* The opinion of the President on the draw on past reserves was circulated to hon Members on 13 April 2020. Please refer to Annex 1.
"},{"date":"27 April 2020","bill":" i. Economic Expansion Incentives (Relief from Income Tax) (Amendment) Bill","atbpPreviewText":"null"},{"date":null,"bill":" ii. Goods and Service Tax Voucher Fund (Amendment) Bill","atbpPreviewText":"null"},{"date":null,"bill":" iii. Hindu Endowments (Amendment) Bill","atbpPreviewText":"null"},{"date":null,"bill":" iv. Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour Convention) (Amendment) Bill","atbpPreviewText":"null"},{"date":null,"bill":" v. Wild Animals and Birds (Amendment) Bill","atbpPreviewText":"null"}],"takesSectionVOList":[{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Parliament Proceedings during COVID-19 Pandemic","subTitle":"Announcement by Mr Speaker","sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Speaker: Order. Hon Members, today is the mid-way point of the extended circuit breaker period in Singapore’s fight against COVID-19. I am heartened to see that Singaporeans have, by and large, remained steadfast in cooperating with all the various measures imposed. Some citizens and private enterprises have even embarked on their own ground-up initiatives to do their part in looking out for the well-being of the most vulnerable in our communities and keeping them safe. This is indeed the SG United spirit in action that will make Singapore emerge better and stronger from this crisis.
As I have said before, and it bears repeating, the onus remains on us, parliamentarians, to continue to lead in critical times both within this Chamber and within our communities. It will not be business as usual as we find different ways of remaining connected to our constituents in carrying out our roles and responsibilities. But those roles and responsibilities are real. But even as we do so, we stand in solidarity with all Singaporeans in supporting and adhering to the Government’s circuit breaker measures as these are adjusted with time and depending on the prevailing situation. All Members from today will wear masks within Parliament House and only remove them temporarily while delivering speeches in the Chamber so you can be heard clearly.
Whatever challenging circumstances we face as a nation, the essential and fundamental role of Parliament continues. All over the world, other parliaments are similarly doing their best to persevere despite the extraordinary COVID-19 times we are living in. And our Parliament in Singapore can do no less.
This is why the Bill that the Leader of the House will be introducing today is timely and significant. In the current climate of uncertainty brought about by COVID-19, it is imperative that we prepare for exigencies, such as the scenario where it is impossible, it is unsafe or inexpedient for all Members to meet at one place for parliamentary proceedings. So, we must be primed and ready to swiftly respond should such exigencies happen. The Bill therefore proposes an amendment to the Constitution to establish a legal framework for arrangements to be made for Parliament and its committees to meet and despatch business; with Members being present at two or more appointed places, if necessary, under continuity arrangements.
As Speaker, I have provided my views and advice on the parliamentary law and procedures to be considered at the drafting of the Bill. The ultimate form and modalities of such continuity arrangements would be looked into once the Bill is passed. For now, I look forward to hearing any views Members may have on the Bill, on how such continuity arrangements can best serve our work in Parliament when exigencies arise.
In tackling the evolving COVID-19 situation, what must remain constant is that we must always be planning and preparing in advance the best that we can. We must remember that this pandemic outbreak is unprecedented in scale. Should the worst-case scenario happens, we will work in concert in executing these contingencies, with the safety and well-being of one another, our families and loved ones always being of the utmost priority.
We will learn where we can from other countries and other parliaments, and implement what works best in our Singapore context.
We must not let our collective Singapore can-do spirit succumb to this virus now. When, and not if, this crisis is over, we must remain vigilant and tackle any new or emergent threats head-on with the same resolve and fortitude. This is how we will always be able to “Majulah Singapura!”, confidently advancing onward as a nation and as a society.
Before I begin, maybe if I could, on behalf of the House as well, to convey our best regards to Mr Low Thia Khiang who is warded in ICU and we wish him the speediest recovery. Our thoughts are with him.
Order. Questions for Oral Answer.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Ministry of Health’s Strategies on Managing COVID-19 Cases in Hospitals and Limiting Spread in the Community","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"The following question stood in the name of Ms Irene Quay Siew Ching –
1 To ask the Minister for Health (a) whether Singapore has an ethical framework ready to prioritise resources and patients when our healthcare system reaches a breaking point due to widespread community transmission; and (b) what are the plans to ramp up our healthcare capacity to avoid the need for implementing such an ethical framework.
2 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Health what plans are in place to ensure the rapid scale-ability of our acute care infrastructure and ICU beds in the event of a rapid escalation of COVID-19 cases requiring hospitalisation.
3 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Health (a) what are the impediments to testing of asymptomatic individuals who are deemed to be at risk from COVID-19 due to proximity to those tested positive, or for other reasons; and (b) to what extent has testing been expanded to those who do not exhibit typical COVID-19 symptoms.
4 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the Government's current strategy and approach for COVID-19 testing; (b) whether the current testing approach is sufficient to provide reliable information about the spread of COVID-19 in the community; and (c) what is the Government's current and desired testing capacity for COVID-19.
5 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Health whether the Government has plans for widespread use of antibody (serological) testing for COVID-19 to determine the extent of the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the Singapore population and identify those who are immune to the disease.
6 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Health what are the metrics the Government will use to decide if the movement control measures such as those imposed under the current circuit breaker can be gradually lifted.
7 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Health (a) whether antibody tests are a valid way to assess the reach of the COVID-19 virus; and (b) whether such antibody tests can be used to assess the level of 'herd immunity' in the community and be part of the plan to gradually return the community to work.
8 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the impact of the increasing number of COVID-19 infection cases on the ability of our healthcare professionals in public service to provide health services to Singaporeans and Singaporean residents; and (b) whether there are plans to enlist the help of healthcare professionals in private practice or who have retired to bolster the number of healthcare professionals needed to deal with the pandemic.
9 Dr Chia Shi-Lu asked the Minister for Health (a) how many healthcare workers have been infected by the COVID-19 virus; (b) in how many of these cases have the workers been infected in their line of duty; and (c) what measures are in place to support healthcare workers and their families should they fall ill with the virus while fulfilling their duties.
10 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for Health in respect of healthcare workers who are working long shifts during this COVID-19 outbreak, whether they will be provided with some form of compensation or wellness support in terms of leave and mental care when the COVID-19 situation stabilises.
\tMs Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Question No 1, Sir.
\tThe Minister for Health (Mr Gan Kim Yong): Speaker, Sir, I will be making a Ministerial Statement later. May I have your permission to take Question Nos 1 to 10 in my Statement instead.
\tMr Speaker: Please do. Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Management of COVID-19 Impact on Employment of Fresh Graduates, General Workforce and Foreign Worker Dormitories","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the latest update on the COVID-19 infection situation in the foreign worker dormitories; and (b) whether the stepped-up measures have been effective in containing the spread.
12 Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked the Minister for Manpower given that the Committee of Inquiry (COI) into the Little India Riot in 2014 noted \"housing available to foreign workers in Singapore ranks well in the world\", whether the Government will appoint a COI to (i) investigate the causes of the COVID-19 outbreak amongst residents of foreign worker dormitories (ii) identify the responsibility borne by the various stakeholders, including any lapses committed between the 2014 COI and the present date and (iii) propose reforms to be implemented to ensure that a similar public health crisis will not recur.
13 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Manpower on the employment prospects for fresh graduates amidst the difficult economic environment, what are the available employment and other options and how can employers and the Government work together to assist fresh graduates.
14 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Ministry will consider amending the Foreign Employee Dormitories Act so that its regulatory framework applies to all purpose-built dormitories, factory-converted dormitories, construction temporary quarters, standalone temporary quarters, construction temporary quarters, quarters in buildings under construction, and temporary occupation licence quarters.
15 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Ministry will consider (i) increasing the minimum gross floor area of 4.5 square metres for each resident in a foreign workers' dormitory and (ii) not including the basic living facilities such as living quarters, kitchen, dining, and toilet areas in the computation for the minimum gross floor area.
16 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether a Commission of Inquiry will be appointed to investigate the causes of high COVID-19 incidence amongst foreign workers (FWs), particularly (i) pre-COVID-19 outbreak living conditions of FWs in dormitories and non-dormitories (ii) how these conditions may have led to the disease spread (iii) the kinds of support provided to dormitory operators to ensure physical and psychological health of FWs (iv) forms of support provided to FWs not living in dormitories (v) how dormitories housing fewer than 1,000 FWs are regulated; and (b) if so, whether the COI will recommend strategic policy changes to improve the living conditions of FWs and enhance our future public health emergency preparedness.
17 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Manpower in view of the rapid spread of the COVID-19 virus among foreign workers in the dormitories (a) what lessons can be drawn from the management of dormitories and whether safe distancing can be practically practised in the existing purpose-built dormitories; (b) what roles have dormitory owners played to mitigate the spread of the virus; and (c) whether there is evidence that infected foreign workers have spread the virus to the community beyond the migrant workers.
18 Mr Png Eng Huat asked the Minister for Manpower since the Foreign Employee Dormitories Act was enacted on 1 January 2016 (a) how many warnings have been issued to licensed operators of foreign workers' dormitories for not meeting the licence conditions under section 11 of the Act; and (b) how many have been charged and fined.
19 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Manpower what is the recourse available to employees who have not been paid their wages despite their employers having received the benefits of the Jobs Support Scheme including employees who have been placed on no-pay leave or reduced pay.
20 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Manpower whether all essential workers among the foreign workers living in all dormitories and other forms of accommodation have already been safely separated from the non-essential workers by 19 April 2020.
21 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Manpower in light of the COVID-19 infection in the foreign workers dormitories (a) what will be the measures to improve the living conditions in the dormitories and contain the spread of COVID-19; and (b) as the healthy workers are relocated to old schools, army camps and flats in the community, how will they be educated on hygiene and social distancing habits to reassure our residents.
\tThe Minister for Health (Mr Gan Kim Yong): Mr Speaker, Sir, as Minister Josephine Teo will be delivering her Ministerial Statement, may I also have your permission to allow her to take Question Nos 11 to 21 in her Statement, please.
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please. Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Rationale for Extending Wage Subsidies under Jobs Support Scheme as COVID-19 Measures to Company Shareholders Employed as Directors","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"The following question stood in the name of Mr Gan Thiam Poh –
22 To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance what is the rationale for extending the wage subsidies under the Jobs Support Scheme to shareholders who are also employed as directors, whose companies have made CPF contributions for their salaries, and whose assessable incomes do not exceed $100,000 in the Year of Assessment 2019.
\tMr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Question No 22, Sir.
\tThe Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (Mr Heng Swee Keat): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS) is designed to support employers to retain their local employees. As such, it previously did not cover the wages of business owners, who are both shareholders and directors of a company or shareholder-directors.
We have since received feedback from some shareholder-directors, especially from smaller companies and start-ups. Although they receive support through the JSS for their employees’ wages, their own personal wages formed a significant portion of their companies’ wage bills but were not covered by the JSS. They also did not qualify for the Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme.
We recognise the challenges faced by these shareholders-directors. We have therefore reviewed our policy to include their wages under the Jobs Support Scheme. By supporting them, we hope that these shareholder-directors will be able to retain their own wages and livelihoods, just as we would like them to retain their local employees.
At the same time, by setting an assessable income criterion of $100,000, we can better target the JSS support at shareholder-directors who need the support more.
We estimate that this enhancement will benefit about 50,000 shareholder-directors. The May 2020 and subsequent JSS payouts will include support for qualifying shareholder-directors. The May 2020 payout will also include back-payment for companies with qualifying shareholder-directors who were excluded from the first JSS payout in April 2020.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extension of $300 Government Payout to Long-Term Visit Pass Plus Holders who are Spouses of Singaporeans as COVID-19 Measures","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"23 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance in respect of the payment of $300 to Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) Plus holders who are spouses of Singaporeans, whether such a payment may also be extended to LTVP holders who are spouses of Singaporeans.
\tThe Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (Mr Heng Swee Keat): The Solidarity Payment is aimed at providing timely support to Singaporean households during this challenging period of heightened safe distancing.
Arising from concerns over some Singaporean families with non-citizen members, we decided to extend the one-off $300 payment to Permanent Residents and LTVP+ holders who have a Singaporean parent, spouse or child.
While Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) holders who are spouses of Singaporeans are not eligible for the Solidarity Payment, they are able to take up employment to support their families. They also receive benefits as part of a Singaporean household, such as GST Voucher – U-Save rebates and special payments, and Service and Conservancy Charges rebates.
If they or their Singaporean family need further financial support during this challenging period, they may seek help through their MSF Social Service Offices, which provide assistance to those who fall into financial hardship. The assistance provided includes the COVID-19 Support Grant. We will exercise more flexibility when considering ComCare applications during this period, to ensure affected Singaporean families can get help.
There are also many Social Service Agencies and those in the community providing support to families in need.
\tMr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Sir, I thank the hon Deputy Prime Minister for his comprehensive answer to my question, and also, his assurance given to Singaporean families with LTVP holders as well, in terms of the help that can be given to the families. My query is in relation to the policy reason for carving out LTVP holders from the LTVP+ holders who would be able to get Solidarity payments, given as I understand the rationale behind the issuing of Solidarity payments to Singapore PRs and the LTVP+ holders is really to help the family. LTVP holders who are spouses are also part of the families as well.
\tMr Heng Swee Keat: I thank the Member for the follow-up question. For LTVP and LTVP+, we have in our system different sets of support for various schemes for different groups of people, one of them being their residential status. So, we need some clear alignment of this. Therefore, this is a way that we are aligning this, with existing schemes that we have. Bear in mind that this support is for a very urgent situation and therefore, we have extended it to a wide range. There are already many support schemes, as I have said.
The assurance that I would like to give Mr Murali is that, as I have said, if families need support, they can approach our Social Service Agencies and many other service agencies that are providing this support. No one will be denied support just because of this particular status.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Singaporeans and PRs who Have Applied for Temporary Relief Fund for COVID-19 Situation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"24 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the total number of Singaporeans and PRs who have applied for the Temporary Relief Fund as at 30 April 2020; (b) how many have returned the cheques or payouts; (c) what is the penalty for wrong declarations; (d) whether there is any penalty if they realise their errors and return the monies; and (e) whether there is a deadline to return the payment.
\tThe Minister of State for Social and Family Development (Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Sir, the Temporary Relief Fund was set up to provide timely financial assistance to lower and middle income Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents who lost their jobs or faced significant income loss due to the economic impact of COVID-19. It was made available during the month of April 2020, and prior to the start of other assistance schemes including the COVID-19 Support Grant and Self-Employed Person (SEP) Income Relief Scheme (SIRS).
As at 30 April 2020, MSF has received a total 537,080 applications for the Temporary Relief Fund. Of this figure, 3,171 individuals have returned their payouts from the Fund. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Minister of State for Social and Family Development\", Official Report, 4 May 2020, Vol 94, Issue No 131, Correction by Written Statement section.]
MSF is working closely with the Police to investigate fraudulent claims for the Temporary Relief Fund. Abuse of the Temporary Relief Fund may constitute an offence of cheating, which is punishable with imprisonment for a term of up to 10 years, a fine or both.
\t
Where individuals returned their cheques or payouts, this will be a mitigating factor in our assessment of fraudulent claims. Individuals should return their cheques or payouts by the end May 2020.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assistance for Rough Sleepers and Measures to Help Them Cope with COVID-19 Circuit Breaker Conditions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"The following question stood in the name of Mr Gan Thiam Poh –
25 To ask the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) how many residents are currently housed in interim housing and welfare homes; (b) how many of them are homeless with relatives and without relatives respectively; and (c) how many have refused to be housed in a welfare home or housing despite the arrangements made for them.
26 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what steps are being taken to deal with rough sleepers at public areas to ensure compliance with the requirement under the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) (Control Order) Regulations 2020 that every individual must stay at or in, and not leave, his or her ordinary place of residence; and (b) whether there are sufficient places in shelters to house these rough sleepers.
\tMr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Question No 25, please.
\tThe Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, I will address Mr Gan Thiam Poh’s and Mr Murali Pillai’s questions on homelessness in this reply, as well as the question from Ms Anthea Ong1, which was filed for tomorrow.
\tMr Speaker: Okay.
\tMr Desmond Lee: As the COVID-19 outbreak evolves, ensuring the safety of those who are homeless and rough sleeping is of paramount importance to MSF and the PEERS Network, which stands for Partners Engaging and Empowering Rough Sleepers. The PEERS Network currently has 26 members and includes Government agencies, social service agencies and ground-up community groups.
We have seen an increase in the number of people seeking shelter over this past month. When the PEERS Network was formed in July 2019, less than half of the 65 people engaged were willing to accept help. During the circuit breaker, nearly 300 have come forward so far to seek shelter and assistance, including many who were affected by travel restrictions.
Since the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) (Control Order) Regulations 2020 were effected, we have worked closely with our colleagues in the frontline agencies, such as the Police and NParks, to refer homeless people and rough sleepers to our shelters, to our Social Service Offices and to relevant social service agencies for shelter and financial assistance. Those who are homeless will not face penalties under the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) (Control Order) Regulations 2020, if they are assisted by us.
We are deeply grateful to our community partners and social services agencies in the PEERS Network who have continued their efforts amidst the COVID-19 outbreak by reaching out to homeless people and providing social intervention. We have also distributed care packs with hygiene kits and surgical masks to temporary shelter residents, as well as homeless persons in the streets, alongside encouraging them to accept shelter and help.
To meet the need for more shelter spaces, we have worked together with both existing and new PEERS Network partners to offer their premises as Safe Sound Sleeping Places, or S3Ps. Since the start of the circuit breaker, our PEERS Network S3Ps have expanded both capacity and operating hours to keep our friends indoors as much as possible. They have allowed their homeless guests to remain in the S3Ps throughout the day and provided them meals. PEERS partners, such as the Buddha Tooth Relic Temple, Catholic Welfare Services, Good News Community Services and New Hope Community Services, have also stepped forward to run new S3Ps as we expected that there would be more people needing shelter during this crisis.
Twenty seven new organisations have answered our call for action, bringing the total number of organisations setting up or operating S3Ps to 35. Some of these are the Singapore Anglican Community Services, together with the Anglican Diocese of Singapore, Kassim Mosque, Ang Mo Kio Methodist Church, Pasir Panjang Hill Community Services, Assyakirin Mosque and Tao One Ltd. HDB has also provided vacant rental flats to our community partners for them to operate S3Ps during this crisis.
Together, all the S3Ps are able to accommodate some 700 rough sleepers. Currently, we have about 400 spaces available. We would like to thank all our partners for generously welcoming our homeless friends of the street as guests into their premises and operating the S3Ps round the clock at this time.
There are currently about 70 families and 75 individuals in our Transitional Shelters. These shelters provide a safe place for residents while social workers help them address their social issues and work towards long-term, stable accommodation.
There is a small proportion of homeless individuals who may be destitute as they lack family support and are unable to care for themselves. There are currently about 1,900 such individuals housed in Welfare Homes. We provide care and rehabilitation at Welfare Homes to improve their physical and emotional well-being and, where possible, re-integrate them back into the community. MSF encourages potential destitute persons to admit themselves to Welfare Homes for their own safety and well-being. We do not track the number of individuals who decline help.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked how many residents in Transitional Shelters and Welfare Homes have relatives. We do not have that information readily on-hand, but 90% of individuals in Transitional Shelters and Welfare Homes are single, divorced, widowed or separated.
Ms Anthea Ong asked about the learning gathered from our strategy on the homeless with the COVID-19 crisis. The crisis has reaffirmed the importance of close collaboration between Government agencies and community partners. Together with our partners and other members of the community, we have been able to more quickly extend help to the homeless during this period. Our aim is not only to keep homeless people and rough sleepers safe during the COVID-19 pandemic, but to help them resolve their underlying challenges and to get back on their feet beyond this period.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, I thank the Minister for the reply and I especially thank him for being on the ground to help the homeless people. I understand that, as the Minister mentioned, a lot of the homeless people are now seeking shelter at the places of worship because they are empty at this point of time. But when they go back to their usual function, could I ask whether MSF has plans for housing for this group of homeless people?
\tMr Desmond Lee: A number of our S3P partners in the PEERS Network are prepared to provide these spaces beyond the circuit breaker. In fact, even prior to circuit breaker, a number of our PEERS partners, both religious and secular organisations, who already run activities on an on-going basis on their premises, have set aside space as a shelter. So, quite a number are able to provide that commitment beyond this period. We, of course, respect that a number of others may not have the space available after this. Having said that, we continue to establish transitional shelter spaces as well as spaces in S3Ps to support them.
The key, of course, is to work with them to resolve the underlying social, family and personal circumstances in order for them to return home, in order for them to find permanency and shelter.
\tMr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the hon Minister for his explanation to my Parliamentary Question. I am heartened to note the cooperation between the PEERS Network, community partners and religious organisations. I think it is very uniquely Singapore to have religious organisations coming together to provide help to rough sleepers across religions. My question is in relation to the current situation involving rough sleepers who are not yet housed. May I please ask the hon Minister's assessment of the current situation and what further steps he anticipates to take during the pendency of the COVID-19 measures?
\tMr Desmond Lee: Sir, over the course of the work of the PEERS Network, we have reached out to and befriended many homeless people to understand what are the circumstances behind their current plight. While some have no home, a number actually have homes they cannot return to because of family disputes. To the extent that we know them, we have reached out to them through our network of partners to bring them into the S3Ps in order for them to be sheltered from the open, in order for them to get help and in order for them to be kept safe during this circuit breaker period.
There are, of course, other rough sleepers and homeless whom our network do not know. Even during the circuit breaker, as an essential service, they continue to reach out and look out for people who are in need of help. There are, of course, some people, including seniors, who are unable to go back home, especially in the day time, because of their family circumstances, because of disputes with other members of the family.
Our safe distancing ambassadors, as you have read in the newspapers, have gone around with the help of social workers to identify people who are out there in the open, not because they refuse to comply but because they have serious underlying issues back home. These social workers then work with the network and with other partners to try to resolve those issues and in the meantime find a temporary space for them to take respite. This work is on-going and the more partners we have in this network, the more effective we will be in making sure that every Singaporean remains safe.
\tMs Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for the response to my question for tomorrow. Could I actually ask two supplementary questions which are really relating to the questions I had in my Parliamentary Question. Do we have any idea how many of the homeless persons have actually been booked by the Police under the Destitute Persons Act since the start of the circuit breaker? Also, how are we ensuring that the COVID-19 relief measures that we have put out actually reach these homeless persons as well? Because in the sense that they are actually on the streets, how would we actually reach out to them to make sure that they are also coming forward to obtain their relief measures?
\tMr Desmond Lee: The Member asked, first, how many homeless people have been booked under the Destitute Persons Act. There is no punitive penalty against a person being homeless. The Destitute Persons Act is a legislation of last resort for people who are unable to care for themselves and have no support. A small group of these homeless people are destitute and are subject to this Act. Even for that group, we persuade them to take shelter, and persuade them to admit themselves to a welfare home to get the support they need and we reserve the use of the legislation as a matter of last resort. So, that is number one.
I think the Member actually means to ask how many homeless people have been served with composition fines under the Control Order. I do not have that number. I think we have to ask MEWR for the latest data. But I think MEWR, together with social service agencies, are mindful that there are some people who have underlying issues behind their being out in the open. So, that is a very important aspect of exercising enforcement and discretion.
The second question the Member asked is how do we ensure that people who are homeless and have no access to, say, a mailbox, get the support provided under the various budgetary measures. In fact, even before the COVID-19 pandemic,our PEERS partners, together with MSF and the other agencies, in reaching out and befriending homeless people have been working with them to ensure that they get the benefits under the GST Voucher, Merdeka Generation and Pioneer Generation packages and when they encounter some challenges, for example, because they do not have ICs and other issues, we have worked with the relevant agencies to make sure that those obstacles are removed to get the help that they need.
So, likewise, even during this pandemic period, we have been reaching out to people who are homeless and see that they get the support they need, including working with CPF Board and other agencies, so that they get the Solidarity payment and other support.
For homeless people, our partners reach out to them and tell them about the Temporary Relief Fund (TRF), COVID-19 Support Grant and SIRS, have the forms and brochures with them available. In fact, in February, I visited one of our S3Ps and our shelters, and spoke to the social worker who had been given the material for the TRF by the MSF officers and given the forms for TRF. I believe that would be in March instead, not February. And these social workers then helped the homeless people to fill in those forms and to make the necessary applications.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : To ask the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the current total capacity of homeless shelters with the safe distancing measures; (b) how many rough sleepers have been housed and how many have been booked by the Police since the start of the circuit breaker; (c) what is the ramp-up plan; (d) how is the Ministry ensuring that the COVID-19 measures are reaching all homeless persons; (e) what types of care and support are given to those who are still on the streets; and (f) what learning has been gathered on our strategy on the homeless with the COVID-19 crisis."],"footNoteQuestions":["25","26"],"questionNo":"25-26"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Actions to Track Originators of Fake News of Partial Lockdown","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"27 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Home Affairs what actions are being taken to track down the originators of fake messages claiming a \"partial lockdown\" in Singapore and whether the culprits will be prosecuted once they are identified.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Amrin Amin) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): The Police take a serious view of all reports of falsehoods regarding the COVID-19 situation, including those that claim “partial lockdown”, as these may cause public alarm. The Police will investigate such cases and take firm action against the culprits.
\t
For instance, Police identified a 40-year-old man who allegedly circulated a false message claiming that he had \"intel\" that the Government would close all coffee shops and food courts, and open supermarkets only two days a week. He urged readers to go \"stock up\" on items. The man was charged on 27 April 2020 for an offence of communicating a false message under the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act. This carries an imprisonment term of up to three years, a fine of up to S$10,000, or both.
\tMr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, considering considering the impact of such fake messages on the public, may I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, how else can Police signal that perpetrators of such fake messages will face the full brunt of the law? Can the punishment be more severe for people who make such fake messages?
\tMr Amrin Amin: The Police have taken this very seriously and have taken stern measures. The law is quite strict on this and I think it is adequate deterrence for those who persist in such conduct. We have, in addition to the law, also taken complementary measures such as advisories and various other measures. I think it is important that broader public communication efforts to clarify and rebut inaccurate information are done in tandem with legal enforcement.
In this case, the Government has issued a clarification via the Gov.sg WhatsApp channel on the same day that the rumour of the partial lockdown was circulated. A clarification was also issued on the MOH website. But I think the point Mr Lim Biow Chuan made is very clear – that we will not go easy, we will not take this lightly and perpetrators, if caught, will be taken to task.
Mr Speaker: Ms Rahayu Mahzam. I will try to recognise all of you with your mask on.
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Thank you, Speaker. I would like to seek a clarification from the Senior Parliamentary Secretary on why action against this message claiming partial lockdown, was not taken under POFMA, whether it is relevant and whether that was something that could have been used against the perpetrator.
\tMr Amrin Amin: The offences under the Miscellaneous Offences Act and POFMA while similar, involve different elements which the prosecution is required to prove. Every case of communication of false message is assessed based on the findings rising from investigations and the Public Prosecutor exercises his discretion on the most appropriate charge. The approach is on a case-by-case basis and is calibrated on what is necessary and appropriate in the circumstances.
I would like to point out that offences under the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act are also regarded as serious and carry an imprisonment term of up to three years or fine of a maximum of $10,000, or both.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Guidelines to be Given to Third Party Food Delivery Companies to Charge F&B Businesses Smaller Commissions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"28 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether guidelines or legislation can be considered to enable restaurants to pay smaller commissions and foster a more equitable partnership with third party food delivery companies.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Chee Hong Tat) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Mr Speaker, Sir, I understand the concerns of food services businesses, as the commissions they pay to food delivery companies will reduce their earnings. However, we need to carefully consider whether legislation is the appropriate solution in this situation.
The Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) has been monitoring the developments in different sectors of our economy, to guard against anti-competitive behaviour. In the case of third party food delivery companies, they have explained publicly that their commission rates are in line with those charged before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. During the Circuit Breaker period, some of these companies have offered assistance to restaurants and hawker stalls, such as removing on-boarding fees, waiving commission for self-collection orders and charging zero commission in the first month for businesses that are new to the platform.
Third party food delivery companies offer food ordering, delivery and payment services. They are also aggregators that offer food services businesses access to their customer networks. The food delivery companies have explained that their commission rates are required to cover their business costs. These include insurance and payment to their riders, as well as costs to develop and maintain the IT systems and databases.
Sir, one important factor is that there are alternative options available to food services businesses and consumers, if they do not wish to go through the food delivery companies. There are vendors who can help food services businesses to set up their own online storefront, with co-funding support from Enterprise Singapore (ESG). There are also ground-up initiatives to help food establishments publicise their products and reach out to consumers directly. One example is the \"Hawkers United – Dabao 2020\". This is a group that was formed on social media to help hawkers. In addition, food services businesses can choose how the food reaches consumers. This includes self-collection by consumers, delivery by the food services businesses themselves, and using the services of third party logistics providers. Some food outlets offer a combination of these options.
There are trade-offs among the different options, and market conditions will also evolve in tandem with changes in supply and demand. Third party food delivery companies may charge higher commission rates, but they can offer end-to-end services and access to a larger consumer base. So, there are trade-offs. Hence, food services businesses should weigh the pros and cons of the different options before making a commercial decision on which one they want to choose.
This approach will produce a better outcome for all stakeholders compared to capping commission rates through legislation. The availability of alternative options, including the possibility of new competitors entering the market, will serve as a check against excessive commission rates and continue to incentivise delivery companies to provide value to businesses who are using their platforms and services.
Mr Speaker, Sir, these are difficult times for our businesses. The Government will continue to support our companies and our workers. Our objective is to help viable businesses to survive this crisis and to prepare for the recovery, when we are able to gradually ease the restrictions and allow more economic activities to resume. We have various schemes in place to help our companies and workers, covering different areas such as workforce training, productivity improvement and adoption of digital solutions. Our businesses who need assistance can approach Enterprise Singapore and the Trade Associations and Chambers and we will do our best to help them.
One example is the Food Delivery Booster Package by ESG to fund five percentage points of the commission charged by Deliveroo, foodpanda and GrabFood. The objective is to reduce the costs for food services businesses which are using these online platforms. For food services businesses that choose to go through approved third party logistics partners to deliver meals to their customers, ESG will assist them by co-funding 20% of the delivery cost that they are paying to these third party logistics providers. The Booster Package has benefited more than 9,000 food services businesses so far. It was originally scheduled to end on 4 May. In view of the extended Circuit Breaker period, ESG will continue to provide this Package till 1 June 2020.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Foo.
\tMs Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Thank you, Speaker. I would like to thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the very comprehensive answer on what help the Government is providing through ESG. Nevertheless, I would like to bring back the point on the 30% to 35% commission charged by GrabFood, Deliveroo and foodpanda in the market. They have a dominant share and continue to have a dominant share during this COVID-19 period and there has been a lot of feedback from F&B outlets whether help can be given to them.
What I would like to ask Senior Parliamentary Secretary is whether the Government has monitored the size and growth rate of the delivery platform business, especially since the COVID-19 outbreak. Whether the Government feels legislation should be necessary to govern the practice of such businesses – I would say they are very large now – to avoid predatory behaviour as well as provide transparency, some kind of format that they have to provide transparency to the consumers to show how much the delivery companies charge restaurants and pay the delivery riders. I think that form of transparency is important. The same practice has been imposed on banks. When banks charge commission, we compel the banks to share with the customers; it would be similar thinking along that line.
I would also like to ask Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether the Government will consider temporary measures to limit commissions charged by delivery platforms – maybe just temporary – during this COVID-19 pandemic, where restaurants dine-in operations are not allowed. If we do not do a permanent arrangement, can we do a temporary one, so as to provide these restaurants a fighting chance to survive?
A number of cities in the US, including San Francisco and Seattle, have already passed Emergency Orders temporarily capping delivery app commissions at 15%. And there are many other cities in the process of doing so.
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Speaker, Sir, when we assess the policy options, I think it is important that we look at the incentives that these policies will create and the outcomes that they are likely to produce and not only on the intent of the proposal. So, we may have good intent when we suggest certain policy changes using legislation, but it does not mean that good intent alone will produce positive outcomes. I think that is something which we have to be quite careful in deciding what option we want to take to tackle the problem.
In my main reply, Sir, I mentioned that an effective way of dealing with this issue is to create alternative options so that you give businesses and consumers choice. And that is a check against anyone – whether it is GrabFood, foodpanda, Deliveroo or any other company – being able to charge excessive commission rates.
So, this is what we have been trying to do. To reduce the entry barrier to help companies that want to seek out alternative options. These options can include having customers pick up their own food. It can include the food services companies working with a third party provider to deliver the food on their behalf. It can also include them doing the delivery to customers on their own.
I think this is the approach that will produce a better outcome compared to using legislation, which is a rather blunt instrument. And what rate do you want to set? If you set it too low, one of the consequences would be that the food delivery companies would then not be able to provide some of these services because they have their costs to cover as well. And they have explained what cost component goes to who – how much of it goes to the riders, how much of it for insurance, supporting the IT systems and maintaining the customer databases. So, yes, I think we do need to keep an eye on making sure that the system is fair, making sure that there are sufficient alternative options. But in the end, I think we should place our focus on what is the outcome that we can achieve.
\t
\tMr Speaker: Ms Foo Mee Har.
Ms Foo Mee Har: Thank you, Speaker. I believe I have made my point. Actually, I would like to speak by apologising to the Senior Minister of State. I had mentioned \"Senior Parliamentary Secretary\"; it is actually \"Senior Minister of State\". I have made my point, so I will not repeat myself. Thank you.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Essential Services Companies Allowed to Operate during COVID-19 Circuit Breaker Period","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"29 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how many companies providing essential services or in the key economic sectors are allowed to operate during the circuit breaker period; (b) how many workers working in the essential firms and key economic sectors are allowed to work at their usual work places; and (c) how has the number changed after the further tightening of economic activities on 20 April 2020.
\tThe Minister for Trade and Industry (Mr Chan Chun Sing): Mr Speaker, Sir, during the circuit breaker period starting 7 April 2020, around 21% of our total workforce continued operating on-site at approximately 80,000 entities. This excludes workers and companies that could continue operating from home via telecommuting arrangements.
Under the enhanced circuit break period starting 21 April 2020, 17% of our total workforce continued operating on-site at approximately 45,000 entities. Again, this excludes workers and companies that could continue operating from home.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): I thank the Minister for the reply. As the number of community COVID-19 infections is reducing, what is the Government's plan to reopen the economy? If the Government do reopen the economy, which are the broad sectors, particularly the production and service sectors, will be first to be allowed to resume the services and production?
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, I had given this reply yesterday during my media interview. There are two parts to it.
