1 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Prime Minister regarding the report by MAS that bank customers in Singapore suffered fraudulent credit card transactions following malicious actors' diversion of SMS One-time Passwords (OTPs), whether a retrospective review will be conducted to establish whether additional customers prior to September 2020 may have been affected.
\tThe Minister for Finance (Mr Lawrence Wong) (for the Prime Minister): Mr Speaker, Sir, aside from Dr Tan's Parliamentary Question (PQ), Member Ms Joan Pereira had filed similar PQ yesterday and Mr Gerald Giam1 had also filed a PQ on this matter.
So, with your permission, may I take all these PQs related to the Monetary Authority of Singapore's (MAS') recent announcement on the SMS one-time password (OTP) fraud, at the same time.
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Sir, MAS, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) and the Singapore Police Force (SPF) announced on 15 September that malicious actors overseas had diverted and used SMS OTPs to perform fraudulent credit card transactions between September 2020 and December 2020. Seventy-five bank customers in Singapore had been affected. Banks have reached out to all the affected customers to waive the unauthorised transactions, amounting to approximately S$500,000.
There have been no confirmed cases of SMS OTP diversion in Singapore prior to September 2020. Banks are reviewing all card dispute cases reported to them from September 2020, to identify if there may be other fraudulent transactions that were enabled by SMS OTP diversion. Banks will similarly investigate any new reports by customers, including any such transactions before September 2020. Bank customers will not have to bear any unauthorised charges in cases which are confirmed to have been enabled by SMS OTP diversion, as long as customers had taken care to protect their card information and authentication credentials. So, bank customers will not have to bear any such unauthorised charges so long as they had taken care to protect their card information and authentication credentials.
Sir, this attack has shown us that the fight against scams and fraud requires collective effort.
Banks have a responsibility to secure their IT systems, put in place robust measures to authenticate customer transactions and conduct active surveillance to detect unusual transactions patterns. They are required to institute robust security controls to safeguard customers’ account information and transaction data from unauthorised access and misuse.
Likewise, bank customers too have a responsibility – to protect their online banking and payment credentials for authentication such as passwords and OTPs, by inputting them only on official websites or mobile applications. These should never be disclosed over the phone, via text message or email.
Mr Giam had asked about the measures taken by banks and telecommunication companies to safeguard against the SMS OTP diversion attack. While banks’ systems were secure and not the cause of these incidents, banks have further enhanced their fraud surveillance measures. This includes rejecting card payments made to common merchants linked to the unauthorised transactions. Banks will continue to closely monitor the evolving cybersecurity landscape, and regularly review authentication mechanisms and other security measures put in place to address risks posed to customers using online financial services.
As for the local telecommunication networks, IMDA, in consultation with the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore (CSA), has required telco operators to put in place specialised firewalls and system safeguards to monitor and block suspicious diversions of SMS.
As Ms Pereira highlighted, consumers need to also take action to protect themselves. Allow me to share a few actions which consumers can focus on.
First, consumers must assume that criminals will try to obtain their online banking credentials. Criminals typically do this by tricking consumers into installing malware on their devices or disclosing their online banking username and passwords through phone calls or fake websites. When in doubt, consumers should call the banks’ official hotlines to verify the legitimacy of requests for online banking and card credentials.
Banks work with SPF, National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) and MoneySense, our national financial education programme, to regularly alert consumers to new methods adopted by scammers and to educate consumers on how they can protect themselves.
Consumers must also develop a healthy scepticism about websites, unsolicited phone calls, messages and emails. When making online purchases, they only should use established and reputable online services. If there is any doubt about a merchant’s legitimacy, do not proceed with the transaction. And be wary of any deal or offer that sounds too good to be true.
Second, consumers should set transaction notification thresholds at low levels so that unauthorised transactions are detected early. Banks work closely with SPF and Anti-Scam Centre to exchange intelligence on emerging scam trends, so that they can take prompt action. The sooner a report is made, the higher the likelihood that the funds can be recovered.
Where bank customers suffer financial losses from fraudulent transactions, they are protected as long as they have acted responsibly. Banks are expected to consider whether the customers could have taken reasonable steps to prevent the occurrence of the fraudulent transactions. Bank customers will not have to incur any losses which arise from the banks’ non-compliance with MAS’ rules.
Let me reiterate: fighting fraud is a collective effort. As criminals will continue to perpetuate new and more sophisticated methods to defraud consumers, banks, consumers and the authorities need to remain vigilant in preventing as well as detecting fraudulent transactions. MAS will continue to work with all stakeholders to ensure that e-payments remain safe and secure.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): I thank the Minister for his answer. Sir, these are serious revelations. A Clementi resident told me that when he disputed a credit card transaction with his bank, he was told because there was an OTP record in his phone number's name, the transaction must be genuine and therefore, cannot be challenged. He appealed a number of times; the case was resolved. But how many more consumers would have given up before attaining a resolution?
Sir, I have got three supplementary questions for the Minister. First, prior to September 2020, how many reports were there of fraudulent card transactions in recent years where the victim said they did not perform the transaction nor receive the SMS OTP? Has the trend been going up, prior to the latest findings?
Second, will MAS consider looking into these earlier cases too? Cases, which based on earlier assumptions, might have been deemed clear-cut open and shut, but given the latest revelations, might warrant repeat scrutiny?
And thirdly, can MAS reassure the public, including our Clementi residents, that agencies will continue keeping an open mind when a customer is concerned about cyber fraud affecting their credit card, involving the SMS OTP?
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, as I mentioned in my reply just now, we have not seen any confirmed cases of SMS OTP diversion. I emphasise, we are talking about SMS OTP diversion fraud cases. We have not seen any confirmed cases up to now, prior to September. But the banks, as I mentioned just now, are investigating any further reports by consumers and customers, and these will include transactions that occurred before September 2020, taking into consideration this new revelation or this new finding that some of these SMS OTPs could have been diverted and we would take that into consideration in resolving these cases.
Certainly, if any subsequent report were to be made and found to be linked to SMS OTP diversion, the cases would be resolved as with the 75 cases that I highlighted, which means that for affected customers, the banks will waive the unauthorised transactions, so long as the customers have taken the necessary care to protect their card information and authentication credentials.
Going forward, for future cases, whether it is due to SMS OTP diversion or other fraudulent methods, I have mentioned before in this House that we have a Payments Council. They are reviewing guidelines and responsibilities for customers as well as financial institutions to clarify responsibilities and liabilities.
Ultimately, everyone needs to play their part: financial institutions will have to do so, customers will have to do so. If we clarify what the responsibilities and guidelines are, then, hopefully, we can continue collectively to do more to guard against such fraudulent transactions.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): I thank the Minister for answering my PQ. Given that SMS OTP diversion is something that takes place overseas where MAS has no jurisdiction, how are the banks going to prevent this from happening to their customers again? For example, are banks or IMDA going to work with these overseas telcos to close these loopholes?
Secondly, will MAS be directing banks to move their multi-factor authentication methods away from SMS to, for example, more secure app-based authentication methods? If so, how will they ensure that the less tech-savvy customers will not be left out?
Lastly, can MAS also require banks to allow existing customers to disable SMS multi-factor authentication for their own accounts and then use app-based authentication instead, because they are more secured?
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Sir, let me just take these three questions in turn. First, as I mentioned in my reply, IMDA is putting in place some safeguards with regard to how the telcos operate. In this instance where it comes to SMS OTP diversion, the perpetrators needed to do several things.
One, they would have obtained the victim's personal and financial information and mobile phone number already. That would have been compromised already, through malware, through phishing, whatever methods they would have gotten that information.
Second, the perpetrators would have gained access to a few overseas telco networks to compromise their system. Then, they would fraudulently modify the location details of the targeted victims as though these victims were overseas. Then, you make a transaction and the bank sends an SMS OTP through this overseas network. And that is how, with the compromised credit card credentials, the fraudulent transaction is made.
And so, as I mentioned just now, telcos are already putting in place additional safeguards, for example, specialised firewalls and other system safeguards to monitor and block suspicious diversions of SMS. This would include, for example, knowing where an individual's location is, and if you suddenly see the change in location, a red flag may be triggered, and then, the telco would then have safeguards in place to prevent the SMS from being diverted. These system safeguards are being worked on by telcos.
On the second question, can you please repeat the second question?
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Asking the banks to use other forms of authentication besides SMS.
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Thank you. Other forms of authentication and whether you can allow customers to opt out. MAS does not prescribe. The financial institutions are required to implement multi-factor authentication mechanisms. It can include SMS OTP but they can include other forms of multi-factor authentication. Each one will potentially be susceptible to perpetrators trying to take advantage of any possible weakness. It is a continuous process where the financial institutions have to review the type of authentication mechanisms which they would like to use, commensurate with the risk level of the financial transaction and the sensitivity of the data involved.
As for allowing options for customers, it is something that MAS can engage the banks on, to see if the banks will be prepared to give more options for customers who feel they would prefer something more secure.
\t
But I must say whatever you put in place, the perpetrators will always be looking out for new ways to identify vulnerabilities and weaknesses. So, this has to be a continuous effort to make sure that our systems remain secure and it requires continued vigilance by regulator, financial institutions and customers, importantly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Question subsequently withdrawn: To ask the Prime Minister (a) how is MAS working with banks and telecommunications companies to prevent hijacking of the One-time Passwords (OTPs) sent by banks via SMS; and (b) whether MAS will require banks to (i) proactively reach out to customers affected by such schemes given customers may be unaware of these transactions taking place and (ii) reimburse customers for any losses resulting from hijacking of SMS OTPs."],"footNoteQuestions":["1"],"questionNo":"1"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Help for Potential BTO Flat Owners Affected by COVID-19-related Construction Delays","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"2 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for National Development in view of the constant start/stop in construction works with the surge in number of COVID-19 cases (a) whether the previous estimated timelines of HDB BTO project completions are expected to be lengthened; and (b) if so, whether further help will be given to the affected flat owners.
3 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for National Development given the continued high demand for BTO flats coupled with the delay in completion of various ongoing BTO projects, whether the Ministry will consider bringing forward various planned BTO projects or consider building more BTO flats than currently planned.
\tThe Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, Members have shared concerns about the impact of the ongoing pandemic on our Housing and Development Board (HDB) Build-to-Order (BTO) supply, the progress of construction work and waiting times for ongoing projects. Let me address these concerns and set out what we are doing to keep our HDB BTO programme on track and to support affected homebuyers.
\tMr Speaker: Minister, you are taking Question Nos 2 and 3 together?
\tMr Desmond Lee: Yes, Mr Speaker, my apologies. If I may have your permission to take Question Nos 2 and 3 together?
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMr Desmond Lee: Thank you. First, Mr Seah Kian Peng had asked if HDB will build more BTO flats or advance planned projects in view of demand. We recognise that demand for public housing has remained strong and that is why we had adjusted our supply. We had launched 14,600 flats in 2019. We increased that to 16,800 in 2020. We are on track to launch 17,000 BTO flats this year in 2021. Next year, we will increase the BTO flat supply even further and launch more than 17,000 flats. We are finalising the details and will announce our plans for 2022 when ready.
Second, there have been concerns over the waiting times for BTO flats, as raised by Miss Cheryl Chan. Some have said that waiting times have risen to six to seven years. That is not the case. Let me start with ongoing BTO projects. The average waiting time for ongoing BTO projects, including delays brought about by the pandemic, has remained between four and five years. Thus far, Government’s support and assistance measures have helped to keep the pandemic-induced delays to our BTO projects to a year or less, except for one project which had already experienced project difficulties unrelated to the pandemic. The total wait time for any given project has been kept under six years.
For BTO projects launched last year and this year, the estimated waiting times range from three to five and a half years. For example, Hougang Citrine launched in August is expected to be completed in three years. Alkaff Breeze in Bidadari launched in February has a wait time of just over three years. And Garden Court @ Tengah, launched last November, has a waiting time of about three and a half years.
There are some projects that will take longer, such as Queen’s Arc – launched in August this year – expected to take longer at about five and a half years. There are a few projects like Queen’s Arc, where the waiting times are longer. This is because the conditions of the site are difficult, and construction will take longer, or these are projects with very high storey-heights, very tall blocks, which require more construction time. These have caused some people to worry that all new BTOs will take six to seven years. But these are in the minority. By and large, barring further unexpected developments, most flat buyers can expect to move into their flats within four to five years after booking their flats.
Third, the recent news on Greatearth’s insolvency may have added to the anxieties of home buyers waiting for their flats to be completed and some are concerned whether this puts the completion of their homes at risk. To try to minimise the impact on home buyers, HDB has brought new contractors on board, within a month, to take over Greatearth’s affected projects. Unfortunately, this will still add a further two to three months' delay to affected projects, but we are working closely with the new contractors to bring the projects back on track. We are watching the progress of all BTO projects closely and have stepped up efforts to detect emerging issues earlier and resolve them.
Fourth, existing home buyers may be concerned about further delays to ongoing projects given the impact of COVID-19 on the construction industry. With tightened border controls over foreign workers, disruptions in the supply of building materials and stringent worksite public health measures, there have been manpower and material shortages and a slowdown in work, which have affected public and private construction projects.
To try to mitigate the pandemic’s impact on our public housing programme, HDB has rolled out extensive assistance to help contractors complete ongoing projects in a timely manner.
To tackle manpower shortages, HDB has worked with firms to safely recruit workers from various countries and co-shared the increase in manpower costs. HDB has also worked with contractors to explore ways to speed up construction without affecting safety and quality. To minimise work stoppages due to COVID-19 transmission, we have implemented Antigen Rapid Testing, or ART, on top of Rostered Routine Testing (RRT) at worksites. This allows members of the construction workforce who have been infected to be picked up and treated early, and close contacts quarantined swiftly. Worksites can then continue operating as long as workers are on the ART regime.
To help with the higher cost of materials, HDB has extended the period of protection against steel price fluctuation and supplied contractors with more concreting materials at protected prices. This is in addition to the extensive Government support provided through the Job Support Scheme (JSS), construction restart grants, legislative interventions, advance payments, sharing of prolongation costs and manpower cost increases, and foreign worker levy rebates.
While the pandemic has inevitably caused delays to both private and public sector construction projects, including BTO projects, we will continue to do our best to minimise the extent of the delays.
HDB has also taken steps to support affected home buyers. We have helped some flat buyers secure interim accommodation and will be increasing the supply of flats under the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS) by 800 units over the next two years. For low-income households with no family support and no other housing options, HDB will consider offering Interim Rental Housing, or IRH on a case-by-case basis. Flat buyers who face delays that exceed their Delivery Possession Date, or DPD, will be compensated at the amount and for the period as set out in the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act, or COTMA, which applies to all developers. We will also consider waiving flat booking forfeitures and the one-year wait-out period based on the flat buyers’ circumstances, such as for flat buyers who choose to cancel their BTO flats due to BTO delays and buy a resale flat to meet urgent housing needs.
Even amidst the ongoing pandemic, we are committed to delivering public housing to Singaporeans. With these measures, we will press on to keep our BTO programme on track and support buyers who may be affected by the delays.
\tMr Speaker: Miss Cheryl Chan. No more than two supplementary questions, please.
\tMiss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (East Coast): Thank you, Mr Speaker, just one. I want to thank the Minister for detailing all the measures that are put in place to ensure the BTO projects will continue in construction, and also to clarify the dates because I have heard a lot of feedback on this aspect.
The question I want to ask the Minister is, just now he mentioned that progressively there will be more BTOs that will be pushed out, even beyond 17,000 over time. Given the fact that there is also a very vibrant resale market currently, how is the Ministry going to balance between the resale market, just to make sure that the prices are still healthy, and also the future BTO flats in place?
\tMr Desmond Lee: I thank the Member for the question. We continue to keep a close eye on the property market in general, both the private sector as well as the HDB resale market. There are a range of reasons why demand for housing is high.
First, of course, this is the Echo Boomer generation, family formation rates, marriage and the desire for housing and their own homes, is one.
Second, the pressures of the pandemic, work from home, changes that we have to adapt and adjust to, have caused people to want more space, in general. And so, both first-timers as well as even second-timers wanting a bigger place.
Thirdly, interest rates, being as low as they are, have enabled people to be able to consider housing options.
Then, the stresses and strains on the construction sector, the delays in both BTO as well as private housing projects, have caused some people who need homes to consider the resale market, both in the HDB resale as well as the private resale market for private properties.
And the social trends that have been taking place over the years and decades: the desire for more space for more privacy, for more nuclearised families, rather than three-generation families, more singles desiring their own homes and own spaces. These, of course, add on to the desire by people to have homes and exacerbated by this pandemic.
So, for the first-time home buyers, we will be pushing out even more BTO flats next year and in future years, to ensure that their housing needs are met. As I have said earlier, we will push out more than 17,000 flats next year, more than what we have launched or are going to launch this year.
At the same time, for the resale market, we have provided significant grants to help people afford homes in the resale market, if they need to. And for those who cannot wait longer for the BTO flats to move to a resale flat because of urgent family needs, we will consider their appeals for waiver of forfeiture for their BTO flats on a case-by-case basis and be sympathetic to their housing needs.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Seah Kian Peng.
\tMr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Sir, first I want to thank the Minister for the mitigating measures that will be introduced. I also welcome the news that there will be more flats that will be built in the coming years; the Minister mentioned more than 17,000. I am quite sure I am not alone in this House but many of us, each week, we continue to receive many requests and appeals from residents, telling us that they just cannot get their flat early enough; they cannot even have a chance of getting a flat.
I believe that the desired outcomes for all of us must be that we want to give couples their first flat as early as possible. So, we need to continue to shorten the waiting time. Four, five years – can it be shorter? Because there is really a lot of pent-up demand.
So, 17,000 now; my first request is, what is the maximum that we could go up to, in order to meet the pent-up demand? Because demand clearly outstrips supply right now. How can we shorten the waiting time?
There are also concerns by residents that whilst waiting for their flat, some of them, their income ceilings may exceed the limits and, therefore, they are disqualified. How do we deal with this?
Finally, again, another concern is that as they wait for the flat, the price of the flat will start to also go up. Their affordability level could be in question. So, my plea to the Minister is that – I do not have the figures obviously, but I am quite sure demand far outstrips supply – let us increase the supply as much as possible to reduce the waiting time and fulfil residents and couples' desire for a flat earlier rather than later.
\tMr Desmond Lee: Indeed, the Member's points are well taken. As I said earlier, we will increase the supply of BTO flats next year, a number larger than the 17,000 we have launched this year. We have been increasing the BTO flats' supply for some years already. For example, in 2019, it was 14,600. Last year, it was 16,800. This year, 17,000. Next year, it will be more than that.
\t
We balance that against the supply in the resale market. As I said, the demand is high for a whole variety of reasons. But we have to keep an eye on the overall ecosystem of housing, both public and private, BTOs and resale, to ensure that the overall housing ecosystem remain stable while meeting the aspirations of Singaporeans.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
\tMr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Thank you, Sir. Sir, the Minister in his reply mentioned about the PPHS earlier on, that young couples who are still waiting for the flats may want to consider PPHS. But from my indications, from the appeals that we have received, it seems that rental flats under PPHS are not so forthcoming and there is still some amount of waiting there as well. So, can I ask the Minister what is the availability of the rental flats under the PPHS scheme and whether there is enough to meet the demands or requests from new home buyers?
\tMr Desmond Lee: The PPHS provides home buyers with an option if they wish to stay on their own before their flats are ready; these are for married couples especially with children. The demand for PPHS has grown significantly because of the pandemic arising from the BTO delays as well as the desire for more privacy and, therefore, while waiting for their flats, they want to get PPHS.
To make sure that we target the PPHS supply to those who need such housing because of their limited housing options, we made some moves in August this year to target such support to those with household income of below $7,000 and prioritising those with children. So, that way we hope to ensure that those with more urgent housing needs while waiting for their BTO flats can get support. For those with no family support and no housing options, we have other alternatives such as Interim Rental Housing (IRH). We continue to see how better we can support families who have been impacted by the delays during this period.
Mr Seah Kian Peng mentioned earlier, if I can take this opportunity to address him, he did ask a question that I omitted to reply, which is with regard to the income ceiling as well as those who may feel that with a longer wait for housing, the risk of them busting the income ceiling is there. We have made some changes to income ceiling in the last few years and continue to review the household incomes of home applicants to ensure that it meets the needs of Singaporeans.
And when people apply for the flats, they book their flats, they get the Housing Loan Eligibility (HLE) as well as their grant eligibility at the point of application. Therefore, the delays in waiting for flats that they have already booked, there will be less impact on that front.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Actions against Employers Accused of Workplace Discrimination Based on Age and Race","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"4 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Manpower what enforcement actions can the Ministry take against errant employers found to have practised workplace discrimination especially on grounds of age and race.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Minister for Manpower): Sir, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) takes a serious view of workplace discrimination, including the use of age or race as a selection criterion. Other than requiring employers to attend corrective workshops conducted by TAFEP, employers can be advised to rectify lapses in their HR processes. MOM will not hesitate to take enforcement actions against discriminatory employers such as curtailing their work pass privileges in more serious cases. We urge employee who experience any workplace discrimination to approach MOM or TAFEP for assistance.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Edward Chia.
\tMr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Thank you, Speaker. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State a supplementary question. Can the Ministry actually do more in the area of greater awareness of fair employment best practises among employers, such as adopting similar like BizSafe framework, where senior executives of firms undergo structured training. And further to that, making it a requirement to attend such training first before one can participate in Government tenders, so that firms are clearly motivated to deepen knowledge in this particular area of fair best practices.
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, indeed, one approach that we want to emphasise is education of both employers and employees on what constitutes workplace discrimination. So, we will take the Member's suggestions and study how we can better do this at workplaces by actively correcting stereotypes and changing employers' mindsets through more promotional efforts.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Sharael Taha.
\tMr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply.
With regard to the Senior Minister of State's reply on workplace discrimination, can the Minister consider naming these errant employers who are found to have practised workplace discrimination, with the intent that by naming them, both the company and the employees in the company will be motivated to adopt fair employment practices as soon as possible?
Can the Ministry also consider that given that SMEs account for more than two-thirds of employment in Singapore, can such training for SMEs before they can recruit or hire individuals be made compulsory?
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, I thank the Member for his idea to actually name and shame some of these employers who may have adopted discriminatory practices. Currently, firms that may have some degree of discriminatory practices may be put on a Fair Consideration Framework, or FCF, watch list. Firms that are on this watch list, technically, they have not flouted any rules yet but, perhaps, some of their practices may be veering on the grey margins. It is through putting them on the watch list that we use it as a way to engage the firms and signal to them that their practices have to be improved. In most instances, employers who are on this FCF watch list have been responsive to TAFEP's engagement efforts and expanded the employment of local employees. In this instance, such engagement is also an educational effort for companies or firms that may not be aware, upfront, of the nuancing of the guidelines on fair employment.
I think we want to take a very educational approach because not every firm that may on prima facie seems to have infringed on some of the regulations, could be doing it in a very deliberate way. Sometimes, through these efforts, firms do change their practices for the better.
Naming firms, sometimes, could also end up having a negative consequence because it would then frustrate their efforts to recruit and hire people. It may then have the negative consequence of impeding some of the business functions that these firms have as well. We would want to probably go on the more educational approach.
As I said, for firms that, despite our efforts to engage them, refuse or have persisted in their discriminatory actions, we will take enforcement actions against them.
Mr Speaker: Mr Patrick Tay.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): I thank the Senior Minister of State for the sharing. I have one supplementary question. Essentially, the Labour Movement, together with Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF), has been engaging more than 10,000 professionals, managers and executives (PMEs) in the past year.
One important observation, as the Senior Minister of State rightly pointed out, education is important. But the HR community as well as the employment agents and agency community are two communities which, we feel very strongly, need to be better educated, be given knowledge and awareness of some of these advisories, guidelines, including legislation, particularly, as many of them are from multinational companies and across the globe.
So, can I suggest to the Senior Minister of State to pay particular attention to these two groups?
Dr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, I thank the Member for his comments. Indeed, HR practitioners and employment agencies are areas of engagement that MOM would want to focus on because they form the link between the employers and the hiring practices of the companies. So, we will increase our engagement with these intermediaries such as HR practitioners.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Current Protection against Retaliation and Dismissal for Employees Who File Complaints on Workplace Discrimination","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"5 Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo asked the Minister for Manpower what protection against retaliation and dismissal is currently in place for employees who file complaints on workplace discrimination.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Minister for Manpower): Sir, the law protects employees against dismissals without just cause or excuse. This covers situations in which a person is dismissed because he or she reported workplace discrimination.
The Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices (TGFEP) also require employers to treat all employees based on merit at all phases of employment. Hence, if an employee reported discrimination and is subsequently treated differently by their employer, they can approach TAFEP for advice and assistance.
As previously announced, the Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness is examining the scope of possible legislation. The Committee will also examine the issue of protection for whistle-blowers. I hope we will give the Committee some time to deliberate on this and we will share more information when the deliberations are completed.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Jessica Tan.
\tMs Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. Can I just ask two supplementary questions? I understand that there is deliberation in terms of improving the whistle-blowing protection. But, currently, what can be done if employers do not provide that safe environment for employees to speak up? What actions can be taken against employers who victimised employees and not just for dismissal but, usually, different treatment.
The second one is, what recourse do employees have, if they do face retaliation for reporting discrimination? Because it is somewhat an unequal relationship.
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, let me assure and reassure the Member that the Employment Act today protects employees against dismissals without just cause or excuse. If the employee does feel discriminated against because of whistle-blowing, then the employee should approach MOM or TAFEP for guidance and we can render any assistance that is needed to further investigate the allegations of such issues against whistle-blowing. And we will take into consideration when we take any enforcement action against the employer for targeting the employee for whistle-blowing.
To reassure the Member as well, TAFEP, in their experience in dealing with such cases, these incidences are actually very rare and far in between. But having said that, anyone who feels that they have been targeted because of whistle-blowing, please let MOM and TAFEP know.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Patrick Tay.
\tMr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: One supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State. On this point on retaliation which the Member brought up, I think it also borders on the issue of workplace harassment. Currently, we have an advisory on managing workplace harassment. I hope the Senior Minister of State, as part of the whole review team, will also look at this topic of workplace harassment to revise and of course update this advisory in light of what is happening in the various workplaces and given the uncertain and uneven outlook.
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: I thank the Member. I think this is well taken. The committee will take into consideration all these suggestions and points that have been raised. We will come up with a set of guidelines. Hopefully, with legislation, they will protect the employees better.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Seniors Aged 55 and Above Who Benefited from Senior Worker Support Package","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the trend of senior re-employment in 2020 and 2021 has been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic; and (b) if so, what further support can be given to companies to enable them to continue to offer re-employment for their senior employees who are eligible for re-employment.
7 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how many seniors aged 55 years and above have benefited from the Senior Worker Support Package introduced in 2020; and (b) whether the Government will be looking into extending this support or other ways of promoting senior employability.
\tThe Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I take Question Nos 6 and 7 together?
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tDr Tan See Leng: Before I start my response, with your permission, Mr Speaker, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a handout on Senior Worker Support Package.
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please. [A handout was distributed to hon Members. Please refer to Annex 1.]
\t
\t
\tDr Tan See Leng: In line with the 2019 recommendations by the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers, the retirement age and re-employment age will be increased to 63 and 68 respectively, and this will take effect from 1 July 2022. CPF contribution rates for senior workers aged above 55 to 70 will also be raised by up to two percentage points with effect from 1 January 2022.
The Senior Worker Support Package was introduced in 2020 to support employers in implementing these and other key recommendations made by the Workgroup, and it consists of four schemes. Members can refer to it in the handout that was just distributed.
First, the Senior Employment Credit provides employers wage offsets of up to 8% for hiring senior workers aged 55 and above. The Senior Employment Credit started from 1 January 2021. Thus far, close to $150 million have been disbursed to 86,000 employers, benefiting 482,000 senior workers.
