calculated crime. Tough laws today save lives. Loosen the laws, multitudes of innocent families will suffer. What we debate today is a key decision. What we must hold today is a crucial line − tough laws against drug traffickers; investing in the rehabilitation of drug addicts and preventing a drug-tolerant culture from being established in Singapore. I trust and hope that the House will hold, protect and defend that line today. [Applause.]
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That this House strengthens the fight against drugs by reaffirming Singapore's strong anti-drug stance and calls on the Government to continue (a) applying tough laws to deter the trafficking of drugs into Singapore; (b) investing in the rehabilitation of drug addicts; and (c) preventing a drug-tolerant culture from being established in Singapore.\" (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker:\tI would like to thank all Members present in this Chamber for their endurance and tolerance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed.\" – [Mr K Shanmugam]. (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at \t10.00 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Current and Projected Population Size","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Prime Minister (a) what is the current population of (i) Singaporeans and permanent residents (ii) foreign workers broken down by the different types of work passes and permits and (iii) tourists and short-term visit pass holders; and (b) what is the projected population of these persons for 2020.
Mr Teo Chee Hean (for the Prime Minister): According to the latest consolidated figures published as at end June 2016:
The resident population, comprised 3.41 million Singapore Citizens (SCs) and 0.52 million Permanent Residents (PRs), totalling 3.93 million.
There were 1.67 million Non-Residents (NRs). Employment Pass Holders numbered 0.19 million, S Pass Holders 0.18 million and Work Permit Holders 0.77 million. The rest of the NR population includes foreign domestic workers, dependants of SCs, PRs and work pass holders and students.
Tourists and short-term visit pass holders are not included in Singapore's total population (5.61 million) as they are in Singapore only for a short period of time.
Based on the population estimates laid out in the 2013 Population White Paper, Singapore's total population could be between 5.8 million and six million in 2020, depending on changes to our birth rates, life expectancy and our social and economic needs. By then, the resident population (comprising SCs and PRs) could be about four million, of which SCs could make up about 3.5 million; the non-resident population then would number about 1.8 million.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Five- and Ten-year-old HDB Flats Sold in Last Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many five-year-old to ten-year-old HDB flats have been sold in the last five years; (b) what are the reasons for these sales; and (c) how many flats have been sold under each of these reasons.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Between 2012 and 2016, close to 33,000 HDB flats which had been owned by their sellers for between five and 10 years, were sold in the open market, or an average of about 6,600 flats sold per year.
Resale flat sellers are not required to disclose their reasons for sale to HDB.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Opening of New Primary School at Designated Education Site Next to Teban Vista","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Education (Schools) under what circumstances will the Ministry consider opening a new Primary school at the designated education site next to Teban Vista to meet the needs of residents staying at Ayer Rajah and West Coast constituencies.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: MOE regularly reviews the demand and supply trends at the national and regional levels to ensure that there are sufficient school places for school-going children. Our school planning takes into account the current and projected population and planned housing development programmes to ensure that there are sufficient school places to meet the needs of each residential area.
While MOE tries to ensure that every child of school-going age in Singapore has a place in a school reasonably near his or her home, it will not always be possible to do so. Every new school needs to have a sufficient catchment of students, over a sustained period of time, to enable it to mount a range of activities for the benefit of the students and to be run efficiently.
There are six Primary schools – Fuhua Primary School, Clementi Primary School, Nan Hua Primary School, Pei Tong Primary School, Qifa Primary School and Fairfield Methodist School – within two kilometres of the residents living in Ayer Rajah and West Coast estates. As there are sufficient Primary school places in these estates, we have no plans to build a new Primary school at the school site next to Teban Vista.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":1796,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Rahayu Mahzam","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170404/vernacular-rahayu Mahzam(1).pdf","fileName":"rahayu Mahzam(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":1797,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170404/vernacular-4 Apr 2017 _ Mr Md Faisal Abd Manap _ Motion on Aspirations of Singapore Women.pdf","fileName":"4 Apr 2017 _ Mr Md Faisal Abd Manap _ Motion on Aspirations of Singapore Women.pdf"},{"vernacularID":1798,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170404/vernacular-4 Apr 2017 _ Dr Intan Azura _ Motion on Supporting Women.pdf","fileName":"4 Apr 2017 _ Dr Intan Azura _ Motion on Supporting Women.pdf"},{"vernacularID":1799,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Sun Xueling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170404/vernacular-Sun Xueling Women Motion 4 April 2017_Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Sun Xueling Women Motion 4 April 2017_Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":1800,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Vikram Nair","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170404/vernacular-Vikram Nair(1).pdf","fileName":"Vikram Nair(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":1801,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Tin Pei Ling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170404/vernacular-Tin Pei Ling(1).pdf","fileName":"Tin Pei Ling(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":1802,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170404/vernacular-Intan(2).pdf","fileName":"Intan(2).pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}