First, the sectors that will progressively reopen as priority. So, first, let me put this in context. During the circuit breaker period measures and during the enhanced circuit breaker period measures, all our essential services continue to function. At the same time, all the productions that are part of the global supply chain, including petrochemicals, pharmaceuticals and certain parts of manufacturing also continue to function. This is to ensure that, domestically, we are able to play our part to meet the essential needs of fellow Singaporeans. At the same time, this allows us to fulfil our responsibilities and obligations to the global supply chains. So, this set of measures are on-going.
As we progressively reopen our economy, we are also looking to reinforce our position to fulfil our responsibilities to the global supply chains, be it pharmaceuticals, biomedical, electronics or petrochemicals. We are also determined to make sure that our hub status as both a Financial Hub, Trade Hub, Aviation and Port Hub status continue to function, not just for the benefit of Singaporeans, but also for the global community. These are the sectors that we gave priority for the progressive reopening.
The second point as to how we progressively reopen, as I had mentioned yesterday, we need to start the preparations now, so that come next week, we can progressively reopen. There are a number of things that we need to do together to prepare our companies to expand their capacities as they reopen.
First, we need to put in place the contingency arrangements to have a safe working environment. This includes the safe distancing work arrangements within the respective companies. It includes safe rest areas and the safe cohorting of different sets of workers to allow for business continuity, and it certainly requires us to have a higher standard of hygiene and cleanliness within our work premises. These are measures that will last us a long time beyond the circuit breaker measures and these are good practices that we should put in place for sustainable operations, going forward.
This week, ESG and EDB will progressively work with our companies and trade associations to put in place the respective measures, so that we can open up and restart up some of the production capacities that have not been done in the last two weeks. That is how we intend to do so.
At the same time, we must also embrace technology to see how we can use technology to help people who need to interact with one another, to come in contact with one another, to track and trace them, should there be an incident.
As I mentioned yesterday, this will be a long fight. We are far from over in this battle with COVID-19. We will need to put in place measures for safe operations. At the same time, if there is a flare-up in any particular one sector or one company, we must be able to quickly put in place measures to isolate that group of workers from the rest, so that the rest of the economy can continue to function.
There will be another set of companies and operations that will need to rethink their business model for longer term sustainability. For example, those companies that are involved in social entertainment, as well as those companies that require high level of interactions between the workers and the customers or amongst the customers, will also need to rethink their business model in order for us to restart those operations safely. This is how we intend to do it in a systematic and progressive manner to reopen the economy, so that more of our people can get back to work.
Having said that, the work from home measures will continue for many people who can continue to do their work from home. We have been able to do this for the vast majority of our economy and those measures are likely to continue in the short to medium term.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
\tMs Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. I have a supplementary question for the Minister for Trade and Industry. We have received feedback from some residents who operate businesses in essential services that under the tightened circuit breaker, they were asked to suspend their operations, whereas they know of others in the same industry who were not asked to do so. So, could the Minister share how MTI actually comes up with these guidelines or restrictions for companies? And why is it that there appears to be companies in the same industry that do not get the same instructions from MTI, in essential services?
\tMr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, the aim of the measures under the circuit breaker period and the enhanced circuit breaker measures have to do with trying to reduce the amount of social interactions and reduce the load, for example, in the transport sector. So, we try to reduce the numbers to the minimum possible, while maintaining the level of essential services required by our local community.
For essential firms, we will first want to make sure that they have a minimum level of operations that can continue to do so. So, even for essential firms, it does not mean that all essential firms get 100% of all the workers that they need. The essential firms will pare down to what they really need to continue their operations in a safe and efficient manner.
I believe Ms Lim may refer to some examples like some of the food establishments that are considered essential and, progressively, we have asked some to wind down. One of the reasons for us to do this is that as demand falls, we hope to be able to aggregate the services provided by various companies. So, all else being equal, for those companies that provide a series of services in an aggregated manner with a minimum number of staff required, we will be able to prioritise them and help them to continue their operations. But on the other hand, companies that have standalone operations and require perhaps a disproportionate amount of staff, we will advise them to restructure their operations to pare down their numbers or, if not, to temporarily suspend their operations for the moment.
Having said that, of course, this is an on-going process. We work with all the essential firms and companies to size up the demand for their workforce. And depending on the period of the circuit breaker at different points in time, they will require different set of workers for both operations and for safe maintenance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Government’s COVID-19 Financing Schemes on Businesses","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"30 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Prime Minister what is the extent to which businesses have been able to benefit from Singapore's COVID-19 financing schemes, which were rolled out to provide them access to credit and improve cash flows, with specifics on (i) total quantum of loans dispersed (ii) number of business loan applications approved (iii) approval rates and (iv) average applicable interest rates, for the period ending 30 April 2020.
\tThe Minister for Education (Mr Ong Ye Kung) (for the Prime Minister): Mr Speaker, Sir, as SMEs are a vital part of our economy, the Monetary Authority of Singapore or MAS, and Enterprise Singapore or ESG, are working closely with the banking sector to ensure that SMEs continue to have access to the financial support they need to tide through this difficult period. This is done through the ESG loan schemes.
The loan schemes have seen strong interest. Based on ESG’s data, SME borrowers have applied for more than 2,500 loans amounting to about S$1.9 billion since the beginning of March this year. This is about six times the credit extended over the same period last year. The approval rate of these loan applications has been high, at 90% to 95%.
Under the ESG loan schemes, the Government takes 90% of the loss if a loan goes bad, with the banks assuming the remaining 10%. This has helped bring down the credit spread that the banks charged.
The ESG loan schemes were then further enhanced when MAS launched a new Singapore Dollar facility for the banks and finance companies. It provides them with fully collateralised funding for two years at an interest rate of 0.1% per annum, for the purpose of their loans under the ESG schemes. This funding differs from the existing five-year, uncollateralised funding provided by the Government.
Together with the earlier enhancements to the ESG loan schemes, this is expected to bring down interest rates for such loans to 2%-3% for most borrowers, compared to 6% or more for most other unsecured working capital loans to SMEs today.
We have also seen good take-up of the complementary set of relief measures to help SMEs during this period. These measures were announced earlier by MAS and the financial industry. They include enabling SME borrowers with secured loans to defer principal repayments until 31 December 2020. Many SMEs have requested to do so. As of 30 April 2020, more than 2,500 applications have been processed, with nearly all applications approved. More than S$4.5 billion of secured loan facilities have benefited from this measure to-date.
MAS and ESG will continue to monitor the effectiveness of our measures.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Foo.
\tMs Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Minister for the very encouraging set of numbers that he has revealed, about six times' increase.
Nevertheless, Minister, amongst the SME circle, the expectations seem to be varying. Many people are focusing that the Government has committed to risk-share at 90% and made cost of fund available at 0.1% for these SME loans. So, the feedback so far has been that actually the rates offered by banks have been quite different and they feel that the rate has yet to reflect the Government's support. So, I would like to ask the Minister for his view – three questions.
The loan application volume – yes, we have seen significant increase but it is unusual times, so the loan volume and the interest rate, whether these are in line with the Government's policy intention; is it seeing the volume it expects?
Second, with 2%-3%, yet Government offering 90% risk-share and 0.1% interest rate, whether SMEs' expectation for lower market interest rates are reasonable?
And third, some SMEs have said the banks' requirements for SMEs to provide personal guarantees are too demanding and not commensurate with the banks' risk exposure; so, whether the Minister thinks these requirements are reasonable.
\t
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: Mr Speaker, Sir, a few points. First, the cost of fund is just one component of an interest rate. Beyond that, there is a credit spread depending on the risk profile of the borrower, and in this case, the Government going to bear 90% of the loan losses, that will bring down the credit spread. Then, there is also another component which is the bank's own cost, their administration costs. So, if you add up, it would be above 0.1%, which is just the cost of funds.
In April, most of the interest rates charged for ESG loans were between 2% and 4.5%. So, it has come down from before, which was 6% or more. So, I think, it is largely Government measures stepping in to lower cost of funds plus credit spread that have led to this outcome.
Whether the volume is according to our expectation, it is hard to say. It all depends on how deep the economic troubles will be. We certainly do not wish for the volume to be too huge. It means that the economic disruption is bigger, but I think the situation is still fluid. I think our measures are in place to answer to the needs of SMEs.
The Member had a last question.
\tMs Foo Mee Har: Personal guarantee.
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: Personal guarantee. So, the purpose of these ESG loans is to address an unexpected event – a black swan event – that is devastating to the economy and to many industries and firms. We want to make sure that firms do not just collapse as a result of this event. They are firms that otherwise would have been viable, which is why the Government put in a massive Job Support Scheme (JSS) and at the same time, provide these loans to help companies tide over. And I think to be able to pledge your personal assets, is an indication of the confidence of the business owner, that this is actually a viable business and that is worthwhile supporting it to tide through this difficult period.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
\tMr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. Just two questions for the Minister to follow up on that. One is in terms of processing times. So, there is still anecdotal feedback that the processing times are still quite considerable and there are some SMEs that are in distress and they need the credit to come in quickly. So, has the Government been tracking whether those processing times for the ESG loans have come down, is it trending in the right direction?
The second question is really in terms of personal guarantees. I suppose just to clarify, would the extent to which banks deploying these ESG loans ask for personal guarantees, does that also – are you seeing that also being reduced because of the 90% Government risk-share?
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: On the second question, I am afraid I do not have the data. But, as I explained to Ms Foo Mee Har, the personal guarantee is an indication of the confidence of the business owner on how viable the business is. And I think it is a necessary prudential measure. Since the Global Financial Crisis, I think all around the world banks have become stronger – stronger balance sheets, more capital. And I think it is fortunate that we went through this period and we now have stronger banks to meet the challenge of COVID-19. We want to make sure that banks use this balance sheet to be able to help economies, sectors, industries tide through, while maintaining their strength and resilience. That balance needs to be recognised and that balance needs to be struck.
As to the processing time, I do have some data. It ranges from one to eight days with the majority hovering around five days, four to five days. So, we will continue to track the schemes and make sure that it is processed efficiently and expeditiously.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Patrick Tay.
\tMr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (West Coast): This is a supplementary question for the bridging loan, specifically. I have encountered companies which hire quite a number of Singaporean workers because they are unable to obtain the bridging loan from ESG, in particular, in this instance where the local shareholding and ownership of company is less than 30%. So, they were not granted. But unfortunately, they hire quite a number of Singapore workers and want to keep above the water. So, is there any way we can assist such companies, which are in Singapore.
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: I would think they should be eligible. Why not give us the details and certainly, MAS and ESG can look into it.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Delayed Graduation Ceremonies for ITE, Polytechnic and University Graduands Affected by COVID-19 Situation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"31 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Education whether the graduation ceremonies for ITE, Polytechnics and Universities will still be organised at a later date for the current batch of graduands should the COVID-19 situation improve and permit.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Ms Low Yen Ling) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, Sir, each Institute of Higher Learning (IHL) typically holds over 10 graduation ceremonies, with the larger ones holding over 20 ceremonies, and some sessions can involve more than 1,000 people.
Realistically, in the light of COVID-19 and the need for safe distancing measures, our IHLs will not be able to hold traditional graduation ceremonies this year. It will also not be practical to postpone these large-scale ceremonies later this year, even if it is safe to do so by then. Because by then, graduands would have dispersed and gone their separate ways after completing their course.
Nonetheless, when the COVID-19 situation improves and stabilises, the IHLs will explore other ways, not involving big ceremonies, to help our students celebrate and commemorate the occasion, should they wish to.
We understand the disappointment of many students and parents. However, having explained the decisions, many have also expressed their understanding of the priority to safeguard health and lives, and that they would take this in their stride. Some graduands have also found their own creative ways to mark the occasion, such as a group of Temasek Polytechnic students who recently held a virtual ceremony on Minecraft.
We want to reassure our students that even though we are unable to hold the physical ceremonies, our students' achievements in their education journey and graduation are no less significant.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
\tMr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah): Thank you, Sir. Sir, indeed, the 2020 batch of graduates are an extraordinary cohort, they face challenging and trying circumstances and we should do our very best to help them if we can. So, I would like to ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary again, should the COVID-19 situation improves and permits, say one year down the road, and graduates and their families are still keen to have a graduation ceremony, would MOE be prepared to support and importantly, to keep the option open for them?
\tMs Low Yen Ling: Mr Speaker, I want to thank the Member Mr Liang Eng Hwa for his supplementary questions. In MOE, we understand the students' disappointment of not being able to mark the graduation with their family and their friends in one ceremony like before. It is hard, but unfortunately, given how easily infectious COVID-19 is, the need for safe distancing measures will continue to remain even after the circuit breaker measures are lifted.
Despite these unfortunate circumstances due to COVID-19, the IHLs have come up with many ways, not involving big physical ceremonies, to support and help the students to celebrate and commemorate this important occasion of their graduation and achievements. For the Polytechnics and the ITEs, traditionally, they hold their annual graduation ceremonies in the month of May, this month. Each of our Polytechnics and the ITEs have already set up a graduation website where congratulatory messages can be posted, in addition to the list of graduates and also the award winners. On top of that, additional commemorative materials such as graduation videos, e-handbooks or even graduation sticker packs, that were creatively done by the Faculty, were developed by the institutions.
Having said that, the Polytechnics and the ITEs are considering to allow gown rentals for photo-taking and eventually the opening of campuses for photo-taking, as and when safe distancing measures are scaled back. So, they are considering all that. That is for the Polytechnics and the ITEs.
As for our Autonomous Universities (AUs), as of now, SMU has decided that they will hold a virtual ceremony in place of the July ceremony. For the rest of the AUs, given that the graduation ceremonies are at least two to six months away, the other five AUs are deliberating the approaches and will certainly keep the graduands informed.
I would like to add that, beyond the commemoration of our students' graduation, all our IHLs are looking at ways to support our graduates given the uncertain economic outlook. For example, all the graduates graduating from ITEs, Polytechnics and AUs, will be offered complimentary access to pursue at least two CET modules and all our Education and Career Guidance (ECG) counsellors are available to support them in terms of career guidance and also career preparation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Students Allowed to Return to School for Support with Technology-based Learning during COVID-19 Circuit Breaker Period","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"32 Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked the Minister for Education with regard to the implementation of home-based learning during the circuit breaker period (a) what is the total number of students returning to their schools during this period; (b) how do schools assess whether students have the necessary support at home to do home-based learning and, if not, will need to return to school; and (c) whether there have been requests from parents for students to attend school during this period which could not be acceded to and, if so, what are the reasons.
\tThe Second Minister for Education (Ms Indranee Rajah) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, the vast majority of our students have been able to participate in full home-based learning (HBL) during the circuit breaker. Participation in full HBL was high, averaging 96% across the levels. The few who did not participate were largely on medical leave, and those who did not participate persistently were encouraged to return to school.
Notwithstanding, schools have also identified a proportion of students who would benefit from returning to school during this period, based on their understanding of the student and his/her family circumstances, parents' requests, and referrals from social workers. These would generally come under the following categories.
First, students whose parents are in essential services and do not have alternative care-giving arrangements. These students can also access the limited services offered by school-based Student Care Centres, or SCCs, including students who were not previously enrolled in the SCCs.
Second, students who face significant challenges learning at home, require face-to-face support or, for whom, a school environment is in the best interest of the student. Schools proactively identified these students and encouraged them to return to school, by providing a welcoming environment and additional small-group activities such as non-contact sports and enrichment modules, while practising safe distancing. This has helped them to stay connected and engaged, and maintain a school-going routine.
Thirdly, students who do not have sufficient digital devices at home or needed Internet access to support home-based learning. To support this group, schools have loaned out more than 20,000 computing devices and 1,600 Internet-enabling devices to date, with some support from corporates. The numbers coming back to schools for this purpose has dropped significantly since, to a small group whose parents do not wish to loan for personal reasons. If Members come across families who need devices, please refer them to the school, as we have more than enough to loan out.
Over the full HBL period, about 3,300 Primary school students and 700 Secondary school students returned to school daily for one or more of the above reasons. Requests from parents for their children to return to school were met, as long as there were genuine needs. The challenge has in fact been the opposite, where schools invite the student to come back to school, but the parents were reluctant over various reasons. But schools will continue to try.
Beyond the loan of devices, MOE and schools have also provided support to students and their families to facilitate participation in full HBL. Teachers monitored their students’ learning and well-being through text messages, phone or video calls. Resource kits are provided so parents can help supervise their children and reinforce their learning.
Through these various measures, we have been able to maintain high participation in HBL while at the same time enabling those with genuine need to return to school subject to the enhanced safe distancing measures in force during this period.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): I thank the Minister for the comprehensive answer. I just wanted to check a little bit more about the issues that some of the parents have been facing because we hear a lot of feedback that it is has been very challenging, even for the most savvy of parents to actually conduct HBL. I am just wondering whether schools and the Ministry have been receiving feedback about some of these challenges that parents are facing, and how are they supported in carrying out some of the HBL lessons at home.
The second thing I wanted to check on is the teachers. How are they coping with this because it is also not very easy for them managing. I think I heard feedback that some of them have challenges in ensuring the level of reception of the students, especially through online learning. So, how are teachers being supported in this? Especially since a recent article mentioned about how some of the students needed support beyond just their lessons but also in terms of the counselling they need because the challenges their parents may be facing. So, I am just wondering how are the teachers supported in all these, especially since some of them also are parents themselves and also have to handle HBL for their own kids.
\tMs Indranee Rajah: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her question and for her very obvious concern for both parents as well as the teachers. Let me start by saying that home-based learning has been a learning process for all – the schools, the parents and the students. That said, it has gone on much better than we had hoped but not without challenges. So, what are some of the challenges?
Some of the challenges are obviously from the parents' view point: some had to get familiar with the resource kits, some had to learn how to use the software, others were okay with the resource kits and the software but they had to work from home or they had more than one child who was also doing home-based learning. There were some, and for them this is particularly challenging if they had a child with special needs and other children who are also doing home-based learning.
So, what the schools and the teachers have tried to do is to ensure that they maintained a contact with the parents, talked through the issues that the parents have and together tried to work at various solutions. And this is also bearing in mind that no two children are exactly alike. Some have taken to the home-based learning very well but some others need more offline learning; and the parents have had to adjust and cope with that as well.
So, I would say that the initial period – certainly, the first week – there was quite a lot of adjustments that had to take place and learning on both sides. But a couple of weeks on and now we are at the fourth week, things have more or less stabilised. But I rather suspect that the school holidays commencing tomorrow will be a welcome break for all.
With regard to teachers, here I really would like to salute the teachers for the tremendous effort that they made. Many of you do not see this behind the scenes but when HBL was first announced, the teachers had to come together very quickly to put together the packages and the resource kits. What was heartwarming from this that we have learnt from the feedback from the schools, is that those teachers who were familiar with technology started to help those who were less familiar. Some of the older ones who were very experienced teachers but not so familiar with technology were learning from some of the younger ones. So, altogether it was an experience where people shared their different knowledge; the teachers shared different resources; some of them were just putting together DIY kits, building on MOE resources that were available. But altogether moving in the same direction with the sole purpose of making sure that the children were adequately equipped, and also trying to ensure that the parents were supported in this task of home-based learning.
And for the students who need support beyond lessons, obviously, the teachers also have been trying to engage them in other ways. And for the ones who have other issues, the school counsellors and the social welfare officers have reached out to them, again, either by telephone calls, video calls, emails, but just trying to make sure that they stay in contact with the students so that they are supported.
\tMr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): I thank the Minister for her replies. And it is very heartening to know that the reply regarding students with special education needs as well. Thank you also for giving examples of some of the groups that are allowed to return to schools during this period. I expect, as the Minister Lawrence had mentioned, in time there will be more information on who will be allowed to return midway during circuit breaker period. But for now, can I ask the Minister to share MOE's experience with regard to perhaps students who are boarders or students who do not have strong family support at home and maybe might be in school hostels, for example. Are special concerns given to these students in terms of allowing them the support, bearing in mind that they might be in their room for a significant period of time without the family support that other children or other students may have in their home.
\tMs Indranee Rajah: For the children who are without family support, the teachers in the schools are especially mindful to make an extra effort for these students. These students also have access to the limited services available. So, I would just like to reassure the Member that every effort to ensure that these students are supported.
\tMs Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): I thank the Minister for the comprehensive sharing. I do agree that HBL has given us all a very big learning curve during this period. I would like to ask if MOE would consider – because of the learning and the processes and challenges we have been going through in the education sector during this HBL period – an initiative to take stock of what is happening, what we have learnt, what are some of the best practices build a body of knowledge so we can learn more about who might be suitable to take home-based learning, what type of configurations some of these students will be more suited for and how we can ensure also that the teachers will be able to move from, say, a very instructor-dependent kind of e-learning, e-teaching to something that is better blended so that content, for example, which is repeatable, can be consolidated, put into packages that everybody can use.
In short, I would like to ask MOE to consider an initiative to take stock of all these learnings, so that indeed we will be able to progress to the next level of e-learning, blended learning and so forth.
\tMs Indranee Rajah: Let me thank the Member for her suggestion. We will certainly take that on board. MOE is already beginning to look at some of the feedback and the learnings that we have derived from this.
One of the pieces of feedback that has come, for example, is that teachers have said that the preparation of the lesson plans for online learning or learning through virtual platforms, is very different from face-to-face learning. So, that is one example. And the way you prepare the resources that you use and how you package it together is different.
They are also looking at the right balance because after awhile, if it is only pure online learning, children get bored. They need stimulation of other kinds. So, you have got to make sure you have the right mix. You also want to make sure that you have a healthy mix.
So, there are actually many things that have come out of this and we should see this as an opportunity to learn, to derive new strategies and add that into the mix of things, as we continue to make sure that our education system remains the foremost one in the world.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reports of Fake News Related to COVID-19 ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"33 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) how many incidents of fake news pertaining to COVID-19 have been identified and reported since January 2020; (b) what actions have been taken to tackle these fake news in the midst of a public health crisis; (c) who are some of the creators of these fake news; and (d) how are they held accountable for their misbehaviour.
The Minister for Communications and Information (Mr S Iswaran): Mr Speaker, Sir, since late January 2020, Government agencies have clarified and debunked about 40 instances of speculation, rumours, scams and outright falsehoods pertaining to COVID-19.
Amidst this crisis, our agencies have spared no effort to swiftly put out the facts, to dispel confusion and calm anxieties fomented by such falsehoods. The clarifications have been conveyed through the media, on Government websites, social media and the Gov.sg channel on WhatsApp and Telegram. Our primary focus is on ensuring that Singaporeans receive reliable and accurate information in a timely manner.
We have also used the powers under POFMA – the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act – to require purveyors of falsehoods to place factual corrections alongside false claims. These actions have been against Singaporeans, here or abroad, as well as some foreign parties and websites.
We will not hesitate to use the full force of the law against those who deliberately or maliciously purvey falsehoods. As was elaborated earlier, recently, an individual was charged in Court under the Miscellaneous Offences Act for claiming on Facebook that he had Government “intel” about tighter measures coming up.
Purveyors of falsehoods must be held accountable, but we all have a role to play in stemming the spread of false information, especially as some may have carelessly shared misinformation. It is of utmost importance, especially at a time of crisis like this, that each and every one of us does the right thing by checking that the messages we receive come from reliable sources and make the effort to verify a claim or piece of information before sharing it.
Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson): I thank the Minister for the answer. First of all, I would like to ask whether the numbers or is there a downward trend of such fake news. Such creators of fake news I would like to think of them as social anarchies. Are we adequately equipped to really identify these creators and take very strong action against them especially in such a public health crisis? We should not let them get away with this.
\tMr S Iswaran: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her questions. First, on the numbers and whether there is a clear trend, I would say that some of the actions that we took at the early stages of this crisis have had a salutary effect in injecting further restraint in the propensity to share such information or to purvey such false information. Having said that, I think they are also episodic; and we see sometimes, for want of a better word, a cluster pop-up because there is a new source of information and then others build on it. So, I would say in general, it has a leavening effect, a salutary effect in bringing the propensity down, but we still see some instances popping up from time to time.
Secondly, are we well-equipped to deal with this? On the part of the Government, we are not going out on the basis of trying to identify who are the purveyors on an ex ante basis. What we do do is, when the false information is brought to our attention then we take quick action. And the action that we take we have a range of responses, from clarifications to correction orders under the POFMA legislation, to even more serious actions that we can take, under POFMA, under the Miscellaneous Offences Act and even the Penal Code.
\t
So, we have a range of tools at our disposal and depending on the circumstances of each case and the outcome of investigations, the Public Prosecutor will decide if more serious action is to be taken.
So, on the whole, I think we have a comprehensive toolkit to deal with this but ultimately, I want to emphasise again the important role that all of us play because, ultimately, such falsehoods will find no traction if we do not give them any traction.
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. Ministerial Statements. Minister for Health.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos 34-35, 37-39, 45-48 and 51 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix. Question Nos 36, 40-44 and 49-50 have been postponed to the sitting of Parliament on 5 May 2020.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Second Update on Whole-of-Government Response to COVID-19","subTitle":"Statements by Minister for Health, Minister for National Development and Minister for Manpower","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister for Health (Mr Gan Kim Yong): Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to update Members again on the COVID-19 situation and address some of their questions.
When I spoke in March 2020, we were seeing the centre of the pandemic shift away from China, and a rapid increase in cases globally. Close to 80% of our cases then were imported, mainly from returning Singaporeans. We tightened our border controls and our import cases have drastically reduced. In the past week, we had no imported cases, down from around 16 a day on average in March.
At the same time, we have seen a rise in community cases from nine a day in March, to 31 a day on average in the week before circuit breaker, with an increasing proportion of unlinked cases, suggesting that there is underlying community transmission. We decided to do the hard thing – to impose circuit breaker measures from 7 April 2020, and introduced stricter measures following that on 21 April 2020. We also extended the circuit breaker measures to 1 June 2020.
There are signs that our circuit breaker measures are working. The average number of new community cases had fallen from 31 in the week before the circuit breaker, to 11 last week. The average number of new unlinked community cases a day had similarly reduced from 12, to five over the same period.
This suggests that our circuit breaker measures are effective. Let me take this chance to acknowledge the many sacrifices of our people, workers and businesses during these past few weeks of the circuit breaker. It has not been easy, but you have all played a part in bringing these numbers down and I want to express my heartfelt gratitude. But we are not out of the woods yet.
While the community cases are coming under control, we have seen a rise in migrant worker cases, particularly in the dormitories. We moved in quickly, set up medical posts in all the purpose-built dormitories and provided mobile medical support for the factory converted dormitories. MOH worked with the Inter-agency Task Force led by MOM to ensure the medical needs and welfare of the workers are taken care of. We are grateful for the assistance of the Task Force's members including the SAF and SPF and our healthcare workers from our public healthcare institutions as well as from the private sector. We are making progress and will continue to do our best to care for our migrant workers. Minister Teo will elaborate on this in her Statement.
Notwithstanding stringent precautions, there have also been cases at our Nursing Homes and at one Welfare Home. As these facilities serve the elderlies who are a vulnerable group, we take such cases very seriously. MOH has ramped up more aggressive testing for staff and residents at these Homes, working jointly with MSF. This is to protect our vulnerable seniors, by quickly picking up hidden cases if any, to isolate them and care for them and thus protect the rest of the Homes' residents and staff. We have started this, but it would take some time to complete.
Meanwhile, we may see cases picked up at these Homes as a result of the active screening. In addition, we are also arranging lodging for staff who interact with residents at designated accommodation facilities on-site or at hotels, to reduce their exposure to the community during this circuit breaker period. Both these steps complement existing safe distancing and infection control measures, so as to enhance protection to our seniors in these Homes.
Overall, despite our high case numbers, we have managed to keep death rates low so far. This is partly because most of our patients are younger and partly due to the tireless efforts of our healthcare workers in providing good and timely medical care for all our COVID-infected patients. We must continue to do all we can to save patients who become gravely ill and keep fatalities as low as possible.
In preparation for the expected increase in the number of cases, especially from the dormitories, we have rapidly expanded our healthcare capacity. This includes both medical facilities, and also healthcare manpower.
We have seen countries whose healthcare systems were overwhelmed and this quickly led to high numbers of death among patients. Ms Irene Quay has asked if we have an ethical framework to allocate use of healthcare resources. We are working hard to avoid getting to this point. We have planned ahead, created and ramped up many different types of healthcare facilities to support the specific needs of COVID-19 patients. In addition, our healthcare system has the flexibility to stretch our capacity to respond to increasing demand. Let me elaborate.
First, on hospital and ICU beds. To ensure that there is available hospital capacity to care for COVID-19 patients, public hospitals have postponed non-urgent elective procedures and discharged medically stable long-stayers to step-down care facilities. Public hospitals have also repurposed and converted existing wards into isolation rooms and progressively opened more wards for COVID-19 patients. Our number of isolation beds has increased from around 550 in January this year, to close to 1,500 as of 2 May 2020. NCID has also increased their capacity from about 100 to more than 500 negative pressure isolation beds in the same period.
Currently, 28 COVID-19 patients are in our ICU, as the majority of the cases are mild. We have about 150 vacant ICU beds and can quickly bring another 300 online. But we are not taking any chances as we must preserve our buffer capacity.
Mr Leon Perera had asked about our ability to further ramp up. The public hospitals have put in place plans to ensure that their infrastructure, equipment, medications and manpower are in place to add another 450 ICU beds by mid-May if needed. We have also ensured a sufficient supply of ventilators and other ICU accessories to support the care of ICU patients.
The majority of our COVID-19 cases have only mild symptoms. Hence, we have expanded our medical facilities to care for patients with mild symptoms and those who are on the recovery path and no longer need extensive medical support. These facilities allow the hospitals to focus resources on providing care to those who require emergency and intensive care. The Community Care Facility (CCF) is one such facility for patients with milder symptoms. At the CCFs, patients continue to be monitored and have access to appropriate medical care when needed.
Currently, we have more than 10,000 beds in our CCFs for our patients. These include places such as the D'Resort at Paris Ris, Singapore Expo Halls 1 to 6 and part of Changi Exhibition Centre. Another 10,000 are being set up. Building up our CCF capacity called for a multi-agency effort comprising Government agencies and the private sector. Many teams had worked round the clock to make this possible, and I want to extend my gratitude to all of them.
For example, for the first hall in Expo, this was made possible through the hard work of individuals from Temasek Holdings, Singapore Expo, Surbana Jurong, the Integrated Health Information Systems, Resorts World Sentosa as the managing agent, PSA, ST Engineering, Certis Cisco, Parkway Pantai and the Woodlands Health Campus as well as the SAF. The list is long, but this gives us a sense of the complexity of the operations and how closely everyone had to work together. Through the efforts of everyone involved, we managed to set up the first hall in a week. This is truly an exemplary example of a Whole-of-Society effort.
Next, let me talk about Community Recovery Facility (CRF). We have also set up these CRFs which is a step-down facility for recovering patients. Based on epidemiological evidence and research by local and international infectious disease experts, patients who remain well at day 14 of their illness are past the critical stage and are unlikely to need further medical care. However, they still have to be isolated to reduce the risk of transmission. Hence, patients past their day 14 of illness can be safely transferred to the CRFs before they are assessed for discharge.
We currently have around 2,000 CRF bed spaces, with some of them within our dormitories and others in selected SAF camps. We will be expanding CRF capacity to more than 10,000 beds by end June. As our CRF facilities increase, we can also free up space at the CCFs.
With this layered set of healthcare facilities customised to patient needs, we will be able to provide the most appropriate care for patients while also ensuring sufficient healthcare capacity to meet our needs. All these efforts require close coordination among multiple agencies, as the example of CCF @ Singapore Expo illustrates, to ensure operations are optimised, facilities are well-managed, patient flows are facilitated and tracked, while keeping watch on the capacity utilisation overall.
MOH has set up a Medical Operations Task Force (MOTF) with the support of the SAF to oversee and coordinate our efforts on the ground. I want to thank our partners and SAF in particular, for their support and efforts.
Looking ahead, while we take heart in the progress made, especially in the community cases, we should not be complacent. There are still unlinked cases and cases picked up from our surveillance programme, indicating the presence of hidden cases in the community. Globally, the number of cases also continue to increase. Even countries and regions with low daily numbers, such as China, Hong Kong, South Korea and New Zealand, are watching out anxiously for a second wave of infection that may result in another prolonged outbreak.
Hence, we must continue to do what we can to keep our cases low, to keep the lid tight even as we gradually roll back some of our circuit breaker measures. We are now at the end of the two weeks of tighter circuit breaker measures. Last Saturday, the Multi-Ministry Task Force announced the gradual resumption of selected activities and services in the coming weeks, subject to the necessary safe management measures being in place. The rest of the circuit breaker measures will continue to apply till 1 June.
If we work together, by 1 June, we hope our situation would have improved further, with community cases remaining low or coming down further. Migrant worker cases in the dormitories will hopefully by then be clearly under control. We can then consider further opening up. This is important to enable our people to start going back to work. It is also important for Singapore to protect our strategic position in the global supply chains as the global economy recovers from COVID-19.
We will still need to open up in a phased and calibrated manner, to avoid a second wave of outbreak. There will likely still be cases of infection in the community as the virus is difficult to eradicate. What is key is to keep the number of cases small and reduce the risk of big clusters, through various safeguards and enablers. It would take a while before the COVID-19 outbreak subsides globally or before a vaccine is available. Thus, we will have to adapt to a new way of life and social interactions.
Ms Sylvia Lim asked what indicators we will look at in considering lifting the circuit breaker measures. We will consider a variety of factors.
First, numbers are important but they are not the only thing. We need to be assured that community transmission locally is stemmed or very low. Community cases should ideally fall to zero or single digit daily, with very low numbers of unlinked cases and not just for one day but sustained over a period of time. We also need to see a decrease in migrant worker cases. These cases are high today partly due to proactive case-finding in some settings. While we have been able to keep local community cases low despite higher number of cases among migrant workers, it is equally important to reduce the migrant worker cases over time, though it will take a while longer. Otherwise, we will continue to be at risk of a spillover from the dormitories into the wider population.
Second, we need to make an assessment of the situation globally and for individual countries to inform the extent and approach on reopening our borders. We will review the rate of transmissions in other countries as well as what they have done to contain the spread. For any reopening of our borders, we are likely to start small and selectively, and to continue to impose a mix of isolation and test requirements to protect ourselves from new imported cases leading to community spread.
Third, we must put in place a system to allow us to open up safely. When we allow more business and social activities to resume, there will be more interactions and higher risks of virus transmission at the workplace and in the community. Therefore, we need to step up our capability and capacity to test and detect cases early, contact trace quickly, ringfence close contacts promptly and establish the original source of the infection to stop other undetected transmission chains, if any. These are the key enablers which will give us confidence to reopen.