Secondly, the Senior Worker Early Adopter Grant encourages employers to implement a higher internal retirement age and re-employment age, above the statutory minimum. From 1 July 2020 to 31 August 2021, 21,000 senior workers working in 2,800 companies have benefited from the grant.
Thirdly, the Part-time Re-employment Grant supports employers who commit to a part-time re-employment policy whenever eligible senior workers request for it. From 1 July 2020 to 31 August 2021, more than 19,000 senior workers working in close to 2,000 companies have benefited from the grant.
With the healthy take-up rates, the Government topped up over $200 million for both the Senior Worker Early Adopter Grant and the Part-time Re-employment Grant in February this year. This was on top of $100 million committed to these grants in 2020.
Finally, the CPF Transition Offset will provide employers with transitionary wage offset equivalent to 50% of the increase in employer CPF contribution rates that will take effect in 2022.
Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, the employment rate of those aged 55 to 64 held steady at over 67%, while the employment rate of those aged 65 and above has increased from 27.6% in 2019 to 28.5% in 2020. This is comparable to the average of the top three OECD countries. The re-employment offer rates among eligible private sector resident employees who wished to continue working have also remained high, at well over 90% in 2020.
Senior worker employment rates have held up and the Government has allocated S$1.5 billion through the Senior Worker Support Package over three years. In addition, last year, the Government introduced the SkillsFuture Mid-Career Support Package to help mature and senior workers stay employable and enter new jobs or new roles. We have also provided additional support for employers who are expanding local hiring amidst the current economic and labour market uncertainty.
The Jobs Growth Incentive, or JGI, provides wage support to eligible firms that hire new local jobseekers, with higher support for new local hires aged 40 and above, including older workers. We had recently announced an extension by another six months till March 2022 with tapered support levels, to support employers to continue expanding local hiring. JGI-eligible firms that hire mature local hires from October 2021 to March 2022 – the cut-off age is 40 – JGI-eligible firms that continue to hire will receive up to $36,000 per hire.
With employers continuing to reskill their senior workers and making every effort to retain and hire them, with society supporting their choice to remain active in work, our seniors can continue to participate actively in all spheres of life.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Jessica Tan.
\tMs Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): I thank the Minister for his reply and it is very heartening to hear that senior employment has stayed stable despite the COVID-19 situation. Could I just ask one supplementary question of the Minister? While re-employment has stayed steady, is there any data to share whether the kind of roles and the jobs are also similar or have they had to take a cut or part-time employment?
\tDr Tan See Leng: I thank the hon Member for her question. Indeed, the majority of the roles, I can share the exact data later on, but the roles that we have placed in the JGI, the majority of them are in roles that were the same or better – in terms of their draw of the salary levels. This is the majority of the hires that we placed under the JGI scheme. If my memory does not fail me, I think the percentage is more than 60%. I need to confirm that and revert.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
\tMs Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Thank you. COVID-19 has been devastating for many families and my residents have told me that in coping with COVID-19, many of them have depleted their intended retirement savings, or that maybe even retrenchments have caused them no choice but to dip into their retirement nest eggs. As such, I was very heartened to hear that the Ministry is looking at more training programmes for our seniors, but I would like to ask if there will be more of such training programmes, especially place-and-train programmes for our seniors.
Also, given that most seniors may have to push back the retirement due to the challenges to their livelihoods because of COVID-19, would the Ministry also give us an update on the preparations for the retirement age to be extended to 70 years old, or its plan for the end of the decade?
\tDr Tan See Leng: I thank the Member of Parliament, Ms Yeo Wan Ling, for her question. Some parts of her question, I think I will address in my answer to Question Nos 8 to 16 later. For her second Supplementary Question with regard to the planning for retirement, up to 70 years and beyond, we are working closely with MOH in terms of an overall broader construct, in terms of studying how to ensure the healthy ageing, together with healthy productivity, is maintained.
At this particular point in time, I think it is premature for me to comment. Today, we have a very clear sustained path to raise the retirement age, eventually to 65, and the re-employment age to 70. I think that will be the first phase. We are also talking to other OECD countries where we are looking at beyond a certain age, work, and retirement ages and re-employment ages could be adjusted according to the healthy life expectancy of the population at that point in time. And they adopted a very dynamic model, but we are still studying it.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Sharael Taha.
\tMr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for sharing the Senior Workers Support Package. Despite all this, many aged 40 and above still struggle to seek re-employment. Can I ask the Minister how many companies have taken up JGI and taken full use of this incentive? What more can we do to get companies to consider senior employment or get companies to look at job redesign, so that we can hire more of these workers?
\tDr Tan See Leng: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the hon Member of Parliament, Mr Sharael Taha, for his question. But may I request for your permission to proceed if there are no further supplementary questions on the first two Parliamentary Questions (PQs) filed, so that I can take them all in a more holistic manner with Question Nos 8 to 16. And if I cannot address in my subsequent answer, then perhaps I could request for the Member to raise the supplementary question again.
\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Assist Employees Affected by COVID-19 and Digital Disruptions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"8 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Manpower what are the employability support given to help workers manage structural changes like digital disruption.
9 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Manpower in respect of job vacancies being at an all-time high of 92,100 in June 2021 (a) how many of these vacancies are not filled after six months; and (b) how can the Ministry help Singaporeans fill these vacancies for firms as soon as possible.
10 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what kinds of employment and training assistance are given to workers to cope with the structural changes in the economy such as the digital disruption; (b) how many workers have been given such employment assistance; and (c) which sectors do these workers predominantly work in.
11 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how many seniors aged 60 years and above are getting the Ministry's assistance to help them hold on to their jobs; (b) what are the forms of assistance rendered to these senior workers; (c) how many of them need to pivot to jobs in other industries; and (d) what are the main hurdles that they have to overcome.
12 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower as Singapore transits to an endemic COVID-19 economy, what are the plans to help our workforce as well as Singapore companies to shift their plans and strategies to meet the changes when the economy opens up gradually.
13 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Manpower what is the Ministry’s assessment on the effectiveness of job placement and training support that are currently provided to assist unemployed and under-employed workers, especially those who are in distressed sectors and those who are facing headwinds during the COVID-19 pandemic.
14 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry can provide an update on the progress of the various career conversion and job matching efforts for mid-career PMETs; (b) whether the schemes have achieved the intended outcomes; (c) what are the frictions; and (d) what are the other upcoming support and initiatives.
15 Dr Tan Yia Swam asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Ministry intends to introduce additional measures to support workers who have lost their jobs as a result of prevailing national guidelines especially for industries such as the food and beverage and the construction sectors.
16 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether studies have been done by the Ministry to understand the digital preparedness of our workers aged 40 to 60 years; and (b) what are the support measures put in place to enable digitally-disadvantaged workers to take on job roles which have pivoted into the digital space.
\tThe Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I will respond to the Question Nos 8 to 16.
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tDr Tan See Leng: On employment\toutcomes and support for workers, I hope to give a more holistic reply.
I thank all the Members for the concern for our jobseekers amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. On the whole, the labour market continued its gradual recovery in the first half of 2021. Although the ratio of job vacancies to unemployed persons reached a high of 1.63 in June 2021 – we have got very, very high job vacancies relative to unemployed persons – however, many of these openings were in the construction sector where the shortage has been due to public health border measures. There were also pockets of recovery in other sectors. Hence, resident employment grew and unemployment continued to ease.
However, the labour market has clearly not fully recovered. Therefore, we must remain vigilant, maintain our support measures for affected workers and we will continue to leave no stone unturned in helping all locals who need our support.
In particular, the $2.2 billion SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package has helped to cushion the impact of COVID-19 on the labour market since its launch in April last year. Thanks to the effort of our tripartite partners and the National Jobs Council, around 128,000 local jobseekers have been placed into jobs and skills opportunities as at end-July 2021.
The supported jobseekers reflect the profile of our workforce. Close to six in 10 placements into jobs and skills opportunities went to mid-career PMETs. Workforce Singapore (WSG) saw a large increase in placements through Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs) with more than 14,000 locals supported. WSG and NTUC's Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) expanded their service touch points, with 24 new SGUnited Jobs and Skills Centres established islandwide, in every HDB town.
We have also appointed Adecco as the first SGUnited Placement Partner, to offer another avenue for mature workers aged 40 and above, long-term unemployed jobseekers, or persons with disabilities, to access professional career matching services. Close to 44,000 jobseekers found jobs through these career matching services.
\t
Members have asked about specific worker segments. Let me address these questions.
Dr Tan Yia Swam, Mr Edward Chia and Mr Sharael Taha were concerned about workers being displaced from distressed sectors. We are supporting such workers through a variety of ways.
The first and most important priority is to save jobs. The Jobs Support Scheme has disbursed more than $27.6 billion as of September 2021, with most support going towards the hardest-hit sectors. This is helping companies preserve their workforce's skills and competencies. We are continually recalibrating our support based on each sector's specific needs and recovery trajectory.
The most-affected sectors such as F&B services, retail and hotels have rolled out Job Redesign Reskilling programmes with WSG's assistance. They are using the downtime to train and to upskill existing workers to take on redesigned and enhanced job roles as part of their industry transformation. We have reskilled and redeployed close to 9,000 workers through these programmes.
Second, we stand ready to support some of the workers who may have to leave their jobs.
The number of retrenchments rose to about 26,000 in 2020, although the incidence of retrenchment remained lower than past recessionary years. Retrenchment numbers have improved since the fourth quarter of 2020 and have decreased to 2,340 in the second quarter of 2021. This is comparable to levels seen in 2018 and 2019.
Notwithstanding Phase Two (Heightened Alert) earlier this year, affected sectors such as F&B services, retail trade and arts, entertainment and recreation did not see elevated retrenchments as more employers put workers on short work-week or temporary lay-offs instead.
We are closely monitoring post-retrenchment outcomes. Amongst all retrenched residents, the six-month re-entry rate was 64.4% in the second quarter of 2021. This is an improvement from 61.6% in 2020. This is also comparable to pre-COVID-19 re-entry rates in 2018 and 2019.
The tripartite Retrenchment Taskforce follows up with every notified retrenchment by proactively reaching out to the affected workers and offering them employment assistance. This includes providing information kits on career resources, briefings on available employment facilitation and one-on-one coaching by WSG and NTUC-e2i's career coaches.
Third, we encourage companies who need workers to create jobs. We provide the Jobs Growth Incentive (JGI) to support employers expand local hiring. From September 2020 to May 2021, we supported 58,000 businesses to hire more than 400,000 locals. Four in 10 were in growth sectors such as wholesale trade, professional services and information and communications, while one in five were in the recovering F&B services and retail sectors.
Encouragingly, half of the JGI-supported hires were not employed at the point of hire and six in 10 – I think this is in reference to the hon Member of Parliament Jessica Tan's earlier question – earned the same or higher pay compared to their last drawn.
I also recently announced the extension of the JGI to March 2022 to secure the labour market recovery and to support our local jobseekers.
JGI provides additional support when employers hire mature workers, persons with disabilities as well as ex-offenders. Each of such hires could attract up to $36,000 of JGI support. I strongly encourage and urge all of our companies looking to recruit to not delay their plans and bring forward their hires.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about support for senior workers to stay in their current jobs or to pivot to new jobs in other industries.
We should be encouraged by the resilience of our senior workers. Notwithstanding the recession, the employment rate of those aged 60 and above increased slightly from 38.5% in 2019 to 39% in 2020.
As mentioned in my response to Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Ms Jessica Tan just now, the Government has introduced the Senior Worker Support Package in 2020 with a budget of $1.5 billion to support employers in hiring and retaining senior workers over three years. I will not go over the details a second time. I think all of you would have gotten the handout earlier as well.
Mr Yip Hon Weng also asked about platform workers. Platform workers are a diverse group and we are very committed to supporting them in their plans. Many, in a feedback survey to us, tell us that they prefer such work because of the flexibility and the autonomy it affords. For them, we have recently established an Advisory Committee on Platform Workers. This committee will consult widely and examine, get feedback from the industry to see how they can be better supported.
For those looking to transit to regular employment, WSG and NTUC's e2i offer career matching services, including career coaching, employability workshops and job fairs.
For example, in 2021, NTUC's e2i conducted several career re-invention workshops in collaboration with the National Private Hire Vehicles Association and NTUC LearningHub to help platform drivers explore new career pathways.
In addition, digital services like the MyCareersFuture (MCF) portal can be accessed at all hours of the day. The whole range of SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package support is also available to them.
We know that it is challenging for platform workers to transit to regular employment but WSG will continue to put in its best effort to support them in their job search.
Ms Hany Soh, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked about how jobseekers are matched to job vacancies.
Mr Speaker, our labour market exists in a constant state of dynamic flux and creative tension. It would not be possible to match all job vacancies with jobseekers perfectly. We understand and we appreciate this and more so especially when we or our loved ones are looking for a job. It always helps to have as wide an option base as possible and to choose the best option that is available.
But if vacancies are accumulating and they are left unfilled, it also indicates that the labour market is having difficulty in accessing and finding the right talent to fill these vacancies, and businesses have to continue to run.
Our latest available data from 2020 show that about 27% of job vacancies were unfilled for six months or more. This is actually down slightly from the pre-COVID-19 situation.
In September, I set up the Jobs Taskforce to coordinate efforts across key Government agencies to enable more locals to take up in-demand jobs with good wages and prospects in key sectors of our economy such as financial services and info-communications and technology. The Jobs Taskforce will work with tripartite partners and employers to make and enable the labour market to function even better.
Some vacancies take longer to fill because the wage or working conditions may not be as attractive as other options available to jobseekers. If they remain persistently unfilled, businesses may have to redesign the job roles. They may even have to review their strategies.
WSG offers job redesign support under the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG-JR), which was launched in December 2020. Through PSG-JR, enterprises can receive support to work with pre-approved job redesign consultants to redesign their work processes, their tasks and their responsibilities. We welcome all enterprises to come on board to troubleshoot any difficulties they may face in hiring new workers and grow their businesses, especially in our Singapore Core.
Other vacancies may persist because the employer is hoping to get someone who is already fully trained and ready to jump straight into the job from day one. We are helping employers to go beyond the \"plug-and-play\" mindset and approach by supporting Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs).
Employers who have adopted this approach have found that people recruited through CCPs are a good fit. About nine in 10 of the people placed through CCPs remained employed after 24 months and about seven in 10 earned more than their last drawn salaries.
Finally, some vacancies persist because of a shortage of skills in the workforce and among jobseekers.
Our industries are digitalising rapidly and as pointed out by Mr Yip Hon Weng, Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Mr Edward Chia, digital competencies are very highly sought after.
Mr Yip Hon Weng has asked about the number of workers who have been given employment assistance to cope with digital disruption.
As digitalisation accelerates, it has affected jobs to varying degrees.
First, many jobs would require workers to acquire basic digital literacy skills such as learning how to use digital communication platforms to market a product.
Second, some jobs will require workers to learn how to implement digital technology such as robotic process automation to automate processes or to perform more complex analysis.
Third, there will be growing demand for deep technology skills, which will bring us into the next bound of digital transformation.
Many workers in the first category will make this transition seamlessly. However, some will need additional support. Hence, we work with unions, Trade Associations and Chambers (TACs), companies and education institutions to scaffold their learning.
Under the SME Digital Reboot programme, Ngee Ann Polytechnic and NTUC LearningHub will work with 500 SMEs to provide workers with training in areas such as digital marketing and digital communication. Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) also drives digital adoption among vulnerable segments under the SG Digital Office while the National Library Board runs a range of digital readiness programmes on digital work skills, competencies and emerging technologies.
Moving on to the second category, where we will see more workers becoming implementers of digital technology. This is already happening rapidly in sectors such as logistics and manufacturing, where digital technology is embedded in the physical world, or what we term as Industry 4.0.
To help workers and companies ride on the opportunities presented by Industry 4.0 to transform and digitalise, WSG has partnered with the Singapore Business Federation (SBF) to launch the Industry 4.0 Human Capital Initiative (IHCI) to encourage companies in these sectors to trial and adopt Industry 4.0 technologies early while developing their workforce's digital competencies to ensure that workers can grow alongside their companies.
Thus far, close to 90 companies have come on board the IHCI, with an additional 210 expected to do so by September 2022. So, we hope that by the third quarter, we will have 300 companies onboarding the IHCI.
Parallel to this effort, the unions and employers have also established more than 600 company training committees (CTCs) where they work closely together to drive business and workforce transformation, including in digital competencies.
The third category of jobs, where deep technology skills are required, is also where we see some of the highest demand across the economy. IMDA's TechSkills Accelerator (or TeSA) initiative serves to meet this demand, having placed and trained more than 10,000 locals in good tech jobs since 2016, with 2,500 placed last year in 2020. Locals placed through TeSA have taken on jobs, such as Systems Analysts or Data Scientists, across sectors including Information and Communications, Financial Services, Professional Services, Manufacturing and Wholesale Trade and Retail.
I know that business and workforce transformation can be daunting. That is why we have set aside close to $10 million to develop Jobs Transformation Maps (JTMs). The JTMs are detailed sectoral manpower studies that map out the impact of technology and digitalisation on individual jobs over the medium term. They serve as a useful compass for employers, in particular our SMEs, and workers to prepare themselves for future jobs and skills. We have already launched three JTMs: Human Resources, Logistics and Financial Services. Twelve more are in progress.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, the road ahead will continue to be uneven and bumpy. However, I am confident that with the Government and tripartite partners continuing to work closely and just as importantly, with your concerns, with your collective efforts, we will be able to help our businesses and workers to emerge stronger together.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply. I have two supplementary questions.
The first pertains to Question No 10. It is important that our workforce is equipped with the necessary skillsets to deal with the structural changes in our economy, post-COVID-19. How does the Ministry check whether these training and employment assistance are fit for purpose, ensuring that there are right workers equipped with the right skills in the right sectors? And what will be the KPIs for tracking outcomes for success?
My second supplementary question pertains to Question No 12. In terms of plans and strategies for our workforce and companies, can the Ministry share in greater details: (a) what is insufficient today and what must change; (b) what must our workforce and companies aspire to do; and (c) when these plans must be firmed up to prepare for the opening of our economy?
\tDr Tan See Leng: I thank Mr Yip for his questions. To his first question, as part of the Industry Transformation Map (ITM) planning, MOM and MOE work very closely with the different sector agencies to identify emerging and in-demand skills for jobs in the various sectors. This will then enable the training providers and the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) to refine their course offerings to make them more relevant, to make them more targeted and more specific for the industry needs.
Doing so will help to ensure that our workers have the necessary skillsets to take on good jobs. In addition, under my other portfolio in MTI, through EDB, through ESG, we have got various market readiness grants. There is also the global innovation alliance network, with the global connect network that we work very closely with SBF, to try to see the needs, the industry trends in many of the developed countries all over the world and to see how we can continue to keep our local workforce abreast of changes to keep them ahead and to keep them competitively sharp. I hope that answers the Member's first question.
To the Member's second point about plans and strategies for our workforce and companies, indeed, this pandemic has accelerated disruption and transformation. It has highlighted very clearly the need for businesses to strengthen their resilience as well as to have to constantly think about the disruptive changes that will come and to diversify. This would not just apply to business transformation but also to the workforce transformation as well, to keep our workers adept, to keep them agile and nimble. So, emerging trends today that we can see, such as automation and digitalisation, have radically transformed and changed the way we work, with remote work becoming more prevalent across many workplaces.
To retain our competitive advantage, to find good sustainable jobs for Singaporeans, our efforts to continue to transform and innovate our economy must continue so that we can strengthen, fortify our business environment and we can ensure that Singapore always remains the preferred hub, the preferred location for trade, for investment, particularly in new emerging growth areas, for instance, like additive manufacturing in Fintech. The anchoring of global companies which meet our desired profile and the aspirations of Singaporeans will help to preserve, spur the creation of good jobs, strengthen our Singapore Core.
I think that point that we debated so long yesterday adds to the fact that we must continue to reinforce trust, reinforce the credibility, our reputation that other economies have, the faith and trust, in us through the years and, hopefully, through the decades ahead.
We must also sustain efforts to help Singaporeans build skills which are relevant to the global talent marketplace. We have started the SkillsFuture movement. We have complemented it with a more nuanced, targeted Career Conversion Programme and these programmes have helped many Singaporeans take up new jobs in growth areas. At the same time, we are also looking to build up our CET pipeline ahead of demand in key growth areas in the green economy. Many of these initiatives come, they converge, we distill them and we develop a very targeted approach to help our fellow Singaporeans.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
\tMs Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Many of my middle-aged residents have faced difficulties traversing the new digital normal. And many have admitted they are left behind in Singapore's drive to be digital. Many are unable to use with confidence online applications, even such as simple ones like Singpass online or even download an e-copy of their CPF, much less so becoming overnight digital marketeers or social media influences.
My residents have told me their frustrations after taking classes and courses, their employers have told them that those classes are irrelevant to the job roles that they are seeking.
Will the Ministry consider working with companies then on identifying key digital skills and the appropriate courses, perhaps across the many different skillsets, on the SkillsFuture platform, that will allow our less digitally inclined workers to be on a level playing field with digital natives in the hiring process and in future in job promotions?
\tDr Tan See Leng: Thank you, Ms Yeo. I think these are very pertinent points. For the training part, in terms of the elderly residents, we do have SG Digital Ambassadors to go around to teach them. And for those, even with the literacy skills, the National Library Board (NLB) also has a whole slew of programmes to help them transform as well.
But I think what the Member has hit on is a key issue which is really making sure that when companies and the workforce innovate, when they digitalise and so on, they must be relevant to the needs of the company. To that end, that is really a huge drive by WSG to develop these Career Conversion Programmes, because they are working with the company.
On top of that, NTUC has the CTCs, again working with the companies to understand the needs and to see how we can help to redesign, if the jobs need to be redesigned, or to help to train our local workforce, our Singaporean Core to be adept and to be able to fit into the expectations of the company.
Beyond that, I have shared earlier on that I have formed the Jobs Taskforce to understand where the gaps are, when there is an inability to clear that match. So, there are multiple initiatives at different levels to try to reach out to as many Singaporeans as possible.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Edward Chia.
\tMr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank MOM and all the officers for their hard work in retraining and reskilling our workforce during this very challenging time.
I have one supplementary question for the Minister. As there will always be laggard effect in reskilling, what is the Minister's assessment of the potential structural impact on the labour market, should job vacancies remain elevated?
\tDr Tan See Leng: I thank Mr Edward Chia for his question. I think we constantly worry about that. That is what keeps all of us in the Manpower Ministry and also, I believe – Minister Chan is here – MOE up on our toes all the time in working and identifying.
The key thing is that in the growth sector, in sustainability and the renewable energy sector, in fintech, in the ICT space, in the wholesale trade, in areas where there are growth, these are the areas that we target at. So, we prioritise, ensuring that the training, the upskilling and the reskilling of our Singaporean Core remains on track, so that we minimise the lag.
Contemporaneously, we also, through our global network of the innovation alliances and so on, see what lies ahead and how do we even prep our workforce to stay ahead of the curve all the time. This is something that we do.
For the rest who do experience that lag, in terms of the hiring, we do have a number of initiatives and programmes that we roll out to help them to catch up and also, to ensure that they are able to keep up in terms of the pivoting. If I were to go into the details of each one of the schemes, it probably will take us another session. But suffice to say that there are a whole slew of programmes available that today, we are already seeing quite a lot of traction.
If you look at the headline numbers, our long-term unemployment continues to remain one of the lowest and even for our resident unemployment today, the numbers are, even though they are not at zero, it will never be at zero, but I think they are at a level that is round about pre-COVID-19 time. [Please refer to “Clarification by Minister for Manpower”, Official Report, 5 October 2021, Vol 95, Issue No 40, Correction by Written Statement section.]
The next thing that we are exploring in terms of the Jobs Taskforce is to also investigate deeper to see how prevalent and widespread this displacement and under-employment that some Members think exists, would be. So, those are the things that we are looking into as well.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Hany Soh.
\tMs Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): I understand from the Minister's response earlier that about 57% of the job vacancies have continued to be left unfilled after six months. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Minister for Manpower\", Official Report, 5 October 2021, Vol 95, Issue No 40, Clarification section.]
In this regard, I wish to find out whether options, such as the Career Trials or Place-and-Train programmes, had ever been explored by the employers with these job vacancies. If yes, whether there have been any findings on why such initiatives were unsuccessful in filling these job vacancies. If the answer is no, do we actually know the reasons behind why there is a reluctance from these companies in considering the adoptions of such job placement programmes?
\tDr Tan See Leng: I thank Ms Hany Soh for her question.
There will always be a certain level of job vacancies in a properly functioning labour market. Sometimes, the job vacancies could just be due to a skills mismatch where the jobseekers may not have the full set of requisite skills to be ready for the job. So, as I have shared, this is where the Career Conversion Programmes come in. Sometimes, we even go above that. We work with the companies to develop these Company Training Committees to ensure that the jobseekers have a proper market-clearing opportunity for them to be able to match up to the expectations of the employers.
Many of the employers who have actually worked with us to adopt this approach, have found out that the people whom they hire and even then the middle-aged workers, because of their experiential wisdom, the aptitude and attitude, they have actually found that after that conversion programme, that upskilling and reskilling, they found that they actually become pretty good fit.
For those who went through this, nine in 10 that was placed through this CCP remained employed in the same company after 24 months. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Minister for Manpower\", Official Report, 5 October 2021, Vol 95, Issue No 40, Clarification section.] And 70% of them, about seven in 10, actually earned more than their last drawn salaries. So, we can see that these programmes that we have put up, we are beginning to see quite good traction.
We need to let it run a bit more because you need to give it that runway before it tapers off or it plateaus off, then we can either reinforce or pivot to a new programme to build upon it. If you look at it, since April 2020, just the SGUnited Jobs and Skills package alone, WSG has placed 14,000 locals into this these CCPs.
There are still employers who would just prefer a \"plug-and-play\"; ostensibly, because some of them are in very high growth, and they keep getting new business coming in all the time, they have no time to think about training you and having that so-called comfort zone and that spare capacity of bandwidth to train. But we encourage these employers to fundamentally adopt some form of a mindset change as well.
For the people who are coming on to be trained, for them, that confidence in themselves, the adaptability is also fundamentally important, because it takes two hands to clap.
Through the Member's questions, it is obvious that she has thought through this very carefully. If I may borrow or leverage the Member's question, if I can leverage everyone here, it would be to reach out to all of the communities, the employers, the businesses and so on, to fundamentally change their mindset where they can be a lot more forgiving in their hiring. Different people have different skillsets that even though it may not necessarily fill that immediate job role, but if the company has that latitude, you will be able to find something for that Singaporean employee. I hope that addresses your question.
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Notice of Motion.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos 17, 20-46 and 48-73 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix. Question Nos 18-19 and 47 have been postponed to the next available sitting of Parliament.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Olympic and Paralympic Achievements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Speaker: Minister for Culture, Community and Youth.
The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"that this House congratulates our Team Singapore Olympians and Paralympians, in particular Ms Yip Pin Xiu, our five-time Paralympic Gold Medalist, for their achievements at the 2020 Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games.\" [Applause.]
Mr Speaker, Sir, we welcome our Team SG athletes who are seated in Chamber today.
After a year of uncertainty and delays, we fielded our Team Singapore Olympians and Paralympians in Tokyo 2020 to compete with the world's best, to represent Singapore at the highest sporting showcase.
We sent a total of 23 athletes across 12 sports to the Olympics; 10 athletes across six sports to the Paralympics. Our athletes came home victorious with two gold medals and five national records, alongside numerous personal bests and many other personal inspiring stories.
But beyond these tangible achievements, our athletes returned to a Singapore uplifted by their sportsmanship, touched by their own moments of vulnerability, and, above all, inspired by their dogged pursuit of excellence as they fought tooth and nail, to put Singapore on the international sporting arena.