Let me start with the testing as the first key enabler. To date, we have conducted over 140,000 tests for COVID-19, or 2,500 tests per 100,000 people in Singapore. This is among the highest testing rates in the world. But we plan to do more and will continue to expand our testing capacity and to strategically deploy them to yield the greatest impact.
Members have asked about different tests and their uses. Today, we use mainly the polymerase chain reaction, or PCR tests, to detect confirmed COVID-19 cases. The PCR works by detecting the virus RNA from a nose or throat swab and is the gold standard for detecting current infection. To the question by Ms Sylvia Lim, we use PCR testing for three key purposes: (a) to diagnose suspect cases to provide early treatment and isolate close contacts; (b) to do screening and active case finding of individuals at risk, such as migrant workers decanted from their dorms before they return to work; and (c) to do surveillance to monitor undetected cases in the community.
Currently, we have the capacity to conduct more than 8,000 PCR tests a day in total across our community and migrant workers in the dormitories, up from 2,900 a day in early April. We are working with various private and public sector partners to progressively increase our testing capacity further to up to 40,000 a day.
With this increase, we will widen the net that we cast for diagnostic testing for symptomatic cases, active case finding, screening and surveillance testing in our community and among workers, including migrant workers. We will also do more testing and monitoring to pick out asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic cases among priority groups such as nursing home residents and staff to prevent clusters from developing. Testing is crucial as risk of infection will increase when we allow more economic and social activities to resume.
Ms Sylvia Lim and Ms Foo Mee Har had asked about another type of test called serology testing. This works by detecting antibodies produced by the body to fight against the virus from a blood sample. Based on our local studies, the effectiveness of such tests is very low in the first 10 days of illness as it takes time for the immune system to develop antibodies. Therefore, unlike the PCR testing, serology tests are useful to indicate past infection but it is not very useful for early diagnosis because of the time lag. Many such tests in the market are also still under review and validation.
Notwithstanding this, NCID has begun to use serology testing to study the level of infection among various groups, including healthcare workers, close contacts of COVID-19 patients and the general population. Their study was published last week and found that among close to 2,000 samples from our healthcare workers, volunteers and general population, none had antibodies pointing to a past infection. This shows that the infection rate among our healthcare workers and general population is low.
The study also showed that among close contacts, around 2.5% had antibodies despite not having had symptoms during their quarantine. That means they had been infected earlier but recovered, and remain well without any symptoms. This points to the need to continue our efforts to quickly isolate close contacts of confirmed cases. We will continue to do more of these studies to help us understand the extent of spread and immunity in the community. I should add that scientific evidence of protective immunity is still under intensive study currently.
There have been some suggestions to do asymptomatic testing for the entire population. We will study this. As there is no widespread community transmission here, the yield will be very low if asymptomatic testing is done indiscriminately for the whole population. To be effective, it may also need to be done repeatedly as it does not reflect immunity and those tested can be infected after the test. It might not be best way to use our testing resources.
Instead, we will and have started doing asymptomatic testing selectively for priority groups. For example, we currently test asymptomatic young children if they are in the same household as COVID-19 patients since they may not be able to articulate their symptoms well. In addition, a key priority is to protect vulnerable groups. This includes seniors, particularly nursing home residents. As mentioned, we have started to test staff and residents at MOH and MSF Homes with a high proportion of seniors such as nursing homes and welfare homes. Such tests complement existing precautionary measures, such as good infection control practices and close monitoring for symptoms in staff and residents. They will allow us to intervene early where needed to protect the elderly residents.
As more businesses reopen, we may also do more tests for essential service workers. At our borders, we can also deploy tests for arrivals to reduce the risk of local transmission from imported cases.
In all, as we build up our testing capacity, we will be able to test more and for more purposes. This will be important as we start to open up so that we can pre-emptively detect and break any potential transmission chains.
The second enabler is our contact tracing capacity. After we have confirmed a COVID-19 case, we will need to contact trace and isolate high-risk close contacts to limit the spread in the community. This needs to be done fast and has to be scalable and thorough for it to be effective. This will allow us to quickly ringfence and prevent further spread. We have set up 50 contact tracing teams, up from 20 since my last update in March. But we must scale up quickly if there are more cases or large clusters and to discover less obvious links. To do so manually will be very difficult.
Many countries have leveraged on technology to help them contact trace effectively and efficiently. We will also explore how we can tap on SafeEntry and TraceTogether as well as other technological solutions.
Even as we build our capability and capacity for testing, contact tracing and healthcare infrastructure, we need the support of our healthcare workers. They are at the centre of our fight against this COVID-19 outbreak. We deeply appreciate their sacrifices, long hours as well as personal and professional commitment to care for each patient. This will be a long campaign and we will need the support of our healthcare workers, and we need to support them and to take care of their needs.
Many Members of Parliament have asked about the well-being of our healthcare workers. I would like to reaffirm our commitment to take care of them in every way. Our key priority is in keeping them safe and healthy by ensuring adequate supply of personal protective equipment to protect our healthcare workers and provide them training on the proper usage.
I thank Dr Chia Shi-Lu for his concern on the infection rate among our healthcare workers. As of 26 April 2020, there were 66 cases of confirmed COVID-19 infections among healthcare workers. Forty six cases were from healthcare workers whose work involved direct contact with patients. Based on investigations thus far, there are no established epidemiological links of a healthcare worker being infected in the line of duty for caring for their patients, except for one case in a private healthcare institution where we are unable to rule out the possible link between the doctor and a COVID-19 patient.
Our healthcare workers have taken an extra level of care at their workplace to protect themselves and their families. The recent NCID study also did not detect any past infection among a sample of healthcare workers. Nevertheless, we cannot be complacent. We have reminded our healthcare workers constantly that they should take adequate precautions during their work to protect themselves, the patients as well as their family members.
In the event that our healthcare workers fall sick, we will ensure that they are well taken care of and our healthcare institutions will provide them with the necessary support.
It is also important for us to take care of the mental well-being of our healthcare workers. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, the healthcare clusters had measures in place, such as counselling clinics, helplines and peer support programmes. We have since stepped up our efforts. For example, our institutions have rostered breaks and staff rotations to ensure that healthcare workers have sufficient rest periods in between work days. The clusters have also been actively working with the NTUC and, in particular, the Healthcare Services Employees' Union (HSEU) with initiatives such as the distribution of care packages, the launch of GrabCare to provide transport for our frontline workers and collaboration with MindFi, a mindfulness app.
The many gifts and words of encouragement from members of the public to our healthcare workers mean a lot to them and have helped to keep up their morale. Members of the public have been writing thank you messages and buying breakfast for our healthcare workers. As part of the SG United initiative, close to 9,000 messages for our healthcare workers were collected from appreciation zones across Singapore. On behalf of our healthcare workers, let me thank you for your continued support.
Compensation is another important area, which Miss Cheryl Chan asked about. We recognise the invaluable contributions of our workers and will ensure that they receive due recognition for stepping up during this challenging period. The Deputy Prime Minister had previously announced a special bonus for our public healthcare workers working on the frontline. Healthcare workers are also paid shift or overtime allowances if they take on longer or more shifts during this outbreak.
However, we recognise that no monetary compensation is ever enough. I want to again acknowledge and thank our healthcare workers for their hard work and dedication. One great example is Ms Tovelle Loh, an assistant nurse clinician from NCID. Ms Loh supports training of staff to ensure that they are updated on infection control policies and recommendations and also helps to review infection control workflows at NCID and other settings. Despite the heavy work load, she remains spirited and committed to do the best for her patients. And it helps that her husband has been very supportive.
Examples like Ms Loh abound, among our frontline workers, support staff and also researchers in our testing and research labs.
Another key part of our strategy is to augment the healthcare workforce, which Mr Murali Pillai had asked about. While our public healthcare sector currently has sufficient healthcare professionals, they are stretched, and there is a need to rotate and refresh staff periodically, as the fight against COVID-19 is likely to be a long one.
To address these sustainability concerns, MOH has given the public healthcare institutions some flexibility to deploy staff across institutions to meet pressing operational needs on the ground and to support one another as one public healthcare system, with strict infection control protocols in place.
MOH has also looked to external sources to augment our public healthcare workforce. This includes tapping on healthcare professionals in the private sector and encouraging retired and non-practicing staff to return to public practice through the newly launched SG Healthcare Corps. We have expanded the scope to include those without prior healthcare experience, for whom training will be provided to enable them to take on supporting roles, such as performing swab procedures and basic care roles. As of 3 May, we received more than 11,000 sign-ups altogether.
I am heartened by this overwhelming response from Singaporeans. So far, we have matched about 800 Corps members to various needs on the ground, and they are being progressively deployed and we will do more. Members of the SG Healthcare Corps will be remunerated for their time and contribution when they are deployed to work alongside our healthcare workers on the ground.
Third, we also use technology as a force multiplier, to deliver the same or enhanced outcomes, with less time and resources. For example, in the CCFs, round-the-clock care is made possible through the use of medical kiosks and teleconsultations. Devices such as pulse oximeters and health apps are also used to monitor patient well-being. Healthcare institutions have also started teleconsultation services for follow-ups on their patients.
Through all these initiatives, we aim to ensure that our public healthcare services remain available to those in need, and our healthcare workers are well taken care of during this challenging period. This enables us to have a sustainable healthcare workforce in this long-term fight. Even as we fight COVID-19, we need to continue to address long-term health issues. I am glad that Prof Lim Sun Sun asked about this, and let me share what we have been doing in this area.
We have temporarily deferred launching any new initiatives to allow staff to be re-deployed to more critical areas of COVID-19 work. But for selected programmes, such as measures on Sugar Sweetened Beverages, banning Partially-hydrogenated Oils, and standardised packaging for tobacco products, we will continue to push ahead.
To support our safe distancing measures, we have already suspended all on-ground activities such as general health screening, but we will continue to encourage Singapore residents to practice healthy habits and fight diabetes through less resource-intensive alternative platforms. For example, HPB continues to provide on HealthHub, bite-sized videos and articles on practising good personal hygiene, healthy eating, physical activity, and mental well-being.
We must also never let our guard down on dengue. The total number of dengue cases in 2020 has exceeded 6,000 – more than double that over the same period in 2019. With the traditional dengue peak season approaching, NEA officers are on the ground conducting dengue inspections at common areas and construction sites, where construction site operators continue to be responsible for vector control measures, even during the circuit breaker period. A worrying trend that NEA observed was a 50% increase in Aedes mosquito breeding in homes over the past three years, compared to the preceding three years. Minister Masagos has asked me to urge everyone at home to be vigilant, to do the Mozzie Wipeout to remove potential mosquito breeding habitats. NEA also brought forward the National Dengue Prevention campaign to 22 March to rally all members of the community. Our efforts on all these fronts continue even as we battle the COVID-19 outbreak, to keep Singaporeans healthy.
Mr Speaker, let me conclude. In this fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, everyone can play a role, during and after the circuit breaker period.
We acknowledge that the circuit breaker measures are difficult, and we appreciate everyone's support and sacrifice to stay home and adhere to the measures. For our frontline officers, including those in healthcare, and dorm operations, we stand behind you, and want to express our enormous gratitude for your efforts. Our collective efforts are not in vain, and we have seen a decrease in our community numbers.
We are looking ahead, and making preparations for post 1 June. We must make calibrated moves to prevent a resurgence of cases and clusters. We must put in place key enablers and safeguards to allow us to contain the spread and care for future cases, even as we roll back our circuit breaker measures and re-open.
We must remain vigilant and not let our guards down.\tIf we all do our part, we can overcome and emerge stronger. Let us work together and move forward together, as one SG United. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Minister Lawrence Wong.
The Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mr Speaker, Sir, during our last update to Parliament, I said that the situation was uncertain and fluid, and that we would have to expect daily changes. Indeed, over the past month, our battle against COVID-19 has escalated sharply. Now, we have ramped up our resources significantly in response to the challenges, and today, we are continuing to fight the virus on two main fronts.
First, we are doing all we can to control the serious outbreak amongst migrant workers in the dormitories, and to take care of these workers. We have had a huge spike in cases at the dormitories. The infection is mostly concentrated amongst workers in the construction sector. We now know that the transmission amongst this group has been happening for some time, and occurred not just in the dormitories, but also in common worksites and in places that they went to with their friends after work and on their rest days. And that is why we had clusters outside of the dormitories too – amongst construction workers living in shophouses and private apartments.
To determine the extent of the spread, we have undertaken extensive testing amongst these workers. Many of the workers have very mild symptoms and they sometimes brush this aside as a very mild cold. So, we are testing not just the workers who report sick, but also those that are asymptomatic and well. This intensive testing explains the large numbers that we are still picking up amongst migrant workers in the dormitories, and we expect this to continue for a few more weeks.
To minimise the risks of spread to the wider community, we have stopped the movement of workers in and out of all dormitories, and put the construction workers living outside the dormitories on a stay-home requirement. At the same time, we have implemented a comprehensive set of support measures to look after the health, well-being and welfare of these workers, which Minister Josephine Teo will elaborate on later.
We are very mindful of our responsibility to these migrant workers who have contributed so much to Singapore, and we will continue to ensure that they get the care and support they need.
The second major front is in suppressing the spread of the virus in the community, through the circuit breaker. We implemented the circuit breaker on 7 April; two weeks later, on 21 April, we tightened the circuit breaker measures, and also extended it to 1 June. We know the restrictions have not been easy and have created considerable inconveniences. But Singaporeans have been resilient and have taken all these in your stride. For this, we want to thank everyone for doing their part.
Through our collective efforts, we are now seeing some results – daily infection numbers have started to come down, although they are not yet at single digits. That is why we extended the tightened measures for another week till 11 May. Thereafter, we will allow some gradual easing, as we had announced over the weekend, but the key circuit breaker measures will largely remain till 1 June.
I must strongly caution that the easing of some measures in the coming weeks cannot be taken as a signal that we can now take it easy and start to go out more.\tRemember, the fight is far from over. This battle against the virus is not a sprint; it is a marathon, and we are not even at the halfway mark! And if you have done a marathon, you will know that the second half is typically harder than the first. So, we must expect more challenges ahead. The virus can flare up again anytime. So, we cannot afford to slacken. But we must stay vigilant, maintain our discipline, continue to stay home and minimise our contacts with others.
As we continue this fight against the virus, we also learn more about how the virus is transmitted. So, we update our risk assessments and adjust our measures accordingly. And as I said just now, we must expect more challenges along this journey, which may require us to take further adjustments in our measures or to take additional precautions.
For members of the public, I can appreciate that it is sometimes difficult to keep up with all the changes. But I hope that everyone appreciates and understands that we are responding to a dynamic and fast changing situation. In every case, we will carefully consider the latest scientific evidence and medical advice and the impact on our people before making a change. Our overriding objective has always been and will continue to be the health and well-being of Singaporeans.
For example, at the start of the outbreak, we had to implement many new travel restrictions and adjust them quickly as we tracked how the virus was spreading from country to country. Later, in coming up with specific measures for our community, we too had to adapt and adjust as we learnt more about the virus. This has happened not just in Singapore, but everywhere around the world. We are dealing with a new virus, and scientists everywhere are discovering more about the virus, even today, and the disease it causes. As Prof Leo Yee Sin, Executive Director of NCID has said, \"for us to be ahead of the virus... we [need to] know the enemy very well\", and right now, \"we're still on the learning curve\". It is not just Singapore which is on the learning curve, the whole world is still on the learning curve.
And that is why we updated our guidance on masks as we learnt more about the virus, and then we made it a requirement for everyone to wear masks when they go out. We also explained then, that the wearing of mask is not the only, nor the most important protective measure. Remember that the virus can spread through surfaces as well. So, the wearing of masks must be complemented with other precautions that we have emphasised from the outset, including safe distancing and good personal hygiene.
Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked if we should make it compulsory to wear masks when you are out in all circumstances; even when ones engages in strenuous exercise outside. Actually, the issue here is not just about the wearing of masks. Requiring people to wear a mask when engaging in strenuous exercise is not advisable because it can pose a health risk. The more fundamental issue is whether we want to allow people to go outside to exercise in the first place.
So, we looked at this very carefully. Going out for exercise is beneficial for your immunity and health. There is a risk of transmission only if you are in close contact with another person for some time. But if you exercise alone in the open with safe distancing, as you are required to, this should not pose a problem. There is also no local evidence of transmission occurring among people exercising in the open. On the other hand, prohibiting outdoor exercise altogether and keeping people cooped up at home for a long time can be harmful.
So, on balance, we decided to allow outdoor exercise by yourself, in your own neighbourhood, so long as safe distancing is in place. This is a balance which other countries have struck too – take the example of the Czech Republic. I mentioned this because there was a video going around earlier on how they were amongst the first European countries to impose a requirement for people to wear masks. In the Czech Republic today, you can go out to exercise and you do not need to wear a mask, so long as you maintain a safe distance from others.
Some think we do not need to bother with these very careful calibrations and just go for a \"full lockdown\".
But if you look at the countries on lockdowns, the measures they implement are not the same, even if they use the same term. What is more important is to understand the specific measures that are needed in our own context and circumstance.
Of course, one of the most effective ways to slow down the spread of the virus is to restrict movement altogether, get everyone to just stay home. As Minister Ong Ye Kung puts it – he coined a very catchy phrases to explain this to the elderly in Mandarin: \"如果你不出门, 你就不会见人; 如果你不见人, 病毒就不会进门\". In translation, \"If you don't go out, you won't meet people; if you don't meet people, you won't bring the virus home.\" It does not have the same ring in English but you get the point.
Staying home can be an effective measure but keeping everyone at home also has substantial social and economic costs. The impact is likely to be felt disproportionately by the lower income and the vulnerable groups. They are also less likely to be able to telecommute for work so staying home will clearly affect their incomes and livelihoods. Being isolated at home for long periods is also not good for their health and overall well-being.
And that is why we considered very carefully before we decided to implement the circuit breaker and then later to extend it for a month. It was a difficult decision to make because we knew businesses and workers are already hurting. But in the end, we decided we had to proceed with this move, so as to break the transmission chain and slow down the spread of the virus.
To mitigate the impact, we supported businesses, workers and Singaporeans at large with the Unity, Resilience and Solidarity Budgets – more than $60 billion in total, including drawing on our national reserves with the President's permission.
For all Singaporeans, we have the Solidarity payment of $600, with more support for those with children and other support, such as the COVID-19 Support Grant and the Temporary Relief Scheme.
Looking ahead, as we think about easing some of the circuit breaker measures, we will adopt this same evidence-based approach to assess the transmission risks, and then make careful and calibrated adjustments. Where possible, and where we assess the risks to be low, we will consider easing and allowing some flexibility on the ground.
So, to Mr Henry Kwek's question, we do allow one change of address during the circuit breaker period, for care-giving needs, such as for parents to move in with their children's grandparents through that circuit breaker period. So, no shuttling to and fro but you move one time and you stay there.
But there will also be many requests we have to reject. We are already getting appeals for more relaxation for more businesses to open, for my favourite shop to open. And you can guess which one is top on the list, going beyond what we have announced.
But we have to hold the line for now and I hope Singaporeans understand why we need to be firm and why everyone must do their part to cooperate and comply with these measures.
Several Members – Assoc Prof Walter Theseira and Ms Anthea Ong – had asked for a review and inquiry into the cause of the outbreak in the dormitories. We do want to review and learn. We do want to continue taking feedback and suggestions to improve. That is our basic attitude – to keep improving, learning and doing better.
But we are now still in the heat of battle. When all this is over, we will certainly look back and learn from the experience. We do that each time, after a crisis. For example, our lessons from SARS have helped us a lot in dealing with COVID-19. Likewise, at the right time, we will comprehensively review this pandemic and our responses – not just the outbreak in the dormitories, but the entire crisis from start to finish, and our overall response, and we will seek to learn and improve. And I have no doubt that we will find many things where we could have done better and many changes we should make to be better prepared the next time.
But for now, let us stay focused on the urgent priorities ahead of us – we have to bring the outbreak under control on the two fronts, in the community and in the migrant worker dormitories, so that we may then resume activities gradually.
And indeed, looking ahead, the key challenge for us and for countries everywhere, is to work out how we can exit from the circuit breaker and resume normal activities safely, without the virus flaring up again.
Easing on the measures prematurely and without proper safeguards can result in a second wave of transmission and then force a second round of tightening, which I am sure no one wants. This has happened in other countries and it reinforces the need for us to move cautiously.
As we take these steps to resume activities, there will be major challenges to tackle. Take the construction sector as one example. Over the years, we have made progress in construction productivity. We now have more pre-fabricated construction. But there are still 270,000 migrant workers in this sector alone.
A construction worksite will typically have hundreds of workers coming from multiple dormitories. One single infected worker – mild or asymptomatic – can spread the virus to their co-workers at the worksite. They in turn can bring the infection back to where they live and also to places they gather with their friends. When that happens, large clusters will quickly form, as has happened. How do we avoid this from happening again?
We will have to work with the industry to fundamentally change the way we go about construction activities. We will need a whole range of measures covering the worksites, the accommodation and transport of workers, as well as additional precautions taken by the workers themselves.
I have highlighted construction as an example. But this applies to all sectors of the economy. All firms will need to change their work culture and practices. Life after the circuit breaker will not be a return to status quo ante.
That is why MTI and MOM are engaging industry associations, business chambers and firms, to help them adapt to these new realities. For example, telecommuting will have to be a default option extended to all staff and for those who cannot telecommute, strict safe management practices will have to be implemented. There will need to be split team arrangements with no cross-deployment of staff, staggered working and lunch break hours, higher hygiene standards, amongst a whole range of different measures. Within the workplace, there should not be any gathering of staff in groups at any time, be it in the pantry or the staff canteen. Very simple measures, but every company has to take them seriously.
Wherever possible, we should make full use of technology to enable the implementation of these measures. And all of these safeguards must be in place before we can allow workplaces to re-open more and allow more people to resume going to work.
When we do so, we will start with industries that are critical to the economy and to local employment and that keep us connected to the world and global supply chains. Some sectors will have to wait for a bit more time, for example, entertainment outlets or activities that attract crowds or people in close contact with one another. I do not think we can restart these activities anytime soon.
Likewise, it may take some time for us to allow dining in at F&B outlets. I understand many people are looking forward to doing that with their family members and friends, but we will have to assess the risks and consider this very carefully, considering that this particular activity is a known vector for transmission.
Religious gatherings and services too may take a while to resume. In fact, all our communities have experienced or will be experiencing their religious observances and holidays under very different circumstances. From Qing Ming and Easter in April, and soon Vesak Day and Hari Raya in May. We know it has not been easy and we really appreciate everyone's understanding of the adjustments that have to be made to keep ourselves and our families safe during this period.
And to open up safely, we will need to do two other things which Minister Gan highlighted just now – to ramp up testing and to harness technology for faster contact tracing.
A nation-wide testing strategy is being developed, even as we scale up testing capacity, as shared by Minister Gan earlier. It will involve more extensive community surveillance, so that we are better able to detect any unlinked cases in the community.
We will also prioritise the testing of higher risk and more vulnerable groups, like the residents and staff of nursing homes and welfare homes as well as healthcare workers that have high touch-points with the community. And then, we will progressively expand testing to the rest of the essential workforce and the broader community, in line with the expansion of our testing capacity.
On the technology front, we have implemented two key tools. The first is SafeEntry, which is a digital check-in/check-out system to log the visits by individuals in all business premises and venues. The second is a TraceTogether app, which uses Bluetooth on your phones to quickly identify whom you have been near to, so that we can track your close contacts when the need arises. The team is now working with Apple and Google to enhance this app and to make it more effective, especially on iOS phones.
Now, we are also developing solutions for the elderly and young who may not have smartphones. So, that is also a group we are focusing on. And there is a whole series of work around the technology front. When the work is ready, we will announce more details.
Expanded testing and faster contact tracing are our two key strategies. But they are not a substitute for personal responsibility. All of us still have to play a part, by practising good personal hygiene habits, wearing a mask when we are outside and seeking medical attention immediately when we are unwell. These are basic fundamentals that we all have to uphold. But with these enablers and the safeguards in place, we can then plan for a safe and gradual resumption of activities in June – provided, as we said just now, we see a continued decline in our community numbers.
Mr Speaker, it has been more than three months since we started our fight against the virus. The entire team has been working flat out over this period. They include our healthcare workers; contact tracers and infectious disease experts; researchers, scientists and lab technicians; our communications team who help to put out accurate and timely information; our safe distancing ambassadors and enforcement officers deployed all over Singapore; our officers manning our checkpoints, isolation and quarantine facilities; the SAF, SPF, SCDF officers mobilised across different areas; and public officers from all Ministries working hard to support the overall effort – they are mobilising volunteers, securing more spaces for the different needs we have, helping with relief measures and mask distribution – a whole range of work.
As Co-Chair of the Task Force, I get a front row seat in seeing the best of Singapore at work during this crisis. And this has been truly a humbling and inspiring experience, because everywhere I go, I see people who are tired but they remain fully committed and focused on the mission and they are still going all out to get the job done.
Some have had to quickly adapt to the new requirements of working from home. Like our teachers who have been busy designing new curriculum and engaging students on home-based learning; and they are now getting ready for the first batch of students returning to schools in two weeks.
For others, it has been a complete change in their job scope. For example, Ms Jaime Lim, who is a Deputy Director at MOM said, and I quote, \"My work went from being desk-bound to manning safe distancing measures ops command and now I am at a dormitory gazetted as an isolation area. Stationed at the dormitory, weekends and weekdays have merged into a blur. I am now used to foggy face shields, powdery palms from glove wear and facial marks made by masks\".
Many others, like Jaime, have gone above and beyond the call of duty. So, a big \"Thank You\" goes out to everyone on the frontline. [Applause.]
They are working their guts out, taking care of fellow Singaporeans, fighting the virus and controlling the outbreak.
We also deeply appreciate all who are in essential services, who have kept Singapore going through this circuit breaker period. They include our cleaners, facilities managers, technicians, refuse collectors, workers in the power and water industries, public transport workers, social service professionals, security guards, delivery riders, taxi drivers and so many more.
It is also very heartening to see many ground-up initiatives from community groups. Our SGUnited portal saw a seven-fold increase in the total donations in this period compared to the previous year. Many social service organisations are helping the more vulnerable groups cope with the circuit breaker and providing additional support to our migrant workers. Thousands of volunteers have signed up for initiatives ranging from mask distribution, helping with applications for Temporary Relief Funds and appreciating our frontline workers.
So, to everyone out there working during the circuit breaker, to those working from home and to those supporting the fight in whatever way you can, we also want to say “Thank You” for your contributions and sacrifices. We are all on the frontline in this fight against the virus. Every contribution counts and helps in our overall efforts.
As we go about tackling this crisis, we see also many shining examples of SG United in action, like how we went about setting up very quickly Community Care Facilities at the Singapore Expo and the Changi Exhibition Centre – truly, a public-private partnership at work. These examples show us how much more effective we can all be when we stand together and combine our efforts across the public, private and people sectors.
Mr Speaker, at some point, this COVID-19 crisis will pass. It will leave in its wake a permanently changed world. Uncertainly and instability may rise in some countries. Societal divides and inequalities may sharpen in others. But a few will emerge from this stronger, more united and more resilient than before. Singapore will endeavour to be in this group. To do so, all of us must continue to work together and support each other. This is the time for us to stand as one nation – to beat the virus, overcome the crisis and emerge stronger together. [Applause.]
The Minister for Manpower (Mrs Josephine Teo): Mr Speaker, around the world, the COVID-19 pandemic has threatened lives and livelihoods. Likewise, in Singapore.
MOM has been supporting the fight on the economic front and also on the public health front. Our priority is to protect the livelihoods of Singaporeans. That remains so even as a new battlefront emerged. Equally important now is to take care of our migrant workers' health. In my statement today, I will cover both aspects.
Last week, I updated the public on the labour market situation. COVID-19 hit us mainly from February onwards. In January, the economy was humming along. The circuit breaker started only in April. Therefore, in the first quarter of the year, the full impact of COVID-19 was not yet felt.
Even then, total employment contracted sharply. But the impact was not even; foreign employment fell significantly while local employment still managed some growth. Retrenchments have risen moderately.
There are signs that employers are trying hard to cut costs to save jobs. They, too, want businesses to restart quickly when conditions allow. They are being helped by the significant wage support through the Unity, Resilience and Solidarity Budgets, as well as the tripartite consensus on managing excess manpower.
In April, over $7 billion were paid out to employers through the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS). This will help co-fund wages of over 1.9 million local employees. Later this month, more than $4 billion will be paid out additionally.
The Government provided levy waivers and rebates to help employers meet their obligations to their foreign employees during the circuit breaker. By May, over 62,000 employers would have received rebates totalling $675 million. Another $675 million is expected to be paid out by July.
Besides support for their employers, we are providing more direct support for our lower wage workers. Many of them are in essential services and are continuing to work. They will get enhanced Workfare payouts which took effect in January, of up to $4,000 annually. In addition, 400,000 workers will get extra $3,000 each in cash support through the Workfare Special Payment. This will be in two tranches – in July and October. Total Workfare payouts this year will be about $2.2 billion.
Inevitably, even with Government support, troubles with business can strain labour relations. In dealing with the disputes, the tripartite partners agree to uphold the principles of fairness and shared responsibility. Not all employers have been impacted to the same degree. Those in better shape financially should use all the Government support to provide their employees with a more generous baseline wage. Others who are financially stressed and face poor business prospects should be frank with their unions and employees. They should work out together how to use the Government support to help each other get through this period of difficulty.
One thing is clear: employers should not act unilaterally and put their employees on prolonged no-pay leave or reduced pay without the employees' consent. To Mr Dennis Tan’s question, employees who need help can approach the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management for advisory and mediation services.
The National Wages Council also issued a helpful set of guidelines in March. For example, it encouraged companies to use any lull in their business to train their workers.
SkillsFuture Singapore has an Enhanced Training Support Package that covers up to 90% of course fees for employers in selected sectors. Many courses come with absentee payroll that give employers in all sectors extra wage support – 90% of the hourly basic salary, up to $10 an hour.
The SkillsFuture Enterprise Credit of $10,000 further helps employers pay for up to 90% of out-of-pocket expenses that are not already subsidised by the Government.
This time round, the Government has made a special effort to also support freelancers and self-employed persons (SEPs). We expect the SEP Income Relief Scheme (SIRS) to pay out close to $1 billion of cash support to over 100,000 SEPs, with the first payment in end of May. The SIRS scheme was designed and implemented in record time. Those who qualify need not apply and are instead automatically included.
We know, as a result, that there may be deserving SEPs who should also be considered. We, therefore, appreciate NTUC for stepping forward to help with the appeals. More than that, NTUC is helping through the SEP Training Support Scheme (STSS) which now provides an hourly training allowance of $10. This comes to about $400 for a week-long course. While modest compared to the income SEPs may have earned in the past, it will still help defray their daily expenditure as they learn new skills during this downtime.
I am very encouraged that already, about 1,800 SEPs will benefit from the scheme. One of them is 34-year-old Jovan, who has been a freelance band director for MOE schools for the past 10 years. Since the suspension of CCA programmes, Jovan has made good use of time freed up and attended seven different courses. They include SkillsFuture for Digital Workplace, Setting up and Running a Business and How to Pitch Like a Pro, all of which he finds useful.
Whether for SEPs or regular employees, finding a job at such times will not be easy. This is why we launched the SGUnited Jobs initiative in March. By now, more than 16,000 immediate jobs vacancies have been made available. This is already higher than our initial target of 10,000 jobs. This initiative has helped jobseekers like Wendy who had a steady job as a flight attendant. When she was placed on furlough, her friends encouraged her to check out the SGUnited Jobs Virtual Career Fair. She now works as a part-time cashier at Prime Supermarket while waiting for the aviation industry to recover.
The public sector has taken the lead to partner NTUC's Job Security Council at e2i, unions and employers to place more than 3,000 individuals from affected sectors to take on jobs such as safe distancing ambassadors and care ambassadors, in various hospitals.
In sectors that are still hiring, for example, security, WSG will ramp up the capacity of Professional Conversion Programmes. Through the SkillsFuture Mid-Career Support package, employers can also receive a hiring incentive which provides 20% salary support, capped at $6,000 over six months. This is for new hires aged 40 and above hired through an eligible reskilling programme.
I share the concerns of Mayor Denise Phua, Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Ms Rahayu Mahzam regarding fresh graduates from local and overseas institutions. This is why we launched the SGUnited Traineeships Programme to help them gain industry experience, build up their resumes and boost their chances of securing jobs in the future. The Government funds 80% of the monthly training allowance for up to 12 months.
Our young people are absolutely critical to our future. There are now more than 4,000 traineeship opportunities offered by 280 organisations. We hope more host companies can come forward to help build up the pool of traineeships and give our young graduates the much-needed opportunities to start their careers. Graduates can apply for these opportunities from 1 June onwards.
Mr Speaker, economic conditions will remain challenging for some time. Given the strong budgetary support provided by MOF, we are holding the line on the economic front. We recognise the many efforts by businesses and workers to adjust to the new situation as it evolves, and help one another weather the storm. As much as we can, MOM will continue to work with our sister agencies to support businesses and protect livelihoods.
Let me now turn to how we are supporting our healthcare colleagues in the fight against COVID-19.
This has been one of the most unusual periods for MOM. We work mainly in the economic and social spheres. Workplace safety and health have always been high on our agenda. Now, it has taken on new meaning.
Early in the outbreak, MOM was mobilised to help prevent imported cases. Progressively, we limited the return of work pass holders coming through mainland China, South Korea, Iran, Italy and then worldwide. In total, we processed about 80,000 applications to return but could only approve a minority. Our officers dealt with many appeals.
To keep the community safe, MOH introduced the requirement for returning persons to serve a 14-day Leave of Absence, which was later tightened to be a Stay-Home Notice (SHN). MOM was tasked to ensure strict compliance. With the help of GovTech, we developed in double-quick time a system of monitoring and enforcement. The system was later adapted for Singaporeans returning from abroad, to protect their families.
Singapore was largely able to curb imported cases due to the combined efforts of many agencies on this front.
Then, in mid-March, Malaysia announced that they would implement the Movement Control Order (MCO). This came as a surprise to businesses who had workers commuting daily across the border. They scrambled to find alternative accommodation. Overnight, MOM worked with MND, HDB, MTI, the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) as well as community groups to source for suitable accommodation to help these businesses.
Most of the affected Malaysians have settled into new accommodation in Singapore. About one in 10 subsequently returned to Malaysia, especially when Singapore introduced the circuit breaker.
Throughout this period, migrant workers were also on our radar. A day after the first confirmed case in Singapore, MOM reached out to dormitory operators to be more vigilant and to step up hygiene. In fact, one of the earliest media conferences that Minister Lawrence Wong and I held was in Tuas View Dormitory, after we inspected their quarantine facilities.
We produced materials in the workers' native languages to encourage them to take steps to protect themselves. Subsequently, non-essential facilities in the dormitories like gyms and TV rooms were closed. Meal times and recreational hours were staggered. Intermixing between blocks was stopped. MOM officers also fanned out on weekends to advise migrant workers to observe safe distancing measures and disperse big groups that were gathering at popular hangouts.
The most prominent cluster of infected migrant workers was from Seletar Aerospace Heights, which was detected in February. It involved five workers, all staying at five different locations, only two of which were dormitories. Thereafter, there was no indication of higher prevalence of COVID-19 amongst the migrant workers, compared to the general community.
Like Mr Ang Wei Neng and Assoc Prof Walter Theseira, we are very keen to understand how the virus later spread among migrant workers. The epidemiological studies provide some preliminary clues.
Within the dormitories that have clusters, not all blocks or rooms are equally affected. Across different dormitories, infected workers were linked through common work sites. At work sites, it was not uncommon for the infected workers to take breaks together, share food and utensils. Likewise, infected workers from different dormitories had gathered during their rest days to socialise and shop, for example, at Mustafa. Back in the dormitories, workers spent time with their friends, cooking, eating and relaxing together.
The virus may have spread through all of these activities, much like how it spread among family members, religious groups and even colleagues.
One recent finding is that most of the infected workers have mild symptoms, likely because they tend to be young. When asked if they are unwell, even after testing positive, some workers say they feel fine. Many were uncovered only because of active case-finding or swab exercises. This may explain why, up to the middle of March, the cases of workers at the dormitories testing positive were few and far between.
Once evidence emerged that the virus had spread in the dormitories, we decided to deal with it squarely and quickly and mobilised the whole-of-Government resources. An Inter-agency Task Force was set up, comprising officers from MOM, SAF, Home Team, MOH, MCI, MND – many agencies. Including the private sector recruits that supplement our efforts, nearly 3,000 staff are now deployed to look after the health and well-being of our migrant workers. Every day, we are joined by thousands of volunteers, especially those from the Migrant Workers' Centre.
Multiple channels of transmission among migrant workers, as appear to be the case, also means that we have to deploy a multi-faceted approach to dealing with the outbreak. A focus on rooming arrangements on their own may not prevent a recurrence. This consideration underpins the comprehensive approach of the Task Force.
About three weeks ago, I explained their three-pronged strategy. First, contain the spread of the virus in the dormitories where clusters have formed; second, prevent spread in those with no clusters; and third, move out and test all workers who are still needed for essential work.
I had also explained the three key enablers to implement these strategies effectively: (a) the Forward Assurance Support Teams (FAST); (b) a medical support plan that is holistic; and (c) roping in dormitory operators and employers to improve hygiene and provide necessities.
The task force has gone about its work professionally, with a clear focus on the workers' well-being.
In the first phase, it was about getting the basics right. This was already an enormous undertaking and there were certainly hiccups along the way. Nearly 200 FAST teams are now deployed and they have helped greatly.
Among the safe distancing measures introduced, we had to stop communal cooking. Officers then worked round the clock to ensure that meals suitable for the varied diets were delivered in a timely manner. More than 10 million catered meals have been served.
They coordinate schedules for workers to use toilets so as to prevent mixing, make sure the dormitories are kept clean and attend to workers' feedback and requests, such as getting paid and money remittances.
More than 10,000 workers in essential services were moved out and progressively tested so they can continue to work safely. Workers from dormitories that had been gazetted as isolation areas were not moved as they would pose a higher risk of infecting others. We then stopped further movements in and out of the dormitories to prevent cross-infections in both directions.
In addition, we provided WiFi access and distributed nearly 300,000 SIM cards so the workers can keep in touch with family and friends.
In the second phase, it was about getting the medical operations right.
The medical support plan was fully fleshed out, the infrastructure and personnel steadily built up. The Regional Healthcare Systems deployed teams of doctors, nurses and technicians to each of the 43 large dormitories. They tend to workers who are unwell, swab those who have shown acute respiratory symptoms, manage the cases that need to be sent to other facilities and assess if the workers are well enough to return to their rooms. They work with the FAST teams to set up on-site isolation facilities and organise safe conveyance from one location to another.
We have also set up four medical posts at the Tuas South, Kranji, Woodlands and Kaki Bukit migrant worker recreation centres to cover the larger factory-converted dormitories (FCDs) and construction temporary quarters (CTQs). For workers in the smaller FCDs and CTQs, we brought in the private healthcare groups as well as the nationwide network of Public Health Preparedness Clinics (PHPCs) and Polyclinics.
If any worker was unwell, they got the same care as any Singaporean would. The worker from Bangladesh who was transferred to a general ward after spending two months in ICU shows the extent of care. Furthermore, the cost of all tests and treatment is borne by the Government.
Members of Parliament like Mr Liang Eng Hwa are naturally keen to know if these measures are working.
The situation within the 43 large dormitories is largely stable now. The picture among the thousand-plus factory-converted dormitories and construction temporary quarters is much more mixed and taking up much bandwidth. In many dormitories, there are active case-finding and swab exercises so that we can isolate and treat infected workers and break transmissions.
Most of the workers are well and those tested positive are on the path to recovery. The full results of these efforts will, however, take time to show.
Outside of the dormitories, we identified another concern. Infection among workers in the construction sector was noticeably higher than the general community and has not tapered off.
Supported by the health assessment of our MOH colleagues, MOM and BCA decided we needed to take further precaution and act quickly. We required all work permit holders and S Pass holders in the construction sector and their dependants to be placed on mandatory Stay-Home Notices.
Excluding the workers already in dormitories, this requirement put another 100,000 workers out of circulation. While they may not be infectious, it is safer to minimise their interactions with each other and the broader community. To decisively break the cycle of transmission, the SHN was extended from the initial two weeks to four weeks in total.
Mr Speaker, in spite of the current challenges, we must now get ready for the third phase where it is about getting the recovery right.
This involves building up community recovery facilities (CRFs) and housing recovered workers in suitable accommodation to minimise the risks of recurrent transmissions. We must work out a way to allow recovered and uninfected workers to go back to work safely. This will again be an enormous challenge and not just the logistics of it.
Many workers will be re-housed and have to get used to new friends and habits, as Mis Cheng Li Hui alludes to. Many employers will have to adjust to their workers being in different locations with new arrangements.
We will have to develop new strategies to monitor the health of the workers. For example, we plan to issue pulse oximeters and require the workers to take readings regularly. We will also have to plan for a more sustainable medical support operation. With telemedicine, we can still attend to unwell workers promptly.
The Task Force is focused on getting its job done. Altogether, they are looking after about 400,000 migrant workers, bigger than the size of two Ang Mo Kio GRCs. It is just mind-boggling when you think about it. For those on the ground, there are no ready-made solutions. Many officers simply roll up their sleeves, work with the stakeholders to improvise.
One such officer is Muhammad Hafiz Ibrahim. A Factory-Converted Dormitory (FCD) operator spoke to Hafiz and said he urgently needed to add extra toilets in a dormitory in order to effectively segregate the usage. It was near impossible to get new ones built anytime soon. Hafiz thought to himself what could be done and promptly sourced for suppliers of portable toilets, bringing much relief to the dorm operator and residents.
The Task Force did not forget to bring some cheer to the dormitories when some of the workers marked their New Year. It worked with the Hindu Endowment Board and community groups to share sweet treats, for example. We are now in the middle of Ramadan. With the help of the Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS), special arrangements were made for the Muslim workers to get their sahur, or pre-dawn meals, at 3 am, which means that the caterers also has to be preparing the food, well, around midnight and to get it delivered. Over 1.5 tonnes of dates had been distributed.
In every phase, the situation has demanded a scale and speed of response that is unprecedented. The task force is keenly aware of its mission. They know it is critical to get things right and to do it with heart. We will fulfil our commitment to the workers and pave the way for work and business to resume safely when conditions allow. Let us give the Task Force our full support.
Mr Speaker, some Members want to know MOM's plans to deal with the housing standards of our migrant workers. A bit of historical background is useful here. During the 1970s to early 1990s, most migrant workers in the construction industry came from Thailand and Malaysia. Most of them rented HDB flats or private residential properties. In the early 1990s, many more construction workers came from China, Bangladesh, Myanmar and India.
To support their housing needs, the Government allocated land for companies to build self-contained dormitories with recreational amenities for their workers. Building and Construction Authority (BCA), HDB and Jurong Town Corporation (JTC) tendered out these sites. One important consideration was, \"what would a migrant worker want at the end of the work day, if he cannot be with his family?\" Well, it is to be with his friends, cook a meal that he would liked, practise his religious belief.
These dormitories were therefore designed for communal living. To enable workers to live close to where they work and reduce the need to travel, the Government allowed some factories to convert part of their space for dormitory housing, subject to standards being met. Today, there are about 200,000 workers housed in the 43 large dormitories and about 95,000 housed in 1,200 FCDs. Most of these workers are from the Construction, Marine and Process sectors.
We have 20,000 workers housed in Construction Temporary Quarters (CTQs). Another 85,000 Work Permit and S Pass holders from the Construction sector live in HDB flats, private residential properties and other premises. Landlords must meet requirements and can be investigated for breaches.
The Government also set aside land to build recreation centres for migrant workers, where they can access supermarkets, remittance services and sports fields. Today, there are eight recreation centres located in areas where there are more dormitories.
Over the years, we have taken steps to raise the housing standards of our migrant workers. A key milestone was the enactment of the Foreign Employee Dormitory Act (FEDA) in 2015. The FEDA imposes higher standards on dormitories that accommodate 1,000 or more workers. For example, licensed operators were required to provide common recreational facilities like TV rooms, gyms as well as provide access to amenities like mini-marts and WIFI in common areas. They are also required to have health facilities like sickbays or isolation rooms and draw up contingency plans for quarantine arrangements. MOM officers regularly inspect licensed dormitories to ensure compliance.
In fact, the Government reviewed these plans with the dormitory operators at the end of last year and conducted a table top exercise – what do you do if you have an outbreak? But no one was quite thinking of something of the scale of COVID-19. In early February, MOM asked all FEDA-licensed dormitories to each put aside at least 10 quarantine rooms. Those were the rooms that Minister Lawrence Wong and I went to inspect. Today, in dormitories with few infected workers, this provision has helped us to quickly isolate the close contacts. Those who are infected, of course, are removed as soon as we can. But the close contacts, you can isolate them and keep them for a while.
Ms Anthea Ong asked about smaller accommodation types. Though not covered by the FEDA, they must still comply with a whole range of regulations. These include BCA's standards for building structural safety, SCDF's Fire Safety Code and NEA's rules on sanitary facilities.
To questions by Mr Png Eng Huat and Assoc Prof Walter Theseira, regulatory agencies all conduct inspections. MOM alone has about 100 dormitory inspectors, full-time, who work under the supervision of the Commissioner for Foreign Employee Dormitories, two Deputy Commissioners and eight Assistant Commissioners. Last year, these officers conducted 1,200 inspections and 3,000 investigations across all housing types. There will be many more when other agencies are included.
Every year, MOM alone takes an average of 1,200 employers to task for unacceptable accommodation under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act and about 20 operators for breach of FEDA licence conditions. Where lapses are found, dormitory operators must rectify them immediately. For offences under FEDA, dormitory operators can be fined up to $50,000 and/or jailed up to 12 months. Under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, employers can also be fined up to $10,000 and/or jailed up to 12 months.
Other than enforcement, MOM proactively engages workers, employers and dorm operators. We conduct roadshows at the dormitories to hear from the workers themselves on improvements they would like to see. We survey the workers. About nine in 10 say they are satisfied working in Singapore and would recommend their friends or family to come here.
Still, we educate the workers on what is acceptable accommodation and encourage them to alert MOM if they see something is not right. We also involve the community. For example, MOM started a \"Colour my Dorm\" programme about two years ago. A wall mural at Kian Teck dormitory was painted by youths as a gift to the residents.
Housing standards for our migrant workers have progressed over the years. Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to show some photographs of what the newer dormitories look like.
Mr Speaker: Yes, please. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]
Mrs Josephine Teo: This is one of those that have been built since FEDA was passed into law. This is a slightly older one, but as Members can see, it resembles some of our earlier HDB housing estates. When I visited Westlite Toh Guan, it really felt very much like that. This one has got ensuite facilities, meaning that company takes a room, the room comes with sleeping areas but also their own kitchen, their own toilet facilities. Next one, this what some of them look like inside. It depends on the size of the room, how many can be allowed to be accommodated. The next one, this is S11 where we have the highest number of infected workers so far. This is what a typical room looks like. I would say the size of the room, if you consider a badminton court, halve it and add maybe about 20% of circulation space, that is what you get.
The next one, one of the dormitories has got a supermarket which the migrant workers can use to buy the food they wish to cook. The next slide shows – this is before safe distancing – what a gym might look like in the bigger dormitories. So, these are the newer ones. We will see how standards can be further raised. But, keep in mind that there are also older dormitories, which perhaps, have not quite reached these standards yet.
What changes will be effective in reducing the transmission risks? Will these changes require different space provisions and technical standards or stronger regulatory levers that Mr Louis Ng has asked about?
Inevitably, in any sort of environment where people gather in groups, there could be significant transmission. For example, the two places where there are substantial transmissions are homes and workplaces. Likewise, when you have a large number of people living together, in a communal setting, there is a very high likelihood of transmission.
There was a significant spread for example on the US aircraft carrier, the Theodore Roosevelt, with 950 sailors getting infected within a few weeks. They were 20% of the crew. The virus respects no housing type, no nationality, no occupation. We will therefore need to re-look how everyone interacts with one another at home and at our workplaces. Even the way we socialise will have to change. We will need a focus on public education. So, the same for our migrant workers.
But as Minister Lawrence Wong said earlier, we are still in the heat of battle. We must be focused on bringing the outbreak under control and work out how we can exit from the circuit breaker and resume normal activities safely. When this is over, we will reflect and thoroughly look into areas where we could have done better, so that we will be better prepared the next time.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, the last few months have been nothing short of extraordinary for the MOM team. Whether on the economic or health frontlines, it has been a real privilege to work with so many dedicated colleagues to tackle what our Prime Minister describes as \"the challenge of this generation\".
Our tripartite partners have stepped up, and so have many employers and workers who are going out of their way to support one another. Many people take the time and trouble to send words of encouragement, including a hand-drawn card from a little girl, my resident in Bishan.
The MOM team has also been very moved by the many offers of support for our vulnerable workers, including our migrant workers. The Migrant Workers' Centre (MWC) set up the “Care Line” that operates 24/7. The volunteers manning the line are migrant workers themselves. Temasek Cares has mobilised its networks to distribute re-usable masks and care packs to more than 650,000 migrant workers including domestic workers. The corporate community is also stepping forward, such as the contribution of 300,000 sets of toiletries by Procter & Gamble. Among grassroots supports, Mdm Magdalene Poh from Kreta Ayer-Kim Seng sourced for and donated 10,000 bottles of hand sanitizers. Ba'Alwie Mosque donated 450 boxes of dates to eight FCDs.
The Inter-agency Task Force (ITF) is especially thankful to a group of 10 NGOs and community groups. such as the Alliance of Guest Workers Outreach, COVID-19 Migrant Support Coalition – which was introduction from Mr Louis Ng; we are very grateful for that – and also Crisis Relief Alliance. These NGOs and community groups deliver food, masks and care packs to migrant workers outside the 43 large dormitories who may not be getting enough support from their employers. HealthServe launched a free virtual counselling clinic. To support the migrant workers’ emotional well-being, the sessions are conducted in the vernacular languages by volunteer counsellors, psychiatrists, social workers and interpreters.
Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad now holds weekly engagements with these partners to coordinate efforts while protecting the health and safety of the volunteers.
Mr Speaker, in the past few weeks, there have been many views shared from all quarters. On such occasions, it is refreshing to hear what the migrant workers themselves say. Yes, there were initial problems with food. Yes, it is hard to be cooped up in the rooms. Yes, they miss their families and want to go home.
But listen also to the voices from their hearts, an example of which is captured by the Facebook post of a certain Mr Mirza, who lives in a dormitory. This is what he had to say, “I on behalf of all Bangladeshi migrant workers in Singapore, want to thank the entire Singapore Government, Police, MOM, MOH and every security, every cleaner, every food supplier. They provide us food, daily needs items, mask, sanitizer, free WiFi/SIM card for our time spent in the room. Medical camp in every dormitory. And I am here today promising here in public if I got a chance to do something for Singapore, I will do it at any cost because they are doing their best for me. I will also do my best for them.”
On behalf of all Singapore, I thank Mr Mirza for sharing his heartfelt acknowledgement and promise. His words are not fanciful but they remind us what this is about: doing our best for each other in times of hardship.
We have said right from the beginning that we have a responsibility to our migrant workers. Many of them made personal sacrifices to come to Singapore to work and they have made significant contributions which we appreciate deeply. We will do everything within our means to make sure that they too win the fight against COVID-19 and reunite with their families in time to come. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. First of all, I would like to thank the Ministers for their very comprehensive updates. I have four supplementary questions. In Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] To many Singaporeans, TCM is an important part of life. Many Singaporeans rely on TCM to regulate their body. Here, I would like to ask the Minister four questions.
First, we have both pharmacies and Chinese medical halls in Singapore. Why the pharmacies are considered essential services and can remain open, whereas Chinese medical halls are not allowed to operate?
Second, tomorrow is 5 May, Chinese medical halls with a resident TCM practitioner are allowed to operate again. Many Singaporeans are very happy to hear that and I would like to thank the Ministers. However, when Singaporeans found out that the TCM practitioners can only do acupuncture, not tuina and cupping, they are very disappointed. I would like to ask the Minister whether you have discussed with TCM practitioners before you reached that decision.
Third, authorities will allow shops selling ice cream, cakes and desserts to resume operation from 12 May, but other Chinese medical halls are still not allowed to open. I would like to ask why it is so. Is it because Chinese medicine is not as tasty as ice creams and cakes?
The last question, under what circumstances will Government allow all Chinese medical halls to resume operation? Many neighbourhood medical halls do not have a resident TCM practitioner. A lot of residents find it very inconvenient if the medical halls remain closed. Thank you.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Mr Speaker, I would like to thank Er Dr Lee Bee Wah for her questions, very important questions. But before I answer her questions, can I just make a correction. I mentioned in my earlier statement that we have 28 patients in ICU currently and the number is wrong. We currently have 22 patients in our ICU. That is just for the record.
For the Traditional Chinese Medicine, we have always allowed some operation of the Traditional Chinese Medicine clinics to attend to chronic diseases and to attend to urgent cases. But we have further relaxed some of these rules to allow acupuncture and to also allow medicine halls, which have resident Traditional Chinese Medicine practitioners there, to allow the medicine hall to be open and able to sell retail products, particularly the Traditional Chinese Medicine products in these shops, for the convenience of residents in general.
As I mentioned in my Statement, we are beginning to allow some of the business activities to resume and for life to begin to return to normal, but we need to do so in a very careful way, in a very calibrated way, step by step, while in the meantime putting in precautionary measures. So, the overriding priority is still to encourage Singaporeans to stay at home as much as possible, go out only when necessary. And similarly even for business activities, including TCM practices, we would also want to make sure that we open it in a safe way to minimise the risk of further transmission and further infection. Particularly in medical practices, including TCM practices, there is a lot of close personal contact and interactions. So, we want to be particularly careful with this, and therefore, the answer is not totally \"no\", but we need to watch very carefully. And if we are able to continue to keep the infection numbers low and are able to put in place additional precautionary measures, we will progressively open many of these services and facilities.
Mr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have one question for Minister Josephine and four questions for Minister Gan. The first question is to Minister Josephine Teo. This is with regard to MOM's efforts on the economic front, the first half of her statement. The key objective of the JSS was to encourage companies to retain workers. However, some employers are indicating that the COVID-19 circuit breaker measures have made their businesses are no longer viable and retrenchments for Singapore workers are inevitable. There has also been some evidence of residents coming up to us and saying employers have instituted wage cuts, no pay leave. This is even amongst established companies. Does the Ministry have any estimate of the retrenchment numbers it is anticipating. What is it working with? And is the Government planning additional support measures, particularly for the low- and middle income.
The next questions are for Minister Gan. The first pertains to COVID-19 testing for foreign workers, which number up to 1.1 million in Singapore as of December 2019, excluding foreign domestic workers. Does the Government have a roadmap to potentially test all the foreign workers progressively, starting with construction workers? And is there a timeline for this?
Secondly, how many foreign workers specifically have been tested so far out of the, I believe, 140,000 figure that Minister shared.
The third question pertains to the impediments to widespread testing early on in early April when the task force said that about 1,500 to 2,500 tests were conducted daily. This number is potentially to be scaled up to 40,000, as the Minister just shared. Can the Minister share what were the impediments and how these impediments were overcome to reach this number? And by when can we expect 40,000 tests to be conducted on a daily basis?
Finally, there is the question I had of the SafeEntry app, which I believe was shared by Minister Wong. By when does the task force expect all commercial establishments to institute or to ensure that the SafeEntry app is used before Singaporeans can enter the those premises?
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, it is not possible for us to tell at this point in time what the retrenchments and the job losses are going to be like during this period. We are watching very carefully. For the time being, we have an added challenge which is that data collection during this period is not as easy as it was. Surveys that are sent to companies may not be picked up in time, because some companies work from home. So, if we have their emails, we will send it to them. Some companies expressed their difficulties to us, for example, in accessing their own databases in order to provide information to MOM. So, we have some of these challenges to overcome.
Nonetheless, I think there is not much point and value in us speculating what the retrenchment and unemployment numbers will be like. I think the key is working with the tripartite partners to plan for recovery of economic activities. Earlier in the Ministerial Statement that Minister Lawrence Wong made, he talked about very important changes that we need to make at workplaces. One thing he said – I am not not sure if Members picked up – was the idea of safe management. Meaning, depending on the workplace situation, how do you ensure that workers can continue to come to work and remain safe. So, we are focusing all of our efforts on that front.
In the meantime, of course, we are in discussion with economic agencies – MTI and, very importantly with MOF – to see if additional support is needed. I think Finance Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat has made the Government's position very clear; and that is, where more help is needed, it will be provided.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Sir, I mentioned earlier that we have tested a total of 21,000 foreign workers sometime last week. By now, the number would have grown to close to 30,000 foreign workers.
Do we have a plan to test all foreign workers? Currently, we do not plan to test all foreign workers. Our testing is still very targeted for specific purposes. We do testing on dormitories generally to establish the baseline level of infection in each dormitory so that we are able to strategise how we respond to the dormitories. And we also do baseline testing of workers in general to have a sense of where we are in terms of the infection rates. But for those who are infected in selected dormitories, we also do aggressive testing in order to allow us to identify infected workers so that we can isolate them and to protect those who are not infected. So, these are strategies that we have put in place for the management of a dormitory and the testing will be aligned with the strategy in managing these dormitories.
At the same time, we are also looking at testing more of the essential workers that are going to continue to work in the community. These would include the foreign workers as well as Singaporean workers. For the foreign workers who are continuing to work in the essential industries, we will have to test them, not just once but repeatedly because they would continue to be exposed in the community and at the workplaces. Therefore, there may be a need to repeat the test on them. These essential workers, the number will grow as we begin to restore more of the business activities. And therefore, it is important for us to do so in a safe way. Testing, as I mentioned, is an important part of the strategy to ensure the safe opening and the safe restoration of some of the business activities.
How do we get to 40,000? There are several constraints. One is the availability of test kits. We will need to look at how we can source for more test kits, both manufacturing locally as well as through procuring internationally to allow us to have more capacity to do testing.
At the same time, we are also looking at materials because each test will also require materials for the testing, such as the reagents that will be needed for the extraction of the RNA materials. It is not enough to just ensure that we have the test kit, but we also need to have the RNA extracted and therefore, we have to make sure that we have sufficient supplies of these materials. And thirdly, there are manpower requirements because we can do the swabs but having swabbed the individuals, we still need to process the swabs, document them, test them and have the results properly recorded. This requires laboratory capacity.
So, there are infrastructure and manpower requirements at every stage of the test. We are progressively raising the capacity and we hope to reach 40,000 as soon as possible. I would not be able to promise you when but we are doing our best to ramp it up. Today, we are able to do about 8,000 per day and we hope that in a short period of time, we will be able to reach 40,000 soon.
At the same time, we also have to be mindful that, in fact, there is a global shortage of some of these test kits and the reagents. And therefore, we have to ensure that we have a continued supply and stock of these materials to allow us to continue and sustain this high level of testing.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, on the last question on the SafeEntry system, we are mandating that for all business premises and venues from 12 May.
Mr Speaker: Mr Alex Yam.
Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Speaker, two questions. One is related to the personal protective equipment (PPE) that our medical staff use. Can I ask if we still have sufficient supply in Singapore and stockpile? And related to that, we spoke at the last Sitting on upping local production capabilities for some of this equipment, could the Minister update the House on the progress on this?
Secondly, for home-based businesses (HBBs). I note that for F&B related HBBs, they will be allowed to restart on 12 May. Some other HBB residents have written in to me asking if there was a reason why they, who do not run F&B HBBs but take similar precautions in dealing with delivery men, are not similarly allowed to continue, if the risk for both groups are the same.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Sir, on the PPE, we are monitoring this very closely. Currently, we have sufficient supplies, but we should not take this for granted. We should always try to preserve our PPE because this is going to be a long fight and whatever stockpile that we have, we will continue to need to require the supply chain to be preserved so that we are able to continue to import more of the equipment. And it is not just the PPE. We also need medication. We continue to need masks and so on. So, I think we will have to continue to remain vigilant to conserve our supplies and the key strategy is really to keep the number of cases low. Once we have a lower number of cases, then we will consume less of our medical supplies.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, for home-based businesses (HBBs), our key consideration is to draw the line for essential services where food is concerned. So, in providing food for Singaporeans, whether it is a physical outlet or it is a home-based provision, then you can do so, and delivery and take-out is permitted. But beyond that, other kinds of retail, whether it is a physical retail outlet or a home-based retail, we are still at this stage not allowing but as we said, we continue to monitor the situation closely and we will see whether the conditions permit for further easing of the measures.
Mr Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah): Thank you, Sir. Two questions. The first if for the Health Minister. In the United States, there has been development on the potential COVID-19 treatment known as the remdesivir. And it has been approved by the US FDA and the company has announced it will donate the first 140,000 doses in May to hospitals in the United States and around the world. Can I ask the Minister what is MOH's position on this new treatment and if MOH is reviewing this as a potential treatment for our patients?
My second question is for the Manpower Minister. In Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Singapore is not the only country that has migrant workers. Many countries have a large number of migrant workers to complement their manpower. I would like to ask the Minister, why is it that other countries do not seem to have large scale infection among migrant workers, yet it happened in Singapore?
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Mr Speaker, on remdesivir, Singapore is part of the consortium of multi-centre clinical trials for remdesivir. As part of the trial, we get certain allocation of this drug for testing and treatment of our patients. We are also concurrently discussing with pharmaceutical companies to see whether we are able to have access to additional allocation over and above what is allocated for the trial. So, the discussion and negotiation are on-going.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, I will also answer the Member, Mr Liang's question in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] There are about 10 million migrant workers who leave their hometown and come to Southeast Asia to work. Only a small portion of them come to Singapore. There are a lot more of them working in Malaysia and Thailand.
Countries have their own ways of dealing with the COVID-19 outbreak, including how they want to handle the health issue of their migrant workers and other migrant worker related matters. We need not to speculate whether the infection rate among migrant workers in other countries is higher or lower than Singapore. What we can say is that, each country will have its own considerations and constraints, especially when it comes to testing and treatment which may not be the same as Singapore.
Our stance is to tackle this issue comprehensively, including setting out clear strategies and providing sufficient resources, and very importantly, ensuring a tight organisation. If a migrant worker is infected, we will make sure that he receives the same good care as a Singaporean until full recovery.
Of course, with the COVID-19 situation, migrant workers not only worry about health, but also their livelihood. We see cases reported in other countries. Quite often, their hometown was also under lockdown or affected by different measures, therefore their family’s livelihood is also under threat.
So, when we deal with the migrant workers related issues, besides ensuring that their meals are taken care of, we also look after their other needs, such as getting wages and remitting money back to their hometown. Our comprehensive approach ensures their health as well as their needs in daily life are being taken care of.
If we continue to go in this direction, even if some migrant workers are infected, the symptoms are very mild. We should focus all our energy on helping them recover.
Mr Speaker: Ms Anthea Ong.
Ms Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have a question for the Minister for Health and then two questions for the other Ministers.
To Minister Gan, I understand that there is a lot of concern regarding the mental well-being and mental health of the migrant workers. And I also understand that for all the 43 purpose-built dorms (PBDs), there is already an on-site medical team in place. So, is the Minister planning to mandate that within this medical team, that there would be at least a mental health professional in the form of a counsellor or a psychologist with the medical team?
With regard to the factory-converted dormitories, which clearly are more dispersed, teleconsultation is being used to support the physical health needs of the migrant workers. Is the Minister looking to also include psychological services through these teleconsultation support?
The other two questions, the first which I actually highlighted in my Parliamentary Question. I agree with Minister Lawrence Wong that this is clearly a colossal task at hand, so it is not the time to look into a review. Anyway, the crisis is still on-going. But would the Ministers assure Singapore and our migrant workers that a Commission of Inquiry would be appointed when we are out of the eye of the storm and when that would be likely, so that we can be committed to making the structural changes needed and be better prepared for the next epidemic or pandemic. We know that the experts are saying it is not a \"if\", it is a \"when\". I think this is especially so given that the Foreign Employee Dormitories Act (FEDA) provides very explicitly for quarantine preparation and testing. So, we have learned that that legislative provision may or may not be enough.
The third is to all the Ministers and also, since the Prime Minister is here, is will the Government consider issuing an apology to the migrant workers, given the dismal conditions that they are currently in, because of the conditions of dormitories and all the other conditions, and especially now that they are in complete lockdown for the sake and safety of Singaporeans?
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Allow me to address the issue on mental health and then I will leave the other two Ministers to address the other two questions.
Indeed, mental health is a part of a very important consideration in our healthcare system and particularly on the ground, with regard to dealing with our foreign workers who are in the dormitories.
Our medical teams on the ground are linked back to the various Regional Healthcare Systems. Within these Regional Healthcare Systems, they have support from the entire healthcare system, including mental health as well as other healthcare services. They have a full range of services available to them and they will assess the situation on the ground and decide in what form the mental health support is needed. They will also be dealing with the individual cases, assessing each individual patient. Even those who are non-patients, those who are not infected with COVID-19, could also have mental health issues and we are quite mindful of their mental health needs. The medical team on the ground is paying attention to the mental health conditions of the workers in the dormitories, as well as those outside the dormitories, where these medical teams are involved in.
Beyond the medical teams, we also have a FAST team, as Minister Josephine Teo highlighted. Within this team, they are also very mindful of paying attention to the well-being of the foreign workers in the dormitories. These include not just their meals, their hygiene and their daily activities, but also their mental well-being. The inter-agency task force looking after these dormitory operations is very mindful of the mental health needs, is paying attention to this and is working with the medical team on the ground with strong support from the various Regional Healthcare Systems to provide mental health services to those workers who may need them.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, I thank Ms Anthea Ong for her question. I am somewhat puzzled by it because the question almost presupposes that we do not want to do a review despite me saying explicitly in my speech just now that we want to.
I think if you heard my speech just now, I said that we are committed to doing a comprehensive review after the crisis. It is more than just a review on dormitories. It is a review on the whole pandemic from start to finish and our response, and we are committed to learning and improving from this experience. That is what I said, so let there be no doubt that we are not wanting to do this because after the crisis is over, we will do a full review.
The actual nature of it, the form of it, the timing of it – clearly, it is not possible to say it today when we are still fighting a battle for which we do not know when it will end. But after that, we are committed to doing a review, and we will announce it as and when we are ready.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, Ms Anthea Ong asked about an apology. We interact very closely with the workers themselves on a very regular basis at the dormitories and even outside the dormitories, whenever our FAST teams follow up on their requests and feedback. I think that what they are focused on is how we can help them to handle this present situation – not fall sick and if they fall sick, how to take care of them, how to ensure their wages are being paid, how to ensure that they can send money home.
These are the things that they have asked of us. I have not come across one single migrant worker himself who has demanded an apology.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Thank you, Sir. Let me start by thanking MOM and all the agencies and NGOs on the ground for helping the migrant workers and for all their hard work. I think they are doing a lot to help with the food, the sanitation, the healthcare, but I hope that Minister Josephine can also look into the gross floor area that I raised in my Parliamentary Question.
At the current 4.5 sqm – which, if you break it down, is about 2.1 by 2.1 metres and that includes the kitchen, the dining and the toilet areas. It is very hard for some of the workers to practise safe distancing. And that is my worry. If we have a second wave of infections and the workers go back to this 4.5 sqm, then I think that we will get large clusters in our dormitories again. Could I ask Minister Josephine if we can review this urgently?
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, the short answer to Mr Louis Ng's question is that we will consider all aspects that are necessary in order for us to move into a safe recovery mode. So, everything is being considered.
Mr Speaker: Miss Cheryl Chan.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have got two supplementary questions. The first one is for Minister Gan. Some individuals who are in the Community Isolation Facilities (CIFs), they are clinically well but they continue to be tested positive in repeated tests. And some of them have been in the CIFs for more than a month. Understandably, they themselves or even their family members are anxious. What more can be done medically to assist their discharge, especially those who are asymptomatic?
The second supplementary question is for Minister Josephine Teo. How does MOM keep track of the residential locations of all the work permit holders or the S Pass holders? Will contact tracing still be required in future on the group of foreign workers who are in the essential services due to their proximity at their workplace and also their social culture? How can we better implement the tracing of these workers and ringfence any possible issues that may arise from the workers who are living outside the dormitories?
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Mr Speaker, this is a very interesting and important question. Indeed, we do find many patients in our CCFs as well as in our hospitals and in our isolation centres who continue to test positive. The theory is that many of these tests may be picking up fragments of the virus and some of these viruses may no longer be viable. But nonetheless, the test will be able to pick them up. The test is not able to determine conclusively whether these are fragments or viable viruses, but when the scientists try to culture this virus, they find it very difficult to culture them after a certain number of days – usually after 14 days. After 21 days, it is even more difficult to culture these viruses. So, in effect, many of the scientists have come to the conclusion that probably, the RNA that has been detected are fragments of the virus and they are no longer viable.