Together with President of the Singapore National Olympic Council and Speaker Mr Tan Chuan-Jin, and Chairperson of the Singapore National Paralympic Council, Dr Teo-Koh Sock Miang, and our Chefs de Mission, I had the privilege of supporting and cheering on our Olympians and Paralympians from the sidelines and stands in Tokyo.
So, I wish to take this opportunity to share some snippets with this House – not just of the Games itself, but also of the challenges which our athletes faced in the lead-up, the run-up that was disrupted by the global pandemic.
Sir, I will also re-affirm our Government’s commitment to supporting and enhancing sports in Singapore and to support Singaporeans at every level from grassroots participation through to the very pinnacle of elite sporting achievement.
Let me start with the Olympics. Our Olympians competed on the world’s biggest sporting stage against the very best athletes in the world, competing for the highest honours.
To compete at this level requires years, if not decades, of dedication and discipline, hard work and sacrifice, and meticulous, thoughtful, careful planning. Even then, there are no guarantees of success. Often, uncontrollable factors, like injuries, strokes of luck, misfortune come into play.
And, as we witnessed, a pandemic intervened at the cruellest of times, just as our athletes began their work on the final lap to peak for the Tokyo 2020 Olympics. The pandemic had severely curtailed our athletes’ training plans, decimated opportunities to travel, either for qualification, or to hone their sporting instincts at other competitions, to keep them primed and match sharp. But our athletes adjusted, adapted, they fought hard to reach their peaks again, after the postponement of the Games in July 2020.
We all heard how Joan Poh went from sculling back to nursing, serving in the front line in the battle against COVID-19, before taking time out again, to trial and then qualify for the Olympics.
Many of our athletes made adjustments themselves: Caroline Chew, Amita Berthier and Tan Sze En trained overseas, and went directly to Tokyo. Some others, like Cecilia, Kimberly and Ryan, in Sailing, chose to leave home comforts months before Tokyo 2020, stayed on the road so as to continue training in suitable conditions with the winds and the waves, without having the down time of quarantine or isolation.
Despite these challenges, Team Singapore made history at these Games. For the first time, we had athletes represented in Equestrian, Marathon Swimming and Diving. Of our 23-athlete strong contingent, 17 were Olympic debutants. These are very encouraging figures and a testament to the growth and potential of High Performance Sports (HPS) in Singapore.
Beyond representation at the Olympics, the results that our 23 Team Singapore athletes also made us proud. I am sure that many in the House would have caught a glimpse of Team Singapore in action on screen, on meWATCH, but allow me to share some highlights as an observer in the stands.
We had two Olympic badminton debutants who did us very proud. Yeo Jia Min was a match away from the knock-out rounds. She was up against a much higher-ranked Korean opponent. She lost that match. I know she was disappointed, but the pain of defeat will spur her on even more.
Loh Kean Yew came up against the reigning Asian Games champion and world number seven, Jonatan Christie, for a place in the knock-out round. Kean Yew rose to the occasion and pushed his much-favoured opponent right to the brink. There was really nothing to choose in the end between Kean Yew and the Asian Games champion and I am sure Kean Yew will be back on court much stronger.
In fact, when I spoke with him shortly after he lost that match and asked him about his plans, he gave me his customary wide cherubic grin and said – of course, Paris 2024! And true to form, he came home after Tokyo, dusted down and went back straightaway on the road to train. He is not here today because he is training in Europe. And I was just told a moment ago that Jia Min would be joining him shortly. Kean Yew sent me a message over the weekend and asked me to thank Parliament on his behalf for the honour of the recognition today and assures us all that he is training hard for his next goal.
In table tennis, many would have seen Mengyu battle hard, fought hard despite having an old injury flare up at the most unfortunate of times. Mengyu had about the toughest draw possible. In her inspired run to fourth place at the Olympics, she was drawn against four of the world’s top 10 ranked table tennis players, she beat two of them along the way. Mengyu may have missed a medal, but I think we all saw for ourselves her dedication, her grit and her fighting spirit against the world’s best players. The women’s team, along with Feng Tianwei and Lin Ye, had a tough draw, meeting world number one, China, along the way before losing out.
Our sailors too had a very good outing. Kimberly and Cecilia made history as the first Singaporeans to ever compete in an Olympics Medal Race for sailing and they overcame great odds in all 12 of their races for the Women’s 49er FX, navigating not just unpredictable weather but also racing against much more experienced well-seasoned teams. They emerged as the top Asian team. In fact, no other Asian team even made it to the top 10 medal race.
Our fencers, Amita and Kiria, had a hard but exciting debut. They were pitted against higher ranked, more experienced opponents. But their agility, their speed and precision came through. Amita held her own in the opening round against the eventual gold medalist, whilst Kiria showed skill and poise well beyond her years. You could not tell that they were Olympic debutants.
Our experienced trio of Joseph, Ting Wen and Zheng Wen put up a strong fight against a very strong field in swimming. It has been a difficult season for them and they know that they are judged on very high standards and would be the first to admit that they are capable of much better. But they have mettle. And they will bounce back, I am sure, in the next competition.
Let me turn now to speak about our Paralympians. They have been an inspiration to all of us. Many of you would have watched them on the channels. They showed us what it means to defy the odds and not be defined or constrained by physical limitations. I spoke earlier about how the pandemic was disruptive to training and competition plans. But the impact of the pandemic to our Paralympians was perhaps far greater. Whilst some could go online for training and instruction, this was not as easy for those who are visually impaired when they were confronted with new modalities to get instruction and to do training. Despite these challenges, I heard no excuses from them when I dropped in from time to time over the last few months on their training. They just had an unwavering desire to get on with it, put their shoulders to the grind, and focus on doing Singapore and Singaporeans proud at the Paralympics.
Let me share a few stories from our Paralympic contingent.
Our debutant tandem cyclist Steve and his competition partner Kee Meng, they clocked two personal bests in the Men’s B 1,000-metre Time Trial and the Men’s B 4,000-metre Individual Pursuit. But what is even more amazing is that both had suffered a crash just days before their event. Their front tire had burst and they collapsed on the road at great speed. Bruised, battered, but not beaten; thereafter, turned in superb timings and achieved those two personal bests.
Steve is here in the House today in his distinctive bright red hair. If he looks familiar to all of you, it is because in 2015, Steve was the captain of the five-a-side football team in the ASEAN Para Games. He is truly an inspiring sportsman.
Our contingent flag-bearer, Diroy Noordin, he left his mark on the field, quite literally. He threw a 9.85-metre and then 9.92-metre in the men’s F40 shot put final – he shattered the national record on both occasions. It is tough enough to break one national record. He did it twice, same event and he broke his own national record!
Our Equestrian team – Max, Gemma and Laurentia – put in some stirring performances. It really warmed me up to see them compete with a smile, writ large across their faces.
Laurentia and her horse, Banestro, came in fifth in the Individual Freestyle Test Finals. This is despite Laurentia being stuck in Britain in the lead-up to the Olympics for a year due to travel restrictions, separated from her coach and her horse, after what was really meant to be just a two-week break.
Our swimmers: Wei Soong, he came, oh so close, just 0.16 seconds away from a podium finish. He also broke two national records, both his own. Sophie Soon held off her competitors and finished fourth in the Women’s SB12 100-metre Breaststroke. A very impressive debut, all round, for both of them and I am sure at this rate, we will see them on the podium in no time.
Last, but certainly not least, Yip Pin Xiu. We warmly welcome Pin Xiu back to this Chamber. Familiar ground for you.
It is hard to find words to describe Pin Xiu, our most decorated Paralympian. At the age of 29, Pin Xiu blazed her own path both in and out the pool.
At the 2008 Beijing Paralympics, Pin Xiu brought home her and Singapore’s first ever Paralympic gold and silver medals. Pin Xiu went on to clinch two more gold medals and also set two world records at the 2016 Rio Paralympics. These records continue to be unmatched, unbroken today.
This year, she dominated the pool yet again, defending her title in the women’s S2 50-metre and 100-metre backstroke events, with some rather devastating performances. She won the 100-metre with a margin of more than nine seconds.
That is a total of six medals, of which five are gold medals, across 13 years, over four Paralympic Games.
It shows that Pin Xiu, or PX, as she is sometimes more affectionately known, has tremendous longevity and staying power. Each time her rivals try and make a move on her, to close down on her, to catch up with her, she has found that something extra, whether it is more power in her strokes, greater rotation of her shoulders or just the sheer courage of conviction and determination to reach the wall first.
Many Singaporeans will remember vividly the two gold medal ceremonies in Tokyo – I did – the moment as our national anthem reverberated through the Tokyo Aquatics Centre and broadcast around the world. I am sure we all celebrated her victory, took pride in her triumph, savoured the moment as our flag rose high, and rose first.
How many of us had wet eyes as we watched Pin Xiu herself fight back her own tears of pride and elation as her achievements, she knew, brought the nation together? I also felt such an immense sense of pride and even now as I remember and relate the event, I feel goosebumps just thinking about it.
And I thank Pin Xiu very much for gifting us such precious moments of national pride and inspiring Singaporeans over so many years.
Outside of the pool, Pin Xiu has made extensive contributions to our nation. As a former Nominated Member of Parliament, Pin Xiu was the voice of her generation. She was a passionate advocate on issues such as sports and inclusion, and spoke out articulately against campus sexual violence and workplace harassment.
Today, she continues to impact the lives of many through her service and contributions on the Purple Parade’s Working Committee, Singapore Disability Sports Council Executive Committee, the World Para Swimming High Support Needs Group, the National Youth Council and the Safe Sport task group.
These are not just names of committees that we rattle off to Pin Xiu. She herself uses each as an opportunity and a platform to make positive and enduring changes to our society.
In 2008, Pin Xiu was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for her accomplishments at the 2008 Beijing Paralympics.
Pin Xiu, your trophy cabinet must be packed by now. But I hope and I think you can find space for one more way in which we can honour and recognise you.
Your innate quality to inspire Singaporeans, your consistency in sporting achievement at the absolute highest level, your contributions in so many areas away from sport and your own quiet, unassuming personality, which I know hides a deep personal conviction to be a positive change-maker, each already amazing in its own right. And I am sure Members will agree with me. But taken together, you and your achievements have really served to unite us as Singaporeans and inspire us deeply.
My Cabinet colleagues and I discussed how we could appropriately recognise Pin Xiu’s achievements. I am very happy to announce that we intend to create a new President’s Award for Inspiring Achievement, and to make the inaugural presentation of this award to Pin Xiu. President Halimah Yacob has agreed to this proposal. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker, this new award will sit alongside the other awards which are presented by the President for outstanding accomplishments. This award will recognise Singaporeans who have overcome personal adversity and led inspiring lives. Through their outstanding and wide-ranging achievements and contributions to society, they are role models who instil a sense of national pride in fellow Singaporeans.
This prestigious award will be conferred by the President to deserving recipients who meet its highest qualifying criteria. It will be presented to Singaporeans with fitting achievements and may not be given out every year.
Pin Xiu has demonstrated these exceptional qualities. She has stared adversity in its face, time and time again, overcame it. She is truly an inspiration to Singaporeans and it is only appropriate that she will now become the inaugural recipient of this award.
I am certain that she will trailblaze a path for many more to follow in her footsteps. And I believe this is precisely what will give Pin Xiu her biggest satisfaction: to see other Singaporeans rise above adversity, take on challenges and be themselves, the positive change-makers.
So, on behalf of this House, let me offer my warmest and deepest congratulations to Pin Xiu, as well as to all our Olympians and Paralympians. [Applause.]
Sir, at this juncture, I would like to take some time to acknowledge and thank the many others who have stood tall and stood behind our Team Singapore athletes. You have given your unstinting, selfless support to our athletes. We know it takes a village. And each one of you is a valued member of that village.
First, I thank the families, caregivers and friends of Team Singapore athletes. They are the unseen and often unsung heroes whose enduring love, sacrifice, belief give our athletes the courage, strength and the platform to turn aspiration into reality.
Second, I am very grateful to the coaches of our athletes, the various National Sports Associations (NSAs), National Disability Sports Associations (NDSAs), as well as the Singapore Disability Sports Council (SDSC) for believing in the power of the possible in our athletes and being there for them every step of the way, supporting them on their journey in every training and at every competition.
We recognise their collective efforts in grooming our sportspersons into the world-class athletes that they are today, from the tangible work of providing the best training environment, the best training instruction, to the intangible value of being mentors and role models that our athletes can look up to.
Third, I would also like to extend our thanks to the Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC) and Singapore National Paralympic Council (SNPC), as well as our Chefs de Mission for the Olympics and Paralympics, Dr Ben Tan and Ms Shirley Low, who are both here, for leading our contingent of athletes to Tokyo and bringing them home safely and soundly. Both of them were completely invested in our team, and their presence and leadership made a significant difference.
Finally, my appreciation goes out to the Singapore Sport Institute (SSI) and the National Youth Sports Institute (NYSI). Their work is often unseen and under-rated as well. But it has been a key ingredient in our High Performance Sports ecosystem and a real value-add when milliseconds or mere millimetres can make all the difference.
Working alongside other partners in the sports ecosystem, SSI and NYSI put the athlete at the centre of what they do, supporting them in a variety of ways. This includes sports medicine, sports science, physiotherapy, nutrition and also psychological support before, during and after the Games, so that our athletes can be single-minded and focused on giving of their best in dealing with the competition.
Take for example SSI’s bio-mechanist Marcel Rossi. Marcel supported our para swimmers in Tokyo. He would take a video of them at each race and analyse their every motion, every stroke, and then on that basis, guide them to make real time adjustments between the heats in the morning and the finals in the evening to optimise performance for the next race.
Our sports scientists studied para-archer Syahidah, studied her gait and posture, built a seat, customised fully to fit her body structure, weight and shooting position, so that she would have stability and comfort, with each arrow she dispatches.
A specially designed year-long nutrition programme was also made for Nur Aini, so that she could get into competition weight while building up sufficient strength at the same time. This paid off when she attained her personal best lift in her qualification event leading up to Tokyo. It was a very credible performance of 77 kilogrammes. And I know that because I tried it at about 50 kilogrammes, and I struggled.
To ensure the mental well-being of our athletes, SSI also sent sport psychologists to support our team on the ground in Tokyo.
Our sailors, Kim and Cecilia, were accompanied by their team psychologist, Joyce, whose task was to keep them focused and positive throughout the Games. It was a long, enduring race, several races.
I saw for myself how critical this was. Kim and Cecilia, if you meet them, they have an intuitive bond between them, an outstanding chemistry. When you are out at sea, battling the winds, the waves and your opponents, for a few hours, this can make all the difference.
So, Mr Speaker, at this juncture, let me reiterate the Government’s commitment to supporting and enhancing sports for all, both in growing the base, so that we can have more active participants and more athletes at the grassroots, and in supporting our elite athletes as they chase success on the podium at the world's best international events.
The Government invests about $70 million annually into the HPS system. But it is not just about financial commitment. At the heart of it all, MCCY’s commitment in both active grassroots sports participation and also HPS is rooted in our fundamental belief that we must give every aspiration the best possible chance of being turned into a reality; for every individual, the opportunity to harness their own talents and chase their own dreams. And I stress the word \"individual\", because no two athletes are alike, even on team sports. The smallest detail and differentiating factor can matter a lot.
And our athlete support structure needs to be personalised and adaptable as such. Members could see from some of the examples I outlined earlier how we approach each elite athlete uniquely, differently and how we support them with differentiated, curated support.
We will also continue to work with our sports stakeholders in our ecosystem, from our schools to NSAs, SNOC, SNPC, ActiveSG as well as the private academies and clubs, working together to build a strong, cohesive, vibrant sporting culture in Singapore.
For us to achieve sporting success on the international stage, we will need a single-minded desire and pursuit to excel, and a unity of purpose amongst all our stakeholders coming on board, pulling together in the same direction and making sure that we produce the best that we can at many more of these international elite events.
Mr Speaker, allow me to speak now on disability sports: its significance, its tremendous value to society, its growth over the years and the efforts which MCCY and our partners will continue to take to nurture its development in Singapore.
Sir, sports have the unique ability to transcend some of the everyday barriers that we might come across in daily living, be it linguistic, cultural and, perhaps, even in social acceptance. This applies to many of us, I am sure, but, perhaps, more so for persons with disabilities.
Sport can help reduce the stigma and discrimination which are sometimes associated with disability because, through sport, community attitudes can be transformed. In sports, we see more of the skills and achievement, and correspondingly, see each individual more for their abilities instead.
In turn, sports can also transform the person with disability in an equally profound way by empowering persons with disabilities, filling them with self-belief and confidence, to level their playing field, to help them gain a higher degree of independence and help them realise their full potential.
Through participation in sports, they are empowered to improve their own quality of life, stay healthy, be strong, be confident, independent contributing members of society.
It also promotes inclusivity. I found that the pool, the tandem bike or the horse, can really be such a great leveller.
For Wei Soong and Sophie, being in the pool meant that they are like any other swimmer. Their disabilities are no longer an obstacle to sports participation. That was how they started on their journey. And today, they are full-fledged Paralympians, just a whisker away from being on the podium in Tokyo.
Gemma, who is also here today, took up horse riding when she was just eight, as a form of hippotherapy to help her with her balance and coordination. She enjoyed it tremendously. Gemma has said before that whilst she is unable to run, being on her horse gives her an opportunity to ride while it trots, to feel like she is running. It gives her the freedom of movement which she would otherwise not be able to experience. Sir, just being in the sport alone has helped her and others look past their disability. In fact, it has given Gemma an added ability to do great things, feel self-confident, build and boost her own self-esteem.
Wei Soong, Sophie and Gemma’s stories, and the stories of so many others who have journeyed on a similar path, are a testament to the value which disability sports has in Singapore, playing such a pivotal part to building inclusivity in society. It is not just about elite sport performance, but really about the difference that mere participation can make. We must, therefore, do all we can to make disability sports more accessible and encourage even more participation.
Mr Speaker, the Government knows the value that sport can bring, and will continue to put our resources into promoting disability sports. We have stepped up on the support and funding of the entire disability sports ecosystem, including through SportSG’s SportCares. The Disability Sport Master Plan places emphasis on grassroots development, encouraging more to take part in sport, lowering the barriers to entry and enhancing the resources to facilitate participation.
We now have eight inclusive ActiveSG Gyms and six inclusive swimming complexes across the island. These facilities have been retrofitted with equipment like inclusive gym machines and pool wheelchairs to make it far more accessible. We are on track to making every single ActiveSG Gym an inclusive one by 2026.
Beyond financial support and physical infrastructure, the people skills are also important. We must have more who can administer, conduct and coach disability sports because these are the natural multipliers for the sport.
To date, 2,800 coaches, educators, volunteers, staff and students are trained to support disability sports in one way or another.
We have also established links with the International Paralympic Committee, Special Olympics, educational institutions like Republic Polytechnic and other partners like KK Hospital and social service agencies like SG Enable and the Society for the Physically Disabled to deliver training courses, hold workshops and outreach programmes, so that even more will feel confident that they can lead and teach in disability sports.
The SDSC and Special Olympics Singapore have also been a major driving force for disability sports in Singapore.
The SDSC has extended its reach to manage and support disability sports programmes in 18 sports across the community and we want to grow this, both in terms of development and also at high-performance elite levels. SDSC has also further diversified and tailored its programmes for different disability groups.
The Special Olympics Singapore, in addition, offers nine sports and five athlete-centred initiatives for individuals with intellectual disabilities.
Both organisations continue to play an active role in the development of coaches and technical officials as well as efforts to raise awareness and the standards of and participation in disability sports, and strengthen Singaporeans' affinity with Team Singapore athletes with disabilities.
SDSC also works closely with SSI to promote inclusion at a higher level with our NSAs to integrate disability sports into their mainstream offerings alongside able-bodied sporting programmes.
SDSC, Special Olympics Singapore and SNPC have also an established system of identifying talent from the pool of grassroots, developing a pathway for these elite athletes to progress through to major games representation for Singapore.
Mr Speaker, all these steps have been positive. Since we hosted the ASEAN Para Games in 2015, we have seen a marked growth in interest and participation. In 2016, one in three persons with disabilities participated in a sport at least once a week. Today, that number is one in two. But we can still do more to push this further and we will.
A few Members of this House have asked if we can do more to reduce the disparity in cash awards between the Major Games Award Programme (MAP) for able-bodied athletes and the Athletes' Achievement Awards (AAA) for para-athletes.
The MAP and AAA are private award schemes that are managed by SNOC and SNPC respectively. They were started in 1990 and 2002 respectively. Since their inception, these awards have been funded entirely by private sponsors.
The award amounts offered under both schemes are raised and determined by SNOC and SNPC respectively, along with their sponsors. Individually, the awards under each of the schemes are tiered based on the standard, the size and the field of competition for each major games; in other words, Olympics, Commonwealth Games, Asian Games, Southeast Asian (SEA) Games
The difference in cash quantum does not reflect how the Government values our para-athletes vis-à-vis our able-bodied athletes. In our eyes, they are all Team Singapore athletes and each athlete, abled or disabled, has his or her own intrinsic value, which we value, recognise and appreciate.
SNPC is working on enhancing the cash awards for para-athletes in major games. They have already had discussions with a few entities to do so. I have also discussed these efforts with the President of SNPC, Prof Teo-Koh, on several occasions and will continue to support their engagement with corporate entities and private funders towards this objective. SNPC will announce the outcome of their efforts in due course.
Sir, I would add that besides focusing on the cash awards for medal finishes by our athletes, it is important, if not more so, for resources to be put into growing the base and uplifting the entire disability sporting ecosystem.
I have said previously, lowering the barriers to entry, opening up more facilities and programmes, enhancing the coaching and training framework, bringing on board more disability sports into the field and realm of SNPC and SDSC, and driving integration between disability sports and mainstream sports in the NSAs. More athletes will benefit from this and more pathways to success and to elite representation will open up.
If we can do this, take these steps, opportunities such as those which Wei Soong, Sophie or Gemma had, can be even more accessible; opportunities across a whole spectrum of participants at different levels and not just at the elite sports levels, because we believe that participation in disability sports alone can bring about such value.
So, Mr Speaker, we will continue to work hard to foster an inclusive society through sports where people of all abilities can come together to experience, play, socialise and if they are able to, to excel at the highest level in sports, and through this, to help Singapore and Singaporeans build deep social connections.
Mr Speaker, I have spoken at length about many things this afternoon that are important and central to MCCY's mission and values when it comes to sports. But allow me to circle back to my original Motion for this House – to thank Team Singapore athletes for flying our flag so high and with such distinction at Tokyo 2020.
All of you in this Chamber today have put Singapore amongst the world's best. We congratulate you for your exceptional performances, for your indomitable fighting spirit on the world stage. You gave everything and left nothing behind in Tokyo.
Your accomplishments brought cheer and joy to our nation and lifted our spirits in, perhaps, one of the most trying and difficult periods in Singapore's history. More importantly, your efforts inspired and united Singaporeans from all walks of life as they tuned in to support your Paralympic and Olympic journey.
Just as the greats who have come before you, these men and women, our athletes, have made many personal sacrifices to carry our country's hopes, our flag and our aspirations to the very pinnacle of sports. These are also the same men and women who have and will continue to inspire generations of athletes to come after them, to rise up, stand on their shoulders, reach higher and bring even more honour and glory to our nation. Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [Applause.]
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Mr Seah Kian Peng.
Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Mr Speaker, let me first declare my interest as a board member of the Singapore Olympic Foundation and the group CEO of NTUC FairPrice.
Mr Speaker, Sir, what does it mean to celebrate a victory? Today, I congratulate and celebrate the achievements of all our sporting talents at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics and the Paralympic Games.
Many of us in this House will have special ties to the athletes. For me, my celebration is especially loud for Ms Yip Pin Xiu, a gold medalist five times over and a former Nominated Member of this House.
I have known Pin Xiu and her parents for some time because they are residents at Braddell Heights and valued members of the community. When Pin Xiu won her Paralympic gold medals in 2016, there was a motorcade parade to celebrate her victory and that of other Paralympians. The motorcade passed by our constituency and we had a big contingent of residents and supporters there to cheer her on.
Pin Xiu had also featured in NTUC FairPrice's SG50 campaign – this was 2015, six years ago – where we did the campaign to recognise the heroes in our life.
Pin Xiu calls her mom as her heroine, both because of the time and energy her mom has given to the family and for her mom's strong spirit. When she was bullied as a child, her mother taught her to stand up. Let me quote what her mom said to her: \"When people stare at you, there is no need to look away, just stare back. My mother is gangster that way!\"
So, we celebrate our \"gang\", that one of our own has stood tall on the world stage and done us all and Singapore proud. We celebrate especially hard when the victory is hard won.
I am a firm advocate of the value that sports have in galvanising people of different backgrounds towards community bonding. It serves as a powerful platform that develops social harmony and contributes to nation building.
Today, with the ongoing pandemic, we have shifted focus towards more pressing needs to help and address topics on bread and butter issues such as employment, training and the protection of the elderly.
Supporting these areas and supporting sports need not be mutually exclusive.
The common denominator is about celebrating the indomitable human spirit in overcoming adversities and challenges and collectively encouraging one another to better ourselves.
For athletes with disabilities, the Singapore Disability Sports Council (SDSC) provides support and deserves our help too. Corporations can and should make meaningful monetary contributions and in this regard, I am pleased to say that NTUC FairPrice has and will continue to support this cause. In fact, since 2008, we have contributed over $4.3 million on various sports-related initiatives to help Singapore become a sporting nation.
We also call out the different identities of the athletes. Pin Xiu is a role model on so many fronts. She and our other national sporting talents, they have all brought our country together and she is an inspiration to all – in her sport, her role as a community leader – and a tribute to her family, especially her mom whom she considers as her hero.
How apt that this year, MSF has dedicated 2021 as the Year of Celebrating SG Women. Pin Xiu is a fantastic role model for young women and that so much is possible, and this itself is a cause for much celebration.
So, congratulations, Team Singapore Olympians and Paralympians for your dedication, your hard work and your achievements at this year's Tokyo 2020 Olympics and Paralympics Games. I salute you, I think we in this House certainly salute you and Singapore salutes all of you. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to speak in this in support of this Motion of thanks.
Let me begin like others in this House by expressing my appreciation and congratulations to all our national athletes, regardless of whether they may have medalled in these most recent games and, of course, to Yip Pin Xiu, our country's most decorated sports personality.
Following the unexpected losses of some of our athletes in the recent games, criticism arose in some quarters about their disappointing performances. But as any sportsman or sportswoman will tell you – I used to be one, albeit never a particularly distinguished one – even with the best preparation, one's performance is subject to a host of extrinsic influences.
Despite exercising extreme care with one's diet, breakfast may simply not agree with one that morning. One could lose concentration for even a split second and that could make all the difference. The wind may not blow in your favour at the critical moment or your opponent could simply be having the best performance of their life.
I am certain that all our Olympians and Paralympians gave their best shot during their time in Tokyo. Even in instances where they may have not won, some achieved personal bests, others set national records. Sport is as much about overcoming personal barriers as it is about beating the competition. That many of our athletes were able to rise to the occasion and establish new individual records is likewise laudable, even if medals were not involved.
More generally, we need to understand as a nation that our support for our sportsmen and sportswomen should not be dependent on them having won medals or tournaments. Our nation's sporting culture will only be elevated when we do not view their accomplishments as transactional, and as such we only celebrate the wins, but, rather, as unconditional.
Having been blessed with the talent, ability and desire, subsequently, these individuals chose to sacrifice their time, energy and finances toward climbing the pinnacles of their sport.
In representing us, they afford us the enormous privilege of being able to live vicariously through their accomplishments and successes. For that, the Workers' Party, as well as, I am sure, everyone in this House, are thankful. Once again, congratulations. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Ms Denise Phua.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I join Minister Edwin Tong in congratulating our Olympians and Paralympians here. I thought the Minister would have made a very good sports commentator, because he was so excited when he shared the journey and their feats. So, thank you, Minister, for being so enthusiastic.