So far, we have been keeping them in the Community Care Facilities (CCFs). The Member is right that to keep them in the CCF is also not very good for them because they are not able to move around freely. We are exploring with our infectious disease experts to see what else can we do beyond just testing them. For some of them, you may still test positive after months because they just continue to have these fragments which may not be viable anymore. So, we may need to think about what we can do to help them so that they can be discharged, go home and go back to normal life if they are no longer infectious.
So, I think these are some things that we are looking and discussing with the infectious disease experts' community to see how we can come to some way to helping these patients so that they can be discharged and go home.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, sorry, can I respond quickly to Miss Cheryl Chan's question?
We keep track of the workers' whereabouts or where they live through the Online Foreign Worker Address Service (OFWAS). Sometimes, the workers move from one place to another at the request of their employers or if they have found new accommodation. So, I must say that this updating is not as prompt as we would like it to be. We will have to look into better ways of encouraging the workers and their employers to update this database. If necessary, we may have to put in place stronger measures to make this happen. Because, as this episode shows, it is quite important for us to be able to know their exact whereabouts. As Miss Chan says, in future, for contact tracing purposes, it is not just their residential addresses, it may have to be some other means as well.
Mr Speaker: Mr Yee Chia Hsing.
Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question is for Minister Gan Kim Yong. It is reported in many countries, including the US and the UK, that due to fear of the virus, even people with serious health emergencies such as heart attacks or strokes are not going to the hospitals. I would like to ask MOH if we are seeing the same thing happening here and if MOH can educate the public about the symptoms of heart attacks, strokes and other serious conditions which require immediate medical attention and to urge them to go to the hospitals if they have these symptoms.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Thank you. Indeed, it is important for Singaporeans to understand that if you have a serious medical condition, do go and see a doctor or do call the ambulance so that they can send you to an emergency department to be attended to. I think it is important for us to encourage Singaporeans to seek medical attention whenever necessary.
From the hospitals' point of view, even though we have deferred some of the more stable patients' appointments, we do continue to keep in touch with them, including through teleconsult, to make sure that they remain all right and stable. For these patients, we are keeping a close watch and if it is necessary, the hospital will call them back for treatment and for surgery, if necessary. We need to continue to monitor these patients. We want to encourage Singaporeans to continue to seek medical care when the situation arises, when they need to do so.
So far, we have not seen signs of patients who are staying away despite having a heart attack or stroke. We will continue to educate them on the signs of critical illness and when they ought to seek medical attention.
Mr Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two supplementary questions for Minister Gan. I am very glad to note that MOH is providing mental well-being support for our frontline workers, especially doctors and nurses who face patients. But how about healthcare support workers? Like frontliners, they also face heavy workloads, physical and mental stress. That is the first question. The second one is, if mental well-being support is provided, what is the type of support that is being done for them?
Mr Gan Kim Yong: I actually mentioned that in my statement. Maybe I have not been that explicit. The support that we provide goes beyond just medical professionals, but also the support staff. And much of this support includes counselling sessions, supervisors talking to them as well as ways for them to seek help, including support groups within the work spaces. All these are part and parcel of the mental health support that we are giving to our healthcare workers, both on the professional side as well as the support staff. So, we do for all staff who are on the frontline.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sir, just four questions for Minister Gan and one for the Minister for National Development. To Minister Gan, firstly, in terms of testing, is the Ministry looking at testing sewage? Apparently, this is something that is being looked at in Switzerland and Australia and is a way to determine where there could possibly be clusters of infection in a particular building or particular locality. Is that something that we will be looking at going forward?
Secondly, the Minister mentioned that testing load is being ramped up from 8,000 moving towards a 40,000 target per day. As far as I understand, currently people with acute respiratory symptoms, not all of them currently are being tested for COVID-19. I am not sure if my understanding is correct. Is that something that the Ministry is looking to review?
Thirdly, right now, when you have close contacts of a confirmed COVID-19 case in the community, some are given Stay-at-Home Notices. Is there going to be a commitment to test all of the people who are close contacts of a confirmed COVID-19 case going forward since our capacity is being ramped up?
Fourthly, this is on vaccines. I think Minister Gan talked about vaccines in his speech. The developments in this space seem to be moving very rapidly and there is news coming from different teams around the world. What is MOH's thinking right now about when we might see a vaccine available? Are plans being made to push that out, roll that out to the population and prioritisation being given to seniors and so on?
My last question is for Minister Lawrence Wong and it is on HDB commercial leases. There is feedback from some micro businesses and SMEs about the rules for re-assignment of HDB commercial leases. There is a logic to those rules, not to allow re-assignment. But would HDB consider allowing a micro business – rather than having to break the lease, give notice, vacate and reinstate the premises, which is time-consuming and costly – to re-assign to another business that might want to take it up, just as a short-term measure during this crisis period?
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Thank you. First, let me talk about sewage testing. In fact, we are doing trials to see whether we can pick up fragments of the virus from the sewage to allow us to have an assessment whether a particular vicinity, whether it is a dormitory, nursing home or hospital – in a hospital, probably you find a lot, because there are a lot of patients there who are infected with the COVID-19 – or housing estates if they have outbreaks. But there are challenges because sewage, by nature, would have been significantly diluted because it is a collection of quite a large population. So, we will need to test the sensitivity and see whether we are able to pick up sufficient fragments to be able to determine whether there is significant infection in the particular target areas. It is something that we are studying but it has its inherent challenges and we may not be able to deploy it for all kinds of settings. But in the high concentration settings, that may be possible. But, then, if there is a high concentration of infected cases, you probably would have detected these cases in any case. So, it is something that we are continuing to study and see whether we could deploy them in a meaningful way.
Testing capacity, yes, we are ramping up and we are hoping to, first, test all prolonged ARI cases, those with prolonged acute respiratory symptoms so that we are able to detect more cases. We are also looking at whether we can expand beyond just PARI to see whether we can enhance or increase the number of tests that we do on the ARIs, that is, those with acute respiratory illnesses. But we also have to bear in mind that we have to assess whether it is productive and going to be effective because the number of cases that would turn positive from the ARIs may be quite low and, therefore, you may end up testing a lot, but not being able to pick up a very meaningful number of cases.
But having said that, we do have, as I have mentioned earlier, a surveillance system where we sample ARI patients and those with flu-like symptoms to have a sense of what is the prevalence level in the population, in the community, to assess whether there is widespread community transmission. As I have mentioned earlier, it does not seem to be so at this moment. But we will continue to monitor. But to be effective in case finding, we may need to be quite targeted in our testing strategy. So, we are planning to expand it to cover all PARI and, hopefully, we are able to ramp up somewhat for the ARI cases in a more targeted way.
For the confirmed cases and those who are in quarantine, whether we will test all of them, so far, our testing for the persons under quarantine is on a very selective basis. As I have mentioned in my speech as well, we do a risk assessment for those who have very close contacts and including the children who are not able to explain whether they feel ill or not. So, those we will quite aggressively test them to make sure that they are not infected. And for the rest of those quarantined, it will also depend on the risk assessment. And as we have more capacity, we hope to be able to test more of them to minimise the risk of transmission.
Mr Pereira also asked about vaccines. It is still very early days. I think there are a lot of news media reports about the progress made. In fact, there is progress made. But from here to testing, to eventually being approved for use by the population, I think there is still some way off. I think we cannot count on the vaccine to solve our immediate challenges of infection cases in the community. We need to do what we need to do. But we hope that the vaccine will come soonest possible and we are involved in some of the collaborative research work internationally. So, we are tapped into the progress and we hope that the vaccines will come out soon. But I think it will still take some time. It is better for us to now focus on the immediate tasks that we need to address.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, on the assignment of HDB commercial units, I think Members might recall that, some years back, HDB had actually put in place some restrictions on such transfers or re-assignment practices because there was speculative behaviour, property play and then these things led to high assignment fees which led on to these costs being passed down to residents. So, restrictions were put in place for a good reason.
We will consider whether some flexibility might be extended during this time. But I think we should not lose sight of the underlying objectives and rationale for why some of these measures were put in place to begin with. I think, again, we should look at it in a broader context. There are many measures that have been put in place to help businesses, including rental rebates and measures that MOF has announced through three successive Budgets. So, let us look at this holistically to see what is the best way to help our businesses.
Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have three supplementary questions for Minister Gan on the testing of migrant workers. Reports suggest that due to resource constraints, we are prioritising testing of and isolation of older migrant workers because of the higher health risks as well as essential services workers. The Minister has explained that earlier in the statement, I think. So, my first question is, how are we managing then the risk resulting from the fact that some of the younger workers may not be tested, detected and isolated for now while we still have these resource constraints. And I am referring here to the risk within dormitories, not so much the wider community.
Second, have we been communicating the reasons for these testing strategies to migrant workers and Singaporeans sufficiently? Again, the migrant workers may not be aware of why some of these strategies are being carried out.
Lastly, are the strategies for testing aligned between the different dormitories? Then we have been hearing some reports that the strategies may differ, depending on who is in charge on the ground and various other operational considerations.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Thank you for the questions. For the foreign workers in the dormitories, whenever they have symptoms, we assess them and the key priority is to make sure that all the workers in the dormitories receive appropriate medical care to make sure that they are taken care of, their illnesses are treated and, if they are at risk of serious or deteriorating conditions, particularly for the older workers, we take them out. Whether or not they are COVID-19, we will take them out so that we pay particular attention in attending to their medical needs. Most of these workers who are older or who have more serious conditions, will be sent to hospitals and when they arrive in hospitals, they will be tested and they will be given appropriate treatment based on their test outcomes. But for the foreign workers who remain in the dormitories, the priority is to make sure that their well-being is taken care of, provide them with the medical attention without having to wait for the test results. And within the dormitories, there are isolation facilities. Where possible, we put them in the isolation facilities where some of them may be cohorted together because they all have similar illnesses.
For the different dormitories, we align them in terms of our strategy or approach. This is coordinated again by the inter-agency task force that is managing the dormitories and they have a comprehensive framework of how to manage each dormitory. Each dormitory is different. It varies. There are some bigger ones and there are some smaller ones, and there are dormitories which have a higher level of infection and there dormitories which have relatively low level of infection. The approach would have to be quite different, depending on the nature of the infection within these dormitories. But the key priority is to make sure that all infected patients, all ill patients are taken care of.
There are also patients who report sick which are not related to COVID-19 and not related to infection, and we continue to take care of them and to treat them where necessary and appropriate. And there are cases where they need hospital attention which are not related to COVID-19, we also will have to send them to hospital for medical attention. So, the key is to ensure that each worker in the dormitory is taken care of. When they have medical needs, we must respond to their medical requirements to make sure that they are taken care of and, at the same time, do what we can to minimise fatalities among our COVID-19 patients.
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. My supplementary question is on the issue of leveraging technology for aggressive tracing – a topic that the hon Ministers, Mr Gan Kim Yong and Mr Lawrence Wong touched on in their Ministerial Statements.
I understand that the take-up rate for the TraceTogether app is about 17%, which is relatively low. As I understand, the efficacy level is 75%. Since we are about four weeks away to the end of the circuit breaker measures, I wonder whether there is any step to mandate or at least offer this on an opt-out basis so that there will be a higher take-up rate and we will be able to leverage on technology to conduct aggressive tracing.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, I would like to thank Mr Murali Pillai for the question. We are, indeed, looking at this matter. As I have mentioned just now, our first priority now is to enhance the TraceTogether app, particularly in use with the iOS phone. In fact, Apple and Google themselves have come out to talk about putting out a protocol that will be more effective when such apps are in place on their phones.
So, the technical teams are working very closely with Apple and Google to enhance the effectiveness of the app. When that is done, we will certainly look at the next step, which is to see how the take-up rate of the app can be a lot more than what it is today.
Mr Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. I have one clarification for the Minister for Health and one for the Minister for Manpower.
For the Minister for Health, regarding his answer to what metrics the Government is using to decide whether to loosen the circuit breaker measures, he gave quite a comprehensive answer. But he did not mention this recognised indicator used by other countries called the effective reproduction number (or RE) of the virus in Singapore. For instance, the New Zealand Prime Minister told her country that they were able to ease their lockdown measures because the RE of the virus in New Zealand had gone from 2 to 0.48, meaning that a person is likely to infect less than one other person at that particular time. So, I would like to ask the Minister for Health whether our Government is actually tracking the RE of the virus in Singapore and if he could make that known and, if it is not, then why is the Government not using that indicator.
For the Minister for Manpower, she touched earlier on the viral outbreak in the dormitories and how it might have been spread through contact, such as within dormitories and also at the construction sites. I would like to ask her whether the Government has also tried to ascertain the origin of the virus in the dormitories. For example, could it be linked to the workers returning from China?
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Mr Speaker, I want to thank Ms Sylvia Lim for the question on the reproductive number. We are, indeed, tracking the number very closely. But as I have said, the numbers are important, but they are not everything. In fact, the reproductive number will be affected by the safe distancing and the circuit breaker measures that we have put in place. The stricter the measures we put in place, in fact, we are suppressing the reproductive number. So, the risk, of course, is that once you remove the circuit breaker measures, the reproductive number may go up again because this basically measures how many persons you are likely to infect for a particular infected person.
So, if you have very tight safe distancing and circuit breaker measures, even if you are infected, you do not have a chance to interact with other people and, therefore, you are not likely to infect more people. But once you remove these circuit breaker measures, you have more interaction and the risk of you transmitting the infection to other people will go up and, therefore, the reproductive number will go up. It is something that we watch and monitor. Of course, if you still have very high reproductive numbers, it is very difficult for you to liberalise your circuit breaker measures because it will just go up even further. But even if you have very low reproductive numbers, you have to be very careful in opening up because, as you open up, the reproductive number may go up as well.
So, it is something that we monitor and watch very carefully. At the moment, I think the reproductive number in the community is significantly lower. It is also reflected in the total number of cases that you see. But in cases like the Safra outbreak, for example, you would expect the reproductive number to be significantly higher during that period of time. If you look at the current infection in the dormitories, the reproductive numbers in the domitories are also likely to be higher. So, therefore, you need to look at the number quite carefully. It means different things in different contexts.
Therefore, I would prefer not to produce one single number and try to peg our metrics on that number. I think we need to take into account all the factors in order for us to be able to restore some of the activities safely.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, I thank Ms Sylvia Lim for her question. I think the short answer to her question is, no, we do not exactly know how the transmission in the dormitories got started. We also do not want to speculate about its exact origins because it is not helpful to risk any group within the dormitories being targeted for blame. The important thing right now is that it has happened. We have to try and bring it under control and then we have to focus on getting ourselves onto the recovery path. Very importantly, we also want to set our sights on how a recurrence can be prevented.
Now, granted, in order to prevent a recurrence, we have to study and understand more deeply how it occurred in the first place. But we may not have that luxury of a full understanding and still have to make adjustments in the best possible way based on whatever scientific knowledge and understanding we can muster at this point in time and applying the best of the technology and resources that we have available to us. That is the focus right now.
Mr Speaker: Mr Png Eng Huat.
Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Thank you, Sir. My questions are for the Minister for Manpower. In her Facebook post, the Minister said that each time the MOM attempts to raise the standard of living in these dormitories, it would face objections from employers due to the added costs that come with the move. My first question is: under the Foreign Employee Dormitories Act, the licenced operator and dormitory owner should be the parties to be held accountable to raise the standard of living in the dormitories in the interest of public health and safety. So, what did MOM involve the employer in the application of the provisions of this Act in this instance? Any intention of the dormitory operator and owner to pass down the cost should be a separate matter for the parties to resolve later as the attempt by MOM to raise the living standard in the dormitories is done in the interest of public health and safety.
My second question is: under the Act, operators must develop a quarantine plan in the event of an infectious disease outbreak. Since the onset of the outbreak, taxpayers have been footing the bill for the quarantine exercise at these affected dormitories. As this is a pandemic, would these dormitory operators and owners be held accountable for a share of the containment and quarantine costs?
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, if I may respond to Mr Png's question this way. Every month, the employers pay a certain sum to the dormitory operators to accommodate their workers. Usually, the rooms are rented by one single employer. So, in any particular dormitory, you may have 400 or 500 rooms, whatever the number may be, and one employer takes one room. Within that room, depending on the size of that room, size of that unit, a certain number can be accommodated. So, if as a result of a change in standards where we say that instead of accommodating X persons in one unit, eventually, they can only accommodate X-2 or X-3 persons per unit, then the cost per employee accommodated naturally goes up. Certainly, to the employer, this is something that they have to bear. And whatever the business the employer is in, this goes into his cost considerations and, ultimately, he will pass it on to whoever buys his products and services. So, that is something that we must always keep in mind. It is not so difficult for MOM, by the stroke of a pen, to change some numbers here and there. But we have to consider the overall implications and whether it is bearable for the employers. So, that is on the first part.
On the Member's second question on whether the costs eventually have to be apportioned, I think, the scale of COVID-19's impact on businesses and, certainly, even in the dormitories, it is just unprecedented. At this point in time, if we were to start calculating the costs, I think it is very hard to move things; it is impossible to get things done. Right now, the priority must be to keep the situation under control, bring it under control, and then, at the appropriate time, we can look at what are the right considerations in terms of handling the issue of costs.
Mr Speaker: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. Just now, the Minister did not answer any of my four questions when I asked them in Chinese. Now, I would like to ask them again in English.
Mr Speaker: Perhaps, there is no need to repeat them. Does the Minister need the questions to be repeated?
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Does the Minister need me to ask in English or he will answer them?
Mr Gan Kim Yong: I will answer them. Let me see whether I can remember.
First, let me just state that the TCMs play an important part in our healthcare system. It is complementary to our western medicine and we do want to allow them to continue to operate in a safe and managed way. Therefore, we have always been allowing these TCM practices to continue, particularly through teleconsult, and for helping to look after the chronic patients. For chronic patients, we have always allowed them to purchase medicine from the medical halls when they consult the TCM practitioners. We have now actually liberalised it and we allow medical halls which have resident TCM practitioners to open, to be able to serve other customers. But we will continue to look at whether we can liberalise it further. But as I have said, as soon as the task force announced lifting some of the circuit breaker measures, we have a list of appeals from quite a lot of people all wanting to be part of the liberalisation. I can understand the anxiety of everybody because we have been on this circuit breaker for about a month, and tighter circuit breaker measures for about two weeks and I think everyone wants to see whether we can go back to normal. I must share with you that we have very heated debates within the task force to decide what to liberalise and what not to liberalise. But the top of our concerns is to make sure that infection remains under control, the reproductive number remains low. Therefore, it is important for us to do it in a calibrated way, in a managed way.
I know there is still a lot of interest to open it up and we will continue to do so and we will be happy to get the task force to look at where else we could do so in a safe way. For the TCM practitioners, we consult them, we get their views and we also want to share with them our plans going forward. But I would assure Er Dr Lee Bee Wah that we will continue to engage them. At the appropriate time, when we are more confident, and having done this first step of opening, if all goes well, we hope to be able to liberalise further.
Mr Speaker: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: Sorry, one last request, Minister.
Mr Speaker: Is it the same question from before or is it a new one?
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah: It is my third question that was not answered. A lot of my residents have requested to go to TCM shops to buy medicine to \"bu tong\" to build up their immune system. So, can this be considered as one of the priorities? If you are allowing dessert shops to open on 12 May, I am sure TCM shops can also observe safe distancing, wearing of masks and so on.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Thank you. I must say that we had the same debate in the task force. It is not an easy decision, but I will take Er Dr Lee Bee Wah's feedback seriously – I always take her feedback very seriously – and we will look at whether or not we could further liberalise for TCM practitioners, including the medical halls. But, today, medical halls that have a resident TCM practitioner are already allowed to do so. Basically, this is starting from the point of view that these TCM halls have to be opened. When the TCM practitioners are seeing patients and they cannot give them the medicine, then how are the patients going to be treated? Therefore, we allow the medical halls to be opened if the TCM is seeing a patient. Previously, we only allowed the patient whom the TCM practitioner had seen to purchase from the hall. Now, we have opened the hall to other people who can purchase from these halls. Even your residents can go to these halls to purchase their medication and we will look at how else we can expand this further.
Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to heed Er Dr Lee Bee Wah's advice and seek more nutrition. I call for a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 6.20 pm. Order.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 6.00 pm until 6.20 pm.
Sitting resumed at 6.20 pm.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Small Motorised Vehicles (Safety) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to control the import of motorised personal mobility devices, power-assisted bicycles and other similar motorised vehicles, and to make related amendments to certain other land transport Acts regarding the payment of moneys into the Consolidated Fund\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) recommendation of President signified; presented by the Senior Minister of State for Transport (Dr Lam Pin Min) on behalf of the Minister for Transport; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Active Mobility (Amendment No. 2) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Active Mobility Act 2017 (Act 3 of 2017) to deal with public paths and seized personal mobility devices and other vehicles and to make a similar related amendment to the Road Traffic Act (Chapter 276 of the 2004 Revised Edition)\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Senior Minister of State for Transport (Dr Lam Pin Min) on behalf of the Minister for Transport; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the High Court (Admiralty Jurisdiction) Act (Chapter 123 of the 2001 Revised Edition) and to make a related amendment to the Merchant Shipping Act (Chapter 179 of the 1996 Revised Edition)\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Senior Minister of State for Law (Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai) on behalf of the Minister for Law; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"Mr Speaker: Leader of the House.
[(proc text) First Reading. (proc text)]
The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth and Leader of the House (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Speaker, I have a Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Bill, to be laid upon the Table.
[(proc text) Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the Bill, laid upon the Table by the Minister. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: The Certificate is in order. Leader, please proceed.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Mr Speaker, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled \"An Act to amend the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (1999 Reprint)\".
[(proc text) Bill read the First time. (proc text)]
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Mr Speaker, copies of the Bill have been provided to the Clerk, who will distribute it to Members now. [Handouts were distributed to hon Members.]
Mr Speaker: Minister, Second Reading when?
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Tomorrow, Sir.
Mr Speaker: So be it. Minister for Social and Family Development.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"COVID-19 (Temporary Measures for Solemnization and Registration of Marriages) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) First Reading. (proc text)]
The Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, I have a Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures for Solemnization and Registration of Marriages) Bill, to be laid upon the Table.
[(proc text) Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the Bill, laid upon the Table by the Minister. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: The Certificate is in order. Minister, please proceed.
Mr Desmond Lee: Mr Speaker, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled \"An Act to provide for the use of remote communication technology in matters relating to the solemnization and registration of marriages under the Women's Charter (Chapter 353 of the 2009 Revised Edition) and relating to marriages and the revocation of divorces under the Administration of Muslim Law Act (Chapter 3 of the 2009 Revised Edition), and related matters, in view of the COVID-19 pandemic\".
[(proc text) Bill read the First time. (proc text)]
Mr Desmond Lee: Mr Speaker, copies of the Bill have been provided to the Clerk, who will distribute it to Members now. [Handouts were distributed to hon Members.]
Mr Speaker: Minister, Second Reading when?
Mr Desmond Lee: Tomorrow, Sir.
Mr Speaker: So be it. Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Rearrangement of Business","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the proceedings on item 2 on the Order Paper for today be taken now.\"
In order for the Second Reading of the Parliamentary Elections (COVID-19 Special Arrangements) Bill be taken in its entirety today and not be interrupted because of insufficient time, we request for Members' support to take this Bill now.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the proceedings on item 2 on the Order Paper for today be taken now.\" – [Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien]. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Minister Chan Chun Sing.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Parliamentary Elections (COVID-19 Special Arrangements) Bill ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"The Minister for Trade and Industry (Mr Chan Chun Sing): Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the Prime Minister, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a second time.\"
Mr Speaker, Sir, our next General Election must be held by 14 April 2021. The COVID-19 situation is most likely to last many more months, including the possibility of recurring waves of infection across the world. We must therefore, make contingency plans to safely conduct our next General Election under COVID-19 situation. This is the responsible thing to do, to robustly plan ahead, to keep our citizens safe while upholding our democracy.
The Parliamentary Elections (COVID-19 Special Arrangements) Bill forms part of the contingency plans to allow the Elections Department (ELD) to implement temporary arrangements for safe elections amid the COVID-19 situation. They are on top of sections 56A to 56F of the Parliamentary Elections Act, which already contain powers to deal with some disruptive events.
The key provisions in this Bill are in two main parts. The first deals with voters who are subject to movement control orders, that is, COVID-19 stay orders, commonly known as Stay-Home Notice or SHN in short, a COVID-19 Quarantine Order or QO in short, or being on Medical Certificate (MC) because he/she shows Acute Respiratory Infection (ARI). The second part allows an aspiring candidate to authorise a representative to file his or her nomination paper if the aspiring candidate is unable or unfit to do so because of a COVID-19 QO, SHN, hospitalisation or ill health.
I will first cover the clauses, which will allow us to make special arrangements for voters subject to movement control orders. In particular, those on SHN will be allowed to vote outside of their electoral divisions. This is because a number of voters, since 10 April, have been required to serve their SHN at designated facilities such as hotels for 14 days to isolate themselves from others and we will continue to issue SHN as part of the strategy to control community transmission.
Clause 3 excuses voters issued with QO, SHN at home or MC for ARI for not voting. Their names will be restored to the electoral registers without penalty. There will be auto-restoration for those on QO and serving their SHN at home, as we have the information for this group. For those on MC for ARI, they can apply to restore their names to the registers after the election and we will restore them without penalty.
Clauses 4 and 5 cater to persons on SHN at designated facilities by authorising temporary polling arrangements for them to vote outside their electoral divisions, either at special polling stations in the SHN designated facilities or some other suitable premises. We do this to minimise their direct contact with other voters. This is possible because, unlike persons on MC for ARI, those on SHN are already co-located physically in designated facilities thus allowing such arrangements to be rapidly deployed.
Polling at the special polling stations will be akin to that at overseas polling stations. Clause 6 requires that a poll and voting at an election involving electors subject to SHN be conducted in the same manner as voting at a polling station in Singapore, with the following modifications:
First, instead of the usual voting hours from 8 am to 8 pm, the Returning Officer can set the voting hours at the special polling stations differently, as long as they are at least four hours and end by close of polls at all the other polling stations in Singapore, that is, by 8 pm on Polling Day.
Second, there can only be one polling agent for each political party, independent candidate or group of independent candidates at each of the special polling stations.
The election official at the special polling stations will have to call out the electoral division and polling district code of the voter before issuing a ballot paper, because each special polling station would have voters from many electoral divisions casting their votes there. If there are no dedicated ballot boxes provided for voting in different electoral divisions at each special polling station, the election officials will have to sort the ballot papers from the opened ballot boxes according to electoral divisions first before starting to count the votes.
Under Clause 6(3), the Minister is empowered to make regulations setting out additional modifications to the Parliamentary Elections Act, so as to minimise exposure of the general public or election officials to individuals who may be incubating or infected by COVID-19.
Let me now move on to the second part of the provisions relating to nomination proceedings.
The Parliamentary Elections Act requires aspiring candidates to submit their nomination papers in person. Clause 9 allows an aspiring candidate to authorise a representative to file his or her nomination paper on his or her behalf, if the aspiring candidate is unable or unfit to do so because of QO, SHN, hospitalisation or ill-health.
The authorised representative must have the Power of Attorney to authorise him or her to act on behalf of the candidate. The authorised representative will be able to file objections and make amendments to the nomination papers on the candidate’s behalf during the nomination proceedings. The other requirements for successful nomination, such as having the Political Donation Certificate and the required number of subscribers, must still be fulfilled.
The Bill does not allow for alternative representation for subscriber, that is, proposers, seconders and assentors. As subscribers can be anyone whose name is in the relevant register of electors, aspiring candidates should find a replacement if any of their subscribers is subject to movement control orders like QO, SHN or MC for ARI, or is having a fever or showing ARI symptoms on the day of nomination.
Mr Speaker, Sir, let me conclude by reiterating the intent behind this Bill. The Bill aims to protect voters, candidates and election officials at the next General Election by providing the Elections Department and the Returning Officer with additional powers to make special arrangements to deal with running a general election under the COVID-19 situation, on top of the powers in sections 56A to 56F of the Parliamentary Elections Act.
While this Bill enables the Elections Department and the Returning Officer to make contingency plans for the next General Election, which must be held within a year from now, the Bill is unrelated to the timing of the General Election. The Prime Minister will decide when to call the election, considering the challenges confronting our country and the evolving COVID-19 situation. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Speaker, elections have been a part of our democratic process since our independence in 1965. In a democracy, voting is a key responsibility and fundamental right of any citizen that enables them to choose their representatives in the government. Hence, it is important that we ensure all citizens get an opportunity to choose who represents them.
Given the current COVID-19 crisis and without the certainly how long it would last, this Bill will allow special provisions to be made during the General Elections. It will ensure that voting to be done safely while abiding with the core principles of the Parliamentary Elections Act such as voting in secret and allowing a Singaporean voter to exercise his rights to a one-man-one-vote principle.
There are some clarifications I would like to seek on this Bill. Firstly, under clause 2, the Bill only refers to elections that take place held on or before 14 April 2021. COVID-19 is not the first coronavirus to land on our shores. Why make these special arrangements temporary when history sometimes has the nasty habit of repeating itself?
Second, clause 5 allows Returning Officers to set up special polling stations in boarding premises or in some other suitable premises in Singapore where the electors are not allowed to leave due to COVID-19 stay orders. Is there any minimum number of voters that would warrant the setting up of these special polling stations? From the view of contesting parties participating in the General Elections, having too many polling stations may pose a resource challenge for them to deploy their polling agents to ensure transparency and legitimacy of the voting process.
Third, under section 81(1) of the Parliamentary Elections Act, no one can dissuade a voter from voting, from Nomination Day to Polling Day. However, under clause 8 of this new Bill, it makes an exception for the Returning Officer and the Director of Medical Services to authorise actions persuading voters not to vote, if they happen to be displaying acute respiratory symptoms, are feverish, or may have been infected by COVID-19. Can the voters go against the advice of the Returning Officer and the Director of Medical Services? Will the polling agents be allowed to witness the process to ensure transparency?
In a democracy, voting is a key responsibility and fundamental right of any citizen that enables them to choose their representatives in the government. In Malay, Sir.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In a democracy, voting is a key responsibility and fundamental right of every citizen that enables them to choose their representatives in the government. Notwithstanding my support for this bill, may I ask why these temporary special arrangements are made, even though the coronavirus threat can re-occur in future as we have witnessed before in human history?
(In English): A government has a duty of care to its people, and during their term, they are accountable to the voters who have voted them in. With or without COVID-19, on the day of the election, voters must have the capacity to hold the ruling party accountable for their actions should they fail to live up to the mandate given, while at the same time choose their representatives in government for the following term. It is the contest for votes amongst political candidates that gives the power back to the citizens to decide on the future of the nation. This Bill ensures that citizens retain this power regardless of the current crisis. Notwithstanding my clarifications, I support this Bill.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, holding a national election in the midst of a health pandemic carries some risk. The Prime Minister has not yet announced when the impending election will be called and by the Government’s own assessment, the COVID-19 situation in Singapore is not yet at a satisfactory phase.
The Workers’ Party has previously called on the Government to be judicious in deciding on the timing of the election, bearing in mind the twin priorities of public health and upholding democratic principles.
Sir, there continues to be unhealthy speculation on the ground as to when the Elections will be held. We note that the recent South Korean election was held at a time where the outbreak showed clear signs of declining cases, underscored by mass community testing. Meanwhile, medical experts here have opined that to be certain that we have turned a corner, a sustained decline in cases to zero or near zero, supported by wide testing, would be needed. As we debate this Bill, this is the elephant in the room. Can the Government clarify what progress needs to be made on the virus front before a General Election will be held?
Coming back to the Bill itself, the provisions cover the processes for Nomination Day and Polling Day. The Workers’ Party will support the Bill but I have some queries and concerns about how the provisions will be operationalised.
First, on Nomination procedures. Clause 9 modifies Nomination proceedings to cater for the event that a candidate is subject to a quarantine or stay home order, or is hospitalised or ill so as to be medically unfit to attend the Nomination in person. The provision allows the candidate to appoint a representative to file his nomination papers in his stead. This is a welcome provision, as it will enable a prospective candidate to still contest the election even if he or she is temporarily unable to attend at the Nomination Centre. One question that comes to mind is that by the time the candidate needs to utilise this provision, he would already be ill or under a quarantine or stay home order. How will he be facilitated to execute the Power of Attorney? For example, will a lawyer be allowed access to the candidate to witness the document?
Another question relates to who can be a candidate's representative. It is provided in clause 9(3) that a representative should be a Singapore citizen who is entitled to vote at the election and duly authorised under a power of attorney. That being the case, I would like the Government’s confirmation that there is no objection to a representative being a fellow GRC candidate or an assentor or subscriber already present at the Nomination Centre.
Next, I move on to the arrangements as to Polling Day. First, voters under Quarantine or Stay Home Orders. Clause 3 provides that voters who are under quarantine orders or stay home orders are excused from voting and that they cannot leave their designated places of home unless the Returning Officer makes arrangements for them to vote. If the RO does make such arrangements, the voters may then choose to vote.
It seems to be then that there are two uncertainties here. First, it is not clear that the RO will definitely make arrangements for such voters to vote, and second, even if such arrangements are made, voters may choose not to vote.
I am concerned about whether this clause will result in significant numbers of people not voting, when they may not be medically ill but simply ordered to be confined as a precaution. According to the Explanatory Statement to the Bill, this provision would also cover those who are on five days' medical leave due to having acute respiratory symptoms earlier.
From what I understand from the South Korean election, voters under quarantine were facilitated to vote, but only after 6.00 pm when the polling booths had closed to the general public. This arrangement protected other voters but also ensured that quarantined voters could vote.
Sir, we do not know the numbers of persons who may be subject to such orders at any time. If there were to be a cluster of infections in a certain area, there could be a significant number of voters for a particular constituency that could fall within this category. A significant percentage of absent voters may affect the outcome of the poll, especially in a close contest. I would like the Minister to clarify what commitment the Elections Department (ELD) is making to voters under Quarantine or Stay-Home Orders. Is the ELD not able to commit to giving all such voters the opportunity to vote?
Next, voters confined to boarding premises. Clauses 4 to 6 deal with voters who are confined to boarding premises which are not their ordinary residences, such as hotels, apartments and dormitories. I welcome the ELD's proposal to provide special polling stations at or near these premises to facilitate the voters' right to vote. On this, clause 5 states that the Returning Officer (RO) may establish a special polling station, where there are two or more voters form the same constituency in the same boarding premises. The use of \"may\" suggests that the RO may decide not to establish such special polling stations. What is the ELD's intention as to when it will or will not do so? Could the Minister also clarify why the Government requires at least two voters from the same constituency to be staying at the same boarding premise, before a special polling station will be set up?