As the Minister has mentioned, behind every successful sportsman is that village behind them. I, therefore, also join the Government in commending all the wonderful families, caregivers, coaches, educators, volunteers, national sports agencies, SNOC, SNPC, SDSC, Chefs de Mission, SportsSG’s SSI, NYSI and so forth – as you can see, we are a country of abbreviated institutions. Many others, many institutions were involved in this journey to the Tokyo Games.
As an advisor to The Purple Parade organising committee, I am really delighted that our Vice Chair Pin Xiu and member Maximillian had set foot again on the world stage, proudly representing Singapore and doing Singapore so proud. In the WhatsApp message that we are having, many of the Purple Parade guys are rooting for you and congratulating you. So, read that later.
Watching the Games reminded me of the time when I was a young girl – that was a long time ago – chasing the Malaysia Cup even when I was studying for exams. Holding my books and watching the game on TV, admiring heroes such as the late Mohamed Noh. The national team did not always bring home the Malaysia Cup but I remember we were always proud of our then \"Team Singapore\".
Sir, this is the month of The Purple Parade in Singapore when many supporters of the disability community visibly show their support for inclusion and celebrate the abilities of people with disabilities.
I thought it opportune to bring up the topic of a debate, or a controversy that some people have mentioned before on the difference between cash awards for medalled Olympians versus medalled Paralympians. Persons in the sector, in fact, quipped that this conversation, this debate over prize, always occurs every four years, often after the Games. The last was in 2016 after the Rio Games.
Proponents calling for equality, or parity, in cash awards for medalists at the Paralympics and Olympic Games, often cite a few reasons: first, that the efforts put in by our sportsmen and women to prepare for the Paralympics are equal to, if not more intense than, the Olympics; two, that Singapore ought to emulate the spirit shown by countries that have equalised the awards, countries such as Japan, United States, Malaysia and the like.
Others defending the current difference in awards cited that there is a difference in scope and depth and, sometimes, appeal of the two Games. I do not know about that, but there is a difference in scope, they say. And that private donors, and not the Government, are the ones footing the bill for the awards and, therefore, it is they who traditionally felt that the awareness and appeal of sponsoring disability sports is lower than that of mainstream sports, leading to a lower prize for medalled disabled athletes. So, those are the reasons.
When I dug deeper into the issue to decide where I stand on this controversial issue, I found that there is more than meets the eye.
For this happy occasion, I will just state some very brief background findings.
First up, Government, as the Minister has mentioned, the Singapore Government has always maintained its position to invest upstream in overall sports participation and then, in grooming sports talents to get to the podium at national, regional, global games under its High Performance Sports system. The Government has hitherto been reluctant to use public funds for what it calls post-podium awards, especially cash awards. So, that is one thing I found out.
The second is this. The two cash awards schemes for medalists are the Multi-Million Dollar Award Programme (MAP) for the Olympians and then, the Athlete Achievement Award (AAA) for the Paralympians. They are administered by different NGOs or non-governmental bodies, SNOC and SNPC. They have different genesis, they started at different times and they have different scopes and features.
The AAA for the Paralympians is managed by the Singapore National Paralympic Council (SNPC) for the para-athletes. Chairman is the ever-passionate Dr Teo-Koh Sock Miang. I think she is there. Dr Teo-Koh. The Olympians are governed by Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC) chaired by none other than our also very enthusiastic Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin.
Both NGOs separately negotiated for the prize awards at different times, much later for the para-athletes and managed to get quite different sponsorships. There are some features. For instance, under the MAP, a gold-winning Olympian may win $1 million but will not get more if he scores another gold medal. For the Paralympians, a gold-winning Paralympian, on the other hand, will earn a $200,000 award each time he or she wins a gold. The whole system is not quite neat at all and bears a review.
Now, I have a call for action. As Singapore strives to become more inclusive and as Singaporeans ask for more parity, they speak up more articulately about inclusion and they want more equality amongst differently abled sports talents, it is time to bite the bullet, to change the game.
Do not wait for the Paris Games in 2024, in a few years' time, to revive this conversation and debate again. Let us start to rewrite the headline of the past decades, always comparing inequality in prize money for Olympians versus Paralympians; making it sound like the Government is heartless, Singapore is so heartless and not supportive of inclusion. As one of the advocates for the disabled, I know this to be far from true.
In this regard, I call for the Government to weigh in, to facilitate the process to reimagine, to review and to resource not only the High Performance Disability Sports system but also to widen the sports participation, to widen the talent pipeline through greater sports participation. This is a happy occasion, but at another occasion, I shall ask for an update from the Minister to the Disability Sports Master Plan including the need for developing a dashboard and review of the structure and the system, so that there is parity in both form and substance.
Mr Speaker, Sir, the time indeed has come. Singapore has adopted and ratified the United Nations Convention for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to grant equal rights to the disabled. Our country has moved decisively in the last decade or more to narrow the gap between persons of different abilities in the important realms of life, in education, healthcare, transport, employment. We are still doing that, we still have not arrived, but we are doing that. So, let us make a statement in sports. Make sports accessible, inclusive and prevalent for all persons with disabilities in Singapore and change the headline from what we always debate about after every major game, about disparity, to equality and to something more positive and exciting.
In conclusion, Sir, let me return to Minister Edwin’s Motion of congratulating our beloved Team Singapore.
Today, this House formally honour and thank the Olympians and Paralympians who did us so proud at the Tokyo Games. Medalled or not, you have accomplished a feat that many of us can only dream of achieving. We, who mostly merely cheered you in the comforts of our homes, watching our phone or TV screens, owe you, your families, coaches and support teams, we owe you much. So, take heart, whether you are medalled or not.
As the former US President Roosevelt famously said in his speech \"Citizenship in a Republic\", he said this, it is one of my favourite quotes and I know that it is repeated by some coaches before they go for games, and part of the extract says this: \"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly.\"
Indeed, the credit belongs to you, our dear Olympians and Paralympians, who in your journey to sports excellence, must have tried, fallen, rose, tried again and again; and not many could have done that, not many could have seen that. So, take heart, whether you are medalled or not. Of course, Pin Xiu is our pride and joy. But also all the others who have just made such a difference. I hope like what Jamus has said, let us take heed, take heart, the rest of Singapore, that we have this culture that is also supportive, whether our representatives are medalled or make it to the podium or not. As long as they have tried their best, I think that is part of our Team Singapore family.
So, thank you. You have placed a small nation like ours on the world stage, you have helped our country punch way above our weight in this space. For that, we honour and salute you. Congratulations. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Mr Mark Chay.
Mr Mark Chay (Nominated Member): Dear Speaker, on the onset, I would like to declare that I am a member of SNOC, Chair of SNOC Athletes' Commission, Honorary Secretary of Olympians Singapore and Singapore Disability Sports Council coach for Yip Pin Xiu.
Making it to the Olympics and the Paralympic Games is an incredible achievement that few can claim. Every Olympian and Paralympian must undergo the very same rite of passage: years of dedication and sacrifice, which amounts to tens of thousands of deliberate practice and hard work. It means qualifying and proving to the world to be among the best of the best. And I am so excited to congratulate you – our Olympians and Paralympians – on your achievements today!
You did not just do it for yourselves. You did it for our nation, our people, our future champions, which is why I wholeheartedly support this Motion.
As an Olympian myself, the chance to earn that invitation to compete for the glory of our flag, our nation Singapore, is something that can never be taken away. You are now Olympians and Paralympians forever as you have stood head-to-head and toe-to-toe amongst the worlds’ elite at the greatest show of excellence.
For over a month, hon Members here, like most Singaporeans, eagerly followed your progress through the Games and you did not disappoint. You brought us through a multitude of emotions. We felt your joy when you did well; your passion when you fought; and your disappointment when things did not go as you hoped. Thank you for inspiring us during these challenging times, for stepping up and enabling us to look forward to you representing us, for showing the best of us as a people and for connecting us with the rest of the world!
Any Olympic and Paralympic campaign is hard. The COVID-19 pandemic certainly made this one tougher. Training was disrupted, competition travel plans were terminated and the postponement of the Games meant that all of you had to put your lives on hold for an additional year. As an Olympian, I recognise the sacrifices you had to make. Some of you had to spend large amounts of time away from your loved ones to train and compete; others put their careers on hold; and others took time off school. All of this to reach the pinnacle of sport.
Yet, it cannot be argued that the amazing achievements by our home-grown athletes would be impossible without the support of the Government and NGOs.
As Members may know, I am Yip Pin Xiu’s coach, and it was indeed a privilege to be part of her journey. She is an amazing athlete and champion, who is professional, talented and not afraid of hard work. She would be the first to tell you that her success is not hers alone; and we have indeed benefitted greatly from the support from the Government as well as NGOs.
Through our Tokyo campaign, I witnessed the grit and resilience of athletes like Pin Xiu mustered. Plans that brought athletes like Pin Xiu to success in 2016 had to completely be rewritten because of COVID-19. Limited training time, limited exposure to elite competition and relearning how to compete under new protocols, changed our approach entirely.
I am very thankful that we had a great team in the MCCY, SportSG, Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC), Singapore National Paralympic Council (SNPC), Singapore Disability Sports Council (SDSC), the National Training Centre (NTC) and the Sports Hub who provided invaluable support, advice and action during this campaign.
The circuit breaker was a very hard time, like many of the athletes here did not have access to training facility time and resources. For athletes like Pin Xiu, who are more efficient in the water, adapting to a land-based training programme was a challenge. We had daily conference calls with SSI's Sport Scientists to make sure that all aspects of her training were covered, and together with Mick Massey from SDSC, we planned for a smooth transition post-circuit breaker. Never once did we lose sight of the target, and in the end, Pin Xiu won two golds. Two times, we, as a nation sang the Majulah Singapura at the Tokyo Aquatic Centre as we joined the world to watch our flag fly high.
So, today, I would like to mention the amazing team that SportSG has assembled to be able to deliver a truly world-class programme. Pin Xiu’s gold medals are proof that we have the capability and resources to produce world beaters in Singapore. I hope that SportSG continues building on its capabilities and programmes to support our athletes.
Pin Xiu is also a beneficiary of the spexScholarship, which many of our athletes here today are on. The spexScholarship provides an enhanced level of financial and programme support for Singapore’s elite athletes, enabling talented athletes to pursue their sporting careers longer.
Other athletes like Joseph Schooling and Quah Zheng Wen have also been supported in their athletic ambitions by deferments granted by MINDEF. Because of these deferments, Singapore was able to realise its first Olympic gold, care of Joseph Schooling. These performances made the world sit up and take notice of Singapore. They redefined what is possible and inspired a new generation of athletes to take on their mantle for many Olympics to come. I hope MINDEF continues to work together with MCCY to recognise talented athletes with extraordinary potential to inspire and unite our nation for future deferments.
There is no doubt that Pin Xiu’s wins have motivated many. Her achievements in and out of the pool will leave a legacy on Singapore and Singaporeans. She has shed light on various groups of persons in society and inspired many to do their part to build a better and inclusive Singapore.
Mr Speaker, I am overjoyed to hear that a special award has been created to acknowledge Pin Xiu's achievements and captures the spirit of her accomplishments.
It is my hope that her success has inspired generations of Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) to redefine their capabilities. Para-athletes like Pin Xiu and Theresa Goh have realigned my perceptions and taught me never to put limitations on their abilities. In turn, I hope that their accolades encourage other PWDs to look beyond their physical abilities and reimagine their own capabilities. Get active, take on a sport, pursue your passions. Hopefully, they will reach the heights of our para trailblazers and beyond. One day, we will be recognising their feats here in Parliament as well.
The conversation around support and the disparity between parasports and sports in general happens every four years. Perhaps this time, we can ride this wave and work with the existing system, which needs more assistance.
Hon Members, we recognise sport has the power to motivate, transform and unite. Sport is a great way to impart values. Our Olympians and Paralympians here today are an embodiment of values such as equality, respect and excellence. At the Tokyo Games, we saw these values in action.
Pierre de Coubertin, the Founder of the Modern Day Olympic Movement said, \"The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not winning but taking part. The essential thing in life is not conquering but fighting well. The important thing in life is not to triumph but to compete. All sports for all people. All sports must be treated on the basis of equality. The important thing in life is not victory but combat. It is not to have vanquished but to have fought well.\"
In the spirit of equality, I would like to encourage MCCY to work closely with SDSC and SNPC to develop the ecosystem and programmes to enable PWDs to pursue sports participation. Even if Singapore has built world-class sports facilities, we have a ways to go in making these facilities accessible for PWDs. By making facilities accessible, we thereby enable our fellow Singaporeans the ability to participate and experience sports and everything wonderful it brings.
As the sports ecosystem relies heavily on donations, sponsorships and volunteers at all levels, I encourage MCCY and SportSG to engage Government-linked companies and MNCs to adopt our national sports associations by financially supporting their activities. I would also like to urge more volunteers to step forward, be trained and make an impact through sport. I would like to encourage Coach SG and various national sporting bodies to develop para-coaching courses, to equip coaches with necessary knowledge and skills to provide appropriate programmes for PWDs at all levels across various sports. By doing so, I believe we can bridge the disparities between parasports and sports by creating opportunities for all and developing a more inclusive society, something deeply rooted in the values as a nation.
Finally, my fellow Olympians and Paralympians, we are very proud of you. Please allow me to leave you with this.
Whilst training for the Sydney 2000 Olympics, my coach Mr Kee Soon Bee passed away. Mr Kee could not see me compete in Sydney, nor was he able to realise his own individual Olympic ambitions because of World War II. When we trained, Mr Kee told me that it is a privilege to go to the Olympics and if I were given an opportunity, I should not take being an Olympian for granted. He would say that \"It’s hard to ascend Mount Olympus, but it is even harder to stay at its peak.\"
As Olympians and Paralympians, we have been given this privilege and opportunity. We have gained knowledge and experienced what it is like to be amongst the world's best. Your journey as Olympians and Paralympians does not stop here, so keep going, keep pushing, keep defying the odds and proving what is possible with hard work and dedication!
Mr Speaker, for all of us here in Parliament today, we know with great opportunities we are offered, comes certain great responsibilities. I would like to encourage each and every one of you to continue your journey in sports and contribute your knowledge, experience and time to the ecosystem in Singapore. \"Once an Olympian, always an Olympian. In service to Olympians and in service to society\". If we work together, there is nothing beyond our reach and we will be able to stand together on the podium for many national anthems to come! \"Majulah Singapura! Majulah Singapura!\" [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Ms Poh Li San.
Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang): Thank you, Minister Edwin, for moving this Motion to recognise and congratulate our Team Singapore athletes.
Mr Speaker, I would like to mention that as Deputy President of the Singapore Table Tennis Association, there might be some personal association on the subject that I will be speaking on.
Tokyo Games would be remembered as an extraordinary pandemic Olympic and Paralympic Games. The Tokyo International Olympic Committee and International Paralympic Committee defied the multitude of obstacles, protests, delays and criticisms to have successfully hosted the event. For bringing the world together to compete and to celebrate the spirit of humanity in the midst of a global crisis, the organising committee certainly deserves the accolades.
With sports, humanity triumphs.
With sports, people all over the world can unite.
With sports, we can overcome adversity.
Singaporeans are worn out by the mental, economic and social impact from COVID-19. Over the past two years, we have witnessed and are reminded of darkness of mental wellness issues.
Sports can strengthen our bodies and minds, toughen our fighting spirit and uplift our spirits during difficult times.
Sports can bring Singaporeans of different races and religions, socio-economic backgrounds together and be the unifying force that bonds and builds Singapore.
In this speech, I am calling for this House to do better and more for our national athletes as well as for all community sports participants, and to affirm the greater purpose of sports to bond Singaporeans.
Singaporeans can easily recall the historic Joseph Schooling’s win against the swimming legend Michael Phelps during the 2016 Rio Olympics. That victory electrified Singapore and brought cheers and celebration across the entire nation. His victory was an inspiration to budding young athletes and his win re-energised the entire local sporting fraternity with renewed ambitions and possibilities.
Our athletes may not have won any medal in the recent Tokyo Olympics but there were some debutants who delivered commendable performances in their maiden Olympic games, namely, shuttlers Kean Yew and Jasmine, fencers Kiria and Amita and sailors Kimberly and Cecilia. In the Tokyo Paralympics, our athletes delivered better than expected. Our athletes came home with two Gold medals and broke five National Records. Our heartiest congratulations to our swimmer and also former Nominated Member of Parliament, Ms Yip Pin Xiu, for winning two Golds at Tokyo Paralympic Games and a total of five Paralympic Gold medals for Singapore since Beijing Paralympics in 2008. And congratulations as well to Pin Xiu’s coach, Mr Mark Chay, who is also an hon Member of the House.
Our Olympians and Paralympians remind us that with grit, determination and passion, we can overcome life challenges. With public expectations, every athlete is expected to perform well even though there will only be one winner.
The thing about competitive sports is that it trains you to be resilient, instills discipline and to embrace failure and pick yourself up again to be better.
When Joseph Schooling did not advance beyond the heats, there were many nasty comments hurled at him on the social media. At the same time, many Singaporeans including President Halimah, Minister Edwin Tong and yourself, Mr Speaker, came forward to support him. Minister Edwin reminded Singaporeans that we should not be fair-weather fans and we must be consistent in our support of our athletes, whether they win or lose. We must embrace failure, give constructive and not destructive comments.
Beyond winning medals, we must remember the greater meaning of sports and of the Olympic Games. As summed up by Tokyo Olympics Chef de Mission, Dr Ben Tan, and I quote him, \"Team Singapore showed professionalism, fearlessness and tenacity at the Olympics\". It is already an immense achievement for an athlete to qualify for the Olympics. In the midst of this raging pandemic, it takes an even greater amount of determination and courage to compete. We must all support Team Singapore!
Mr Speaker, now that the Tokyo Games is over, it is time to review our national sports strategy. Prof Tommy Koh mentioned in his opinion piece that small countries could win medals as well. I agree. Now that it is evident to us that being small and unable to perform is just an excuse, we need to look into why Singapore cannot win more Olympic medals when countries that are less well-endowed and with similar or smaller populations can do so. Countries such as Hong Kong, Luxembourg, San Marino, Jamaica, Bahamas and Grenada have each won several Olympic medals. What else must Singapore do more and do differently?
In preparation for this Motion, I have consulted several senior members of SportSG, Singapore Sports School, national coaches and several national athletes. I thank them for their candour and I would also like to put on record the commendable work and contribution in the development of the local sports ecosystem by MCCY, SportSG, SNOC, SNPC, many National Sports Associations and local sports clubs over the years.
Here is a chronology of what was done so far for sports in Singapore. In 1993, the Sports Excellence programme, or SPEX in short, was introduced. In 2004, Singapore Sports School was launched and in 2011, the Singapore Sport Institute to support Team Singapore athletes and coaches in high performance sports started. In 2013, SPEX Scholarships for top national athletes was launched and other athlete-centric programmes were introduced. In 2014, the $1.3 billion Sports Hub with its state-of-the-art integrated facilities opened. By 2015, National Youth Sports Institute was operational.
Annually, the Government invests some $400 million towards sports and sports development in Singapore, including $70 million on the High Performance Sports system to support the development of national athletes and national sports associations.
Clearly, these are significant investments by a country to ensure their high performance athletes have a conducive training environment and some financial support for them to train and compete full-time for major competitions.
However, despite these investments to the sports ecosystem, Olympic medals still elude Singapore. Clearly, there are still gaps that we need to address to help our national athletes excel on the world stage.
It is time for us to make a clear commitment whether we want to provide the best possible support to our sporting talents and excel on the world stage or are we just satisfied with participating in some major international events. If we want Singapore to shine and to show the world that our sporting talents are world-class, we will need a better plan with a clearer strategy.
I would like to suggest the following recommendation basing on the following four points.
First, focus. We need to be very clear about the sports that we intend to develop to create multiple structured development pathways. Basing on past performances and future potential, we will have to carefully identify three or four sports to focus on, basing on performance outcome and not social community participation.
Second, search. To excel in anything you do, one will require the time to train. If you wish to be an Olympics Champion, you need to start training from an early age. We have to build a broad-based pyramid that includes the community sports academies, clubs and National Sports Associations to identify young sports talents. Upon selection and training, expose these talents to high-level international competitions in order to sharpen their skills and build up their experience. It is possible to find our gems if we search hard and early enough.
Third, nurture. We have to do way more if we wish to develop a conducive environment for our talents, starting with MOE schools and the Institutes of Higher Learning to be more supportive in accommodating sports talents. Athletes will have to miss lessons or even examinations when they are representing Singapore at the regional and international sporting events. Such students should be provided with flexibility if they have to take a longer time to complete their academic studies, diploma or degree programmes. It is not easy for anyone to focus 100% if they have to choose between achieving excellence in their interest and their academic commitments. Most parents would want their children to focus on academics because that is the mainstream approach when it comes to securing a good future. This common mindset about no future for professional sports in Singapore must change. Academics may not work for everyone and sports can, in fact, be a good alternative for those who are less academic.
We can be talking about our strategies and problems till the cows come home but the fact is, \"No money, no talk.\" So, on the financial aspects of nurturing a sports talent, we have to ensure that all talented athletes from humble family backgrounds are not denied a chance to excel due to the lack of resources. As of now, most of our national athletes are amateur athletes with no professional sponsorships. Most will have to juggle full-time studies or a full-time job with daily training. Nearer to major competitions, some may have to decide if they wish to take a year or two off from school or work at their own expense. Understandably, not all athletes can afford to do so.
The SPEX Scholarship was launched in 2013 to address this issue. SportSG sponsors about 70 top-tiered national athletes with a monthly stipend so that they can train full-time. SportSG also provide various training grants to those athletes who decide to take time off to train full-time. Separately, SpexBusiness is a network of companies from diverse industries which offers our national athletes various career development support, such as employment opportunities and workplace flexibilities.
All these grants sound good but it is just not good enough to attract talented athletes to go professional. To groom an Olympic medalist from a young age, it can easily cost millions. Instead of having to constantly justify why more state funds should be used to groom a handful of athletes when these resources could well be channelled into social services, we could relinquish total management control of our national athletes.
With professional management, successful professional athletes can be very influential, just like big stars. When athletes win medals and excel at the global stage, they not only bring pride to Singapore, but also goodwill and publicity to their corporate sponsors. We could look into working with bigger commercial corporations that require endorsements and branding and in return, have them support the cost of training and provide financial assistance. A strong partnership with big corporate sponsors should be considered. Recently, there are some fast-growing multinational technology companies setting up shop in Singapore. We ought to move fast.
A career in sports can be short-lived. I would now like to touch on the matter of professional athletes retiring. In March 2015, the Singapore Coach Excellence Programme was established to provide enhanced training and development pathway for all coaches from the grassroots and community to high performance sports. However, a career in coaching may not work for all athletes. One possibility could be a continuation of partnership with the corporations that supported these athletes or for Government-linked companies or Temasek-linked companies or even the Public Service to assist and support our national athletes to transit into second careers. A viable second career opportunity would certainly provide an additional assurance to athletes and their parents when considering if they should turn professional. All professional athletes' safety net must be addressed.
On this note, I would like to recommend that MCCY and MTI work together to start a Sports Representation programme, to recognise the participation of big corporations in the support of our top-tier national athletes who are keen to turn professional.
Fourth, persevere. The reality is that there is no short cut. A lot of hard work, resources and systematic development have to be invested in order to groom that one winner. Developing a talent to be able to compete at a high level competition and able to have a continuous pipeline of talents will require time.
These four pointers are necessary to ensure a strong pipeline of athletes. The next Olympics Games is only three years away and we look forward to more local athletes shining brighter in the Paris Olympics in 2024.
Mr Speaker, I would also like to discuss how community sports bond our nation.
The People's Association (PA), Health Promotion Board (HPB) and ActiveSG actively promote sports and active living. The annual National Sports Participation Survey reports that regular participation of at least once weekly in sports and physical activity grew from 42% in 2011 to an all-time high rate of 69% in 2020. Since the launch of ActiveSG in 2014, they have garnered a membership base of two million and a visitorship of over 17 million every year to ActiveSG sport facilities and programmes before the pandemic. Community sports, such as zumba and brisk walking, have also garnered a huge following. In Northwest CDC, the brisk walking club has membership of more than 60,000 walkers!
These sporting activities are simple, widely accessible and affordable. They are suitable for people of all ages and, more importantly, these community sports activities bring people together, regardless of their race, language and religion, gender and age. In addition, community sports and fitness activities play a very important role to keep our residents, especially the seniors, active physically and engaged psychologically, so that they can continue to age actively into their golden years. To add, instead of staying home to play online games, our younger residents are reminded to exercise several times a week through these community events.
Unfortunately, the pandemic caused a severe impact on our community events. The strong momentum gathered over the past decade declined. A recent study by marketing research company Ipsos showed that 30% of 500 respondents experienced an average increase of around five kilogrammes during the pandemic. The main reasons were due to the more sedentary lifestyles and the closure of and capacity restrictions in gyms and fitness studios. Fortunately, 40% of the respondents reported that they are exercising more often due to the absence of work commutes which made it easier to carve out time to exercise.
Going forward in a COVID-endemic world, if some of the safe management measures were to remain for a prolonged period, PA, HPB, ActiveSG and schools must look into what can be done to encourage people to partake in community sports. There are several challenges that will require creative solutions. I hope we can consider the following.
Firstly, different measures for the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Access to enclosed and air-conditioned gyms and fitness studios will not be accessible to the unvaccinated individuals. Unvaccinated individuals will have to exercise in the open spaces instead. In fact, some fitness centres, including those operated by ActiveSG, have started outdoor gyms so that members can still do their free weights and circuit training in an open space.
Secondly, I recommend that ActiveSG rent out fitness studios at a special rate to fitness instructors who wish to coach their students online. This will allow some fitness instructors to leverage technology to amplify their outreach. They could even take a step further by using these facilities to create digital content and produce fitness workout videos.
Sports will prepare our youths to be physically and mentally prepared for the challenges of the real world and my biggest concern is actually the unvaccinated young children below 12 years old. At the moment, physical education lessons for Primary schools are very controlled or suspended. In fact, most national school sports meet and games have also been halted for almost two years now. This stoppage of physical activities has an unhealthy and negative effect on young children and youths. Not only are they not able to exercise, they are not able to interact with their friends and are also unable to develop their physical and mental strengths through sports and games.
It is important for MOE to take a risk-based approach to gradually open up sports activities and CCAs in Primary schools and restart the national school sports meet and games in the Secondary schools and Junior Colleges.
Mr Speaker: Ms Poh Li San, you have half a minute left.
Ms Poh Li San: As the pandemic situation wanes, sports that are played in the outdoors, such as track and field, and those with minimal contact and played indoors, such as table tennis and badminton, should restart. Hopefully, team sports with less contact like volleyball and netball can also restart. Understandably, contact sports like soccer and rugby will take some time but the game could be reorganised into smaller teams so that children can resume playing again in a safe manner.
Mr Speaker, be it competitive or community sports, sports should be an integral part of our daily lives, with a purpose to bond Singaporeans.
Singapore is still very much a young nation and our sporting culture is still evolving. Sports can be a viable professional career in Singapore. What is important is that we search, focus, nurture and persevere to build a solid and strong foundation for our sporting ecosystem.
Mr Speaker, Sir, through sports, we will bond and build Singapore. I support the Motion. [Applause.]
Mr Sitoh Yih Pin (Potong Pasir): Mr Speaker, I rise in full support of the Motion.
I believe that I speak for all Members of this House when I say that we are extremely proud of all our athletes who represented and continue to represent Singapore, be it at the Olympics, Paralympics or any other sporting event.
We have seen for ourselves how sports have the capacity to rally a nation and inspire generations. Sports, therefore, play a crucial and important role in forging a strong Singapore spirit. Sportsmen and sportswomen also serve as good role models for our youths, with their passion, perseverance, drive and values in sportsmanship. Athletes like Yip Pin Xiu and Joseph Schooling are good examples.
But as we celebrate and recognise the successes of our athletes, we should also cast our minds towards the equally important task of improving the support system for all our committed elite athletes who are striving hard every day in their respective sporting disciplines regardless of the eventual outcomes in competitions.
If we succeed in establishing a strong, multifaceted support system for our athletes, a strong national sporting culture can evolve where our athletes can train and aspire to be the best that they can be, while having the peace of mind that they have the financial support during and institutional support after their sporting careers.
In order to achieve this, the Government can consider working further with the private sector by creating an official platform and invite like-minded private sector organisations to come on board to spearhead these efforts. At the moment, we do have various existing programmes by the Government and the private sector in support of the sporting community. Examples include funding from SportsSG, the One Team Singapore Fund, spexScholarship and also spexBusiness which tap on private sector support. I am also aware, for instance, that Deloitte has its own specially-curated programme, \"Deloitte Ignite\" which offers internship and employment opportunities for elite athletes, current and retired.
These existing programmes have certainly assisted our athletes over the years but, Sir, I think we can do more. We can invite senior executives from the private sector to sit in a committee, together with MCCY, to look at how we can better support our athletes holistically. Working closely with the private sector, we will be able to access a wider range of resources and utilise these resources flexibly to benefit a wider spectrum of athletes in more sporting disciplines. We will also be able to better tailor the support given to each athlete as requirements may differ from athlete to athlete and from sport to sport.
Separately, a perennial worry for elite athletes is their livelihoods after their sporting careers are over. The spexBusiness network has done well in this area for many of our athletes but such a committee can look to leveraging the existing network to do even more.
Japan, for example, has a culture of \"corporate athletes\", where Japanese corporations have sometimes hired elite athletes as full-time employees with a flexible work-training schedule that is tailored to meet the athlete concerned. While we may not be able to adopt a similar model, the committee can look at other innovative arrangements, suited to our local context, for our Singapore athletes.
My sincere hope is that successes such as those of Pin Xiu and Joseph and the many athletes that have come before them, can inspire a whole new generation of Singaporean athletes to pursue their sporting aspirations. We, as Members of this House and the Government, must certainly try our very best to support this endeavour.
My heartiest congratulations once again to all our Olympic and Paralympic athletes for their best efforts in representing Singapore. We are all so very proud of you. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Minister Edwin Tong.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Mr Speaker, I thank the various Members who have spoken in support of the Motion so wholeheartedly. And even as we celebrate the successes today, I thank them for their vision and suggestions in looking forward, looking ahead on what else we can do.
I thank Mr Seah for his pledge to continue to support sports and, in particular, for him, in his capacity in FairPrice, to lead the initiatives to contribute towards sports. I thank Assoc Prof Jamus Lim and Ms Denise Phua's suggestions and also, their reiteration that sports, like many other situations in life, we have to cater to the vicissitudes of the circumstances and that that itself ought not to diminish the achievements of our sporting talents.
As usual, Ms Phua has also set me a task – and also, thank you for acknowledging my alternative career as a sports commentator. I will take on board the suggestions and, of course, be accountable to the various initiatives that she has set out. I have no doubt she will ask me to explain the dashboard to her, in her words, on a different occasion.
I thank Mr Mark Chay for sharing his own experience, unique as it is, once an Olympian and now coach of a Paralympian champion. Your insights being in the system, showing us your view from the inside, understanding the different moving parts between Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC), Singapore National Paralympic Council (SNPC), Singapore Disability Sports Council (SDSC), all the acronyms, coming together, really say a lot about the village and the support that we have as a village to ensure the successes of our athletes.
I thank Ms Poh for the very thoughtful and considerate suggestions. There were many of them. We will take them on board and review them closely with SportSG. And finally, I thank Mr Sitoh for his suggestions. The reiteration that we will work with the private sector and that there is a lot of good that will come out of this partnership, as I have mentioned earlier in my opening speech.
I underscore the point that we will reimagine our spots framework to ensure that all levels of participation from the grassroots through to the elite sporting talents will be given opportunities through programmes like the spexScholarship and others to allow athletes to realise their full potential.
On this, let me come back to the Motion and reiterate our gratitude, our thanks and our deepest, warmest congratulations to all of our TeamSG athletes, Olympians, Paralympians and, in particular, our Gold Medalist champion from Tokyo 2020 and now five-time Gold Medal winner Paralympian, Ms Yip Pin Xiu on her award today. Thank you very much, Sir, I beg to move. [Applause.]
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That this House congratulates our Team Singapore Olympians and Paralympians, in particular Ms Yip Pin Xiu, our five-time Paralympic Gold Medalist, for their achievements at the 2020 Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games.\" (proc text)]
[(proc text) Thereupon, hon Members stood to their feet and applauded. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Thank you. Order.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Minister for Manpower","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Speaker: Dr Tan See Leng, you have some clarifications.
The Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): Mr Speaker, with your leave, I would like to make a clarification with respect to my response to Ms Hany Soh's supplementary question on employment outcomes. Ms Hany Soh had said earlier that 57% percent of job vacancies were unfilled for six months or more. I would just like to clarify that based on the latest available data from 2020, the proportion of job vacancies unfilled for six months or more was 27%, not 57%.
Earlier, I also said that nine in 10 people placed through the Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs) remained employed in the same company after 24 months. I wish to clarify that nine in 10 people placed through the CCPs remained employed after 24 months but not necessarily with the same company. Thank you.
Mr Speaker: Thank you. The Clerk will proceed to read the Orders of the day.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Sedition (Repeal) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr K Shanmugam): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time\".
This Bill repeals the Sedition Act and makes related amendments to other legislation.
The crime of Sedition has its origins in English common law. It was originally designed to protect the monarchy and the British government from civil unrest and dissent among its people. Sedition laws were first introduced in Singapore through the Sedition Ordinance 1938, when Singapore was a British colony.
The Sedition Act, in its current form, has its roots in the Sedition Ordinance 1948, which was introduced by the British to the Federation of Malaya in 1948 in part to curb local opposition to British colonial rule. The Act criminalises conduct with seditious tendencies. Those tendencies are defined in section 3 of the Act including: (a) bringing into hatred or contempt or exciting disaffection against the Government; (b) exciting citizens or residents to attempt to change in unlawful ways, any matter legally established; (c) bringing into hatred or contempt or the exciting of disaffection against the administration of justice in Singapore; (d) raising discontent or disaffection amongst the citizens of Singapore or residents in Singapore; and (e) promoting feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population in Singapore.
[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]
Some of the key aspects of the Sedition Act are no longer relevant and have not been relevant for a long time. Those provisions have not been used for prosecution. Those provisions which remained in the law up to today, have not been used for a long time.
For instance, the excitement of disaffection against the Government should not be criminalised. I think if it is, a lot of people including many in this House, would be considered criminals.
It had not been done away sooner because some of the other provisions were relevant. But over time, as other laws come into place, which were originally covered by the Sedition Act, including: \"(a) conduct which impugns the integrity and impartiality of Judges or undermines public confidence in the administration of justice in Singapore\", have already been dealt with under the common law of contempt, but now there is the Administration of Justice Act; \"(b) inciting violence with the objective of effecting change to policies in Singapore\" have now and for some time found a place in other legislation; and \"(c) ill-will or hostility between groups of people in Singapore\".
But one aspect, which is not in any other legislation, which remains relevant and has not been dealt with, therefore, is conduct that promotes feelings of ill-will and hostility between different groups in the population, not just along racial or religious lines but other lines as well. So, racial and religious lines are already covered but other classes of the population are not covered.
We will, therefore, be making related amendments as we repeal the Sedition Act. We will be making related amendments to the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code to ensure that that aspect to safeguard social cohesion in Singapore is maintained.
Sir, let me just touch on the amendments to the Penal Code. We now have laws that deal with conduct that threatens racial and religious harmony, as I had said. They include sections 298 and 298A of the Penal Code as well as, of course, the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act.
Beyond racial and religious harmony, we must also continue to safeguard social cohesion between other groups of the population. They could be organised along lines of language, socio-economic status and other groups. The Bill, therefore, amends section 267C of the Penal Code to cover this.
Section 267C today only covers the use of documents or electronic records. It will be amended to cover speeches and other forms of communication, because they are equally relevant.
The Bill raises the threshold of section 267C by requiring proof of a mental fault element. The person must have intended for the violence or disobedience to the law or breach of the peace to occur, or knew or had reason to believe that these were likely to occur as a result of his words or actions.
Compared to section 3(1)(e) of the Sedition Act, the offence threshold for the amended section 267C will be higher.
The Bill also amends section 267C to define the phrase \"counselling disobedience to the law\" as providing instruction, advice or information that promotes disobedience to the law. The amendment is intended to provide greater clarity on the scope of the offence and its application.
Next, I will touch on the amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code.
The offences currently under the Sedition Act are arrestable. It allows the Police to move quickly.
Once the Sedition Act is repealed, to ensure that the Police can continue to be effective in investigations where particularly social cohesion is concerned, we propose to amend the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) to make the following offences arrestable.
Section 298 of the Penal Code, which criminalises the deliberate wounding of any person's racial or religious feelings.
Section 298A of the Penal Code, which criminalises the promotion of disharmony between different racial or religious feelings.
Section 505 of the Penal Code, which criminalises, among other behaviour, the making, publication or circulation of material with the intent to incite any group of persons to commit an offence against another group of persons.
Section 267C is already an arrestable offence. No amendment is needed in this regard.
In conclusion, with that, I beg to move. Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied): Mdm Deputy Speaker, the Government has set out its rationale for the repeal of the Sedition Act Bill. It said that it had used the Sedition Act in the past to address various forms of conduct that weaken our social fabric and undermine our institutions. However, new laws were introduced to deal with these concerns in a more \"targeted and calibrated manner\", such as the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act (MRHA), Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), Administration of Justice Act, Undesirable Publications Act, Newspaper and Printing Presses Act (NPPA) and specific provisions under the Penal Code.
MHA has said that for this reason, it finds that the Sedition Act is of limited application and can be repealed. But as a result, various provisions in other Acts are being amended.
Madam, I do not oppose this Bill but will pose some clarifying questions to the Minister on areas of concern.
Firstly, under section 5(1) of the Sedition Act, \"No prosecution for an offence under section 4 shall be begun except within six months after the offence is committed: provided that for the purposes of this subsection a prosecution shall be deemed to be begun against any person when a warrant or summons has been issued in respect of any charge made against that person and based on the facts or incident in respect of which the prosecution afterwards proceeds.\"
This would appear to create a time limit for prosecution for any offences committed under the Sedition Act. This plays a useful role of helping to reduce the risk of a suspect being investigated too long after the event and relevant evidence may not be fully available.
With the consequential amendment to section 267C of the Penal Code, this time limit for prosecution would not seem to apply anymore.
I would like to ask the Minister to confirm this and if it is so, what is the basis for making this change? Should not the time limit for prosecution provision have also been added as an amendment to the Penal Code in this Bill in the same way that this Bill makes the offences described in sections 298, 298A and 505 of the Penal Code arrestable, because they are arrestable in the now to be repealed Sedition Act? That is my first point.
Secondly, the new section 267C of the Penal Code will be amended to clarify that \"counselling disobedience to the law\" includes but is not limited to providing instruction, advice or information that promotes disobedience to the law.
My concern here is with the phrase \"information that promotes disobedience to the law and such order\". I would like to clarify whether the act of merely conveying information about the topic of civil disobedience without any specific intent to induce someone to commit a specific act of civil disobedience would count as an offence.
For example, a lecturer may teach a module on the history of civil disobedience as part of a course in history or politics or citizens may convey information to one another on social media about acts of civil disobedience that have been committed elsewhere or in the past or ideas relating to the philosophical arguments for and/or against civil disobedience.
If there is no specific intent to induce a person to commit a specific act of civil disobedience in Singapore that can be demonstrated from the said sharing of information, would this still constitute an offence? I think it should not but I welcome the Minister's assurance on this point.
My third point, Madam, is that this Bill makes offences under 298 and 298A arrestable, which the Minister just alluded to, meaning that the Police may arrest without a warrant.
No doubt these powers were already in the now to be repealed Sedition Act. However, I would like to ask for clarification about why these offences are now being made arrestable in the Penal Code for the following reasons.
At paragraph 11 of the MHA press release accompanying the First Reading of this Bill, MHA pointed out that the offences under the Sedition Act are arrestable and stated that with its repeal, making this change is \"to ensure that the Police can continue to act swiftly and effectively when dealing with egregious cases that affect social cohesion\". Hence, MHA proposes to make, among other things, sections 298 and 298A in the Penal Code that deal with conduct that threatens social cohesion and harmony arrestable.
The problem is, sections 298 and 298A are broadly worded. By way of contrast, even the offences in the colonial-era Sedition Act contains safeguards and exceptions to protect legitimate, non-seditious speech, which these sections of the Penal Code do not appear to contain.
Section 3(1) of the now to be repealed Sedition Act defines a seditious tendency and includes in section 3(1)(e) \"to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore.\"
Critically, however, section 3(2) of the now to be repealed Sedition Act sets out a list of exceptions to specify what shall not be deemed as seditious and I quote from this section 3(2) of the now to be repealed Sedition Act, \"Notwithstanding subsection (1), any act, speech, words, publication or other thing shall not be deemed to be seditious by reason only that it has a tendency: (a) to show that the Government has been misled or mistaken in any of its measures; (b)\tto point out errors or defects in the Government or the Constitution as by law established or in legislation or in the administration of justice with a view to the remedying of such errors or defects; (c)\tto persuade the citizens of Singapore or the residents in Singapore to attempt to procure by lawful means the alteration of any matter in Singapore; or (d)\tto point out, with a view to their removal, any matters producing or having a tendency to produce feelings of ill-will and enmity between different races or classes of the population of Singapore, if such act, speech, words, publication or other thing has not otherwise in fact a seditious tendency.\" Section 4 then sets out the list of offences under the Sedition Act.
In contrast, sections 298 and 298A of the Penal Code as amended by this Bill do not have such express exceptions or safeguards.
Perhaps the safeguards come in the requirement that there must be \"deliberate intention\" to wound the religious or racial feelings of any person in section 298.
In section 298A, the offender must know that they are promoting or attempting to promote feelings of ill will and so on between different racial or religious groups or must know that they are committing an act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious or racial groups in which disturbs or is likely to disturb public tranquility.
However, I am not sure if such requirements in section 298 and 298A of the Penal Code really provide for the same safeguards as section 3(2) of the Sedition Act. In particular, I am concerned about the scope of the new section 298A(b).
What if someone points out something which they know is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious or racial groups and is likely to disturb public tranquility but they are doing so for the purpose of trying to point it out so as to remove it? This would fall under the exception to section 3(2)(d) of the Sedition Act, which is now to be repealed but with the Sedition Act to be repealed, that would not be an exception in the amended Penal Code. So, will the Police investigate such conduct as a potential offence?
Madam, because of the safeguards in the Sedition Act but which are not in sections 298 and 298A of the Penal Code that are in this Bill, I do not think that the offences under the Sedition Act versus 298 and 298A of the Penal Code are a like-for-like swap or porting over, as it were.
MHA's rationale for adding arrestability to these two offences, aside from merely porting these over from the Sedition Act, is also so as \"to ensure that the Police can continue to act swiftly and effectively in dealing with egregious cases that affect social cohesion\".
However, is there a threshold for what constitutes egregious and if so, what are some of the criteria for it? Determining such offences involves judgement and by making these offences arrestable and giving the Police the power to arrest without a warrant, would that not increase the risk of the wrong judgement being made, which might potentially inflame a delicate situation further? How would that risk be mitigated and managed?
And my last point, Madam. Section 298 and 298A of the Criminal Procedure Code were amended when the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act was amended back in October 2019. I would like to clarify if those amendments are already in force. The Singapore Statutes Online facility does not reflect any MRHA amendment being enforced from 2019. The last amendment reflected there is in 2011.
If the amendments to the MRHA passed by Parliament in 2019 are not yet in force, why is this the case?
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Minister K Shanmugam.
Mr K Shanmugam: Thank you, Madam. I wanted to say I thank Members for the overwhelming support for this Bill to repeal the Sedition Act. The fact that only Mr Perera wanted to speak, I think, does suggest overwhelming support. And he supports it as well, so, I thank him for that. I will address the clarifications that Mr Perera has raised.
I think the first question that he asked is the time limit for prosecution. Under the Sedition Act, actions have to be brought within six months and there is no time limit under the amended provisions.
To understand this, I think we need to look at the Sedition Act a little carefully. We are talking about very different offences. Let me make that clear.
The six-month time limit is in section 5 of the Sedition Act. Section 5, then, must relate back to section 4, for example, 4(1)(a), where any person who does or attempts to do or makes any preparation to do anything which would have a seditious tendency. So, what is important is seditious tendency. That, in turn, brings you back to section 3(1), which defines what seditious tendency is.
A seditious tendency is a tendency to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the Government. If you look at (d), \"to raise discontent or disaffection amongst the citizens of Singapore or the residents in Singapore\"; (e), \"to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore\".
So, if you went out there and you said something that makes people upset with the Government of Singapore, under section 3(1)(a), that is an offence. If you raise the discontent or disaffection amongst the citizens, it does not matter whether it is against the Government or not, that is also an offence.
So, it is a very extreme legislation and we are doing away with it and you can understand why a time limit of six months has been put.
As I said earlier, I think on the strict wordings of section 3, Mr Leon Perera would have committed offences several times. I am likely to have committed offences several times as well, both in my previous incarnation and now, because it talks about raising discontent, disaffection amongst the citizens of Singapore and exciting disaffection against the Government. These all really have not been relevant for a very long time.
Over a period of time, different provisions come up, as I explained in my Second Reading opening speech. For example, the Administration of Justice Act on contempt of Court, on interfering with proceedings in Court, on bringing that disrepute to the Judiciary. So, there is legislation that deals with that.
Section 267C takes some parts of section 4. That is really on violence, getting people to violently do something and contrary to the law. There is no complete taking of the Sedition Act and putting it in. What you now have with the other pieces of legislation are completely different animals. The essence or the heart of the Sedition Act is actually being done away with.
So, the rationale for the six months has got to be seen in the context of what the Sedition Act provides. In the other legislation, in normal criminal cases, you take the normal criminal approach, which is that there is no time limit on prosecuting offences.
So, for example, if you look at section 267C, which is the amendment that is coming along, section 267C of the Penal Code is an existing provision with no time limits. It originally dealt with usage, making, printing, reproducing, distributing, communicating any incitement to violence. So, you can see it is a very different type of offence, counselling disobedience to the law or to lawful order of a public servant, which is likely to lead to a breach of the peace. So, it is that sort of offence. It has got nothing to do with exciting disaffection against the Government or making people unhappy. It is a very direct focused offence and we are making some changes there, including to the mental elements.
Specifically, we are covering statements made, words uttered and reproduction sale, offer for sale and importation of documents. That is the reason why the six months' requirement under the Sedition Act is not being ported over because, basically, most of the key elements of the Sedition Act, which kept the colonial rule in place, are being done away with. Bits and pieces which are relevant for modern Singapore have already been moved out into other legislation. Now, one last bit is being moved out.
The second point that Mr Perera makes on the counselling of civil disobedience and the mental element. Again, if you look at section 267C, conveying information about civil disobedience is, in and of itself, not an offence under section 267C because if you look at section 267C, it has got (1)(a), (b), (c), (d), then it says, in the proposed amendments, the person does any of these things, intending for violence, disobedience to the law or such lawful order or breach of the peace to occur. So, the person must have intended for the violence or the disobedience or the breach of the peace to occur, or knowing, or having reason to believe, that such consequences would occur. And, likewise, under 267(2)(d), there is also a requirement for knowing or having reason to believe an intention. So, the mental elements are set out in the proposed amendments, which are at a higher level than what the Sedition Act requires.
The third point Mr Perera makes is why is it being made arrestable. Again, I think you need to compare sections 298 to 298A, which are already in our Statute books, with section 3(1). I just took the House through section 3(1). As I mentioned, a large number of us would probably have run afoul of section 3(1) at one point of time.
The reason for lower thresholds in section 3(1) is due to its own history of maintaining colonial rule. You have got to look at section 3(1) and you have got to see what is important is that section 3(1)(a), \"A seditious tendency is a tendency to bring into hatred or contempt or excite disaffection against the Government\". And then, of course, you have got (b), (c), (d), (e), some of which have been moved over in the past and one aspect is being moved over now.
And then, section 3(2) says it shall not be deemed to be seditious by reason only that you are trying to show that the Government has been misled or mistaken; or you are pointing out errors or defects in the Government as by law established; or you are trying to persuade citizens of Singapore, the residents in Singapore to attempt to procure by lawful means the alteration of any matter in Singapore; or to point out, with a view to their removal, any matters producing or having a tendency to produce feelings of ill-will and enmity between different races or classes.
So, you see this is really nothing to do with the offences that are now found in other legislation, including the slight amendments to section 267C which is on counselling disobedience to the law or the view to breaking of the law.
The Sedition Act section 3(2)(d) has some reference to producing feelings of ill-will and enmity between different races or classes, but you must look at it in the light also of section 3(3), which says the intention of the person charged at the time he did some of these things, seditious words are irrelevant. Your intention is irrelevant. If you did what you did and it has these tendencies, then you are liable under the law. Your intention, your knowledge is completely irrelevant. So, it is a very different animal, very different kind of offence and one could almost say very sui generis. We are not going down that route.
If you look at sections 298 and 298A, which, by the way, is not an issue today, \"whoever by words, spoken or written, or by signs or visible representation, promote or attempts to promote, on the grounds of religion or race, ill-will and commits any act which he knows is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious groups\". That is section 298A. So, the element of intention is incorporated in section 298A(b). Section 298 refers to deliberate intention. It is relevant today insofar as offences are being made arrestable.
So, one can ask: does it have to be made arrestable? What is the prejudice? Those are fair questions. I do not think the question can be asked by reference to the Sedition Act which, as I have said, deals with quite different subjects and the exceptions do not make sense in the context of these provisions. But I think it is legitimate to ask. Do you need to make it arrestable? I think a counter question is: what is the prejudice if it is made arrestable? It allows the Police to move faster, it allows the Police to intervene and these are serious matters. And that is a matter of judgement.
I think Mr Perera's fourth and final point is whether the MRHA amendments are already in force. No, they are not yet in force. I think we answered a Parliamentary Question in September. The amendments were passed in 2019 but, normally, with many such legislation, which affect a large group of people on the ground – here, it is all the religious organisations – they have to make disclosures, they have compliance requirements. You cannot just bring the Act into force without making sure – religious organisations are differently resourced. Some are well-resourced, some are less well-resourced. Some are essentially a very small operation – to give time to all of them to resource themselves, to be able to comply with the requirements of the legislation. In fact, you have got to take time to educate them, talk to them about the requirements.
We also have to make sure that our own systems are set up to be able to receive the information that comes through. Another subject which I have spoken about quite frequently in this House is that we are short of officers and we now have to find officers who can be trained to deal with these specific returns that the religious groups will be giving. So, there are a number of different factors here.
We will do this as quickly as we can. I have said the training of the Investigation Officers on the thresholds for the amended offences is ongoing and that will take a little bit of time. But, on the ground, as in the religious organisations, also need a little bit of time. And our systems need a little bit of time. We will bring it into force as soon as all these things are in sync.
Madam, once again, I thank Members for their support of the Bill.
[(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 K Shanmugam]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Income Tax (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Minister for Finance (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time\".
The Income Tax (Amendment) Bill covers 38 amendments. Of these, 13 amendments arose from the Budget Statement in February 2021, as well as COVID-19 support measures announced earlier this year to help workers and businesses. Another 25 amendments arose from the periodic review of Singapore’s income tax regime.
We have sought views from the public on the draft Bill earlier this year and have taken into account the feedback received. We thank all the contributors for their inputs.
Let me start with the key amendments that give effect to the 2021 Budget Statement and the support measures announced earlier this year.
First, to help businesses with cash flow, the enhancement to the Loss Carry-Back Relief scheme has been extended for another year. Qualifying deductions for the Year of Assessment (YA) 2021 may be carried back up to three preceding YAs, instead of one. The amount of qualifying deductions that may be carried back is capped at $100,000. This allows businesses to get a refund of up to $17,000 of income tax paid for YA 2018 to YA 2020. Clause 32 of the Bill provides for this amendment.
Second, the scope of the Double Tax Deduction for Internationalisation (DTDi) scheme has been enhanced to cover additional qualifying expenses, for example, specific expenses incurred to participate in approved virtual trade fairs. Clauses 8 and 11 of the Bill provide for these amendments. This is to help us encourage our firms to internationalise.
Third, the 250% tax deduction for qualifying donations to Institutions of Public Character (IPCs) has been extended for another two years to Calendar Year (CY) 2023. Likewise, to continue supporting corporate volunteering, the Business and IPC Partnership Scheme (BIPS) has been extended for another two years to CY 2023. Clauses 14 and 29 of the Bill provide for these amendments. We hope this will continue to encourage Singaporeans to give back to the community.
Fourth, mandatory or voluntary monetary support payments that tenants receive from their landlords in 2021 will not be taxed. This will allow tenants to benefit from the full amount of the monetary support payments. Landlords will also be allowed to claim income tax deductions for these monetary support payments they made to tenants in 2021. This is to facilitate the passing on of rental waivers granted to master tenants of qualifying Government-owned commercial properties to their sub-tenants, as well as the making of monetary support payments by landlords to their tenants in 2021. Clauses 7, 16 and 19 of the Bill provide for these amendments.
MOF regularly reviews and refines the income tax regime. Let me now touch on three key amendments among the 25 amendments in the Bill, arising from this periodic review of our tax regime.
First, we will set out the tax treatment for two situations: where trading stock is appropriated, or used, for non-trade or capital purposes, and vice versa. In other words, where capital assets become trading stock. IRAS’ current tax treatment of such situations is similar to the practice and case law of the UK. The proposed amendments will now codify this current tax treatment into our tax legislation.
Trading stock held by taxpayers may be appropriated for non-trade or capital purposes. For example, a property developer may decide to stop trying to sell unsold units and instead keep them for long-term capital gains. In such cases, we will treat the market value of the trading stock on the date of appropriation as income at that juncture. Any gain, which is arrived at after deducting expenses, will then be subject to tax, while any loss is allowed as a deduction.
This proposed amendment is necessary to protect our revenues. Because without this amendment, there would be revenue loss from deductions claimed by the taxpayer when the asset was held as trading stock, whereas any gain on the subsequent disposal of the asset will be treated as capital in nature and not subject to tax in Singapore because we do not have a capital gains tax.
Conversely, non-trade or capital assets may become trading stock. For example, a property developer may choose not to hold its investment property and redevelop it for sale.
When the redeveloped property is subsequently sold, the gains are computed and subject to income tax. The proposed amendments provide that in computing such gains, the cost of the trading stock is its market value on the date the asset, in this instance the investment property, becomes trading stock.
Clauses 3, 20, 21, 27 and 61 of the Bill provide for these amendments that pertain to the clarification of our tax rules for the purposes where trading stock is appropriated for non-trade or capital purposes and vice versa.
Second, we will facilitate IRAS’ effectiveness when it administers public schemes.
Over the past two years, we have introduced and enhanced many support measures, like the Jobs Support Scheme and the Jobs Growth Incentive, to help businesses and workers. IRAS has stepped up to support this effort by centralising and taking on the business disbursement functions for nine such schemes, which will be added to the Ninth Schedule of the Act.
As part of the quality assurance process to ensure that public schemes are administered as intended, such as disbursing the correct amount of payments to eligible firms, IRAS needs to work with external auditors to check and audit its scheme allotment. This includes checking against income tax data to verify a company’s eligibility for public schemes, for example, whether it is an SME.