One more query on this. For such voters confined to boarding premises, clause 6(3) states that the Minister may provide for the marking of votes remotely, that is, the voter need not turn up at the special polling station but may mark his vote, for example, in his room and hand his vote securely to the Returning Officer (RO). There may be a good intention behind this, but it adds a risk to the voting process. What safeguards will there be to ensure that the marked ballot paper is not tampered with or lost and has been duly included for counting?
Next, transporting of electors. According to the Explanatory Statement to the Bill, it may become necessary for the Returning Officer (RO) to arrange for dedicated buses to convey electors subject to COVID-19 Stay-Home Orders to the special polling stations that are not their places of accommodation, in order for them to cast their votes. Clause 7 thus provides that in such a situation, the usual prohibitions against transporting electors to and from polling stations will not apply.
Sir, I appreciate that this is a practical matter that ELD may need to provide for. However, it is useful to bear in mind the rationale for the prohibition on transporting electors in the first place, to ensure that on Polling day, voters may be casting their votes of their free will without undue influence or pressure. To this end, will the ELD implement any safeguards to prevent any attempt to influence voters on these buses from any person or even amongst the voters themselves, for example, by recording the journeys on CCTV or by imposing strict no-communications rules on board?
Sir, apart from what is in the Bill, what other practical measures is the Elections Department (ELD) likely to take to safeguard public health on Polling Day? It will be useful if the ELD can share its thinking, so voters know what to expect. For instance, will voters' temperatures be taken? Will they be issued with masks, hand sanitisers and gloves and would polling booths be disinfected regularly, as was done in the South Korean election? How much more is likely to be spent on an election with such additional requirements?
Another critical aspect is safe distancing. How will this be implemented at the polling stations? For instance, past practice shows that voters tend to congregate at the polling stations early in the morning, and by lunchtime the polling stations are quite empty. Will voters be advised to spread themselves out this time? What else can the Elections Department (ELD) share on the practical considerations?
Finally, the Bill does not cover how the campaign methods will be modified. On the issue of campaigning, Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean had told this House on 25 March that in view of the pandemic, campaign methods will need adjustment. For example, there may possibly be live streaming of videos on the Internet or more television time for candidates. It is important for these changes to campaign rules to be made known publicly and to political parties as soon as possible, so that candidates and parties have sufficient time to make necessary preparations and to source for service suppliers. When will the ELD make known the exact changes? Lastly, whatever changes are made, it is also critical that these modifications do not result in an escalation of campaign costs.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, it is right that the Prime Minister's Office prepare to provide a safe environment for the holding of the General Elections and we appreciate the rationale for the Bill. I look forward to the Minister's clarifications on the matters I have raised regarding the timing of the General Elections, the modified procedures and campaigning.
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Walter Theseira.
Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, I support the Government's proposal to ensure that elections can be held as smoothly as possible if the COVID-19 outbreak is still on-going when elections are called.
Sir, this Bill's provisions will help assure electors and candidates that they will still be able to exercise their democratic rights, even if they are under Stay-Home Orders or other COVID-19 related restrictions. However, I am concerned whether the Bill goes sufficiently far in exploring alternatives, such as remote electronic voting, that might allow all electors, including those under Quarantine Orders, as well as those falling ill on Polling Day, to vote. Such remote voting technologies might allow us to reduce in-person voting, which will make it easier to protect public health.
I also wish to ask why the Bill does not address safe campaigning regulations under COVID-19, which should be defined well in advance of the polls, so that all parties can prepare.
Sir, even if COVID-19 appears under control when Parliament is dissolved, conditions may get worse by Polling Day. Polling may take place during circuit breaker measures, not by design, but due to necessity. Candidates and our campaign regulations will need to be prepared in advance.
First, let me discuss the issue of remote electronic voting. Electronic voting itself has been quite contentious. Since 2001, the Parliamentary Elections Act (PEA) has contained provisions for electronic voting, through Direct-Recording Electronic or DRE voting machines.
When the 2001 amendment to the PEA was debated many Members treated DRE voting with caution. Members argued that voters might be unfamiliar with the technology, expressed concerns about maintaining voter secrecy and asked how could DRE voting be proven to be free from electoral abuse.
Sir, in the end, these concerns come down to a lack of trust either in the Government's stewardship of the voting process or in the technology itself.
The passage of 20 years has given many reasons for greater trust in both factors. Many Singaporeans now routinely use remote electronic technology to transfer money, pay bills, make investments, file claims in Court and more. And most Singaporeans do not question whether technology can securely determine the identity of the user and record their decision properly.
As for trust in the voting process, there are six elected Opposition Members today, most of whom won their seats in a GRC. So I do hope the debate on the nature of democracy in Singapore has moved on beyond questioning the voting procedure itself, although I do appreciate as Ms Lim has reminded us that we should always be vigilant to safeguard democracy.
So, I think we should ask: why not consider provisions for secure remote electronic voting?
To be clear, convenience alone would not be a good reason for remote electronic voting. Voting in public binds Singaporeans together as we exercise our democratic rights. But during COVID-19, having a significant fraction of electors choose to use remote electronic voting would greatly reduce crowding at polling stations. Crucially, this would free up polling stations for elderly voters, who are less likely to use remote electronic voting. And it will also mean voters who are acutely sick or under Quarantine Orders, could also exercise their right to vote.
Sir, there is a real risk that many electors would be unable to vote due to COVID-19. I will stand corrected, but the present Bill's clause 5 does not appear to require the Returning Officer (RO) to ensure special polling stations are set up to accommodate all electors subject to Stay-Home Orders. There may be some discretion permitted.
It will be helpful if the Government could clarify whether the Bill does impose a requirement that all electors on Stay-Home Orders must be given arrangements to allow them to vote.
The present Bill is also silent on electors under Quarantine Orders, while clause 8 also expressly allows the Returning Officer (RO) or Director of Medical Services to advise electors against voting if they are acutely sick or otherwise exposed to COVID-19. So, there are many cases where electors could have difficulty exercising their right to vote in person, while protecting public health.
Second, I wish to ask why the Bill does not address the conduct of campaigns during COVID-19. Sir, our campaign process must also be adapted to ensure public health is not at risk. I note that the PEA does not govern campaigning in detail. But nonetheless, the Government could have used this Bill to enact temporary amendments to the PEA or to other Acts to create a legislative framework to govern campaigning during COVID-19.
I am not so worried that there will be a free-for-all in campaigning that puts public health at risk. I am confident that the ELD will consult with MOH and issue instructions on the conduct of the campaign. Rather, I am asking whether we should do more to ensure that a broad framework to allow for a range of restrictions on campaigning, calibrated to the public health risks, is put into the primary legislation for the duration of COVID-19.
Sir, this relates to a broader question on the right balance between specifying policy in the primary versus secondary legislation. But there are reasons to err on the side of being exhaustive in the primary legislation, where elections are concerned. The PEA itself goes into detail on voting procedure because it is important that every aspect which might affect the integrity of the vote be subject to as little discretion as possible. Through this, all candidates are assured that the electoral process reflects the laws agreed and passed by Parliament, rather than the decisions made on the ground by individual officers or the regulations issued by the ELD. So, the lack of discretion can be a virtue.
Sir, I will not propose specific rules here, but campaigning must be regulated because it exposes the candidates and electors to public health risks from COVID-19. The hallmarks of a normal campaign – gathering volunteers, holding rallies, attempting to meet as many electors as possible – all involve significant personal contact. We should, therefore, define rules for specific campaign activities which may be allowed as essential, depending on the severity of the COVID-19 outbreak at the time. And defining these rules well in advance will allow candidates to prepare.
In my view, a good framework would first aim to govern the campaign activities the candidate can engage in, which may include restrictions on places that can be visited, number of electors that can be contacted, rallies and so forth.
Second, to govern the number of persons, other than the candidates, who can assist in physical campaign operations, as each additional person naturally adds to the public health risk.
Third, to regulate the extent to which supporting services to a campaign, such as vehicle rental, poster printing, Internet advertising, and so forth, will be made essential, at least to candidates, even if not to other parties.
And fourth, to provide for changes in the allowed campaign expenditure level to account for the fact that much of the work normally done by volunteers on the ground may have to be conducted online through costly advertising, and to account for other increases in cost, as may happen if essential services have to open solely to service candidates.
Sir, there are no doubt many other considerations. For example, candidates may face difficulties accessing Internet advertising during the campaign, as this also depends on the cooperation of the Internet platforms. Google, as we know, has ceased to accept political advertising in Singapore, as of December 2019. And with restrictions on physical campaigning, Internet advertising becomes quite essential.
Mr Speaker, I support the Government's efforts to ensure our elections can carry on, even if called in the midst of the COVID-19 outbreak. But I believe more work can still be done to improve access to voting for all electors and to define rules for campaigning in advance that are fair to all candidates and protect the public health. I hope the Government will address these in the reply, or in subsequent legislation if necessary.
Mr Speaker: Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Exempted Business","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that, \"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.\"
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(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.\" (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Parliamentary Elections (COVID-19 Special Arrangements) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Mr Ong Teng Koon.
Mr Ong Teng Koon (Marsiling-Yew Tee): (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, if anybody had ever doubted the importance of a strong government, I believe that this current pandemic should have ended those doubts.
Can you imagine a Singapore without the three Budgets, which have kept the economy afloat and supported the livelihood of the people with a total amount of $63.7 billion to fight the COVID-19 crisis? What would be the consequences?
Can you imagine a Singapore with a runaway infection number of critically ill patients without the circuit breaker in force? What would then be the consequences?
Can you imagine a Singapore where the Government is too weak to make the tough but necessary choices? What would it be like now?
I cannot imagine what the situation would be without all those. I am fortunate and am grateful how we are faring now in Singapore.
These are the far-reaching strict and painful measures that only a democratically elected Government with a strong mandate from the people can enact effectively during an outbreak. A politically weak Government will not have the political capital or legitimacy to do this.
Legitimacy is only conferred with a free and fair election, and only a legitimate Government can get a strong mandate from the people. Without the strong mandate from the people, the Government will not be able to make the best possible decisions to steer us out of this crisis.
As Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean has said in Parliament, unless it is a state of emergency, it would be unconstitutional not to hold an election before the date of 14 April 2021.
Singapore, since its founding until now, has not declared a state of emergency and we should not take it lightly to set this precedent. If the Government fails to defend the Constitution, how can it answer to the people who have elected it time after time since our independence in 965? How are we going to answer to the voters?
Several opposition parties have said that the Government would be most irresponsible if it were to call for a General Election during the outbreak. But no one really knows if COVID-19 will end before 14 April 2021. Of course, I sincerely hope that COVID-19 will be behind us by then. But even if it is not fully eradicated, it would be most irresponsible of the Government not to call a General Election by 14 April 2021. Fourteenth April 2021 is still a long way away, there is no excuse for the Government not to prepare properly for the election in advance and hold one at an appropriate time.
This Bill ensures that the Government will put in all the necessary precautions to ensure a fair election and to ensure the safety and health of voters if the outbreak is not over yet. This requirement is non-negotiable.
While we are trying to uphold the Constitution, we also cannot risk a flaring of the outbreak. Singaporeans from all walks of life have been suffering economically from the circuit breaker. The sacrifices of these people cannot be made in vain. The real question is how do we do this effectively?
Specifically, we have to explore all the ways to make sure that physical voting is safer, for example, staggered polling times, more polling stations, less contact from sharing objects. Other than that, we also need to use this opportunity to explore other areas which are not stipulated in this Bill. For example, to use internet technology to enable online voting instead of physical voting. Can we allow online voting if the voters log in with their SingPass?
Of course, this is a new exploration. There will always be new issues to address. For example, privacy, the secrecy of the votes, cybersecurity and also fraud. Seniors may also need help in technical areas.
But as with any encounter with new things and new developments, we have to endeavour to try to overcome all the difficulties and challenges in order to move forward. If the COVID-19 outbreak has taught us one thing, it is that many things that were similarly described as impossible in January this year had in fact been shown to be possible.
Ensuring safe and fair campaigning is as important as ensuring safe and fair polling. If the electorate feels that some parties were constrained unfairly, then the election will no longer be legitimate. Hence, this Bill should make provisions for political parties to conduct virtual hustings and virtual rallies, and to make sure that the boundaries are clear. If internet campaigning or social media are used, rules and regulations should be established, especially to guard against any rumours or fake news. In order to ensure fairness of the election, these boundaries are very important.
Mr Speaker, in these challenging times, true humanity will be revealed. We talk about sacrifices. We talk about having to choose between liberty and life. But in real life, execution is of the essence. What we should aim for is to allow our voters to exercise their democratic rights safely. If you fail to plan, you plan to fail. If we make the right decisions and start preparing now, our voters will not need to make a trade-off between democracy and health.
It is very easy to say \"no\", but our responsibility is to find a more effective, safer and win-win solution. As the old adage says, \"A sunken ship watches a thousand boats pass by it, a withered tree sees ten thousand saplings blossom beyond it. (As the old continue to wither away, the new will blossom and lead the way.)\" Sir, we will be able to find a new way of polling that will adapt to the new information age. Singapore will definitely rise again from the ashes of the pandemic.
Mr Speaker, I support the Bill. Thank you.
Ms Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, this Bill addresses the public health risk from an election amidst the COVID-19 crisis and works towards creating the possibility of a General Election that is safe and secure. There have been indications that an election is imminent. The Electoral Boundary Review Committee released its boundary report in March. Historically, elections have been called within a month or two after the announcement of the Electoral Boundary Review Committee. Prime Minister Lee has also not discounted the possibility of a COVID-19 election and said he would judge the situation at hand first.
The Bill at hand is a laudable effort. However, I am not certain that its current form is truly sufficient to protect the safety of the electorate nor the integrity of our political processes should an early election be called for whilst we are deep in this battle with COVID-19. Please allow me to elaborate these concerns.
First, Mr Speaker, the right to vote forms the foundation of our representative democracy. It concerns me that the Bill in providing for an election in a pandemic excludes a significant segment of the electorate. This, to my mind, inevitably threatens the integrity of our democracy by taking away the voting rights of citizens and, as a consequence, weakens the mandate. Let us discuss these exclusion provisions.
Materially, section 3(2) of the Bill exempts individuals serving quarantine orders (QOs) from having to vote and subsection (3) makes it clear that quarantined electors cannot claim their right to vote as a valid defence for violating their quarantine order. What this therefore means is that citizens under quarantine orders face legal repercussions if they attempt to vote.
In the case of voters under Stay-Home Notices (SHNs), the Bill stipulates that if at least two individuals residing in one boarding premise exist, the Returning Officer can then establish a special polling station for these voters. As at 2 May, 2,020 persons were under SHNs and approximately 28,000 under some form of QOs. Even if we discount those in the dormitories, I think we are still looking at about 15,000. This number is expected to rise, which gives a sense of the number of Singaporeans who would be prevented from voting.
In addition, section 8 of the Bill allows for possible exemption of those who may be unwell or vulnerable to illness or exposure to be discouraged from voting, applying to those Singaporeans who may be first-order contacts. The number of cases in Singapore has exceeded 17,500, when I last checked, with unlinked cases in the community continuing to emerge, indicative of a larger, hidden reservoir of COVID-19 cases in the community that continues to go undetected.
If an election is held in a time when we are still grappling with a high risk of community spread, we may be looking at a significant part of the population being discouraged from voting.
Mr Speaker, since the beginning of our history as a nation, the principle of \"one man, one vote\" has been fundamental to Singapore such that our founding fathers made voting compulsory. \"The right to vote is a constitutional right. It is an implied right, arising from the various provisions in the Constitution, including Articles 65 and 66,\" said the Minister for Law in a parliamentary debate in 2009.
Explicitly, section 38(1) of the Parliamentary Elections Act states that the presence of an elector in the register of electors is \"conclusive evidence for the purpose of determining whether a person is or is not entitled to vote at the election\". Does the exclusion of voters in this Bill not therefore deprive Singaporeans of this right? Will the Minister please clarify on the constitutional invalidity of depriving quarantined voters of that right to vote, especially how they have no legal defence if they exit their quarantine holdings to vote?
Sir, aside from the explicit exclusions, we must not forget too that the Bill does not account for electors who may voluntarily abstain from exercising their right to vote out of fear of contracting COVID-19, including the elderly who are immuno-compromised and/or voters residing with elderly family members, regardless of the penalties incurred. An election cannot truly be held in good faith if Singaporeans are forced to choose between voting and protecting themselves and their families.
Similarly, have we accounted for the thousands of eligible Singaporeans overseas who are excluded because they may not be able to vote at the designated polling stations because of lockdown measures and travel restrictions?
Can the Minister please clarify if the Bill has been formulated with these concerns in mind and if not, how does the Government intend to rectify this potential loss of more voters?
Mr Speaker, one reason that has been provided for why we should hold an election during this period is to provide the incumbent Government with a fresh and strong mandate to tackle our on-going public health and economic crisis. Yet, I cannot help but sincerely question just how strong and fresh of a mandate the new government can marshall in a COVID-19 General Election where there are such significant parts of the electorate excluded from voting by law, by illness, by fear and by choice, which would most certainly result in substantially lower voter turnout.
Mr Speaker, I would like to now address if a COVID-19 election also runs the risk of an inequitable playing field for political parties in terms of campaigning.
MHA, Cyber Security Agency and Elections Department have issued advisories to political parties on the threat of foreign interference. Under the guidelines of the advisories issued, political parties are expected to not only shore up their digital literacy but also beef up their existing IT infrastructure and security.
Not all political parties will have the necessary resources to ensure full and adequate compliance with the advisories and this is especially concerning given that a COVID-19 election will likely heavily depend on social media and other online platforms for campaigning to replace rallies.
Some believe that rallies contribute to the leveling of the playing field, and give fair opportunity for each political party to offer their pitch.
To have an election without rallies would be disadvantageous to parties with less resources. In this regard, I think there was an online dip poll held by Lianhe Zaobao in late March about the desirability of an election found that 67.5% of those polled disagreed on holding an election during the ongoing pandemic as it would be difficult to hold rallies.
This Bill does not seem to have any provisions for fair campaigning. Can the Minister clarify how the Elections Department will ensure commensurate and fair campaigning across all political parties, given the extenuating circumstances?
Last but not least, Mr Speaker, apart from the integrity of the mandate and democratic processes, we cannot discount the possibility that holding an election any time soon will increase the risk of transmission again. It is true that measures can be taken to ensure higher sanitary standards in voting booths throughout voting day. However, we must not forget that all it takes are a few minor lapses to trigger another dangerous bout of contagion.
As of 15 April, there were over 2.6 million voters registered in the voter roll. The likelihood of such lapses on a day where we expect over 1.8 million Singaporeans to head to the polls is more than high. Just looking at how quickly the virus spreads in weeks with 200,000 workers across different dormitories should alarm us to what we would be risking to allow large hordes of people to come together at the polling stations.
Some may urge us to look at the example of South Korea to suggest that elections can still be successfully held without risk to public health. South Korea, however, had managed to stem their flow of infections before they held their election. Besides, we do not even know if the South Korean elections will lead to a relapse in infections, given the 14-day incubation period. Already, there are worrying trends that the virus is more devious and more complicated than previously thought. South Korea, in fact, has seen more than 180 cases where recovered patients have become reinfected by the virus.
Mr Speaker, while the COVID-19 crisis has been foisted upon us without choice, we can still choose to protect the health of Singaporeans and safeguard our democracy.
No one can say for sure how long this public health crisis will last until it is actually over. I do therefore humbly urge the Minister to direct the energies and resources of this Government – which still has a full year mandate ahead of it – to be focused on resolving the crisis and safeguarding the physical and mental health of Singaporeans. And not to burden the severely-stretched public service further with an early election, particularly with the colossal inter-agency efforts to resolve the migrant worker crisis that are ongoing and will be needed beyond COVID-19.
Sir, if the COVID-19 crisis resolves before the due date of 21 April 2021, then we can hold an election as per normal. If not, we may consider holding an election at that time according to the terms of this Bill. Alternatively, if the situation in fact worsens in a way that will still hamper a fair election, this House may have to consider passing a constitutional amendment to extend the deadline for an election. Some may contend that passing a constitutional amendment with regard to elections would be unprecedented, but Mr Speaker, I think we will all agree that many of us what we have witnessed in this Chamber in the last months have been anything but “business as usual”.
I would also like to seek the Minister’s assurance that this Bill is viewed as a last resort; that it should only serve as a guarantee, and not be interpreted as a go-ahead to hold elections immediately in this current climate. If we are to pass this Bill today, we must make sure that the Bill is comprehensive in ensuring both the safety of the electorate, maximum suffrage and fair campaigning.
This will also help to quell sentiments on the ground that an early election is being exercised for political expediency, avoiding an undue erosion of public trust.
Mr Speaker, please let me conclude by reminding this House and Singaporeans that voting is not a fire drill exercise we conduct every five years; it is a right and privilege to have a say in how we want to build this nation and the life we want for ourselves and our families.The right to exercise this vote is therefore what holds our society together, and must not be denied by exclusions nor be encumbered with fear of infection. Any yes that is given without the ability to safely say no is never a true choice. And therefore not the kind of vote or mandate we want the new government to be built upon, especially to lead us in a post-COVID world.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, it was Dr Anthony Fauci, an infectious disease expert who said of the COVID-19 virus, “You don’t make the timeline, the virus makes the timeline”.
I am supportive of planning for all contingencies to enable as many eligible Singaporean voters to cast their votes as possible in a General Election. At the end of the day, we do not want a situation where we are forcing Singaporeans to choose between their right to vote and their health. We need to have plans and back-up plans. We need to have resources to ensure that we can implement our plans. We also should ensure our message is clear that those who are not well should stay home and that those who are well can safely vote because we have taken all necessary precautions.
Sir, I have five clarifications on the Bill.
First, this Bill is intended to have effect until April 2021. We can try to predict but it is difficult to say for certain how the number of infections will unfold. In the event that the number of people subject to COVID-19 Stay Order Regulations and living at boarding premises increase significantly, more special polling stations will be required.
Can the Minister share the measures taken to ensure that we have sufficient resources to operate special polling stations and, if necessary, to transport electors such that every elector subject to the COVID-19 Stay Order Regulations and living at boarding premises will have access to a special polling station? Can the Minister also share what public health and safety measures will be implemented at special polling stations to prevent disease transmission?
Second, clause 6(3) provides the Minister with the power to make regulations allowing electors subject to COVID-19 stay orders to vote without leaving their boarding premises. The explanatory note elaborates that such an elector may remain in his or her room at the boarding premises, be delivered the ballot paper to mark secretly, and return it using a secure method to the Returning Officer. This is a very significant departure from in person voting at polling stations and is not subject to the usual protective measures at polling stations to ensure the secrecy of votes such as the presence of polling agents, the sealing of ballot boxes and the supervision of a presiding officer. Where votes are collected from individual electors’ rooms, as opposed to where votes are cast at a single location, there are many more points where the secrecy of the vote may be undermined. There are measures that can be taken to ensure the secrecy and integrity of the vote and the Explanatory Note states that the regulations need to be consistent with principles such as secrecy of the vote and one-person-one-vote.
Can the Minister share what are some of the protective measures that may be introduced in regulations if it is necessary for an elector to vote from his or her room?
Third, as early as November 2018, the Elections Department (ELD) announced new technology and processes to be used at the next elections. These include counting machines, electronic registration, and self-inking pens. The ELD announced in November 2019 that it would hold roadshows ahead of the next General Election to familiarise voters with the new equipment. The ELD also announced that it will organise sessions for political party representatives to try out the new digital services and provide feedback. Training would clearly also need to be carried out for counting agents who will have to operate the counting machines.
Can the Minister share what measures will be implemented to ensure that voters, polling agents, and counting agents can be familiarised with these new initiatives to ensure smooth roll out on polling day itself? How will training be conducted if on-site sessions cannot be conducted, for example during circuit breaker periods?
Fourth, clause 6(2)(b) provides that the hours of any poll at a special polling station must not be less than four hours as set by the Returning Officer, and must close no later than the close of poll on polling day in Singapore. It is likely that the voting process will be slower because of the additional safety measures taken, the new technology used and the potential need to transport electors to special polling stations.
Can the Minister share what plans there are to address any potential delays in the polling process that might affect electors’ ability to vote before the close of the poll on Polling Day, whether at a regular polling station or a special polling station?
Lastly, as of 2015, there were 10 overseas registration centres in Canberra, London, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Beijing, Shanghai, Dubai, New York, San Francisco and Washington DC. Many of these cities are currently and may in the future have high rates of disease transmissions and may be in varying states of lockdown. While overseas electors may form a small proportion of the voters, they too are citizens of Singapore and it is important to preserve their right to vote as far as possible. Can the Minister share what the COVID-19 special arrangement plans are in relation to overseas voters?
Sir, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Minister Chan
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Speaker, Sir, let me first thank all the Members who have spoken on this Bill. I will address the points specific to this Bill first before I cover the other points.
Ms Anthea Ong expressed her concern that the Bill deprives certain voters of their right to vote. This is a misconception. The Bill does not take away any one’s right to vote. Rather, the special arrangements in this Bill will in fact allow more voters to vote.
Under the Infectious Diseases Act, a voter on QO, or SHN cannot leave his or her place of isolation or accommodation without the permission of the Director of Medical Services. However, this Bill enables special arrangements to be made to allow those on SHN staying at designated facilities to vote under special arrangements that will minimise their contact with other voters. Thus, the arrangements afforded by this Bill should allay concerns among the wider voting population who might otherwise be dissuaded from voting because of in-person voting by those under SHN.
To use Ms Ong’s own words, Singaporeans should not have to choose between voting and protecting themselves and their families. As for those on QO, fewer than 1,000 Singaporeans of voting age are on QO as of yesterday, and certainly not as many as Ms Ong asserts.
As Ms Sylvia Lim has noted, the Bill merely recognises that voters who are under QO or an SHN at home have a legitimate reason for not voting because of the COVID-19 situation. Because voting is compulsory, the Bill makes clear that being on QO or SHN at home provides an adequate reason to them for not voting and these voters will thus be entitled to have their names restored to the relevant register of electors, without paying the $50 penalty.
To Ms Lim’s question, the Elections Department will consult MOH and MHA nearer the election date to assess if the public health and security risks of allowing these two categories of voters to leave their homes and making special arrangements for them to vote in-person at polling stations can be managed.
Mr Zainal Sapari asked about clause 8 which provides for the Returning Officer and the Director of Medical Services to advise voters who are unwell to be socially responsible and not turn up to vote at the polling station. Public health issues still need to be addressed even during an election and our officials should not be prevented from doing so because of the offence that is in section 81(1) of the Parliamentary Elections Act. I would add that this clause only applies to public advisories for the awareness of voters in general and is not directed at any particular voter or voters. Voters will be required to comply with the directives of the Returning Officer or the Director of Medical Services. This is to ensure the safety of others and the Election Officers will explain this to the voters.
Mr Louis Ng asked about the powers vested in the Minister to make regulations allowing voters subject to COVID-19 stay orders to vote without leaving their boarding premises. Let me assure Mr Ng that any regulation required for the operation of the special polling stations will have to be consistent with the principles of the Parliamentary Elections Act, such as one-man-one-vote and voting secrecy.
The process, if we need to do this, will include extra steps that ensure that the correct voter receives an authentic ballot paper, remind him or her to vote freely and in secret, and that ensures the secure return of his or her marked ballot in secret for counting. We will also ensure there is transparency as candidates, independent or representing a political party, and their polling agents can be present to observe the proceedings.
Mr Louis Ng and Mr Zainal Sapari highlighted the potential resource challenges for candidates and political parties if there are too many special polling stations.
Let me assure Members that the Elections Department (ELD) will work with the relevant agencies to minimise the number of special polling stations to be set up. Based on the current numbers, we do not expect more than a few polling stations to be set up in the designated facilities. Just to give a bit of context, we have over 800 polling stations around the island. I would also like to assure Assoc Prof Walter Theseira and Ms Sylvia Lim that the intention is to enable every voter serving SHN at designated facilities to vote.
Ms Sylvia Lim also asked about the rationale for requiring at least two or more voters to be from the same constituency before setting up a special polling station. This is to address concerns on the secrecy of the vote where there is a lone SHN voter. In such a case, the Bill provides the flexibility of transporting the lone SHN voter, together with others, to a larger special polling station. If this is necessary, the Elections Department will put in place the necessary safeguards. I would add that the offences of treating, undue influence and bribery in the Parliamentary Elections Act still apply in such a situation. But let me assure Members that unless the number of SHN voters spikes, the Elections Department's preference is to conduct polling within the designated facilities rather than transporting the voters to special polling stations outside.
On Ms Sylvia Lim's questions pertaining to the Power of Attorney to be executed by an aspiring candidate who is unable or unfit to file his nomination papers in person, the aspiring candidate can engage a lawyer to prepare the Power of Attorney to expressly authorise the representative to represent and act on behalf of the aspiring candidate at nomination proceedings. This must include an authorisation to submit nomination papers and raise objections to the nomination papers of other candidates. The Bill also does not prevent a GRC candidate or an assentor of the group from doubling up as a representative of another aspiring candidate of the GRC who happens to be unwell as long as he is in possession of the required Power of Attorney.
Let me now move on to the issue of safety precautions for elections conducted under COVID-19, which have been raised by various Members, including Ms Sylvia Lim, Ms Anthea Ong, Mr Louis Ng and Mr Ong Teng Koon. I would like to assure the House that the Elections Department will put in place the necessary measures to protect candidates, voters and election officials to assure a safe election.
In drawing up these measures, the Elections Department will abide by the prevailing advisories issued by MOH for health, and MHA for security. The Elections Department is also studying the experiences of countries that have held elections under pandemics, such as South Korea. In the case of South Korea, they implemented precautionary measures, such as temperature screening, safe distancing and requiring voters to wear masks and plastic gloves. Another useful observation from the South Korean elections is the wide use of collaterals, such as videos and infographics, to assure voters of the precautionary measures being put in place. As a result, they had a record turnout at the elections. The South Korean health authority also recently concluded that there were no local transmission cases arising from the elections. Their experience shows that it is possible to run a safe and smooth election under COVID-19, provided we have in place the necessary safety precautions and voters are assured of the safety of the election.
Beyond the best practices from South Korea, the Elections Department will also consider Mr Ong Teng Koon's suggestions to increase the number of polling stations and even out the flow of voters across polling hours. This is something that the ELD has started studying. As the COVID-19 situation is evolving, the Elections Department will share the details nearer the General Elections. So, the ideas of staggered hours, temperature taking, disinfecting the polling booths more frequently, gloves – all those are part of the study and ELD will make public its recommendations and advice soon, before the elections, to give everybody and every party the necessary time for their preparations.
Finally, although Mr Louis Ng's questions about educating voters and candidates about the use of electronic registration and other new equipment are outside the scope of the Bill, let me just respond briefly to say that we do recognise the importance of public education and will be putting out information on the use of electronic registration and other equipment, together with the necessary precautionary measures to address the COVID-19 situation.
Let me now move on to the next issue touched on by Mr Ong Teng Koon and Assoc Prof Walter Theseira about online voting. We have not implemented online voting as it is difficult to prevent impersonation and ensure voting secrecy. Even with SingPass, we do not know for sure if the vote is cast by the person himself or by another person who is assisting him. For a voter to be sure that his online vote is accurately recorded for audit purpose, present-day IT verification systems will require the system to also retain information on the voter's choice, which will compromise voting secrecy. In addition, there are system reliability issues and security risks, such as vulnerability to hacking and cyber-attacks. It is not possible to have polling agents present during online voting.
Assoc Prof Walter Theseira raised a very philosophical point, which is this. We have two considerations for the voting process – first, the verification of the voter's identity; second, voting secrecy. Now, this is fundamentally different from a bank transaction. A bank transaction verifies the person's transacting identity. At the same time, there is an audit trail to allow any dispute to be settled thereafter. In a voting situation, it is precisely quite different. We want to verify the identity of the voter and, yet, at the same time, we have to assure the voter of the secrecy of his vote, which means that he must be assured that it cannot be traced back absolutely to him. So, this is the fundamental issue which many countries have grappled with and this is also the reason why we have not chosen to go onto an online mode at this point in time, given the concerns of verification, voter secrecy and also the security concerns.
These reasons were highlighted in an article in the 28 April issue of The Economist on why online voting is not the way to hold elections during a pandemic.
Now, let me touch on overseas voting. Ms Anthea Ong and Mr Louis Ng asked about the Singaporean voters overseas. We want Singaporeans who have registered to vote overseas to be able to do so. But we must also recognise that the COVID-19 situation has affected many cities around the world to different extents and we do not know how it will evolve. For example, if there are unacceptable risks to the safety and health of overseas Singaporean voters and election officials, and if the physical conduct of polling in certain overseas locations is not possible, then we may have to abandon overseas voting in those locations as allowed under the Parliamentary Elections Act. This is a decision that will not be taken lightly. The Returning Officer will assess and monitor the situation for each overseas polling station after the writ of election is issued before making any such decision.
Next, let me touch on the issue of campaigning. Ms Sylvia Lim, Ms Anthea Ong, Mr Ong Teng Koon and Assoc Prof Theseira asked about campaigning under the COVID-19 situation. This is outside the scope of the Bill as laid out in its long title. I will just briefly say that the Elections Department will share the guidelines for campaigning in due course, taking into account the COVID-19 situation then. As the Parliamentary Elections Act and its subsidiary legislation cover only some aspects of campaigning like the regulation of election advertising, with rallies and walkabouts covered under the Public Order Act, the Elections Department's practice has been to issue an advisory on campaigning guidelines, together with other relevant authorities like the Police and MHA. The Elections Department will also work with MOH on the health and safety aspects of campaigning before issuing its advisory. This will be done with sufficient time for political parties and aspiring candidates to prepare.
Again, Assoc Prof Walter Theseira raised a philosophical point. What are the parts that should go into the Rules and what are the parts that should go into the subsidiary legislation or Regulations? In general, our philosophy must be this – for those things that are conducted in a defined, structured environment, the fewer the variables, the more we are able to write it down in clear rules, and we should do that upfront. For those activities that are conducted in less structured environments, where things are evolving rapidly, then, certainly, not everything can be written upfront and whatever rules that are going to be made for those activities, including campaigning activities, will have to take into consideration the prevailing health and security considerations by MOH and MHA respectively.
This is the reason why the Bill is structured in this way. For things that are conducted in the polling station, where it is a structured environment, we will try to be as clear, as defined, and to let people know as early as possible. For those things like campaigning, which is conducted in a less structured environment, which is more subject to the evolving health and security considerations, not all of that can be written down prior, and not all of them may need to be written down because then that will circumscribe the actions that may be possible in due course. So, that is the philosophy behind why the Bill is structured in this way.
Now, let me address Mr Zainal Sapari's point about why the arrangements are temporary. Mr Zainal asked why are the special arrangements provided in the Bill temporary and not permanent. These arrangements are specifically to deal with the conduct of an election under the COVID-19 situation, which we all hope is temporary. But I agree with Mr Zainal Sapari that if there are provisions which are relevant to future elections, we will include these provisions when we next amend the Parliamentary Elections Act.
Next, let me touch on the issue of the timing of the election, which is not a part of this Bill.
Ms Sylvia Lim, Ms Anthea Ong and Mr Ong Teng Koon commented on the timing of the General Election. As Mr Ong Teng Koon has articulated, Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean has explained in his reply to this House on 25 March 2020 that it is unconstitutional to delay an election beyond the required timeframe of April 2021 and for the President to appoint a caretaker government. Let me reiterate that this Bill allows the Elections Department to make contingency plans for the next General Election. It is not related to the timing of the General Election. It will be for the Prime Minister to consider what is in the best interests of Singapore and Singaporeans and make the decision on when to call the next General Election.
Ideally, we would all like to conduct elections in normal conditions but it is uncertain when the COVID-19 situation will stabilise. However, as South Korea has shown, holding an election under COVID-19 is possible, but there must be adequate precautionary measures in place to safeguard the well-being of voters, candidates and officials, and it will be prudent and responsible for us to make those necessary contingency plans ahead of time.
Mr Speaker, Sir, let me conclude. In a few short months, the way we live, work and interact with others has changed drastically. Will we revert to the pre-COVID-19 norms? Nobody knows. But we cannot plan on the basis that it will. Instead, we need to plan ahead and put in the necessary measures so that we can hold elections safely even under the new and evolving COVID-19 norms.
This Bill allows the Elections Department to implement temporary arrangements to ensure the safety of voters, candidates and election officials should the next General Election take place under the COVID-19 situation. This is the responsible thing to do – to consider the prevailing circumstances and plan as robustly as possible – so that we can take care of the well-being of Singaporeans while upholding democracy in Singapore.
With that, Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Chan Chun Sing]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee, reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Leader.
","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":"Resolved, \"That at its rising today, Parliament do stand adjourn to 1.30 pm tomorrow.\" — [Mr Desmond Lee].
The Deputy Leader (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\"
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Mr Speaker, for this opportunity to speak on this Adjournment Motion on providing support for home-based businesses during the current COVID-19 circuit breaker period.
Here, I would like to state for the record, deep appreciation for the work done by our Multi-Ministry task force and our frontline workers. Their dedication, courage and sacrifices in fighting the COVID-19 outbreak is admirable and will always be held in gratitude by all of us.
The COVID-19 outbreak has disrupted our lives on many levels. Our personal freedom has been curtailed and our livelihoods have suffered a beating. Some of us have had to change the way we work – whether it is working from home, doing flexi-work, working in split teams, or working extended shifts on the frontlines.
A vast majority of Singaporeans understand the need for these changes and restrictions. We understand that in order to reduce and eventually eradicate the COVID-19 infections, we need to restrict movement and interactions as much as possible, even though these restrictions will impact livelihoods. Definitely. Lives over livelihoods. No one will challenge that.
For some of us, we are not sure if work will still be there for us or if we are able to continue to provide for our families – when we go on sick leave, when we are asked to go on no-pay leave or worse, when we are retrenched or lose our only source of income.
For those among us who are retrenched or have had their source of income cut off, home-based businesses (HBBs) such as baking or cooking, or selling crafts or other items from home, allow them to earn a living despite the current COVID-19 circuit breaker (CB) measures in place. I know of individuals doing HBBs who steadfastly observed the CB measures as they went about delivering their orders, or when they engaged third-party delivery companies to deliver their orders.
However, the recent move to ban all deliveries by HBBs has cut off this income stream, and for some, the only source of income, for their families. For these HBBs, their choices are very limited, and they are the ones we worry about. They need time to make adjustments, especially where their income is concerned.
For many of the HBBs, orders have had to be cancelled or put on hold, refunds have had to be made, and to some extent, raw ingredients already purchased have had to be discarded. For the affected HBBs, they did not just suffer a loss of income, they also saw their own hard-earned savings put to waste. It is not an easy life for HBBs. I know because I grew up as the daughter of a home baker.
My mother used to sell pineapple tarts, peanut cookies and lapis cakes when I was growing up. She used to get only two or three hours of sleep so that she could fulfil her orders, which were aplenty during festive seasons. This was on top of her day job as a typist. I used to help her. I helped to put the little floral dough on top of the pineapple filling of the tarts and the little peanut pieces on the cookies, and I was the one to help her butter the baking sheets onto the baking tins. It was hard work. But it helped to supplement our family income especially when my late father lost his job for a period of time.
But then again, I was probably one of the lucky ones. My mother still had a day job and some income, and the home baking was to supplement what she earned. For some among us, it is not quite the case. Home baking or cooking, or selling their crafts or other items from home is their only source of income, without which, they will be unable to put food on the table or pay for daily expenses.
Like Mdm N. Mdm N is the sole breadwinner of her family of four. Her husband lost his job as a driver because of his diabetes and heart condition. Her mother-in-law, who lives with her, is advanced in age, of poor health and unemployed. Her son is in Primary school.
Mdm N has to take care of them and find ways to earn an income. So, she bakes from home and sells them. Her Nutella tarts and brownies are to die for. I have ordered from her and there was once when I offered to give some extra cash to help the family. She declined. Her sense of dignity in wanting to earn through her own toil and sweat and creativity, is admirable. She does not want handouts and she takes pride that she is able to put food on the table and pay for her family's expenses through her own hard work and creativity. She is dignified and empowered, knowing that the best help is in her hands.
Take also the example of Ms Sery, who is a home baker and single mother of five school-going children. She sells beautiful cakes with frosting through Violet Frost. She bakes from home so that she is able to earn an income to support her children and at the same time be at home to take care of her 10-year-old son who has spina bifida. Some may lament and say that she should work as there are childcare or after-school care arrangements for her children. But Ms Sery is so good at baking and decorating cakes, and like Mdm N, she is dignified and empowered, knowing she is able to use her creativity to put food on the table, and be there for her children as well.
Yet another home-based business owner is Ms Adeline Tan. Ms Tan has been selling cakes, brownies and cookies full-time since graduating from University last year. Ms Tan had to go through a couple of eye surgeries, which would have disrupted a more permanent form of employment. With her passion in baking, she decided to be a home baker so that she can hone her craft and have that dignity of being able to support herself through her passion and talent.
The dignified tenacity and resilience of home bakers and home business owners such as Mdm N, Ms Sery and Ms Tan, they are admirable. They embody self-reliance. They do not want to be a burden to society and they want to strike out on their own, on the path they all know well. Just like when we had to become self-reliant when we gained independence as a nation. Our HBB owners, they embody our nation's DNA.
I understand that from 12 May, HBBs will be allowed to resume operations, with some restrictions. May I seek clarity on and details of these restrictions from 12 May 2020? In addition, may I ask why introduce the blanket ban on 25 April in the first place, which was then back-pedalled on 2 May, when the announcement to ease restrictions was made – a matter of only one week? Did HBBs pose a serious COVID-19 related risk in the first place that required a blanket ban? The blanket ban imposed severe disruptions and inconveniences to many HBBs. As I mentioned earlier, orders have had to be cancelled or put on hold, refunds have had to be made, and to some extent, raw ingredients already purchased have had to be discarded. For the HBBs that were affected, they did not just suffer a loss of income, they also saw their own hard-earned savings put to waste. Why make them go through that?
Here, I wish to put forth a few suggestions for the Government to consider implementing, should restricted measures still need to be in place.
One, I understand the authorities will allow HBBs to engage the services of third-party delivery companies, much like how Food and Beverage (F&B) establishments are already doing to deliver their food and drinks. Hence, contactless collection and delivery can be arranged and carried out. This was what the HBBs were asking for when the ban was introduced. Going forward, the third-party delivery companies can even be assigned ones for HBBs to use, so that there is close monitoring of who the delivery personnel are. This will facilitate contact tracing efforts, if required.
Two, those HBBs who are already under HDB's Small-scale Business Scheme will continue to adhere to current food hygiene rules, if they are doing baking or cooking businesses. If, and only if, there is any worry or concern about their health during this COVID-19 circuit breaker period, these HBB owners can be asked to log their temperature checks and health declaration daily. This can be done through a mobile application that can be easily set up. This will give assurance to consumers and the authorities that the HBBs are generally in good health and do not pose any COVID-19 related risks.
Three, some F&B establishments are offering the use of their central kitchens to HBBs who may be keen to do so. In this way, hygiene, health and temperature checks, and centralised and monitored deliveries, can all be done more easily. This is a good initiative but we also recognise that not all HBBs can work in central kitchens or work away from home. But at least, this can be an option for some HBBs to continue operations during the period of restricted measures. However, this would also mean increased costs for those who run the central kitchens. Would the Government consider co-funding the cost of running these central kitchens for a defined period of time to allow the retail and home-based businesses involved some time to get back on their feet?
The suggestions above are in no way asking for special waivers of current CB measures. All along, HBBs have not asked for special treatment, exceptions or waivers of any of the current CB measures. All they ask, is for an equal opportunity to continue their business like other retail establishments whilst still observing restricted measures in place; as well as clarity and consistency in applying any restrictions that are in place. I think this is a fair request.
At this juncture, Mr Speaker, please allow me to speak in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I am particularly concerned about the fate of home-based businesses (HBBs) because I myself grew up as a child whose mother had a home-based business. At one time, my mother sold pineapple tarts, peanut cookies and lapis cakes to supplement our family’s living expenses, and the additional income from the sale of her cookies really came in handy when my late father lost his job temporarily.
My mother, who comes from our Merdeka generation, was an independent person who always displayed perseverance. Just like the rest of our Merdeka generation, our HBBs also displayed an unwavering spirit. This spirit must be encouraged because it is the same spirit that propelled us to develop Singapore after we achieved independence.
This is also the spirit emulated by our HBB owners like Mdm N.
Mdm N is a housewife who sells cookies and kueh from home. She supports her husband who lost his job as a driver because of diabetes and heart condition, and their son is studying in Primary school. Mdm N also takes care of her mother-in-law who has poor health and is unemployed.
I have ordered Nutella Tarts and brownies on several occasions from Mdm N. They are so yummy. I have also offered to give her some extra cash to help her with her expenses. Although grateful, she declined my help. She said she can still earn a living through her own toil and sweat. That is how determined Mdm N is. She does not simply hope for handouts and she wants to earn her own income to pay for her family's expenses and living.
Our HBB owners are not asking for exemptions from the current restrictions or regulations. They are just asking for an equal opportunity to continue their businesses, just like retailers who are allowed to use third-party delivery services, for instance. To me, this is reasonable request.
I shall not repeat the suggestions that I mentioned earlier. I hope the authorities can consider these suggestions seriously. Once again, I would like to emphasise that none of these suggestions are asking for any exemptions from the restrictions or regulations that must be implemented for the sake of public health and safety.
(In English): In conclusion, Mr Speaker, I wish to reiterate that our HBBs are not asking for special treatment or waivers of current CB measures in place. All they are asking for is equal treatment, clarity and consistency and an opportunity to carry on their businesses, while still observing restrictions that are in place. And all they are asking for is some empathy and understanding of their situation, and leadership in arriving at inclusive solutions.
I hope that in doing this Adjournment Motion, I am able to, in some small measure, highlight the challenges faced by, and the resilience and dignity of, our HBBs in taking charge of their lives and livelihoods, without expecting handouts or financial help from others. Their resilience and dignity to support themselves and their families ought to be celebrated, and they should not be admonished when they give feedback or ask for a level playing field to carry on their businesses.
I hope that in doing this Adjournment Motion and speaking for our HBBs, we are able to demonstrate empathy, understanding and leadership in finding ways to reconcile our differences and arrive at inclusive solutions for our HBBs, while still complying with the restrictions that need to be in place, in the interest of public health and safety.
More importantly, going forward, what are the lessons we can learn from this current episode that will help us manage, navigate and lead in future crises, where we listen and understand first, not have knee-jerk reactions, and co-create solutions in an inclusive manner?
Here, I would like to thank President Halimah Yacob and Minister Lawrence Wong for showing empathy and understanding of the hardship and challenges that HBBs face. It is the kind of leadership that people need in times of difficulty.
I would like to end with two quotes. First, by Barack Obama, and I quote, \"I believe a stronger sense of empathy would tilt the balance of our current politics in favour of those people who are struggling in this society. After all, if they are like us, then their struggles are our own. If we fail to help, we diminish ourselves.
And another by Audrey Hepburn, and I quote, \"Nothing is more important than empathy for another human being's suffering. Not a career. Not wealth. Not intelligence. Certainly, not status. We have to feel for one another if we are going to survive with dignity.\"
That is all from me. Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker: Mr Zainal Sapari
Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Speaker, I would like to thank my parliamentary colleague, Dr Intan Azura, for this Adjournment Motion. I welcome the announcement made on Saturday on the easing off some restrictions to some businesses, including home-based business (HBB) which will be allowed to operate with some restrictions from 12 May onwards.
There are also many types of home-based business (HBB) owners. Some do it full-time and others may be seasonal and carry out their business during festive seasons. However, the impact of COVID-19 on home-based business (HBB) during the circuit breaker period varies, with some facing financial distress even with the lifting of restrictions.
As the Temporary Relief Fund has ended, can I have a confirmation that Home-Business Owners can apply for the Self-Employed Relief Scheme or SIRS if they are in financial distress? Second, is SIRS applicable to all HBB owners as they could be full-time or seasonal in carrying out their business?
Another problem home-based business (HBB) is the inability to fulfil the orders leading to customers asking for refunds. The orders are usually small amounting to less than few hundred dollars but when combined can amount a few thousand dollars. The deposit paid by customers may have been used to purchase materials needed to fulfil the orders. They will incur a loss if their customers insist on a refund instead of postponing the orders.
The advice given to these Home-Based Business (HBB) owners is to file for relief under COVID-19 Temporary Measures Bill for Ministry of Law to decide on the final settlement if the HBBs' agreements can be classified as a \"Scheduled Contract\". The reality is that most HBB do not have \"Scheduled Contract\" and will not be able to avail themselves of the reliefs under the Act.
Neither is seeking a legal recourse a practical option as legal fees are expensive. The best way forward is to negotiate with the counter party and try to arrange in such a way that they can postpone delivery. Here, I would like to make a call to HBB owners and customers, to be gracious and come to an amicable settlement, especially during this difficult time. Failing which, the HBB owner might lose a customer permanently and get bad reviews on social media and a customer that would just have to suck it up. In Malay, Mr Speaker.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] During this COVID-19 crisis, there are Home-Based Businesses or HBBs that may encounter financial hardship even though several restrictions will be eased. May I seek confirmation that HBB owners can apply for the Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme or SIRS if they have financial difficulties?
Most HBBs do not have a \"Scheduled Contract\" and will not be able to avail themselves to the reliefs under the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act 2020. Here, I would like to call on the HBB owners and customers to negotiate amicably in order to reach a settlement that will not burden any party.
(In English): I would like to end my speech by thanking our President Halimah Yaacob on her Facebook post where she connected well and showed great empathy toward the home-based business (HBB) owners.
I would also like to thank Mr Lawrence Wong and our Ministers in the Inter-Ministerial Task Force for their leadership in steering Singapore through this crisis. I believe great leadership is not only about making the hard decisions but, having empathy and the ability to relate to and connect with the people that are hardest hit to gain their trust and providing the support needed to cushion the impact on their lives. Without a doubt, our Ministers have demonstrated great leadership.
And to the thousands of frontline workers, your display of courage and tenacity is undeniable and we are immeasurably grateful to all of you. I hope, once this crisis is over, as a society, we will accord the due recognition for the important work of essential workers by ensuring fair wages and benefits are accorded to them. And to all of us, regardless whether you are a service buyer, service provider or end consumer, let us do the right thing and support efforts to boost their wages and improve their welfare, even if it means at a higher cost to us. We have the means through our Progressive Wage Model to make this happen.
Mr Speaker: Minister.
The Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M): Let me catch my breath. It is hard speaking just after taking out the mask.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Dr Intan and Mr Zainal Sapari for conveying the concerns of home-based businesses, or HBBs.
I too salute Mdm N, Ms Sery and Ms Tan for their spirit of self-reliance. I too can empathise with Dr Intan's mother who supplemented her income with a home-based business. This was what many Malay families and many of us in the Chamber have gone through. My mother, too, operated a home-based business when my father passed on.
So, when I empathise deeply with their challenges, I say this as someone who lived that life. Many housewives juggle, taking care of their children and elderly parents, and running these businesses to supplement their incomes.
The tightening of circuit breaker measures has put restrictions on many businesses, including HBBs. For HBBs catering to the Malay/Muslim community, I understand their disappointment, especially those who had been gearing up for Ramadan and Hari Raya celebrations.
But the COVID-19 crisis is not about preserving livelihoods alone. The crisis has forced many governments, many of us, to make stark choices between preserving livelihood and preserving life itself.
Indeed, their plight reflects the difficulties many Singaporeans currently face. Many have lost their jobs or have been placed on no-pay leave, so through no decisions of this Government. And even for those of us who still have our jobs, we are confined to our homes, going out only for essentials and exercise. But I believe many support the circuit breaker and agree that it is necessary. We are starting to see the results. I thank everyone for choosing to Stay United, to save lives and protect our community.
Let me share with the House our approach so far and the support available to those affected.
On 7 April, we imposed the circuit breaker to decisively curb the spread of COVID-19. Before this, we routinely had more than 50 new cases daily. Like many countries, the risk of cases growing exponentially was real and this is the reason why it is hard to plan and prepare our citizens for what comes next. We had to act fast and hard to minimise people movement and social interactions. We understand this has been painful for everyone.
The list of essential services was further tightened from 21 April as the infection rate had not reduced sufficiently. Barbers, laundromats as well as desserts, confectionaries and cake stores suspended their operations.
We also clarified that only HBBs that operated solely online were allowed, as these do not involve collection and delivery of goods.
Non-online HBBs could normally run without oversight or registration as they were typically small and do not disturb their neighbours. However, their informal and dispersed nature presents a special challenge during COVID-19. We cannot enforce safe distancing in them the same way we do for commercial orders. This poses a real risk when people move and interact in residential estates, as goods are collected and delivered.
It takes just one infected person to start a cluster. Lives, especially of our elderly, are at stake, and they can be right in the homes of this HBB operations. The circuit breaker would need to be extended if community transmissions remained high. So, we are not backpedalling. We are just making a decision because the situation has improved. Hence, as we made the difficult decision to restrict the operations of HBBs. I hope everyone understands why.
But what has been the outcome? Because everyone, including the HBBs, complied with the measures, we are seeing earlier results. The average daily number of new cases in the community has halved, from 25 in the week before to 12 last week.
We are therefore gradually relaxing restrictions from 12 May. Beyond allowing retail sale of cakes and confectionery for takeaway and delivery, we are resuming food HBBs for delivery and collection only. But we are not out of the woods yet, because clusters can still form as activities and interactions increase.
Food HBBs, their customers and delivery personnel have to comply with a set of safe distancing measures – practising contactless delivery and collection, and installing TraceTogether to help contact tracing.
Dr Intan suggested channelling HBBs is to central kitchens, but this is not necessary with the latest position and may result in even greater movement of people. Other non-online HBBs are to remain closed for now.
Food HBBs can now accept and start preparing orders to be fulfilled after 12 May. It is hoped – as I had expressed in my Facebook post – that you will be in time for Hari Raya Puasa, even if we must be prepared for a quieter Raya.
Because most are rapid and hit hard. Just to preserve lives, we know we still have to take care of those directly affected by the COVID-19 situation and those affected by decisions to curb is exponential growth in infection.
MOF has introduced schemes over three Budgets to support our businesses, workers and those in need. All Singaporeans aged 21 and above also received a once-off Cash and Support payout in April.
Many HBB operators would have benefited from the Temporary Relief Fund that was meant for relief in April. From May, as Mr Zainal inquired, self-employed HBB owners can apply for the Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme, or SIRS, or the COVID-19 Support Grant if they do not qualify for SIRS but are salaried employees who lost their jobs, suffered pay cuts or were placed on involuntary no-pay leave. SSOs will also extend other forms of support like ComCare for low-income families who need help.
Many members of the Malay/Muslim community have stepped up to calm worries and extended help to food HBBs. This is the correct spirit in the holy month of Ramadan. I would like to thank them all.
For instance, the Singapore Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SMCCI) quickly got in touch with over 1,800 HBBs. SMCCI helped qualify HBBs so that they could access the Temporary Relief Fund automatically. They are advising them on how to tap on other Government support schemes. SMCCI is also looking to provide capability and capacity building for HBBs. If there is a silver lining, the HBBs now have SMCCI to champion and help them run viable and resilient micro-businesses. I wish them a fruitful relationship.
I also thank lawyers in the M3 community who, together with SMCCI, extended free legal advice to HBBs concerned about the legal implications of failing to fulfil their obligations, like issues around deposits and inability to deliver in time. Mr Speaker, allow me to speak in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I am deeply concerned and sympathise with those from our community who depend on their home-based businesses as a source of income. Those who have accepted orders during the months of Ramadan and Syawal will be most affected, especially since orders during Ramadan may have dipped slightly this year due to COVID-19. However, we need to minimise all movement and interactions so that we do not spread the virus to the elderly, to our families and to our friends. Some adjustments have to be made, just like how some of us have adapted to a very different Ramadan this year.
I thank the community for understanding and making adjustments. As we have already seen some results from the tighter measures to break the chain of transmission, the Government has allowed home-based businesses to resume operations from 12 May. This will give the business owners some time before Hari Raya Aidilfitri, even as this year’s celebrations will require some adjustments as well.
The Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DPPMS) is engaging and advising the business owners to tap on the various Government schemes and is also working with lawyers from M3 to offer free legal advice. In its effort to help HBBs from the Malay/Muslim community, DPPMS is exploring ways to help this group for the long run.
(In English): Let me conclude by assuring Dr Intan, Mr Zainal and the House and the Government stands ready to support workers and businesses have been hit by COVID-19.
The situation has improved, not by chance, but because we stayed home and observed safe distancing. But we must not be complacent – we are dealing with a cunning virus and a difficult adversity.
If we have reaped anything from this, it was to give focus to food HBBs to do your part to enforce safe distancing during food preparation. I also hope that through the crisis, they will be reborn resilient, like Dr Intan's mother. For those HBBs that remain suspended, please be patient. Restrictions can only be lifted gradually and carefully when the situation continues to improve. We must prevent infections from spreading uncontrollably because when that happens, nature will take a tragic course. The more united we are in observing the circuit breaker, the sooner we can lift the measures.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 8.17 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":"Matter Raised On Adjournment Motion","questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Complaints about Betting Messages Sent to Mobile Phone Subscribers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"34 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) over the past three years, how many complaints have been made by mobile customers receiving online betting messages; and (b) what can a mobile subscriber do to block out such messages.
Mr S Iswaran: At present, when the Police receives a complaint, they will note the offending phone number and take appropriate actions, such as follow-up investigations. Since May 2018, the Police has been working with the telcos to terminate phone numbers associated with illegal online betting activities. While the Police does not track the global number of complaints for online betting messages specifically, about 1,300 phone numbers have been terminated to date. These were identified through complaints by members of the public or through investigations carried out by the Police.
Mobile subscribers should block online betting messages they receive using the spam filtering functions on their phones or third party applications. In addition, they can report such messages to SPF's I-Witness platform, the Police@sg mobile app or via email. My Ministry and IMDA will also continue to work with MHA and the Police to counter SMSes promoting illicit activities including online betting.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extension of Rental Waivers to Sub-tenants and Licensees at Government-owned Properties","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"35 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether sub-tenants/licensees of Government-owned properties, including coffeeshop stallholders, have any recourse to seek rental waivers provided to tenants as part of the COVID-19 measures but which have not been passed on to the sub-tenants/licensees by the tenants, especially where the sub-tenancy/licence agreements require the regular payment of rent instead of alternative methods of profit sharing or remuneration between the parties.
Mr Heng Swee Keat: \tMr Speaker, may I request that Question Number 35 be redirected from the Minister for National Development to me as the Minister for Finance, please.
The Government has a total of about 37,700 tenants who will benefit from the rental waivers.
We recognise that there may also be sub-tenancies under some of these main or master tenants. This is why the Government requires all master tenants to sign a written undertaking to pass on at least 80% of the rental waiver granted by the Government to eligible sub-tenants, including coffeeshop stallholders. The requirement to pass on at least 80% of the rental waiver took into account that master tenants may have to incur costs for the space, such as maintenance and cleaning.
The written undertaking is legally enforceable and agencies can withhold the rental waiver or even take tenancy action as a last resort if the rental waivers are not passed on to the sub-tenants.
If Members of this House encounter any sub-tenant who did not receive Government rental waivers passed down from their master tenants, please direct them to notify the landlord agency who will assist to enforce the rental waiver pass-through.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Training for Safe Distancing Ambassadors and Safe Distancing Measures after COVID-19 Circuit Breaker Period","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"37 Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) what training has been given to the safe distancing ambassadors to prepare them for their role during the circuit breaker period; and (b) what measures have been put in place to ensure their safety and well-being as they perform their roles.
38 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources when the circuit breaker period ends (a) whether the safe distancing measures and penalties will continue to be in force and, if so, how; (b) whether additional measures are necessary to ensure a continuous reduction in new COVID-19 cases; and (c) whether safe distancing ambassadors will continue to be deployed and, if so, how will it be ensured that they adequately protect themselves from abuse and violence.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The introduction and enforcement of Safe Distancing measures (SDMs) is an important strategy in Singapore's national effort to curb the transmission of COVID-19. The Government takes these SDMs seriously as they are crucial to slow the transmission of the virus and to keep all of us safe. We thank the majority of Singaporeans who have followed not just the letter of the law but also the spirit of the measures. For the small minority who refuse to cooperate, they remain at higher risk of contracting the virus and then spreading it to others. We therefore have enforced strictly so that the pain endured and sacrifices made by the majority are not wasted.
The Ministry of Environment and Water Resources leads a Taskforce to implement SDMs in key public spaces in HDB estates, such as town centres, wet markets, hawker centres, coffee shops, parks, and public transport nodes. The Taskforce comprises NEA, SFA, HDB, NParks, LTA, SportSG, PA, SPF, MCCY and PSD. Every day, the agencies deploy around 3,000 Safe Distancing Enforcement Officers, SG Clean Ambassadors, and Safe Distancing Ambassadors.
The role of an Enforcement Officer or Ambassador is not an easy one. The officers start their shifts from as early as 6am and are constantly on their feet ensuring that members of public and businesses adhere to the SDMs. Enforcement Officers are authorised to take enforcement actions against violations of SDMs. I would like to thank our officers for their tireless efforts and sacrifices to keep us safe.
Our Enforcement Officers and Ambassadors have different backgrounds and skillsets. Many are public service officers from around 50 different agencies, who have stepped forward to join the Taskforce's operations, on top of their existing functions and duties which they still have to balance. Others are displaced Singaporeans on temporary employment, such as those recruited from the aviation sector. We also have volunteers who support PA and other Task Force agencies to ensure safe distancing.
Training is conducted for all officers to prepare them before deployment. They are briefed on the SDMs and rules of engagement when dealing with members of public. We pay special attention to remind them not to put themselves in harm's way and to train them to handle situations like assisting vulnerable groups such as seniors and individuals with mental illness with sensitivity or managing uncooperative and abusive individuals. During their initial deployment, these officers are paired with more experienced team mates for additional on-the-job guidance to familiarise them with the work and build their confidence.
For their safety and protection, Enforcement Officers and Ambassadors are given identification, such as passes and armbands, and protective equipment, which may include face masks, face shields, and hand sanitisers. They are also reminded to practise good hygiene such as to take their temperature twice a day, wash their hands frequently with soap and water, and shower and change their clothes at the end of the day before they come into close contact with others. We have also developed a set of best practices for deploying agencies, such as keeping officers to the same team for daily deployment where possible.
While the majority of the population has been cooperative, a small number of individuals have been defiant and abusive to our Enforcement Officers and Ambassadors. They have photographed and filmed them as they do their jobs, and have even verbally and physically abused them. Let me state categorically that this is unacceptable and we have zero tolerance for abuse of our officers. We have and will continue to work closely with the Police to identify, apprehend, and charge those responsible with the full force of the law.
SDMs and the associated penalties will be in force for the duration of the Circuit Breaker period, which is until 1 June. We will adjust the measures and deployment of officers depending on the prevailing situation. To minimise the risk of future outbreaks, we must continue to take steps to protect ourselves and others. I urge everyone to continue to follow the prevailing safe distancing advisories and measures, and observe high standards of personal hygiene and social responsibility. In this way, we can better protect ourselves and our loved ones.
I also seek your support for our Enforcement Officers and Ambassadors who are working for our collective safety and health. Please cooperate with them. If you see them in your community, give them a wave of encouragement from a distance away, to recognise and support them for their hard work to keep us safe.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore’s Plans for Economy as Other Countries Gradually Reopen Their Economies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) given the other countries' gradual reopening of their economies, what is Singapore's plan for our economy; and (b) how will an extension or repeat of the circuit breaker impact our economy.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: We are acutely aware that the circuit breaker will disrupt businesses and have a substantial impact on our economy, but this painful trade-off was needed to save lives and protect the health of our people, including our migrant worker community.
As we bring down the number of new COVID-19 cases, we will progressively restart our economy. This will not be straightforward. We have kept essential services going. But the rest of the economy will have to open up step by step, and not all at once. We will open up some sectors earlier, but others will have to wait, especially those that attract crowds such as entertainment outlets or sporting events. In phasing in the opening of firms and sectors, we will take into account their importance to the economy and supply chains, contribution to local employment, and ability to minimise risks of transmission at their worksites. Sectors that allow us to trade with the world and access critical supplies must restart first. Sectors that attract high traffic and social interactions will have to put in additional safe measures before restarting progressively.
To ensure that the health of Singaporeans and our workers continues to take priority even as we resume economic activities, we are ramping up testing capabilities and leveraging technology to conduct robust contact tracing and rapid isolation of close contacts, to ringfence infected cases quickly and prevent the growth of clusters. We will also raise the minimum standards for the safeguards needed to keep our workplaces safe. This will apply to all companies that are currently operating, as well as those who are allowed to reopen subsequently.
Companies will need to deploy SafeEntry, to facilitate better contact tracing. Companies must also continue to implement and strengthen safe management practices. These include telecommuting wherever possible, enforcing safe distancing and mask wearing amongst their employees at the workplace, staggering working hours and break times, ensuring no cross-deployment of staff across teams or worksites, and reducing physical interaction or mixing amongst workers, including outside of work. Further details will be announced by the relevant agencies in due course. We will also work closely with the Trade Associations and Chambers over the next few weeks to reach out to businesses, including small and medium-sized enterprises, to help them prepare to meet the stronger safe management requirements when they reopen.
In the longer term, COVID-19 will result in many structural changes to the global economy. The movement of goods and people will be more restricted. Countries will worry more about depending on others or relying on a single source of supply for essential goods like drugs, medical equipment or food. This will have major implications for global trade and investments, and for a small and open economy like Singapore.
This will mean that we must be prepared for significant structural changes to our economy. Companies will have to change their business models to survive, and workers from disrupted industries will have to reskill themselves to take up jobs in new sectors. But there will be new opportunities as well, in areas such as medical services, biotechnology, online education, food production and delivery. While we already have capabilities in some of these sectors, we will have to build up our capabilities and workforce in some of the newer industries.
Adapting to the post-COVID-19 world will be a serious challenge, but I am confident that Singapore will be able to succeed. We have restructured our economy before, and emerged stronger each time. If the government, employers and workers continue working together, we will also be able to overcome this challenge.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Government's Stance on Changing One’s Sexual Orientation through \"Conversion Therapy\"","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"45 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for Health with regard to the practice of changing one's sexual orientation through psychological and spiritual means, also known as \"conversion therapy\", whether the Ministry will consider (i) stating an official position against conversion therapy, as it is not approved by expert bodies in psychology including the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and the British Psychological Society (BPS) (ii) disseminating guidelines against conversion therapy to mental healthcare professionals (iii) establishing complaint mechanisms for clients who have experienced conversion therapy and (iv) pursuing disciplinary action for mental healthcare professionals who practise or refer patients to conversion therapy.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th revision (ICD-10), which is the current standardised medical classification list by the World Health Organisation (WHO), states that sexual orientation alone is not to be regarded as a clinical disorder that needs to be cured. Homosexuality has not been considered a psychiatric diagnosis since 1973 (by the American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) and 1977 (by the WHO International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems).
MOH expects doctors and other healthcare professionals to practice according to evidence-based best practice and clinical ethics, and to consider and respect patients' preferences and circumstances (including sexual orientation) when providing care. For individuals who seek care with a desire to change one's sexual orientation through clinical means, healthcare professionals should care for and support these individuals with empathy and sensitivity.
Mechanisms for the public to feedback on care provided already exist at public healthcare institutions and members of the public can submit a formal complaint to the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) if a doctor is acting unethically or providing inappropriate treatment.
The SMC takes complaints against doctors seriously and will investigate and impose disciplinary action if the doctor was found guilty of misconduct.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Exemption of Listed Developers with Minor Foreign Shareholders from Qualifying Certificate Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"46 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for Law (a) what is the rationale for exempting listed developers with minor foreign shareholders from the Qualifying Certificate (QC) Scheme; (b) how can this ensure that developers do not acquire land bank plots that are designated for non-landed housing development; and (c) how will the QC Scheme ensure that the objective of proper management of Singapore's land is met while factors like additional buyer's stamp duty (ABSD), shareholder structures in developers' companies and their stock exchange listings evolve over time.
Mr K Shanmugam: The objective of the Residential Property Act, or RPA, is to safeguard residential land for Singaporeans, and prevent foreign housing developers from hoarding or speculating in residential land. Under the Qualifying Certificate regime, or QC regime, which is administered under the RPA, foreign housing developers are required to complete their developments within five years of issuance of the QC and dispose of all residential units within two years of completion. The QC regime is not a market control mechanism.
A housing developer that is a Singapore company is not subject to the QC regime. A Singapore company is defined in the RPA as one that is incorporated in Singapore, and all its directors and members are Singapore citizens or Singapore companies. This strict definition meant that housing developers which are essentially Singaporean or have a substantial connection to Singapore were not considered as Singapore companies, if they are publicly listed and their shares are freely traded.