As the Income Tax Act restricts the disclosure of protected income tax data to non-public servants including external auditors, this amendment will allow persons authorised by the CEO of IRAS access to selected income tax data and documents, appropriately safeguarded, for the sole purpose of auditing the administration of public schemes.
Safeguards are provided for in the Bill to ensure the proper usage of such tax data. In particular, the Comptroller of Income Tax will be able to restrict the extent of information that needs to be made available to the authorised persons. Authorised persons who are granted access to the protected data will be prohibited from copying or retaining the data, or disclosing the information to other parties. In addition, to protect data privacy, identifiers will be masked before any data is released to auditors under this provision.
As a related amendment, we will also amend the Goods and Services Tax Act to allow access to Goods and Services Tax information to persons authorised by the CEO of IRAS to audit the administration of public schemes. Clauses 2 and 57 of the Bill provide for these amendments.
Third, a protection of informers provision will be included, similar to the provision in legislation like the Customs Act and the Cybersecurity Act 2018. This amendment protects informers by prohibiting witnesses in Court, who might be the informers themselves, from disclosing information that may lead to the discovery of an informer’s identity and thus encourages informers to step forward with information that will enable more effective tax enforcement.
Related amendments will be made to the GST Act, Property Tax Act, Stamp Duties Act, Betting and Sweepstake Duties Act, Private Lotteries Act and Estate Duty Act. Clauses 50, 55 to 60 of the Bill provide for these amendments. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Madam, this Bill introduces a wide array of reforms meant to update our income tax policies and provide necessary financial support to our economy.
I thank the Ministry for doing a public consultation for this Bill in June 2021 and for publishing in September 2021 its response to feedback received. Indeed, several pieces of feedback were accepted and we see their imprint in today’s Bill. I hope MOF will continue this good practice of holding public consultations and accepting productive feedback.
Madam, I have three points of clarification to make.
My first point is about tax deductions for donations. Singaporeans should donate to social and community causes. To encourage this, the Government is providing tax deductions for qualifying donations up until the end of 2021. This Bill extends the end date of that scheme by two years. I thank the Ministry for it.
However, I would like to raise questions about one kind of recipient: donor-advised funds (DAFs). To my understanding, donations to DAFs are eligible for income tax deductions if the DAF is designated to offer grants to Institutions of Public Characters (IPCs).
DAFs have become more popular around the world. From 2015 to 2019, donations to DAFs have risen by 110% in the UK and 80% in the US. With this growth, lawmakers and experts have criticised the rise of DAF-related \"zombie philanthropy\".
This is the trend where DAFs hold on to donations indefinitely and fail to disburse them to charities. The government loses tax income immediately due to tax deductions, while society benefits only belatedly as donations sit untouched for a long time.
On this point, I would like to raise three questions.
First, can the Minister share what is the yearly dollar amount of income tax deductions linked with donations to DAFs for each of the past five years?
Second, can the Minister share what information is typically requested under section 37(3)(b) of the Income Tax Act? In particular, what information has it previously requested when an individual attempts to claim tax deductions using donations to a DAF?
Third, can the Ministry share how the Government proactively guards against the problem where donors claim tax exemptions, tax deductions for donations to DAFs while the DAFs fail to disburse funds to the IPCs in a timely manner?
I know DAFs are meant to encourage charitable giving and I have no broad concerns with their existence. However, there may be room for stronger tax rules on DAFs that tie the incidence of tax deductions with the distribution of the funds. Such rules would promote stronger governance of intermediary charity groups and promise more timely benefits for society.
My second point today is about data secrecy. This Bill empowers IRAS to offer people access to highly confidential government data for the purpose of auditing the administration of public schemes, such as of IRAS’ IT systems. Such people can copy government records for conducting their audits.
While this amendment may help IRAS undertake vital audits, I am concerned that it may not promise sufficient safeguards for data secrecy.
On this, I have two questions on the topic of excess for the Minister’s clarification.
First, excessive scope. What scenarios fall within and outside the purpose of the audit? Would it be reasonable for a data audit firm to create extensive digital back-ups stored on their own systems? How does the Government determine whether the backups are excessive in scope?
Second, excessive time. Why do the amendments not penalise permitted people from holding on to copies of government records for excessive amounts of time? Surely, we agree that even IT auditors should not be holding on to confidential government records for longer than necessary.
Copies of government records held in excessive scope for excessive time increase the likelihood and severity of data leaks and data misuse. I hope the Government will take strong action to ensure vital government records are used and copied in a responsible way.
My third point today is about tax deductions for landlords. In this COVID-19 crisis, more than before, Singaporeans have learned the immense powers landlords have over commercial tenants.
Commercial tenants have gone out of business as they struggle to pay their rent. Many groups, such as the Restaurant Association of Singapore and Singapore Tenants United for Fairness, have spoken in chorus about the lack of flexibility from landlords.
The Government has tried our best to urge landlords to do the right thing. But the pleas have often fallen on deaf ears. As a result, in the past year and a half, this House has to pass laws compelling landlords to provide rental waivers, to allow penalty-free termination of rentals and, most recently, to match rental support provided by the Government.
In this context, the purpose of the new section 14ZH is unclear. It seems to encourage a somehow perverse situation where a landlord can evict a failed tenant and then pay reduced taxes on their rental income.
Why should landlords receive financial incentives when they evict a tenant and keep the property vacant? The outcome is a net loss for society as productive land is left unused.
In addition, how will IRAS ascertain whether a landlord has made \"reasonable efforts\" to find a new tenant during the vacancy period? This loosely defined clause appears to be the only check in these amendments against the scenario I have just described. It would be important to clarify how IRAS intends to implement it and guard against bad-faith actors.
Madam, notwithstanding my clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I am not speaking on the Bill. I believe there was some error. My colleague, Mr Louis Chua, is speaking. Thank you.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Okay. Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mdm Deputy Speaker, many businesses continue to struggle during this pandemic period. I support the provisions and exemptions to reduce some of their overheads. Nevertheless, I would like to highlight five issues.
First, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I am concerned about ensuring adequate revenue streams from the loss of income tax due to the exemptions. The Government has already had to dip into reserves twice to fund the COVID-19 package. Through the Government’s prudent planning and reallocation of resources, we are assured that we do not need to expect to tap on the reserves anytime soon. Yet, it is apparent that the costs to deal with the economic effects of the pandemic are rising.
In these trying times, it seems that the Government would continue to fund the bulk of the COVID-19-related healthcare expenses for as long as possible. With reduced tax revenues, how does the Government ensure that the expenses remain sustainable? What is the projected loss in revenue from the proposed provisions and tax exemptions?
Mdm Deputy Speaker, related to the above, my second point is on ensuring that the tax exemptions for businesses meet their intended purpose of providing a lifeline to struggling businesses. These exemptions should remain sustainable, in case they have to be extended in light of the persistent uncertainty of COVID-19.
Businesses have been accorded a litany of support measures to tap on, from the JSS to rental waivers, training grants and schemes, and so on. Do we really need to further exempt in areas that companies are supposed to strategise and exercise prudence on, as part of running a business? I am referring specifically to packaging, provision of doubtful debts and diminution in value of investments and renovations.
For instance, companies that have had to invest in R&R works to pivot their business, or to fulfil safe management requirements owing to the pandemic, should be the intended recipients of this tax exemption. On the other hand, there are also companies that have clearly expanded and are thriving due to the pandemic: delivery companies and online office solutions come to mind. There must be a way to differentiate between the former and latter type of companies, as the latter are not the intended recipients of these tax exemptions.
These companies should indeed be applauded but they should be assisted through other schemes and grants that we already have in place which reward companies that are expanding or hiring more employees.
As for tax exemptions on the design of packaging for overseas markets, I understand that this is meant to support internationalisation efforts. However, we should be promoting green and sustainable packaging, in line with the global call for more sustainability efforts. It would appear contradictory to our long-term goals of reducing waste in packaging, if companies can get subsidised for extravagant packaging. Let us not forget that the recently introduced Mandatory Packaging Reporting Framework under the Resource Sustainability Act, which was intended to help companies reduce packaging use, had also hit roadblocks due to COVID-19.
I would propose a more targeted approach to identify relevant sectors and businesses for specific tax rebates. This is not to make things difficult for businesses, but to be judicious in providing rebates. Support schemes should remain sustainable. This is to continue providing the necessary assistance to businesses and workers for as long as needed. Beyond tax exemptions, further support can be given in the form of mentorships and consultations, to guide businesses to tap on the existing relevant support schemes.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, my third point is that the impending GST hike, originally planned to take place between 2022 and 2025, will come sooner than later, to make up for this loss in tax revenue. I have spoken about this before in my earlier speeches. Understandably, the GST hike was announced before the pandemic and there were plans to implement measures to cushion the impact on the lower- and middle-income groups. However, residents have expressed the sentiment that the GST hike should only be implemented after the job market stabilises, hopefully, in the short to medium term. This is especially so as we brace ourselves for overall increases in the cost of living over the next few years.
Fourth, Mdm Deputy Speaker, there must be increased vigilance against unscrupulous companies who may manipulate the provisions. In the past two years, we have seen how some errant employers either tried to make money off the Jobs Support Scheme by falsifying CPF contributions, or asked employees to return part of their monthly wage in cash. Some would also split wages across business entities to circumvent the salary ceiling. What are the methods of auditing to prevent such acts from happening? Moreover, how would IRAS determine the validity of declared expenses to ensure that they are not frivolous, or worse, fictitious? This is relevant, especially in reference to clause 7 of section 13ZA, which relates to the exemption of certain payments received, in connection with COVID-19 events.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, my last point is that I support the introduction of whistle-blowing protection in clause 50 of the ITA and the related tax statutes. This is consistent with the Cybersecurity Act 2018, as what the Minister has said, and the Regulation of Imports and Exports Regulations (RIER). This also helps to prevent unscrupulous companies from manipulating the provisions, a point I made earlier.
In practice, it is difficult to detect corporate crime like money laundering and fraud. It does not mean that this does not exist. Corporate crime exists in Singapore. We have seen recent high profile cases involving Hin Leong and the fraudulent Envy nickel trading scheme. Whistle-blower protection is key to good corporate governance. It allows employees who want to do the right thing to speak up, alert the authorities and limit damage before it becomes too late. The fallout can be enormous and damaging.
Hence, the introduction of whistle-blower protection in tax statutes is welcomed. Will the Government introduce similar provisions to other statutes concerned with corporate crime? Will the Government also consider enhancing the current whistle-blower protection clauses to prohibit corporations from retaliating against whistle-blowers? The current provision only protects informers from being identified in proceedings. However, it does not stop a company who is aware of a whistle-blower complaint, from initiating a witch-hunt to flush out the whistle-blower. The company may also place pressure on the whistle-blower, for example, by threatening to derail his career.
Protection of a whistle-blower’s identity in the context of proceedings is scant reassurance, when they could still be retaliated against in other forms. Without further protection, whistle-blowers will still be reluctant to come forward.
In conclusion, Mdm Deputy Speaker, the past two years have been difficult for our local businesses. Many continue to struggle to stay afloat to provide jobs for Singaporeans and to move our economy. They should be the target of our support schemes and tax exemptions to help them tide over these difficult times. The Government is also running a tight ship with increased demands and expenses, exacerbated by the pandemic. A poorly timed GST hike would lead to reduced consumer activity, which in turn hurts businesses. Additional prudence must be exercised. This is to ensure that the assistance offered is, as John Maynard Keynes put it wisely and succinctly, targeted, timely and temporary. I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to first declare my interest as a research analyst working in a financial institution, covering the real estate industry and I am also a chartered accountant of Singapore, although not a practising public accountant.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, it is said that in this world, nothing is certain except death and taxes. What we can also be certain of is that this quote for more than 200 years ago, will often be repeated by politicians, even though taxes most certainly do not affect everyone in the same way.
I recognise that Income Tax (Amendment) Bills are introduced to Parliament with sufficient regularity as many of the clauses relate to tax changes made in the Government's annual Budget Statement.
In my speech, I would like to first raise some clarifications relating to specific tax measures and tax changes that are raised in the Bill before moving on to share my thoughts on pertinent tax issues, which I believe ought to be seriously considered as part of Singapore's periodic review of the income tax system.
First, in relation to the proposed amendments included in the Bill, clause 29 amends section 37, where the 250% tax deduction for qualifying donations made to IPCs and other qualifying recipients will be extended for another two years, that is, for donations made during the period 1 January 2022 to 31 December 2023.
While donations ought to be made on altruistic grounds, I am also supportive of the enhanced deductibility of donations, given that this will continue to encourage Singaporeans to give back to the community and to provide support for the charity sector.
Singaporeans have been giving selflessly, of course. Looking back at 2020, when the Government gave all adult Singaporeans regardless of income a one-off Solidarity payout of $600, many decided to donate this payout instead.
Notwithstanding the giving surge in 2020, the persistency of COVID-19 has presented much challenge to charities this year. For most charities, donations are the primary means of funding the good work that they do and it is important for them to ensure both the sufficiency and regularity of the donations that they receive.
To better encourage sustainable giving by Singaporeans and companies here, where the habit of giving is integrated into our lives, should we not make permanent the 250% tax deduction for qualifying donations made to IPCs? This does not preclude short-term enhancements in future such as back in the year of assessment 2016, where the tax deduction granted is three times.
However, with the 250% tax deduction already in place since YA 2010, making permanent a baseline level of tax deduction for donations gives charities the assurance of this continuing support while encouraging Singaporeans to continue supporting the causes that matter to them in a sustainable manner.
Second, clause 2 amends section 6 to allow any person authorised by the Comptroller of Income Tax access to any IRAS records and all documents containing taxpayer income information protected under section 6 that are necessary for the person to audit IRAS administration of any public scheme specified in the Ninth Schedule. These will include schemes such as the JSS and Wage Credit Scheme, for example.
And the role of IRAS is to be the main tax administrator to the Government. Yet, over time, IRAS has also been called upon to go beyond tax collection and to support the Government in disbursing various support grants to companies.
I do support and believe in the importance of enabling an independent third party audit of how IRAS has been implementing these support schemes to ensure proper accountability. This is especially in the context of COVID-19 where substantial sums of monies are involved and continue to be disbursed in some of these schemes alongside the complex and ever-changing conditions around them.
I note in section 6(11)(c) that authorised persons must make and subscribe to a declaration of secrecy in accordance with section 1, \"must not disclose or make copies of the records or documents and will be guilty of an offence if otherwise.\" That being said, my concern is less on the deliberate disclosure of information, but more in the inadvertent leakage of such information through data breaches. Given the sensitivity of tax information, any such breaches would be disastrous even if the negligent party was charged subsequently.
In the spirit of being prudent with taxpayers' information, is there a consideration to codify the requirement to retain such records or documents only for a specific period of time required to conduct the audit and for such authorised persons to declare that all copies of tax information in their possession have been destroyed thereafter?
Thirdly, I note the creation of a new section 10P which provides the tax treatment for cases where trading stock is appropriated for non-trade or capital purposes, and where non-trade or capital asset becomes trading stock. I believe the new section provides for greater certainty in the timing and recognition of the tax base in such cases, given that the market value of trading stock on the date of appropriation for capital purposes is treated as income that is subject to income tax at the juncture and, similarly, where the cost of the trading stock is its market value on the date the capital asset becomes trading stock.
Again, in the context of COVID-19, companies facing economic challenges and cash flow issues may have no choice but to scale down their operations, and in so doing, dispose of their capital goods such as property, plant and equipment. May I seek confirmation from the Minister that such transactions are not caught under the new section 10P? And how would the distinction be drawn between a manufacturer selling off its factory or production line compared to a residential developer which converts its existing office building, formerly held as an investment property to strata units which are on-sold to investors?
Further, I note under section 10(1)(g) of the Income Tax Act, a so-called \"catch-all\" provision that taxes any gains or profits of an income nature not falling within paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) under the preceding paragraphs. How would section 10(1)(g) factor into IRAS' consideration as to the factors used to determine whether or not such gains from the sale of what is now deemed to be trading stock are revenue in nature?
Mdm Deputy Speaker, I shall now move on to speak about the number of tax issues which I believe ought to be considered as part of Singapore's periodic review of the income tax system.
First of which is the need to consider implementing a wealth tax in Singapore. Even as COVID-19 ravages across the world, disrupting livelihoods and causing economic hardship to workers and businesses alike, rising equity markets and government stimulus mean that global wealth and the number of high net worth individuals continue to reach record highs globally.
I am sure that Members in this House will agree with me that widening wealth inequalities are undesirable over the longer term insofar that they risk leading to tensions that impact our societal cohesiveness.
The idea is not new, of course, and such taxes have been raised by the Workers' Party in this House. During the Budget debates earlier this year, Deputy Prime Minister Heng agreed that there is scope to further review our wealth taxes. I wonder if this is currently being actively studied by MOF and if so, what is the status of the study?
At a lecture at the Institute of Policy Studies in July, the Managing Director of MAS, Mr Ravi Menon, noted that to address the risk of growing wealth inequality, it made sense to shift the balance in Singapore's tax structure away from taxing income towards taxing wealth, wherein property would form a major component in the Singapore context.
Again, in Singapore, where housing prices have broadly grown in tandem with the economy, high home ownership rates and public housing subsidies have in the past helped to narrow the disparity in household wealth. But these mitigating factors can only go so far.
An area that I am particularly concerned with is the divergence in public and private home prices. For example, private home prices rose 10.9% between end-2020 and end-2015, while HDB resale prices only rose by 2.4% over the same period. Even if we take into account the sharp spike in HDB resale prices year-to-date, HDB resale prices rose by 11.7% in the past five years compared to 19.7% for private home prices. This wealth gap has been exacerbated by the falling percentage of resident households who live in public housing, which has declined to 78.7% in 2020, from 80% in 2015 and 82% in 2010.
Put in other words, household wealth from property is increasingly skewed towards the top 10% to 20% of resident households. If left unchecked, this could lead to greater disparity in inter- and intra-generational wealth.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, I recognise that Member Ms Foo Mee Har has also been speaking on wealth taxes, although respectfully, I do not think that any new wealth tax should be one-off in nature. While well-intended, the fear of further \"one-offs\" could negatively impact faith in regulatory certainty in Singapore. Rather, in principle, wealth taxes need to be recurring yet sustainable, reasonably easy to implement and hard for the wealthy to avoid so that the middle class does not end up bearing more of the burden.
One possible solution is to raise property-related taxes on the homes valued above a high threshold, say, $5 million, or for owners of multiple properties cumulatively worth $5 million. I have used this value just as a starting point for discussion, so as to not penalise the majority of Singaporeans, especially the aspiring middle class.
As home valuations are well documented in Singapore, this will help with policy implementation before we consider wealth taxes on net worth, which more comprehensively captures the wealth of the ultra-wealthy. This also means that for the vast majority of Singaporeans who reside in HDB flats, there will be no wealth tax applied to them.
The imposition of such a tax could generate legitimate concerns, one of which pertains to Singapore's status as a financial centre and wealth management hub. Yet, one also has to bear in mind that Switzerland, as a key financial centre and wealth management hub globally today, is one of the countries that actually has a net wealth tax.
Let us also remember that not only does Singapore not have a wealth tax, there is no capital gains tax, no tax on dividends, no inheritance tax, no estate duties, and has one of the lowest effective personal income tax rates globally.
Yes, there could be implementation challenges and a wealth tax will take many forms, be it net wealth tax like Switzerland, a property gains tax or an inheritance tax, to name a few. And, yes, having a wealth tax alone will not eliminate widening wealth inequality in Singapore. But do we truly want to have a tax system where our low- to middle-income workers pay more in income tax than a trust fund baby living off his grandparents' inheritance?
The second issue is to raise the level of progressivity in our corporate income tax regime to better support our local SMEs.
I do recognise that there are features in our current corporate taxes that better benefit SMEs. Corporate income tax rebates being capped at a dollar amount, $15,000 for the Year of Assessment (YA) 2020, for example, would mean large multinational companies (MNCs) would not disproportionately benefit from the corporate income tax rebate of 25% that was given.
In 2018, Hong Kong implemented the two-tiered profits tax regime to relieve the tax burden for SMEs, in particular. In Singapore, we do have the tax exemption scheme for new startup companies and partial tax exemption for all companies which have a similar effect. Yet, it was in the same year in Budget 2018 that the Government announced tighter restrictions around these schemes. For an SME making $300,000 in chargeable income, for example, total corporate income tax paid before any rebates will be close to $34,000 or an effective rate of about 11%, compared to around $25,000 or an effective rate of about 8% based on prior rules.
Even as other support for companies to build capabilities is being strengthened, I hope the Government will consider providing greater tax relief to our SMEs, such as by raising tax exemption limits which are geared towards SMEs, given the challenging domestic trading conditions brought about by COVID-19.
I recognise that Minister for Finance Lawrence Wong has said that effective tax rates for SMEs are much lower than the effective tax rates for non-SMEs in Singapore. But what is also true is that SMEs paid $4.8 billion in corporate income tax out of profit before tax of $44 billion for YA2019 versus non-SMEs, which paid $11.5 billion in corporate tax out of profit before tax of $459 billion.
As I shared in my speech in July this year, SMEs accounted for 9% of total profit before tax in YA2019, yet, they contributed an outsized 29% of corporate income tax paid.
Now, I do appreciate that MOF has its way of calculating effective tax rates, which the Finance Minister has clarified is based on a definition of chargeable income that is a bit different from that per section 38 of the Income Tax Act.
So, using the data provided to my Parliamentary Question yesterday, for example, based on the subset of profit-making firms in YA2019, SMEs accounted for 20% of accounting profit before tax, 22% of chargeable income but 30% of corporate income tax paid.
So, similarly, the conclusion can still be made that SMEs collectively paid more tax per dollar of either pre-tax profits or changeable income, as compared to non-SMEs.
Ultimately, what companies report in their financial statements to shareholders are accounting profits, which are audited in Singapore based on the Singapore Financial Reporting Standards, which are, of course, modelled after the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS).
The use of accounting profits as a meaningful basis of comparison on tax rates is made all the more relevant, given the fact that Pillar Two of the G20/OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) 2.0 proposal is quite simply using financial accounting income for the determination of the tax base, with a small number of adjustments allowed.
This brings me to my third point in that in the fullness of time, I do hope that the Government will continue to safeguard its taxing rights and view the global minimum tax reforms as an opportunity rather than a threat, given Singapore's strong non-tax advantages and attractiveness to MNCs.
I recognise that a lot of details on BEPS implementation are still being ironed out. But given the current average effective corporate tax rate is close to 3% as shared by the Minister, technically it would seem that even a small shift towards the proposed global minimum rate of 15% could result in much higher corporate tax receipts for the Government. Tax receipts which can then be used to reinvest in our people and our local companies.
To conclude, Mdm Deputy Speaker, notwithstanding my clarifications on the Bill, I support the amendments.
Our tax policy sends a strong signal of the kind of growth we want to pursue and the kind of society we want to build. In the face of rising inequality and the economic and social disparities that are brought to the fore by COVID-19 globally, we have a moral imperative to enhance progressivity in our tax system and ensure that any tax changes we propose bring us closer towards achieving quality growth and an inclusive society.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Don Wee.
Mr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I declare that I am a council member of the Institute of Singapore Chartered Accountants. In Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Deputy Speaker, income tax is one of the main sources of our national revenue. An appropriate tax regime would enable revenue to be fully utilised and promote economic growth. In addition to giving the Government the capacity to regulate macro-policies, it would also promote the development of specific areas.
The amendments proposed in this Bill are broadly in line with these objectives, especially in this challenging economic environment, to help our SMEs.
COVID-19 has led to a widening wealth gap between rich and poor in many countries. In order to avoid the rich getting richer while the poor getting poorer in our country, the Government has been improving the situation through a number of inter-Ministry policies and measures, including tax deductions and encouraging individuals and businesses to do more good and to donate to Institutions of Public Character (IPCs).
I support and recommend that MOF consider giving higher tax deductions on large donations. I believe this will help build a more united and caring society. A good tax regime is one that works towards an ideal society where the needs of all Singaporeans are met.
Next, I would like to comment and ask some questions on the Bill.
(In English): Mdm Deputy Speaker, allow me to comment on the various amendments by section.
Amendment of section 6: regarding the proposal to allow authorised persons access to IRAS records and/or documents containing taxpayers' income information, would the Ministry share specific examples where IRAS' records will be shared with a private sector auditor?
Amendment of section 13ZA: I thank the Government for its compassion towards the companies by exempting the Jobs Support Scheme payouts from income tax during this challenging time.
Amendment of sections 14B and 14K: the Ministry proposes to enhance the Double Tax Deduction for Internationalisation (DTDi) scheme to include additional qualifying expenses in support of efforts made by our enterprises to go international. I would like to ask if expenses incurred on digital platforms can be included, such as advertisements on social media and the engagement of influencers to drive online traffic to virtual trade fairs?
If the online exposure attracts a great deal of interest and the companies benefit from many business leads derived from the virtual fairs, can the follow-up marketing and business development expenses be eligible too?
Amendment of section 14ZA: to promote rated retail bond issuances, the amendments seek to extend and refine the Double Tax Deduction (DTD) Scheme for allowing qualifying upfront costs attributable to these bonds. I would like to ask if green bonds can be included in the scheme to promote sustainability.
Amendment of section 19A: the Ministry seeks to extend the option to accelerate the write-off of the cost of acquiring plant and machinery to capital expenditure incurred in Financial Year (FY) 2021.
Based on the current business environment which seems volatile till the first half of 2022, would the Ministry consider extending the option to FY2022 as well? This would be helpful as we are encouraging business owners to automate in order to reduce reliance on foreign workers.
Amendment of section 37: to continue to encourage donations, the 250% tax deduction for qualifying donations will be extended for another two years to 31 December 2023.
I would like to suggest that MOF offer higher tiers of tax deduction for bigger donations. For example, for donations of $5 million and $10 million, the tax deductions can go up to 300% and 400% respectively. This will encourage the wealthier members of the community to factor in donations as part of their estate planning.
My concern is that our wealth gap here may widen substantially after this COVID-19 pandemic. Many of our Institutions of Public Character (IPCs) are doing a great job helping vulnerable Singaporeans. I hope richer Singaporeans can be incentivised to contribute more to support good causes.
Amendment of section 104A: regarding the inclusion of a provision to protect informers, how would MOF prevent people with malicious intent from falsifying claims against their competitors or rivals? With informers so well-protected, genuine or not, how can falsely accused persons or companies defend and protect themselves against fabricated charges?
I would like to conclude with my support for the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Minister Lawrence Wong.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mdm Deputy Speaker, I thank Members Mr Louis Chua, Mr Louis Ng, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Don Wee for their support for the Bill and their comments and suggestions.
While this Bill is mainly to effect the extension of measures announced at the Budget this year and the various COVID-19 support measures that we have also announced earlier this year, Members have raised other suggestions and broader concerns. So, I will respond to these in turn.
Let me start by responding to the comments on the Budget and COVID-19 support measures.
I should clarify that the Bill gives effect to the implementation of measures that have been announced in the Budget and in the various COVID-19 support packages. These are not new measures. They really detail the implementation of measures that have been announced.
I think Mr Yip had questioned if these exemptions were too generous. But to clarify, these are not new measures, they were announced earlier either in the Budget or in earlier statements and we are implementing them, and you would see that in the implementation of these measures, we have been quite careful in scoping them.
For example, the Renovation and Refurbishment (R&R) measure mentioned by Mr Yip, allows taxpayers the option to claim tax deductions on qualifying expenditure over one year, instead of the three years which is already allowed under the Income Tax Act today. But we are just allowing now one year instead of three years. There is also no change to the overall cap of $300,000, which applies for every relevant period of three consecutive Years of Assessment. So, basically, we are allowing the option to claim tax deductions on an accelerated schedule which provides cash flow support to businesses during this period, but we have not changed the overall caps.