This is why we introduced the exemption framework under the QC regime earlier this year. It allows publicly listed housing developers with a substantial connection to Singapore to be treated as Singapore companies within the meaning of the RPA, when they acquire residential land for development. The exemption framework better aligns the QC regime with the objectives of the RPA.
Housing developers that wish to obtain exemptions from the QC regime on the basis of a substantial connection to Singapore, are assessed based on strict criteria, including whether they have a Singaporean chairperson and Board majority, a significantly Singaporean substantial shareholding interest, and their track record in Singapore.
Exempted developers must continue to meet the exemption criteria to retain their exemptions. They will also be subject to monitoring and other safeguards, including an annual declaration of material information, such as the members of their Board and substantial shareholding interest.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adequacy of Current Number of Qualified Lift Technicians to Meet Requirements in Enhanced Regulatory Framework for Lift Maintenance Industry","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"47 Mr Zainal Sapari asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the current number of qualified lift technicians; (b) given BCA's introduction of an enhanced regulatory framework for the lift maintenance industry, whether there is enough supply of lift technicians; (c) how does the regulator ensure that all lift technicians obtain the necessary certificate of competency; and (d) what actions will be taken against companies who deploy untrained lift technicians to the worksites to perform lift maintenance.
Mr Lawrence Wong: There are currently about 2,400 lift technicians employed in Singapore. BCA has put in place various measures to attract, develop and retain lift technicians. These include introducing a progressive wage model for the industry in 2019, which sets out structured pathways for progression. BCA is also exploring the use of Remote Monitoring and Diagnostics technology to increase productivity. This will uplift the nature of the job and enable each technician to maintain a larger number of lifts.
To ensure a high standard of maintenance as our lift stock continues to grow, BCA will require lift technicians to obtain either a Nitec in Built Environment (Vertical Transport) or a Certificate of Competency (CoC) in Lift Maintenance for Lift Specialist before they are allowed to maintain lifts independently.
To date, more than 400 of the 2,400 lift technicians have received either the Nitec or the CoC. BCA will continue to work with ITE to ensure that there is sufficient capacity to train our lift technicians before the requirements come into effect.
Once the requirements take effect, it will be an offence for lift maintenance contractors to deploy technicians without the required certification to maintain lifts independently. BCA will conduct audits on lift maintenance operations and take enforcement actions against errant contractors.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Inspection of Older HDB Main Doors Installed Before Weather Pattern Changes to Test Their Adequacy to Withstand Elements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"48 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for National Development considering that many HDB flats were built in the years when rainy weather was less extreme compared to today, whether HDB will (i) do a one-time inspection of the main doors that bore the brunt of heavy rain to ensure safety and (ii) provide goodwill repair of damaged doors.
Mr Lawrence Wong: During a heavy downpour, especially during the monsoon season, some rainwater splashing along the more open areas like lift lobbies and common corridors is inevitable. For weather protection, common corridors are provided with an extended overhang like a canopy. While this is generally adequate to minimise rainwater splashing during normal rainy days, it may not be able to fully prevent the corridor or main doors of flats from getting wet during heavy downpours accompanied by strong winds.
Nonetheless, if HDB receives feedback from residents that the rainwater splashing is severe, HDB will assess the situation and, if necessary, offer to provide a rain screen, subject to SCDF's fire safety requirements being met.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Quantum of Grants Disbursed under Seniors Mobility Fund and Re-Application for Replacement of Mobility Devices","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"51 Dr Chia Shi-Lu asked the Minister for Health (a) for the past three years, what has been the quantum of grants disbursed under the Seniors Mobility Fund; and (b) whether the Ministry will allow eligible seniors to re-apply for replacement of mobility devices after a number of years as these items are subject to wear and tear.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Seniors' Mobility and Enabling Fund (SMF) supports seniors to age in place, by providing eligible Singaporeans aged 60 years and above means-tested subsidies to offset the cost of assistive devices and home healthcare items.
Between 2017 and 2019, the Ministry of Health (MOH) disbursed $89 million in SMF subsidies.
SMF subsidies are meant to support seniors with the purchase of their first device. Nonetheless, we recognise that there may be exceptional circumstances, where seniors may need to purchase a replacement device but have no financial means. In such cases, the Agency for Integrated Care will assess and approve applications on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the senior's circumstances.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Quantum of Wage Subsidies for Service Industries/Companies of Hotels Deriving 100% of Business from Hotels","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the same quantum of wage subsidies can be given to supporting service industries/companies of hotels which derive 100% of their business from the hotels.
Mr Heng Swee Keat: The Ministry of Finance recognises the significant challenges faced by firms during this difficult time. As such, various support measures have been introduced through the Unity, Resilience and Solidary Budgets.
The Jobs Support Scheme is meant to provide wage support to employers to help them retain their local employees during this period of economic uncertainty. In this regard, all eligible employers who have made CPF contributions for their local employees will qualify for at least 25% wage support. In the Resilience Budget, greater support of up to 75% is provided for sectors that are more significantly and directly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, such as aviation, tourism and food services. In the Solidarity Budget, the support has gone up to 75% for all sectors for the month of April. This has since been extended to include the month of May. In addition, there are also other support for companies.
The economic linkages across firms and sectors are intricate, and hence, many firms have been affected by this unprecedented global pandemic. Some firms, as a matter of strategy, may choose to focus their businesses on a particular customer segment and may, as a result, have higher exposure to the harder-hit sectors. We appreciate the challenges that they are facing, and they can submit an appeal for a higher tier of support from the Jobs Support Scheme via IRAS' website. We will assess each appeal on its merits on a case-by-case basis.
We encourage firms to take this opportunity to review their business strategies, accelerate their business transformation plans and diversify their revenue sources, as the economic landscape is changing rapidly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Ensure Safe Distancing on Public Transport during Circuit Breaker Period and Thereafter","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Transport what are the measures to ensure safe distancing on public transport during the circuit breaker period and thereafter.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: During the current circuit breaker period, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has implemented several safe distancing measures in the public transport network. All trains and train stations, as well as buses, bus interchanges and bus stops have been marked with safe distancing stickers, wherever practical. This includes marking out seats that should be avoided and where commuters should be standing. Public Transport Operators' (PTOs) Transport Ambassadors (TAs) and bus captains work together with LTA's enforcement officers to help commuters maintain a safe distance from one another.
We also require all commuters to wear masks in the public transport network. Errant commuters may be refused entry or asked to leave. Offenders will face fines or prosecution in court.
When the circuit breaker measures are lifted and commuter traffic returns, the measures will largely remain in place. The exception is that we will find it very challenging to implement safe distancing in public transport, especially during peak periods. It will therefore be very important for companies to continue to implement staggered working hours and maintain their telecommuting practices as much as possible. Commuters can also play their part to minimise discretionary travel and to travel during off-peak hours when the trains and buses are less crowded.
However, we will continue to require all commuters to wear masks in the public transport network. Mask-wearing is also the practice in mass rapid transit systems in Taipei, Hong Kong and Seoul.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Efforts to Assist Those Affected by COVID-19 Crisis Needing Urgent Legal Advice in Light of Circuit Breaker and Suspension of Physical Legal Clinics","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked the Minister for Law in light of the circuit breaker and the suspension of physical legal clinics (a) what are the efforts to ensure that those who need urgent legal advice are able to receive assistance; and (b) whether the Ministry looking at coordinating more specific guidance or legal support for those who may be affected by the COVID-19 crisis such as tenants, landlords, and businesses.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Ministry of Law and many of our partners continue to provide legal services during the circuit breaker period.
(a) The Legal Aid Bureau continues to provide legal advice, legal assistance, and legal aid on civil matters, to Singapore citizens and Permanent Residents with limited means.
(b) Accused persons with limited means may also continue to apply for criminal legal aid from Law Society Pro Bono Services (LSPBS) for matters which the Courts continue to hear.
(c) Persons in need of legal assistance may also seek help from Law Society's Community Legal Clinics as well as several other legal clinics.
Given the need to reduce movement of people, services will be delivered remotely via video conferencing, email or telephone, where possible. In addition, members of public can access various online tools that provide useful legal information. For example, the iLAB chatbot on the Legal Aid Bureau's website provides tailored legal information on divorce and family violence. It is also able to generate simple legal documents for those who can self-help. Another example is the Community Justice Centre's Automated Court Document Assembly and Generation, which provides step-by-step guidance on filing certain court forms.
Ms Rahayu also asked about the Ministry's efforts at coordinating specific legal support for those affected by COVID-19. There are two aspects to our efforts.
First, we are supporting law practices in their continued provision of legal services during the circuit breaker period. The Ministry of Law has worked with the Ministry of Trade and Industry to allow the continued provision of urgent and essential legal services.1 For all other legal activities, where law practices may need to work from their office on an exceptional basis, they may apply for time-limited exemptions as and when necessary. This is to enable law practices to continue serving the urgent legal needs of citizens and businesses.
Second, we are coordinating measures to provide relief via legislation to individuals and businesses. One such example is the relief for certain types of contracts under the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act 2020, which recently came into force on 20 April 2020. This will help Singaporeans, from SMEs struggling to pay rent, to wedding couples whose weddings have to be postponed.
We will monitor the situation closely, and will consider further measures as needed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The list of categories of legal services considered essential is available at covid.gobusiness.gov.sg/essentialservices/legalservices."],"footNoteQuestions":["3"],"questionNo":"3"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown and Rationale of Funds Allocated for Suicide Prevention Services on Annual Basis","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for Health (a) how much funds are allocated to suicide prevention services on an annual basis; (b) what is the breakdown of such funding for (i) government-run services and (ii) community partners including the Samaritans of Singapore (SOS); and (c) what is the rationale for current funding levels for suicide prevention services.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Singapore adopts a multi-prong approach to suicide prevention based on building mental resilience, encouraging help seeking and early identification, supporting at-risk groups, and providing crisis support.
The reasons for suicides are often complex and multi-dimensional requiring a holistic management approach. Consequently, funds have been allocated for overall mental health awareness, prevention, detection and intervention and not specially for suicide prevention. In FY18, MOH's expenditure on mental health was approximately $310 million, comprising operating subvention to Institute of Mental Health (IMH), psychiatry services in Public Healthcare Institutions and intermediate and long-term care facilities, including funding for the various programmes under the National Mental Health Blueprint and Community Mental Health Masterplan.
Social service agencies also have a key role in suicide prevention, by providing community-based intervention and support to individuals who are in distress. Samaritans of Singapore (SOS) provides support to individuals facing crises, thinking about or are affected by suicide. In addition to SOS, agencies such as Singapore Association for Mental Health (SAMH) and TOUCH community services provide helpline and counselling services to the general public and youths respectively. These early intervention and upstream support help to reduce suicide ideation and suicide attempts.
The National Council of Social Service (NCSS) provided $8.7 million and $5.7 million in funding to Social Service Agencies (SSAs) for mental health support services and counselling programmes respectively in FY18. In addition to funding suicide prevention services, NCSS has launched Belle, an interactive Helpbot to consolidate and provide 24/7 access to information about helplines and mental health services to make it easier for users to seek help when they need it.
MOH will continue to work with public hospitals and service providers in the community, including schools, social service agencies and family service centres, to ensure that we provide holistic and timely support for persons with mental healthcare needs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Financial Assistance for Essential Outpatient and Inpatient Medical Treatment and Plans to Liberalise Use of MediSave and MediFund on Account of COVID-19 Outbreak","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Dr Chia Shi-Lu asked the Minister for Health (a) since January 2020, whether there has been an increase in the number of patients appealing for financial assistance for essential outpatient and inpatient medical treatment; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider liberalising the use of MediSave and MediFund considering the economic impact of the COVID-19 outbreak.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The number of patients who have appealed for financial assistance for medical treatment since January 2020 has remained about the same as that over the same period in previous years.
Notwithstanding this, MOH has already put in place measures to improve healthcare affordability during this period. These include:
(i) Free COVID-19 treatment for Singaporeans, except for those who choose to continue travelling against travel advisories during this period.
(ii)\tSpecial subsidies for Singaporeans at the Public Health Preparedness Clinics for Acute Respiratory Infection diagnoses, to remove financial barriers to care.
(iii)\tExtension of CHAS subsidy and MediSave for video-consultations of selected chronic conditions, to allow suitable patients to receive treatment at home.
We will continue to work closely with healthcare institutions to identify patients who might be in need of financial assistance, exercise flexibility for appeals, and implement enhancements to our healthcare financing schemes to ensure that healthcare remains affordable for all Singaporeans.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Annual Revenue Generated by Private Security Sector and Value-add Per Worker for 2015 to 2018 and Total Industry Revenue of Security Technology Firms for 2018 and 2019","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Mr Zainal Sapari asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the annual revenue generated by the private security sector from 2015 to 2019; (b) what is the value add (VA) per worker for the same period; and (c) what is the total industry revenue of security technology firms for 2018 and 2019.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Between 2015 and 2018, the revenue of the private security industry averaged $2.2 billion per year, while its nominal value-added (VA) per worker averaged $38,300 per year (refer to Table 1).1,2 The total revenue of the security technology industry was $651 million in 2018.1,3
7 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what are the average interest rates or the range of interest rates for loans offered to SMEs under the Government risk sharing schemes; (b) how do these differ from interest rates for loans offered commercially without Government's risk sharing; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider requiring banks offering loans with 80% or 90% Government risk sharing to set interest rates at levels significantly below interest rates for non-Government-backed loans under similar circumstances.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Government introduced the Temporary Bridging Loan Programme (TBLP) and enhanced the Enterprise Financing Scheme – SME Working Capital Loan (EFS-WCL) Programme in the Unity Budget, to help enterprises cope with their working capital needs during the COVID-19 situation. The schemes were further enhanced in the Resilience and Solidarity Budgets. In addition, the MAS SGD Facility for ESG Loans was launched on 20 April 2020 for banks and finance companies. It provides them with funding for two years at an interest rate of 0.1% per annum, for the purpose of their loans to SMEs under the ESG loan schemes.
Under the ESG loan schemes, the interest rate of loans taken up by over 95% of the SMEs applying in April 2020 ranged from 2% to 4.5% per annum, compared to 6% or more for most other unsecured working capital loans to SMEs.
Following the introduction of the new MAS SGD facility, interest rates for such loans is expected to be around 2 to 3% for most borrowers.
Participating Financial Institutions (PFIs) have committed to pass on lower interest rates to borrowers. ESG and MAS will continue to monitor the situation to ensure that SMEs are able to access financing during this crisis.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Anticipated and Actual Impact of Circuit Breaker on Economy, Possible Trigger for Another Circuit Breaker and Singapore's Preparedness","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the impact of circuit breaker on our economy; (b) whether the extent is as anticipated; (c) what will trigger another circuit breaker; and (d) how prepared is Singapore should another circuit breaker be necessary.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: On 3 April, the Multi-Ministry Taskforce announced a set of circuit breaker measures, including only permitting entities providing essential services to continue operating onsite with reduced manpower. This took effect from 7 April. Around 80,000 entities were allowed to operate, with 21% of our total workforce operating on-site. On 21 April, the Taskforce directed a further reduction in work premises which could operate on-site. Around 45,000 entities were allowed to operate, with 17% of our total workforce operating on-site.
We are acutely aware that the circuit breaker will disrupt businesses and have a substantial impact on our economy, but it is also essential in the fight against COVID-19. Our primary objective in this fight is to save lives and protect Singaporeans and our families. We recognise that the more stringent the measures we put in place to curb transmission of the virus, the bigger the impact on our economy. But the alternative of not taking sufficiently stringent measures to curb the virus will result in more infections and more deaths.
We must therefore work together – business, workers and Government – to make the circuit breaker as effective as possible so that we protect lives and recover faster and emerge stronger. Every business can play their part – strictly observe the circuit breaker measures and shut down onsite activities if you have not received approval to operate so that your workers and their families can stay safe. For essential firms that have to continue to operate, minimise the number of workers who have to travel to work onsite and make sure that safe distancing measures are implemented at the workplace. As long as we can keep the number of cases low, this will mitigate the need for a circuit breaker.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Public Rental Flat Tenancy Terminations, Downgrades to Smaller Rental Flats, Eligibility Criteria for Assistance Measures and Demographics of Recipient Households in Last Three Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for National Development (a) in the last three years, how many households living in public rental flats have respectively experienced (i) a termination of rental tenancy due to arrears or (ii) have been downgraded to a smaller rental flat due to arrears; (b) how many households currently owe rental arrears to HDB, broken down by duration and amount of arrears; (c) what are the eligibility criteria for financial assistance measures provided by HDB and what does the financial assistance cover; and (d) what is the demographics of the households, in terms of (i) household size (ii) flat type and (iii) household monthly income per capita, who received financial assistance measures from HDB.
Mr Lawrence Wong: About 5,200 public rental households, or about 10% of all public rental households, are in rent arrears. In terms of value, about 75% of them owe less than $3,000 in rent, and in terms of duration, about half of them owe less than one year's worth of rent.
The Housing Development Board (HDB) takes a compassionate and holistic approach when assisting tenants who are in arrears, and will seek to understand their individual circumstances. HDB has various assistance measures in place to help public rental households in arrears.
For households whose financial circumstances have changed (e.g. household income has fallen), HDB will assist to reduce their monthly rent upon appeal. Tenants who need more time to resolve their arrears are also allowed to pay off the arrears in instalments. HDB also works closely with MSF's Social Service Offices (SSOs), and will refer households who may be in need of financial assistance to the SSOs.
For tenants who prefer to move to a smaller rental flat to ease their rental burden, HDB will help to facilitate their transfer. In the last three years, HDB assisted 159 households in arrears to move from 2-room flats to 1-room flats. The vast majority of them had four persons or fewer in the household.
Termination of rental tenancies is only taken as a last resort, and would not be solely due to the accumulation of rent arrears. In the last three years, there has been only one case of such termination.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Better Support for Essential Service Workers Living Outside Dormitories During COVID-19 Outbreak","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Minister for National Development how can essential service workers such as cleaners of town councils who live outside of the dormitories be better supported by the Government and residents especially during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Workers performing essential services play an integral role in ensuring that critical functions remain operational during the circuit breaker period. In Town Councils, essential services include services such as conservancy and lift management.
In response to the economic challenges posed by the COVID-19 outbreak, the Government has rolled out a series of support measures. These include the corporate income tax rebate, the waiver and rebate of the foreign worker levy, and the Jobs Support Scheme, where the Government co-funds up to 75% of the wages of local employees. These measures will help to stabilise businesses and minimise any impact on the livelihoods of our workers, including those in essential services.
The Government has also taken steps to safeguard our essential service workers. To suppress the spread of COVID-19 at workplaces, employers are required, by law, to implement appropriate safe distancing measures. Specific to the cleaning sector, the tripartite partners have issued a joint advisory to ensure the sustainability of the sector in view of COVID-19. Amongst other measures, this advisory calls upon employers to provide suitable protective equipment, and to remunerate their cleaners appropriately, such as through increasing the wages of cleaners with higher workloads. Essential service workers with concerns about workplace safety or other employment matters can provide feedback to MOM for further follow-up.
To minimise the risk of transmission amongst workers during the circuit breaker period, there has also been a reduction in the number of workers performing essential services. This could result in degradation of services, and we seek the public’s understanding on this matter.
We thank all essential service workers for their efforts and call upon the public to also show their support.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Additional Plans to Bring Down High Number of Dengue Cases in Order not to Overwhelm Healthcare System Fighting Against COVID-19 Outbreak","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources what are the additional plans to tackle and bring down the expected high number of dengue cases so as not to overwhelm the healthcare service providers who are currently heavily engaged in the fight against the COVID-19 outbreak.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The total number of dengue cases in 2020 has exceeded 6,000 so far – more than double that over the same period in 2019. The number of weekly dengue cases remains high, hovering at around 300 to 400 cases per week, and the total number of dengue cases is projected to exceed the 16,000 cases in 2019. To manage the expected increase in cases as we approach the traditional peak dengue season, The National Environment Agency's (NEA) dengue operations are continuing during this circuit breaker period. NEA has also called for all stakeholders to take concerted action to suppress the Aedes mosquito population.
Regular housekeeping and maintenance of premises and common areas are crucial to curb dengue transmission. Raising the standards of personal and public hygiene are not only critical for our defence against COVID-19, they also mitigate the spread of dengue.
Good housekeeping at residential premises is critical, especially as more people are working from home. NEA has observed a 50% increase in Aedes mosquito breeding in homes over the past three years, compared to the preceding three years. NEA therefore brought forward the launch of the National Dengue Prevention campaign to 22 March to rally the community to be vigilant in carrying out the Mozzie Wipeout to remove potential mosquito breeding habitats. Homeowners of landed houses are also urged to check their roof gutters and perimeter drains in their compounds for potential mosquito breeding habitats.
NEA is working closely with stakeholders in the Inter-Agency Dengue Task Force, including Town Councils, to remove potential mosquito breeding habitats in public areas and housing estates. Despite increased demands on the cleaning sector arising from the ongoing COVID-19 situation, NEA has worked with our cleaning service providers and Town Councils to ensure that cleaning of higher footfall areas and flushing of drains are not compromised, and even stepped up as necessary.
Even though businesses are closed during the circuit breaker period, NEA requires owners of premises and work sites to continue with proactive vector control measures. Pest control operators are allowed to continue operating during the circuit breaker period. Owners of premises, especially construction and renovation sites which have a propensity for water pooling that allows for larger mosquito breeding habitats, should apply for \"Time-Limited Exemptions\" for their workers to return to their premises to perform essential mosquito prevention measures during this period.
NEA has also embarked on a stepped-up inspection regime of construction sites, prioritising hotspots which are located in dengue clusters or have a previous record of mosquito breeding. NEA has reached out to members of the Singapore Contractors Association Limited and operators of dormitories to sustain their vector control works. This posture will be maintained for the entire duration of the Circuit Breaker period.
All stakeholders, residents, contractors and business owners, have a part to play in preventing dengue. Everyone must step up efforts to eradicate mosquito breeding habitats together, uphold good personal and public hygiene, to protect themselves and their loved ones from dengue and COVID-19.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Enhance Cybersecurity for School Websites and Online Home-based Learning","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Education what measures will be implemented to enhance cybersecurity for school websites and online home-based learning especially after the COVID-19 circuit breaker period is over.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Our systems need to be secure and resilient to the evolving cybersecurity threats.
For schools websites, these have been migrated to the Whole-of-Government Content Websites Platform since December 2016. This allows centralised management of the infrastructure design and implementation of adequate cybersecurity controls for these websites.
As for the Student Learning Space, we have put in place the necessary cybersecurity controls in the design, implementation and management of the national digital learning platform for schools. Measures include requiring robust passwords for logins as well as regular security testing and reviews.
The Ministry of Education (MOE) is also working closely with video-conferencing platform providers to ensure online live lessons are conducted in a safe and secure environment. MOE has worked on centrally managing the security settings of these platforms to provide a consistent experience while safeguarding the usage of the systems.
We will also continue with user education in the form of guides, training videos, and webinars. Similar guides have also been provided to parents and students on how to safeguard themselves in the online space. This is part of the Cyber Wellness Education that we already have in place.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Need to Advertise in Jobs Bank for 14 Days Prior to Hiring of Personalised Employment Pass Holders and Rationale for Non-advertisement","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether employers need to advertise a job on the Jobs Bank for 14 days prior to hiring a Personalised Employment Pass holder for that job; and (b) if not, what is the rationale.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Personalised Employment Passes (PEP) are granted selectively to persons in senior or highly specialised roles. Unlike Employment Pass (EP) applicants, PEP holders do not require an employer to sponsor their application. They are however required to notify MOM when they find employment, instead of their employers applying for approval. The advertising requirement does not arise as a result.
The PEP regime is similar to schemes in other countries, such as the Global Talent Visa in the United Kingdom and the Global Talent Independent programme in Australia, which support businesses in accessing senior or highly specialised persons. In the last few years, PEP holders have accounted for around 1% of all new EPs issued.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Management of COVID-19 Impact on Employment of Fresh Graduates, General Workforce and Foreign Worker Dormitories","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower (a) to what extent are licensing conditions under the Foreign Employee Dormitories Act based on the Singapore Standards Council's Technical Reference 37 (2014) on the \"design, management, maintenance and operation of foreign employee dormitories\"; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider updating the Technical Reference, adopting it as a Singapore Standard, and requiring all foreign workers' dormitory operators to adhere to it.
15 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower for each year in the past five years, with regard to foreign workers residing in purpose-built dormitories, factory-converted dormitories, construction temporary quarters, standalone temporary quarters, temporary quarters, quarters in buildings under construction, temporary occupation licence quarters, HDB flats, and private residential premises (a) what was the total number of foreign workers residing in each housing type; (b) how many of each housing type were there respectively; and (c) whether the Ministry will start collecting or compiling this data if it is not already doing so.
16 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how many Malaysian workers have stayed behind in Singapore after Malaysia started its movement control order on 18 March 2020; and (b) how many of these workers have returned to Malaysia after Singapore started its circuit breaker measures on 7 April 2020.
17 Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether there is a significant number of Singaporeans returning from overseas and seeking jobs in the local job market in the past six months; (b) if so, whether the Ministry foresees challenges in placing these Singaporeans in the current job market and what are some of these challenges; (c) how can these challenges be overcome; and (d) whether the Ministry will consider creating specific programmes to help those who have returned to adjust to the local work environment by equipping them with the relevant skill sets and information about the local job market.
18 Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked the Minister for Manpower in each of the past three years (a) how many offences has the Commissioner for Foreign Employee Dormitories charged operators for breaching the licensing standards for accommodation, health, safety and emergency preparedness; (b) how many compliance directives and regulatory actions have been issued respectively; and (c) whether there is any relationship between the violations and the severity of the COVID-19 outbreak at the dormitories.
19 Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked the Minister for Manpower with regard to the Foreign Employee Dormitories Act, in each of the past three years (a) how many public officers have been appointed as Commissioner, Deputy Commissioners and Assistant Commissioners respectively; (b) whether the officers are appointed to these duties on a full-time basis; (c) how many staff have been appointed as Dormitory Inspectors; and (d) how many dormitories have been inspected and how frequently have the dormitories been inspected on average.
20 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Minister for Manpower how can the Ministry partner other stakeholders in the public, private and people sectors to seek permanent/temporary job or internship opportunities for fresh graduates in a labour market impacted by the COVID-19 outbreak.
Mrs Josephine Teo: These questions have been responded to via a Ministerial Statement on 4 May 2020.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number and Ratio of Social Workers-to-Client in Each Family Service Centre in Last Three Years and Measures to Cope with Sudden Increase in Caseload in Times of Crisis","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) in each of the last three years, what is the number of social workers in each Family Service Centre (FSC); (b) whether this number deviates significantly from the capacity required at FSCs; (c) what is the number of clients served by each FSC; (d) what is the social worker to client ratio at each FSC; (e) what is the fluctuation in the number of clients across each quarter; and (f) whether there are policy measures to allow FSCs to cope with sudden increase in caseload, such as in times of crisis like COVID-19 or when a community suffers significant disruption due to relocation.
Mr Desmond Lee: Family Service Centres (FSCs) are community-based social services that support low-income and vulnerable individuals and families to achieve independence, stability and resilience, through social work intervention.
The number of social workers in the FSCs has increased over the past few years, from 588 in 2017, 680 in 2018 and to 706 in 2019. This translates to an average of about 15 social workers per FSC in 2019, with the variance depending on the size and needs of the town it serves.
FSC caseloads vary across centres and are generally stable from quarter to quarter. The FSCs see an annual average of 350 clients each, with social work practitioners managing an average caseload of 23 in 2017, 25 in 2018 and 22 in 2019. Each FSC distributes the cases among its staff according to the needs of their centre.
MSF and NCSS work closely with our FSCs and Social Service Agencies (SSAs), both in normalcy and during challenging periods like COVID-19. During this period, MSF has been in regular contact with FSCs to understand their concerns, and issues advisories to FSCs on the precautionary measures to be taken to cope with the evolving situation. MSF also provides funding to FSCs based on their caseloads, with more funding provided for complex and high-risk cases. This ensures that FSCs have the resources and flexibility to hire more staff when needed.
In addition to the support measures announced in the Resilience Budget, FSCs being NCSS member agencies are eligible to claim $3,000 from the Community Chest to help them cope with COVID-19-related expenses. NCSS will also support SSAs in adopting digital tools through the existing VWOs-Charities Capability Fund, and these tools can enable FSCs to continue serving clients remotely during this period. SSAs can also tap on the SG United portal to recruit volunteers to augment their manpower, to support them during this period.
We will continue to work closely with the FSCs to support them and their clients during this challenging season.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Applications Approved, Help Given Through ComCare to Unsuccessful Applicants and Fraudulent Applications Detected for Temporary Relief Fund as at 30 April 2020","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"22 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) how many Singaporeans have applied for the Temporary Relief Fund (TRF) as of 30 April 2020; (b) of these, how many applications have been approved; (c) of those not approved, how many have been given help through ComCare; and (d) how many fraudulent TRF applications have been detected.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Temporary Relief Fund (TRF) sought to provide timely assistance to lower- and middle-income Singapore Citizens/Permanent Residents affected by the economic impact of COVID-19, for the month of April 2020, before other assistance schemes kicked in. Individuals who lost their jobs or faced an income loss of at least 30% due to COVID-19 could apply.
As at 30 April 2020, we have received about 594,206 applications and approved 444,786 applications. The main reasons for non-approval include applicants not meeting the qualifying criteria of job loss or income loss of at least 30%, and applicants exceeding the qualifying income criteria of monthly per capita income of not more than $3,100 or gross monthly household income of not more than $10,000.
TRF applicants may also apply for ComCare if they need further assistance with basic living expenses. We do not have readily available data on how many ineligible TRF applicants were subsequently provided with ComCare.
We are investigating all alleged fraudulent TRF applications. Investigations are ongoing and we do not have a confirmed number of fraudulent cases yet.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Eligibility of Lower and Middle Income Singaporeans for COVID-19 Support Grant whose Employment Offers were Revoked Due to Outbreak","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"23 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether lower and middle-income Singaporeans who have accepted employment offers from employers only to have these offers revoked due to COVID-19 may be eligible for COVID-19 Support Grant, even though they have not commenced employment with these employers.
Mr Desmond Lee:The COVID-19 Support Grant (CSG) assists Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents who were employed but lost their jobs or are placed on involuntary no-pay-leave (NPL) for at least three consecutive months due to the impact of COVID-19. These individuals may apply for the CSG from 4 May 2020. Employees who lost at least 50% of their income for three consecutive months will also be eligible for CSG and may apply from 11 May 2020. These changes in employment or income situation should have occurred after 23 January 2020, which is when the first case of COVID-19 was detected in Singapore.
Applicants should have been in full-time or part-time employment prior to being unemployed. Individuals whose employment offers were revoked before they started work or who have no valid employment contracts are not eligible for the COVID-19 Support Grant. Low-income individuals and families who need help with their basic living expenses may approach our Social Service Offices (SSOs) to apply for ComCare assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Minister of State for Social and Family Development","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WS","content":"[(proc text) The following statements were in the speech given by the Minister of State for Social and Family Development (Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong) during Question Time for the Parliamentary Question \"Number of Singaporeans and PRs who have applied for Temporary Relief Fund for COVID-19 Situation\" at the Sitting of 4 May 2020: (proc text)]
The Minister of State for Social and Family Development (Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong): Sir, the Temporary Relief Fund was set up to provide timely financial assistance to lower- and middle-income Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents who lost their jobs or faced significant income loss due to the economic impact of COVID-19. It was made available during the month of April 2020, and prior to the start of other assistance schemes including the COVID-19 Support Grant and Self-Employed Person (SEP) Income Relief Scheme (SIRS).
As at 30 April 2020, MSF has received a total 537,080 applications for the Temporary Relief Fund. Of this figure, 3,171 individuals have returned their payouts from the Fund. [Please refer to \"Number of Singaporeans and PRs who have applied for Temporary Relief Fund for COVID-19 Situation\", Official Report, 4 May 2020, Vol 94, Issue No 131, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
[(proc text) Written statement by Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29 (5): (proc text)]
After my statement during Question Time for the Parliamentary Question “Number of Singaporeans and PRs who have applied for Temporary Relief Fund for COVID-19 Situation\" at the Sitting of 4 May 2020, I wish to make the following factual corrections. My reply should read as follows:
The Minister of State for Social and Family Development (Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong): Sir, the Temporary Relief Fund was set up to provide timely financial assistance to lower- and middle-income Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents who lost their jobs or faced significant income loss due to the economic impact of COVID-19. It was made available during the month of April 2020, and prior to the start of other assistance schemes including the COVID-19 Support Grant and Self-Employed Person (SEP) Income Relief Scheme (SIRS).
As at 30 April 2020, MSF has received a total 594,206 applications for the Temporary Relief Fund. Of this figure, 3,951 individuals have returned their payouts from the Fund.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[{"annexureID":1367,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex 1","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200504/annex-Annex 1.pdf","fileName":"Annex 1.pdf","sectionType":"ATBP","file":null}],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":3901,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200504/vernacular-Lee Bee Wah Min Statement 4May2020-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Lee Bee Wah Min Statement 4May2020-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":3902,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Liang Eng Hwa","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200504/vernacular-Liang Eng Hwa Min Statement 4May2020-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Liang Eng Hwa Min Statement 4May2020-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":3903,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mrs Josephine Teo","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200504/vernacular-Josephine Teo Min Statement 4May2020-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Josephine Teo Min Statement 4May2020-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":3904,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Zainal Sapari","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200504/vernacular-4 May 2020 - Mr Zainal Sapari - Parl Elections (COVID-19) Bill (002).pdf","fileName":"4 May 2020 - Mr Zainal Sapari - Parl Elections (COVID-19) Bill (002).pdf"},{"vernacularID":3905,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Ong Teng Koon","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200504/vernacular-Ong Teng Koon Election Bill 4May2020-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Ong Teng Koon Election Bill 4May2020-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":3906,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200504/vernacular-4 May 2020 - Dr Intan Azura - Support for HBB During CB Period (002).pdf","fileName":"4 May 2020 - Dr Intan Azura - Support for HBB During CB Period (002).pdf"},{"vernacularID":3907,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Zainal Sapari","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200504/vernacular-4 May 2020 - Mr Zainal Sapari - Support for HBB During CB Period.pdf","fileName":"4 May 2020 - Mr Zainal Sapari - Support for HBB During CB Period.pdf"},{"vernacularID":3908,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200504/vernacular-4 May 2020 - Minister Masagos - Support for HBB During CB Period.pdf","fileName":"4 May 2020 - Minister Masagos - Support for HBB During CB Period.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}