Mr Yip also asked about tax deductions on provisions of doubtful debts and the diminution of value of investments under section 14I of the Income Tax Act. This is only available for banks and qualifying finance companies, and is subjected to caps to safeguard against excessive provisions. This existing tax deduction aims to promote the overall soundness and stability of our financial system by catering for the building up of adequate provisions to cushion against potential losses in the financial institutions’ loan and investment portfolios. The change, which is to be incorporated into this Bill, expands the scope to include specified loans and securities in line with financial reporting standards. Again, there is no change of the prevailing caps in the Bill.
Mr Yip was also concerned about tax exemption for packaging costs. I wish to clarify that packaging costs, like any business expense incurred in the production of income, can only enjoy 100% tax deduction. There is no further tax break.
There were also some questions on the Double Tax Deduction for Internationalisation, or DTDi scheme. That covers, amongst others, specified expenses incurred in the design of packaging for overseas markets. These expenses are design costs, not packaging costs. Such design costs include, for example, costs of third-party consultancy fees to design packaging for overseas markets. As part of the Budget 2021 measure, we have announced that design costs would be added to the existing list of automatic qualifying expenses under the DTDi scheme. Again, the overall cap remains unchanged at $150,000 per year for the list of qualifying expenses which taxpayers can claim in their tax return without the prior approval of Enterprise Singapore under the DTDi scheme.
Mr Don Wee had asked about qualifying expenses in relation to virtual trade fair that qualify for this scheme. Expenses incurred by firms on overseas advertisement and promotional campaigns on social media, including the engagement of influencers, are covered under the DTDi scheme. In this Bill, we will enhance the scope of the DTDi scheme to cover specified expenses incurred to participate in approved virtual trade fairs. These specified expenses include third-party costs for the design and production of digital collaterals and promotion materials for the approved virtual trade fair, and logistics costs incurred to send samples overseas to potential clients met at the approved virtual trade fair, subject to conditions. So, as you can see, we are talking about expanding the scope of qualifying expenses but we have continued to keep a cap on the overall amount at $150,000.
Mr Wee asked if the double tax deduction, or DTD scheme for qualifying upfront cost attributable to retail bonds issued under MAS’ Bond Seasoning and Exempt Bond Issuer Frameworks can be extended to green bonds. The answer is yes. Green bonds which meet the qualifying criteria for the DTD scheme can qualify under the scheme.
So, these are to address all the comments about Budget measures, COVID-19 measures which had been announced, but we are talking about the implementation and we want to assure Members that in working out the implementation details as reflected in the amendments in this Bill, we have been careful to make sure that the schemes are carefully and properly designed.
Mr Don Wee then also asked about the further extensions of some of the schemes, beyond what had been announced. For example, he asked if the option to accelerate the write-off of the cost of acquiring plant and machinery can be further extended for another year, in view of the current situation. I should say that each time we ask for additional requests for help for businesses or individuals, we should look at schemes in totality. It is not just one particular scheme but we have other schemes in place overall to encourage businesses to invest in new and emerging technologies to sharpen their competitiveness.
For example, in Budget this year, we had extended the enhanced support levels of up to 80% for existing enterprise schemes like the Productivity Solutions Grant and the Enterprise Development Grant, to end of March 2022. We continue to monitor the situation closely and review all our schemes, as needed. Should there be a need to extend any measure, any such extension will then be announced at Budget 2022 and then it will be effected in next year’s Income Tax (Amendment) Bill. So, it is an ongoing process.
Next, let me address the specific comments raised on other amendments outside of Budget and COVID-19 support measures.
First, Mr Louis Chua asked about the new section 10P. This is a scenario where trading stock is appropriated for capital purposes. I must clarify first that this is an existing treatment. IRAS already practices this. But this is to codify the existing treatment, which is also similar to what is done in Hong Kong and the UK.
Mr Chua asked about the disposal of property, plant and equipment. That is capital in nature. So, it is not considered as business trading stock in the first instance. So, there would be no appropriation of trading stock and section 10P does not apply under such a scenario.
Mr Louis Ng asked about the new section 14ZH in the concerns that it may inadvertently reward a landlord who evicts a failed tenant and keeps the property vacant. This section is in line, again, with the existing tax treatment that IRAS applies up to now. The legislative clarification provides tax certainty for the taxpayers, namely landlords who are taxable on their rental income. So, under this section, as long as the landlord demonstrates with supporting evidence that he has made reasonable efforts to secure a tenant during the vacancy period, IRAS will allow tax deduction for qualifying expenses such as property tax, repair, insurance and maintenance of the property incurred during the vacancy period.
So, what does the landlord have to demonstrate in order to show reasonable effort? For example, IRAS would request a taxpayer to provide supporting evidence such as documents showing that the repair was made to the property to keep it in lettable condition; or that a property agent was appointed to find a tenant; or that the property had been advertised for rent. And if IRAS is satisfied that reasonable efforts have been made to seek a tenant during the vacancy period, then this section will apply. But if IRAS is not satisfied that reasonable efforts have been made to secure a tenant, then the tax deductions will not be allowed.
Next, let me address the points raised by Mr Ng with regard to donor-advised funds (DAFs). Mr Ng asked for data on the amount of income tax deductions linked with donations to DAFs. We do not track this data specifically because tax-deductible donations are currently tracked based on IPC and approved grant-maker status, and this is in line with requirements for the receipt of tax-deductible donations under the Charities Act and the Income Tax Act respectively.
I understand Mr Ng's concerns over ensuring the timely disbursement of funds by DAFs to IPCs. So, for DAFs which are themselves IPCs, they have flexibility to disburse the funds for the charitable programmes, no different from other IPCs. But I think Mr Ng is more concerned about DAFs which are approved grant-makers. For such DAFs, they are required to disburse the tax-deductible donations to IPCs within five years from receiving the donations.
The only exception is when an endowment fund is being set up by the approved grant-maker, in which case the approved grant-maker can disburse the tax-deductible donations to IPCs over a longer period, obviously because they are setting up an endowment fund.
To ensure accountability, all grant-makers are required to submit annual reports to IRAS on the tax-deductible donations received and disbursed. Thus far, all grant-makers have disbursed the donations received to IPCs according to the disbursement requirements within the specified number of years. So, Mr Ng can be assured that we do not have this scenario where donations are being made to grant-makers, but they hold back on disbursing grants to the charities.
Mr Ng also asked about the information requested by IRAS when an individual attempts to claim tax deductions on their donations to a DAF. Again, IRAS does not separately request for information on tax-deductible donations to a DAF. If the DAF is an IPC or an approved grant-maker, the same reporting requirements applicable to IPCs and approved grant-makers would then apply respectively.
On the issue of tax deductions for donations, Mr Wee had proposed for the Government to tier the tax deduction rates based on the donation quantum. I understand the intent of such a suggestion but such a tiered system would then primarily benefit the higher-income as well as larger IPCs who have the resources to engage higher-income donors. Mr Wee's suggestion to provide 300% or 400% tax deductions will also result in more tax revenue forgone.
And Mr Louis Chua, likewise, had suggested to make permanent this tax deduction. Again, I appreciate the intent of Mr Louis Chua and Mr Don Wee to promote philanthropy and charitable giving. But we have to consider the merits and trade-offs carefully, bearing in mind that we currently have one of the highest tax deduction rates for donations in the world and we want to make sure that any scheme we have in place is fiscally sustainable.
In addition, besides tax deduction, the Government also adopts a multi-faceted approach to encourage charitable giving within the community. So, let us not just look at tax alone. Let us look at what we do with regard to non-tax measures as well. And we will continue to review both the tax and non-tax measures to do more for charitable giving.
Next, several Members asked about data confidentiality issues regarding audits on the administration of public schemes. In my speech, I mentioned that safeguards are provided for in the Bill to minimise the risk of unauthorised disclosures and the misuse of tax data. The audits provide independent checks to ensure IRAS disburses payouts correctly to their intended beneficiaries and the data provided to auditors will be limited to what is necessary for quality assurance of that specific scheme.
For example, annual revenue data would be provided to auditors to determine the eligibility of SMEs for the Rental Support Scheme. As revenue size is not part of the scheme design for the Jobs Growth Incentive, such data will not be shared with auditors for the Jobs Growth Incentive. So, the Comptroller of Income Tax will have the discretion to decide on the extent of information that needs to be made available, subject to the safeguards that I have explained.
More importantly, as I mentioned earlier in my speech, the data made available will not be identifiable. Various methods like tokenisation would be used to prevent the disclosure of individual data.
Authorised persons who are granted access to protected data will be prevented from retaining or making copies of the data provided in the first place. In other words, they can only access data on IRAS-issued devices and only within IRAS' premises. So, there is no issue of external auditors storing data for excessive amounts of time.
Authorised persons who are granted access to protected data would be required to make and subscribe to a declaration of secrecy. It would be an offence under the ITA and the Official Secrets Act for authorised persons to disclose any protected information to other parties.
Appointed audit firms will also be required to adhere to contractual terms on data confidentiality and ensure that the use of confidential information is only for authorised purposes. In the event of a breach, the appointed firm will be liable to legal actions under the terms of the appointment contract and penalties under our Acts governing the data.
Let me assure Members that the Government takes this issue very seriously, and safeguards would be put in place to protect the confidentiality of taxpayers' information and to minimise the risk of unauthorised disclosures and the misuse of tax data.
Next, Mr Yip asked about the methods of audits on the disbursement of schemes like the JSS. IRAS, as the administrator of the JSS, had instituted a robust anti-gaming framework, making use of data from multiple sources to identify and detect abuse. While we are unable to share the specifics of IRAS' anti-gaming operations for good reasons – if you tell people what we are doing, I think it will encourage more gaming behaviour – this framework has been in place since the first JSS payout in April 2020. For cases suspected of higher fraud risks, IRAS requires the firms to authenticate their CPF contributions before the payouts are released. Cases with strong corroborative evidence to suggest abuse are reported to the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) for further investigation and prosecution.
I also thank Mr Yip for his support for the introduction of the Protection of Informers, or POI, provision in the Income Tax and other tax Acts. Mr Yip asked about whistle-blower protection in other statutes.
In fact, the proposed POI provision in this Bill is modelled after similar provisions in the Customs Act and the Cybersecurity Act 2018. The legislative amendment to better protect informers will also apply to other tax Acts, beside the ITA.
Mr Wee asked how we will prevent people with malicious intent from falsifying claims against their rivals or competitors.
Let me assure Members that IRAS does not act on baseless or frivolous allegations. IRAS will carefully examine not only the information provided by an informer, but also other information available to IRAS, and assess the validity of any allegations. IRAS will only commence an investigation when it assesses that a prima facie case exists for tax evasion and if the information provided by the informer proves to be reliable and accurate.
Apart from IRAS' internal process, the POI provision includes a legislated safeguard, similar to the POI provisions in other domestic legislation, which will mitigate against the risk of informers making false claims. In particular, the safeguard provides that the Court may require the production of the original complaint and full disclosure of the informer's identity only if the Court is satisfied that the informer wilfully made in his complaint a material statement which he knew or believed to be false or did not believe to be true; or justice cannot be fully done between the parties without the disclosure of the informer's identity. So, these safeguards are in place.
Let me now turn to some of the broader comments raised by Members.
Mr Louis Chua mentioned wealth taxes and more reliefs and help for SMEs. I would say, in terms of direction, what Mr Louis Chua has suggested is completely aligned with MOF's thinking. We want to address wealth inequalities and we want to do more to support our SMEs. So, in terms of policy intent, we are completely aligned.
But to address wealth inequalities, what exactly do we do? What sort of measures do we put in place? That is something that we will have to study carefully. In fact, we already have a form of wealth tax by way of the tax levied on private residential properties today which is tiered according to annual value (AV). So, we already have that structure in place in our property tax system.
I am unable to reveal what we are thinking about now. I think that will be premature and I do not want to pre-empt the Budget next year. But, obviously, we are continuing to consider all options to address, as I have said, number one, income and wealth inequalities; and number two, what more we can do to support SMEs.
Where SMEs are concerned, I think the data is very clear. I think it is useful to bear in mind when you look at the data, it is not a homogenous group; it is very diverse. And, therefore, if you look at averages or you look at effective tax rates, one can get a misleading picture. Because, in fact, the vast majority of SMEs, vast majority of them, pay very little tax. That is the reality.
We also need to be careful when we look at reliefs and exemptions for SMEs that we do not want to have inadvertent consequence. This discourages them from growing because if they stay small, they pay less tax, I think that will be unhelpful for our SMEs to scale up and grow and develop to become global champions in their own right.
So, we need to find the right incentives to support them but, at the same time, encourage them to scale up and grow. So, that is something that MOF, together with our economic agencies, continue to study carefully. And we will look not only at tax measures but also at non-tax measures, in other words, the kinds of support schemes we can provide to them through grants, loans and equity.
Next, Mr Yip also highlighted the caution that we need to ensure that we spend in a fiscally sustainable manner. And he is absolutely right because beyond our short-term fiscal response to COVID-19, we are mindful of our long-term fiscal responsibility to maintain a balanced and sustainable Budget position. Our prolonged fight against COVID-19 has been facilitated greatly by our ability to tap on Past Reserves for extraordinary measures to protect lives and to safeguard livelihoods.
But beyond these emergency conditions, when it comes to recurrent expenditure, ongoing expenditure, I think it is very important that we maintain the principle to fund them through recurrent revenues. As our recurrent expenditures continue to go up for a whole range of reasons, including rapidly ageing population, the need for more healthcare, to make growing demands for social spending, then we have to ensure that we look at raising our recurrent revenues to meet these recurrent expenditures. So, there is no avoiding this.
Of course, it is never easy to implement a tax increase, let alone a GST increase. The Government has announced that the GST rate increase will take place sometime during 2022 to 2025. This remains unchanged and we will continue to consider all factors, including our fiscal needs as well as the prevailing economic conditions in deciding on the timing of the GST rate increase.
At the end of the day, we must have the courage to make the difficult decisions that are necessary to uphold a culture of fiscal stewardship and fiscal responsibility. That is how we can best serve the interests of Singaporeans, both in the current as well as in the future generations.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, I believe I have addressed Members' concerns and questions. Mdm Deputy Speaker, 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 Lawrence Wong]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.15 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.55 pm until 4.15 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.15 pm.
[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]
[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Minister of State for Home Affairs (Mr Desmond Tan) (for Minister for Home Affairs): Mdm Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time\".
The Private Security Industry Act (PSIA) provides for the regulation of private investigators, private investigation agencies, security officers, security agencies and security service providers. It was introduced in 2007, with the aim of upgrading professional standards in the private security industry. This was to enable the industry to better contribute to Singapore’s overall safety and security, as the security landscape evolves.
Since then, MHA and the Singapore Police Force (SPF) have continued to work closely with the industry on various initiatives to uplift industry standards. One example is the Security Industry Transformation Map (ITM) that was launched in 2018, which aims to shift the industry towards integrating skilled manpower and technology to deliver higher quality security services.
Security officers are vital partners of the Home Team. They play important roles in safeguarding Singapore’s safety and security. They are deployed for important duties such as screening, security patrols and access control at a wide range of premises, both in the private and public.
In recent times, they have also stepped up to assist with COVID-19 safe management measures. These roles require them to interact with members of the public. While the large majority of the public are cooperative, there have been cases of persons confronting security officers carrying out their duties, with some going further to verbally or even physically abuse them.
From 2018 to 2020, there was an average of about 150 reported cases of such abuse a year. A survey of security officers conducted by the Union of Security Employees and the Singapore University of Social Sciences last year found that four in 10 security officers experienced some forms of abuse at their workplace.
Some cases are particularly egregious. In 2019, a security officer at Roxy Square was verbally abused and punched by a man; a video that captured the incident was circulated widely. Last year, a woman deliberately sneezed at a security officer at Ion Orchard, after she was denied entry for not wearing a mask.
MHA has repeatedly emphasised that we take a very serious view of the abuse of security officers. Members of this House, the security industry and the union, have also called for better protection for security officers.
Hence, the imperative to enhance the protection for security officers is clear and present. The Bill will amend the PSIA to create offences against common types of abuse faced by security officers. The Bill will also update the regulatory regime for certain security services, taking into consideration the development of the industry.
Let me start with the first objective, of creating offences against the abuse of security officers.
Section 17A of clause 3 creates an offence of assaulting or using criminal force to deter a security officer from discharging his or her duties. Section 17B of clause 3 creates an offence of voluntarily causing hurt to a security officer in relation to the discharge of his or her duties. These offences take reference from similar offences under the Penal Code and carry harsher penalties compared to similar acts committed against general member of the public.
Section 17C of clause 3 creates an offence of intentionally causing harassment, alarm or distress to a security officer. And this takes reference from similar offences under the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) and the penalties are similar to harassment offences committed against public service workers.
Taking reference from POHA, section 17D of clause 3 provides for enhanced penalties for repeat offenders who have previously committed harassment offences. Clause 7 amends POHA accordingly, so that the PSIA harassment offence will also be considered a precedent for enhanced penalties in relation to the relevant POHA offences. This ensures that there is consistency in the treatment of harassment offences.
Section 17F of clause 3 provides that the civil remedies available to public service workers under POHA, such as Protection Orders, are also available to victims of the PSIA harassment offence.
Clause 5 provides that the new PSIA offences are non-arrestable, unless committed in the view of a Police officer. This takes reference from similar offences under POHA and the Penal Code.
I will now speak about the second objective, on changes to the regulation of security services.
Under the PSIA, persons who engage in the business of providing security services must be licensed. This includes security consultants who identify and analyse security risks and provide solutions or strategies to minimise these risks. They also provide advice in relation to equipment designed to provide or enhance security, or for the protection or watching of any property; and they also provide services on security methods or principles, such as on preventing intrusion.
In January 2020, the Association of Certified Security Agencies (ACSA) and Security Association Singapore (SAS) launched the Security Consultants Accreditation Programme (SCAP) to develop competent security consultants with the requisite skills and competencies. The programme requires accredited security consultants to undertake continuous professional development and also has a disciplinary framework for infractions committed by the members.
Moving forward, MHA will remove licensing requirements for security consultants to allow the industry to oversee them, including through SCAP. SPF has also worked closely with Temasek Polytechnic’s Security Industry Institute to develop a Specialist Diploma in Security Consultancy for security consultants to get formal certification of their role.
SPF has assessed that the risk of security consultants abusing their position to commit security-related offences is low, as they do not supply the actual security systems or have access to premises for the installation and maintenance of security systems. There has also been no reported case of such abuse in the past five years.
Even as we move towards industry oversight, if security consultants abuse sensitive information obtained in the course of their work to commit crimes, they would be prosecuted under other applicable laws.
Clause 4 thus amends the PSIA to remove the mentioned activities from requiring licensing. Persons who provide any other security services that fall under section 18 of the PSIA, such as the sale, import, export, installation or maintenance of security equipment, will continue to be licensed.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Deputy Speaker, Singapore is one of the safest countries in the world. Security officers are important partners of the Home Team in ensuring the safety and security of Singaporeans.
Three weeks ago, I tabled the Private Security Industry (Amendment) Bill for the First Reading. The Bill proposes two amendments. First, enhanced punishment for abuse of security officers to better protect them and allow them to discharge their duties with peace of mind. Second, removal of licensing requirements for security consultants.
Singapore has a stringent licensing framework to regulate the security industry. All security officers must undergo and pass assessment for mandatory courses in order to be licensed. This ensures that they remain calm and are able to maintain public order and safety during an incident. However, security officers are often harassed by unreasonable members of public and sometimes verbally and physically abused.
Security officers are just performing their duties to enforce rules or regulations of the premises they protect. Would we prefer the security officers to be irresponsible and not carry out their duties? Security officers are often caught in a bind – they are sometimes scolded when discharging their duties too firmly and also scolded when they are not.
In moving this Bill, we want to remind everyone to respect and protect the interests of security officers and deter abuse. We often say we should not do unto others what we do not want done unto us. I appeal for everyone to continue to work with the industry and union to raise industry standards, and respect and recognise the important role played by security officers in ensuring we continue to enjoy living in a safe and secure Singapore.
(In English): Mdm Deputy Speaker, security officers are important partners who support the Home Team’s efforts in keeping Singapore safe and secure. The nature of their work puts them at higher risk of confrontation and it is necessary to ensure that they are adequately protected under the law. It is also necessary to update our regulatory regime for security services, to keep up with industry developments. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill.
In our civil society, we should not tolerate anyone using abusive language, assault or cause hurt to another person, let alone using abusive language, assault and cause hurt to a security officer on duty. Yet, 40% of the security officers who took part in a survey last year indicated that they suffered some form of abuse in the course of their work.
Thus, it is timely for the Private Security Industry Act to be amended to make it an offence to abuse, assault or cause hurt to a security officer. With this newfound protection and power, if the Bill is passed, people will expect more from the security officer. Mdm Deputy Speaker, let me continue in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] There are close to 50,000 security officers in Singapore. They are of varying standards because of the low entry requirements. In the past, security officers earned less than $1,000 a month and had to work 12 hours a day to just earn a living. Fortunately, there has been an improvement in the salaries of security officers after the implementation of Progressive Wage Model in the security industry.
Security officers are often not taken seriously. In 2019, there was a case of a senior executive in the finance sector that insulted a security guard at the car park of a condominium and sparked a public outrage. This incident of abusing a security officer also shows the importance of amending the Private Security Industry Act.
The Private Security industry (Amendment) Bill aims to better protect our security officers. If you abuse, attack or cause hurt to a security officer while on duty, you will face a maximum fine of $5,000 to $10,000 or maximum imprisonment of one to five years, or both. Once the Bill is passed, 50,000 security officers will benefit.
With the new protections and powers, we need to ensure that security officers do not abuse their power to bully innocent people. Recently, online shopping and food delivery have become a trend. There were cases where delivery persons were bullied by security officers when they delivered parcel or food to offices and condominiums. Thus, I would like to ask the Minister of State three questions.
Firstly, can MHA work with security companies, Union of Security Employees, Security Association Singapore and The Association of Certified Security Agencies to ensure that new security officers and the nearly 50,000 existing security officers understand the new regulations and powers? At the same time, security officers also need to be aware of the consequences of abusing their power.
Secondly, defendants are generally presumed innocent unless proven guilty under the Singapore legal system. However, under section 17(C)(3) of this Bill, it is stated that the accused has to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that the accused’s conduct was reasonable in order not to be convicted in Court. In other words, as long as security officers feel that they have been verbally abused by the other party and the other party is charged in Court, the chances of the other party being found guilty are much higher than in ordinary cases. It appears that the security officers are even better protected in this aspect than civil servants. I would like to ask the Minister, why is this so?
Thirdly, with the new protection measures, security officers may become more effective in their work. However, some black sheep may abuse their power and make life difficult for others for no good reason. At present, when people encounter an unreasonable security officer, they usually complain to the security company or the entity that hires their service. Under the new framework, can the Minister consider allowing people to also lodge complaints with the Police Licensing and Regulatory Department? If there are too many complaints, perhaps the relevant authority could consider setting up a separate department to investigate complaints.
Although I agree with the Bill to give more protection to our security officers, we also need to be aware of the counter effect of the amendments. I will continue in English.
(In English): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I agree with the additional protection to be given to the security officers with the amendments to the Private Security Industry Act. However, we need to better train the security officers so that they can understand the new clauses that protect them and not to abuse the new protective measures.
In addition, I have reservation why we need to shift the burden of proof from the prosecutor to the defence lawyer or the accused to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that the accused's conduct was reasonable under section 17(C)(3). The accused here refers to a person being accused to cause harassment, alarm or distress to a security officer.
I would like to ask the Minister of State if a Police report must be made before the Police will investigate the offence disclosed under section 17(A) to (C)? If so, would the Police be more inclined to charge a person in Court when the person is accused to cause harassment, alarm or distress to a security officer because of section 17C(3)? Would the Minister of State be able to explain the rationale of shifting the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defence?
In short, I support the Bill. But we need to have sufficient safeguards against possible abuse so that the pendulum will not shift too much to the other direction.
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Mdm Deputy Speaker, the private security industry plays a vital role in our nation's security, supporting our law enforcement agencies. With increased concerns over the threat of terrorism and social frictions, such as race relations, the demands on our security sector are increasingly complex and challenging.
Yet, unfortunately, some negative stereotypes persist about private security officers among sections of our population. Unarmed security officers are often labelled as \"old and frail\", or as \"moonlighters sleeping on the job\". Even their cousins, the auxiliary policemen, are derided as merely \"acting like policemen\" but having no real power to arrest, belying the police powers they are actually vested with. These stereotypes embolden some people, leading them to think they can taunt and even bully our security officers.
So, the proposed amendments to protect our security officers from harassment and abuse, with penalties pegged higher than if they were committed against members of the public, are very much welcome.
They also signal the standing in which the private security profession ought to be held by the general public, which is crucial in attracting more capable talent, and upgrading and transforming the industry.
As Members of Parliament working to help place our residents in jobs, we know that the private security industry is one sector which seems to have a constant demand for manpower. This suggests that the turnover rate is high. I urge MHA to continue to work on initiatives to attract, develop and retain capable young people into the industry and to keep advocating for their career development and empowerment.
On the shift from licensing to industry-led accreditation for security consultants, I believe this could help to make the industry more competitive and grow the pool of competent security consultants. Being industry-led, a well-run accreditation programme would also allow the industry to be more agile and responsive to changing needs and client demands. It can also help to more clearly and objectively articulate the different skills, knowledge and experience required in different situations, paving the way for more recognition of these skills and, along with that, commensurate increase in wages and more sustainable remuneration packages which, again, can help to entice good people into the security industry.
At the same time, in an industry that requires a range of services, buyers have the flexibility to opt for higher skills when they need to, while opting for lower-level skills or prices when they do not.
However, industry accreditation, without the teeth of licensing, where security consultants are encouraged to get accredited but not required to be accredited, does open up the potential for standards to diverge across security companies, especially when the barriers to entry in the business are not high. The level of understanding and appreciation by buyers of the importance of higher quality services under certain circumstances is also a factor.
Faced with tenders going for the lowest bids, security companies may adopt different standards. In an industry like security, standards and adherence to security protocols are so important, and varying practices and standards can be quite visible to the general public, which will only invite comparison.
I would, therefore, like to seek a few clarifications from the Minister of State.
First, how will MHA ensure that standards are consistent across players in the industry and ensure that these standards continue to go up?
Two, how can MHA encourage the industry to go for accreditation? For example, by requiring accreditation to receive Government grants, or limiting providers for Government contracts to accredited companies or individuals.
What will be done to educate or require buyers of security services to require, and thereafter to fairly assess and compensate, security companies to have accredited security consultants where required?
Lastly, will there be regular audits on company accreditation course contents as well as industry and company practices, and what will be the role of MHA or other industry associations and bodies?
Ultimately, it is important that the general public believes that the SCAP is acting in the interests of the public at large rather than in its own interests or the interests of its peers. Mdm Deputy Speaker, in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The private security industry hires a relatively high share of our Malay community. I welcome the move to better protect security officers from harassment and abuse at work.
I also hope that it will signal to the public that they should give the private security profession due respect and the standing it deserves. This is crucial in attracting more capable talent and upgrading the industry. A well-run industry accreditation programme for certain aspects of security services, could allow the industry to be more agile and responsive to changing client needs and demands. This will also help to articulate the different skills, knowledge and experience required, thus paving the way for more recognition of these skills and, along with it, an increase in wages and remuneration packages that are more appropriate for security officers. I urge that their accreditation requirements should include professional development. I hope that these moves will open up more opportunities for young and capable Malays to develop their careers in this sector.
(In English): Mdm Deputy Speaker, growing up in Singapore, our nation's security is something that is easy for us to take for granted, but there are new threats in the world today and the importance of our nation's security cannot be underestimated.
We must have a strong, capable and trusted private security industry working hand in hand with our law enforcement agencies, who have the trust and respect of the public. Notwithstanding the questions above, I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Mdm Deputy Speaker, for a long time, security officers have had to operate in a difficult working environment. While they are tasked to protect property and persons, they are not adequately protected by the law in executing their duties. They are at risk when confronting hostile members of the public and can be unfairly targeted for simply carrying out the instructions of premise owners, instructions which could be unpopular or badly thought-through. The diverse profile of security officers in the industry, ranging from the young to the elderly, is an added concern.
In 2019, the Government pushed ahead to raise standards of conduct among security officers by introducing a change to the Private Security Industry (Conduct) Regulations. The change made it a criminal offence for security officers to be potentially negligent while on duty, such as to fall asleep or to not respond promptly to certain calls for assistance. If convicted of such an offence, an officer could be fined up to $2,000 or jailed for up to three months, or both. While I understood the rationale behind the change, I raised concerns in Parliament at that time. I was concerned about whether a strict implementation of the legislation would be fair, given the diverse profiles of security officers and varying resources available to them at their deployment sites.
Madam, in that regard, I welcome the changes brought by this Bill which will give security officers greater confidence on the ground.
The key change brought about by this Bill is in clause 3, which introduces various new offences to criminalise acts of obstruction and abuse of security officers while on duty. By enacting these specific offences, a public signal is being sent that conduct such as obstructing, abusing or harassing security officers are serious offences that will be punished accordingly.
As for the calibration of punishments, I note that the punishments in the proposed sections 17A and B are set somewhere between the punishments for similar conduct against public officers and that against ordinary citizens. Thus, for instance, the offence of voluntarily causing hurt to a security officer in the course of his duty will attract imprisonment of up to five years, between the maximum jail terms in the Penal Code for similar conduct against a public servant which attracts seven years and that against ordinary citizens which attracts three years. I believe this is an appropriate approach for the offences of using criminal force and voluntarily causing hurt to security officers.
However, Madam, in order to ensure that this law will indeed improve outcomes for the industry and for the public, it must be accompanied by appropriate levels of training and the ability to attract able persons into the sector.
For the last few decades, there has been much outsourcing of work previously done by the Police to the Auxiliary Police and to private security. Today, security officers are expected to do much more than just guard the entrances of factories or shopping malls in a balmy environment. Today, security officers may be deployed to work in higher intensity conditions such as event security, crowd control and even to assist in search of persons. Earlier, the Minister of State also mentioned that they are deployed in enforcing COVID-19-related safe management measures, with high interactions with the public.
Madam, whether security officers are adequately trained and suitably equipped for their tasks is an important background factor which will affect the way members of the public interact with them. If they do not have adequate training, or their working environment is not conducive, altercations between them and the public are quite likely to take place.
To this end, I would stress that it is not just the hard skills that are required, for example, knowing what the laws are or the extent of a security officer's powers. It is equally necessary that security officers have training in soft skills, to be able to handle difficult people, use tactful language and so on.
To take an example, security officers in shopping malls may actually spend more time on their shifts dealing with public enquiries about where certain facilities like toilets are located, rather than with the prevention of crime. People skills are thus critical.
At the same time, being able to attract able persons to join the industry has not been easy. From my observations, there is a heavy reliance on Malaysians to fill security positions.
In my former capacity as a Polytechnic lecturer, I had conducted some research into perceptions of Singaporean security officers on their work prospects. At that time, about 15 years ago, some security officers told me that they will not encourage their children to enter the industry, mainly due to the long hours involved. To this end, I note that the situation has improved somewhat. In answer to my Parliamentary Question in July this year, MOM reiterated that the overtime hours for security officers have come down, even if the proportion of full-time security officers who still did overtime each month for last year was still nearly eight out of 10 officers, or 80%.
To attract able people to join the industry, the current efforts to improve the image and working conditions should continue. Earlier, the Minister of State mentioned the Security Industry Transformation Map (ITM) announced in 2018. This ITM has identified key strategies which I agree have the potential to enhance the industry's image and capabilities. For instance, the concerted push towards adopting technology in operations has the potential to both improve job satisfaction and productivity, as well as to reduce manpower needs and long working hours for security officers.
Madam, as these initiatives are still being rolled out, teething problems are expected. For instance, I have observed instances of long and angry queues at the condominiums' entrances when new security systems are installed, with the security officers being the subject of verbal abuse. On this front, I would urge managers of premises to work with security providers to ensure smooth rollouts of new systems and thereby to minimise stress on security officers. Members of the public, too, can play their part by exercising patience and remembering that the officers are simply trying to do their jobs.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Desmond Choo.
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I declare my interest as an Advisor to the Union of Security Employees (USE). There are two main features of this Bill. First, enhancing protection for security officers. Second, having the industry accredit security consultants. I will speak on these in turn.
First, I would like to share some of USE's findings and efforts regarding the protection of our security officers.
No one would disagree that security officers' work is difficult: long hours, physically demanding, mentally challenging, uncomfortably juggling between protecting a site and providing quality customer service. Now, they also help in enforcing safe management measures. Yet, some people see them as an inconvenient presence to bear with at best.
The statistics state as such. USE commissioned SUSS to conduct a series of surveys from 2020, the most recent being in September and November of 2020. In the survey released in March 2021, four out of 10 security officers had faced some form of abuse. This is a 10% increase from an earlier survey just eight months ago. This increase has been attributed to security officers enforcing safe management measures (SMMs). And, unfortunately, this seems to be their burden for some time to come.
We need to stand by our security officers. They need our respect and they need our protection. We have come a very long way from calling them \"jagas\" and \"guards\" and now, rightfully, \"security officers\". They are no longer just watchmen. They are critical to fighting terrorism. They are critical to combating the spread of COVID-19. The Progressive Wage Model (PWM) has given them their rightful standing in the security landscape. Now, we need to do more for them.
USE and MHA have been the vanguard in protecting our security officers. In clear cases of abuse of security officers, USE assists security officers in lodging Police reports. Why? Because our older security officers may not be aware of their rights. They face more abuses.
We must also help to mediate disputes and steer away from litigation as much as possible. USE launched its Mediation Services in 2018 to resolve issues and disputes involving security officers. In recent years, the Services has seen a marked increase in cases. On average, it handles 200 cases yearly. In a recent case, an officer was tasked with managing entry into a club's facilities room. A visitor, apparently upset with the verification process, vented his frustration and dragged the officer from the chair. The matter was reported to the union and investigations are ongoing. But there should not be such disrespect in the first place. We can only hope that this case is the exception rather than the norm. We are taking no chances. We will launch a mobile application by the end of this year for officers to report cases quickly.
We must reinforce this protection of our officers. We need enhanced penalties against abusers of security officers. There must be zero-tolerance for abuse. It is even more urgent now during COVID-19. Abusers must not breach our defence of SMMs. I would like to raise two points for the Ministry's consideration.
First, the proposed section 17C makes it illegal for an individual to threaten and abuse a security officer. However, it seems that we can only prove liability if the offence is committed while the security officer is doing his duty. What if an abuser abuses and threatens an officer while the latter is off duty because of an earlier incident? Can the abuser be similarly punished?
Second, the elements of section 17C is substantively in pari materia to section 3(1)(a) and (b) of the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA). However, section 3(1)(c) of the POHA, which relates to the offence of doxxing, is not found within the proposed section 17C. This appears to be a gap. Abusers can use social media to publish personal information to harass these officers and their families. Could the Ministry consider including the offence of doxxing in section 3(1)(c) of POHA within the proposed section 17C?
Next, will the Ministry consider the inclusion of section 5 of POHA within the amendments as well? This section concerns causing fear, provocation or the facilitation of violence. Like section 3 of POHA, section 5 also relates to abusive behaviour which security officers may face during their course of duty.
Next, I would like to speak on the proposed shift to accredit security consultants by the industry. The security consultants must take Continuous Professional Development under the Security Consultants Accreditation Programme (SCAP). They are subject to the yearly renewal of their accreditation.
This pivot ensures that Security Consultants are attuned to the new security trends and needs. These consultants can help guide service buyers on outcome-based security contracts as qualified persons by leveraging technology rather than manpower. This can improve security outcomes significantly. We can be more productive. This makes wage increases in the security PWM sustainable. Better jobs and better pay for the longer run. Mdm Deputy Speaker, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Deputy Speaker, this Bill enhances the protection of our security officers and improves their working environment. This is the right thing to do. Security officers are our frontline workers who have tirelessly kept Singapore safe and protected. They deserve our respect and protection. The amendment Bill will ensure that our officers can carry out their duties without the fear of repercussions and impose harsher punishments on abusers of our security officers.
Quite often, our security officers also face unfriendly behaviours and attitude from the public. I urge that we must all stand up against such disrespect of security officers. Besides their employers, we are all entrusted to preserving respect for our security officers. Say no to disrespect.
(In English): Mdm Deputy Speaker, this Bill enhances the protection of our security officers. This is the right thing to do. Security officers are our frontline workers who have tirelessly kept Singapore safe and protected. They deserve our respect and protection. Imposing harsher punishments on abusers of our security officers will ensure that our officers can carry out their duties without the fear of repercussions or reprisals.
However, there are subtler forms of abuse faced by our officers which are not captured by the law and probably cannot be done so. Therefore, we, as the public, must also stand up against such disrespect of security officers. Service buyers and employers are entrusted with this role. But we are all entrusted to preserving respect for our essential workers. Say no to disrespect.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, the Labour Movement will continue to work with the Ministry to provide our security officers with the respect they deserve. I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Darryl David.
Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Mdm Deputy Speaker, much has been done over the years to enhance the wages and working conditions of the private security industry. For instance, the Progressive Wage Model developed by the Security Tripartite Cluster implemented in 2016 helped to encourage security officers to upgrade their skills and achieve productivity-based wage progression.
Other support includes the joint guidelines announced by MOM, NTUC, SNEF in December 2019 on the provision of proper rest areas for low-wage workers like security officers, as well as a $1 million Workcare Grant announced in May 2021 to help facilities owners set up new or upgrade existing rest areas for outsourced cleaners and security guards.
Taken collectively, these measures have certainly benefited the security industry.
Madam, while we can institutionalise improvements in wage and work conditions of security officers, we cannot legislate societal attitudes towards them. In recent years, several high-profile incidences of security officers being physically and verbally abused by members of the public have been reported in the media.
In September 2019, as mentioned in Minister of State Desmond's speech, a man was jailed for punching a security officer at Roxy Square. In January 2021, another man was jailed for punching a security officer after breaking through a safe distancing barricade and causing a ruckus at Jurong Point. And in a video that went viral on social media, a member of the public was recorded to be berating an elderly security officer and using insulting language on him when the security officer informed him that he needed to pay a fee for his friend to park his vehicle in a condominium after 11 pm. These are all examples of utterly reprehensible behaviour towards our security officers.
Madam, in each of these incidents, the security officers were just doing their job and certainly should not have been subjected to any form of abuse. As such, the proposed amendments to the Private Security Industry Bill are timely and important.
It is heartening to know that the amendments to the Bill will strengthen the penalties against verbally and physically abusing security officers.
The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted everyone, especially frontliners like healthcare workers and security officers. Not only do these workers need to carry out their daily duties, they also find themselves having to interact more frequently with members of the public than before the pandemic.
A recent study conducted by SUSS and Union of Security Employees (USE) revealed that 40% of security officers have experienced some form of abuse, with incidences of abuse occurring more frequently during the COVID-19 pandemic. Part of the increase in incidence of abuse could be attributed to possible tensions that arise from the implementation of COVID-19 related measures, such as safe entry and safe management measures.
While it is understandable that the public might be frustrated by COVID-19-related measures and are even confused in the initial stages when regulated entries into premises are managed and regulated, these frustrations and confusions should not be vented on security officers who are doing their job.
The amount of psychological stress experienced by security officers is arguably higher than that of the public as they are now required to take on new responsibilities beyond just security work. They certainly should not be subjected to additional emotional stress of having to deal with this verbal abuse.
Not only do we need to safeguard and protect our security officers from abuse and harassment, but we also need to take care of their mental and emotional wellness too. I hope that the Government will consider implementing an industry-wide Employee Assistance Programme (EAP) for security officers. Companies that have implemented EAPs have found them to be effective in promoting mental and physical well-being of their employees.
Positive impacts of EAPs include lowered absenteeism and turnover, improved well-being and productivity. The EAP for the security industry can be a permanent feature spearheaded by the industry association and union to provide an additional layer of support for security officers.
Madam, at present, there are several different models for the employment of security officers. Most companies have chosen to outsource their security services to providers, others continue to hire their security officers directly as their employees to maintain stronger control over the training and deployment of these officers.
The latter approach could possibly be adopted by public service organisations if these organisations wish to have stronger oversight over the provision of security services on their premises.
The amendments to the Bill have made a special provision which stated that an individual would be covered by section 6(5) of the Protection from Harassment Act but not the Private Security Industry Bill if he or she is also a public service worker. This could have implications for security officers who are hired directly by public service agencies, if the penalties under the Protection from Harassment Act and other existing legislation are different from those covered by the amendments to the Private Security Industry Bill.
I would just like to seek for clarification as to why and how the Bill differentiates between the two groups of security officers who are essentially carrying out the same job functions and are facing similar levels of job risks? Would this lead to a differentiated level of protection based on employers and employment arrangements? If so, would the Government consider aligning the penalties to ensure parity for all security officers, regardless of the institution and organisation they are working for, and whether they are outsourced or direct-hire staff?
While this Bill has introduced additional protections for security officers from physical and verbal abuse, I would like to propose that we consider additional legislation to further enhance the working conditions of the security officers.
For instance, instead of having guidelines on rest areas for security officers, can the Government consider mandating the minimum standards for rest areas in the same way that the Government has mandated minimum standards for foreign worker dormitories?
Also, given that the security landscape is getting more complex due to the multi-dimensional safety and security threats that we now face, would the Government consider introducing incentives to support security companies to send their officers for enhanced training and reskilling to combat evolving threats of terrorism, managing safety and security in the post-COVID-19 world, and to familiarise themselves with artificial intelligence and other forms of security-surveillance technologies?
Madam, I believe these additional proposed measures will help to enhance the work conditions of security officers, enhance the attractiveness of the industry and, thus, improve the overall standards of the security industry.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, my clarifications notwithstanding, I conclude my speech in firm support of the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I welcome this Bill which will hopefully improve the working conditions for the staff of our private security industry.
The men and women hired to protect security for properties such as condominiums, shopping centres, commercial buildings, just to name a few, are facing increasing incidents of abuse from visitors, residents and tenants at the properties they are assigned to.
I had spoken to security personnel in my constituency and they shared these concerns with me. Similarly, members of the condominium management committees have highlighted and given similar feedback.
This COVID-19 pandemic has brought out the worst in many offenders because there are more regulations. Security officers have more responsibilities today – new ones which did not exist before, such as ensuring that people wear their masks, maintain safe distancing and not exceed certain group sizes while on their properties.
Some security personnel told me that there are residents or visitors who blatantly disregard the regulations, by gathering in big groups, pulling down their masks whilst walking, smoking and so on. Attempts by the guards to advise them lead to altercations. Security officers tell me that they have been totally ignored or verbally abused whilst the breaches continue to take place. This is totally unacceptable. Police officers can warn and arrest offenders on the spot, but how about our security personnel?
I would like to suggest that the Ministry make it mandatory for all private security officers to be equipped with body cameras. MCSTs should also be accorded more powers to deal with such offenders on their estates. Madam, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I would like to suggest that MHA make it mandatory for all private security officers to be equipped with body cameras. MCSTs should also be accorded more powers to deal with such offenders on their estates.
(In English): I would also suggest that in addition to the fines and jail terms, offenders be made to serve community service and undergo mandatory social education programmes, where they learn to respect people from different income and social groups.
The private security sector should be treated as an important partner in our national security framework and their officers should be empowered to do their jobs well and effectively. Madam, I would like to conclude with my support for the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Abdul Samad.
Mr Abdul Samad (Nominated Member): Madam, allow me to convey my appreciation to my fellow leaders from the Union of Security Employees (USE) for their efforts in pushing and advocating for greater protection of the security officers.
When I first got to know about this Bill, I contacted my fellow Union leaders from USE and asked for their views about the changes that the Bill could bring for our workers. I wanted to know if the amendments will improve the workers in the four key areas that we are concerned about: protection, progression, placement and privileges. These 4Ps are NTUC’s key pillars that every union leader is working towards in achieving, in addition to the 3Ws: wages, welfare and work prospects for our workers.
USE leaders' immediate response to me was this, I quote, \"Brother Samad, this Bill signifies that the Government never fails to hear our calls to improve the protection of our security officers in their course of work and we certainly welcome these amendments.\"
For those who are not aware of USE and what they do, USE is one of 58 unions affiliated to NTUC. Formed in 1978, they represent all persons who are employed in the security and security-related services. USE has evolved over the years and currently represents over 20,000 union members. Security officers are aware that USE leaders are security officers, as well as workers from the industry. However, they take on the additional role by walking the ground and understanding the concerns and issues faced by the workers to better serve their needs.
Beyond providing social benefits via NTUC Social Enterprises, USE actively carries out industrial relations works. In fact, they started USE Mediation Service in 2018 as unionised security agencies and union members felt that USE understood the industry practices and was in a better position to deal with grievances. On average, they have been handling over 200 cases per year. The number of cases has been on the rise since COVID-19 struck us last year. Last year, USE handled 267 cases, the same number of cases they see now year-to-date, and we still have one more quarter to go.
USE Mediation Service serves not just members but all officers in the security industry by helping them to mediate issues that range from salary payment to harassment cases. USE will soon launch an app in the fourth quarter this year to allow officers and agencies to report any harassment or work-related grievances for Union to take action together with our tripartite partners. This is in line with NTUC’s belief that Members First, Workers Always, which means every worker matters.
In addition, USE recently has collaborated with the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS) to conduct a longitudinal study to track changes in the wages, welfare and work prospects among security officers in Singapore. In the first survey conducted between January and February 2020, 30% of the security officers surveyed had faced some form of abuse in their course of work. When the survey was conducted again between September and November in the same year, 40% of the security officers surveyed had faced some form of abuse in their course of work. This is a 10% increase in a matter of months.
Madam, allow me to share a case that our USE leaders had represented and, hopefully, with the amendments of this Bill, it can help to prevent similar cases from happening again.
A security officer was deployed at a condominium and shared that the tenant and condominium manager at the site had been constantly yelling at them, being disrespectful and using profanities at the security officers. He brought up the issue to his Operations Executive on multiple occasions. However, no follow-up actions were taken by the security agency. Thus, the security officer sought help from, who and where else, USE Mediation Service. Upon receiving the report, USE engaged the security agency and stressed that USE does not condone such behaviour towards any security officers. The agency acknowledged and assured that the matter will be addressed with the condominium manager. This incident was investigated and the condominium manager was issued with a stern warning for his actions. This is just one of the many cases that our union leaders have represented and protected the interest of our workers.
With such uncalled-for behaviour towards our security officers, this Bill is timely as it introduces three new offences to protect security officers when they are executing their duties. It will give the security officer assurance towards any form of assault or criminal force, voluntarily hurt caused by members of the public and also against any indecent, threatening words or behaviour, or such communication against security officers, with intent to cause and as a result causing harassment, alarm or distress.
With the amendments to this Bill, these offences will carry penalties pegged higher than if they were committed against the members of the public. This is very welcoming and heartening news for all our security officers.
I would like to urge security companies to implement other measures to prevent abuse and not solely rely on legislative protection. For example, USE has pointed out that some altercations could be avoided through the better deployment of technology and manpower in order to minimise in-person interactions with officers. This is also in line with NTUC’s push for workplace transformation and towards achieving worker 4.0. Madam, in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The amendments to this Act have been long awaited by security officers who have frequently been challenged when carrying out their duties. Please know that the Union of Security Employees (USE) will always be with you to listen to your grievances about your job and every feedback, and we will do our best to find the best solution for all of you.
Many of us know and have also heard stories of security officers being insulted, scolded or verbally abused when carrying out their duties. This is very sad. Therefore, I would like to encourage all security officers to become union members and seek the USE's assistance. If you do not know anyone from USE, please visit the Mediation Centre located within Textile Centre which is at Jalan Sultan. This centre provides a dedicated service for you. We will always listen to you and help you with any problems related to work and the workplace.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, the job of security officers has changed a lot compared to the past. Previously, we needed many security officers for a particular place or building. But technology has improved the quality of security officers' jobs. As a result, employers do not need to hire so many security officers anymore because each security officer is now able to use technology to monitor even more areas. Employers can certainly save costs, and here, I implore these employers to share the cost savings with your security officers. Do not just fill the pockets of your bosses. This transformation came as a result of the efforts of USE and NTUC, to improve the capabilities of each officer so that they can reap better benefits in terms of their salary, welfare and career advancement.
Madam and hon Members, the job of a security officer appears great only on the surface. Their responsibilities have increased with time. They are aware of these added responsibilities and they also hope to receive support from all parties in order to carry out their duties.
I call on all parties to appreciate every security officer, whose job is becoming increasingly challenging, especially during the pandemic. To all security officers, I hope that this Act will make you feel safer in performing your duties. Once again, I invite you to join the union so that you can reap its benefits and please visit the Mediation Centre for assistance if you encounter problems at the workplace.
(In English): Beyond this Bill, with the presence and continuous advocacy from USE, security officers are being better protected and we encourage more to join the union and allow us to represent and serve you.
We acknowledge there are some lower-earning security officers who may find it challenging to pay the membership fees. Hence, I call on employers to consider sponsoring the union membership fees for all their security officers. More assistance should be provided to them.
Madam, every security officer is a human being tasked to enforce rules, some of which are not well thought through. But as professionals, they do their jobs when called upon. Behind every abuse is an officer who feels upset, angry and emotional, so, we appreciate these amendments in giving security officers greater protection.
To all security officers, on behalf of NTUC and USE, I would like to convey my appreciation for the good work you do in keeping our loved ones safe. Be assured that with USE and NTUC around, you will never walk alone and we will always be here for you. Madam, I support this Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Madam, COVID-19 has made life harder for our security officers. In addition to their usual work, many now have to do the thankless task of enforcing COVID-19 safe management measures. The Union of Security Employees says that this has increased tensions for security officers.
Indeed, a survey of 1,002 security officers between September and November 2020 found that two out of five security officers had experienced some form of abuse in the course of their work.
I thank our security officers for their service. This Bill is a welcome step for increased protection for them.
I have two points of clarification.
First, I would like to ask what counts as a security officer's duty. This Bill is meant to protect security officers from abuse. To this end, it strongly punishes individuals for assaulting, hurting or harassing security officers. However, this enhanced punishment kicks in only if it happens during the execution or discharge of duty by the officer.
Can the Minister share what counts as the execution and discharge of an officer's duty? Do these new offences apply only to functions outlined in section 13 of the Private Security Industry Act or do they apply to any functions reasonably connected to a security officer's work?
We need to be clear about this as security officers may be required to perform diverse tasks not outlined in section 13 of the Act. Such tasks may equally put the security officers at risk of abuse and harassment. We should look to protect security officers performing such tasks too.
My second clarification relates to the defences against the offence of intentionally causing harassment, alarm or distress to a security officer under section 17C.
Notably, the wording of section 17C tracks the wording used in section 3 of the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA). Section 3 of POHA deals with the offence of intentionally causing harassment, alarm or distress.
One of the defences to section 17C is that the accused did not know or had no reason to believe that the words, behaviour or communications would be perceived by the target person. However, this is not a defence to the similar offence of intentionally causing harassment in section 3 of POHA.
Instead, this defence appears only in section 4 of POHA. Section 4 of POHA deals with the offence of behaviour, which is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. Importantly, section 4 is different from section 3 of POHA in that it does not require intention to cause harassment.
It seems inconsistent that a defence to a harassment offence in POHA that does not require the element of intention now applies to a harassment offence in the Private Security Industry Act, which requires intention.
In addition to inconsistency across legislation, this seems difficult to understand in principle. Surely, someone who acted with the intention to harass another person should not be allowed to say that they had no reason to believe that harassing conduct would not be perceived by the victim.
Can the Minister clarify why this defence applies to intentional harassment under section 17C when it does not apply to intentional harassment under POHA? Does this suggest that intentional harassment under the Private Security Industry Act has a different scope from intentional harassment under POHA?
Madam, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mdm Deputy Speaker, a number of my Yio Chu Kang residents are security officers. Security officers play an unsung but important role in our society. We sleep soundly at night, knowing that with their vigilance, we are safe and that our property is protected.
Yet, security officers are not safe from abuse. Many Members have spoken about this today. Nearly a third of security officers have experienced abuse on the job, a 30% surge over the past two years.
We cannot claim to be a gracious and kind society if our workers are going into work expecting that it is unfortunate but normal to be insulted, threatened or even assaulted on the job. We need to improve protection and welfare of our security officers.
I would like to highlight four issues.
First, Mdm Deputy Speaker, we must be able to deter harassment by ensuring effective means to capture concrete evidence. The Bill introduces definitions to the offences that constitute the types of harassment and abuse faced by security officers. This is a good initiative. However, without a witness or closed-circuit camera in the vicinity, harassment and verbal abuse can be difficult to prove.
The high-profile case of a condominium resident verbally abusing a security guard last year came to light only because it was caught on video and then circulated. Many other security officers would suffer in silence.
Similar to the point made earlier by Member Joan Pereira, I urge the Government to consider recommending or requiring security guards to wear a body camera. Notwithstanding, we must account for the need to balance the provision of adequate protection with the challenges of ensuring data privacy, as well as managing rising costs in the industry.
To address these concerns, one suggestion is for body cameras to be considered if the security guard works in a location where he is susceptible to higher risks of abuse, patrolling alone or out of range of nearby closed-circuit television (CCTVs).
The body camera proposal is not just beneficial for the wearer. Section 17 of POHA states that the burden remains on the prosecution to prove the offence is beyond a reasonable doubt and disprove a defence raised based on a balance of probabilities.
However, whether the accused's choice of words and tone can be interpreted as abuse is subjective. Moreover, prior provocation may have occurred to lead to their choice of words and tone.
There has been feedback that some security officers are rude. There are usually two sides to every story. The truth usually lies somewhere in the middle.
The body camera can help to even the odds. It can shed some objective light into where truth may lie.
If harassment of security officers falls under this Act, the burden of proof falls on the accused to justify their word choice and behaviour. Likewise, without witnesses and audio-visual proof, it will be difficult to prove their innocence.
Yet, in the eyes of the law, an accused is innocent until proven otherwise or beyond reasonable doubt. The onus should be on the plaintiff, in this case, the security guard, to provide the evidence of harassment or abuse. In this case, the evidence would come from the officer's body camera. It is indisputable evidence that is up for evaluation by the Court, rather than personal interpretation.
Second, Mdm Deputy Speaker, security officers must be equipped with the necessary skills to protect themselves and to react appropriately when faced with aggression.
Self-defence training should be recommended and made accessible for those who are in the security industry or planning to join it. These courses should be tailored to different age groups. This is because the age demographic in the industry is varied, with youngsters in their 20s to elderly in their 60s.
Those in a front-facing role should also receive training on communication skills. These skills should focus on managing disputes with residents and de-escalating conflicts.
In this regard, would such training and skillsets be made mandatory in subsidiary legislations or guidelines? How does the Government plan to work with the industry to further professionalise the sector and provide pathways for progression? Expectations will be increased. However, these skillsets are transferable and will serve security officers well if they wish to explore other roles or to take on greater responsibilities in the sector.
Third, Mdm Deputy Speaker, security officers are often ordered to do things that are beyond their job scope and they rarely receive remuneration for it. A resident of mine who is a security officer in a condominium told me that he has been asked to drop off the mail or food delivery, water the plants or even clean up messes when the cleaner is not available.
Whilst some security officers do so out of goodwill, it should not be a given. Not only is this unfair, it is also dangerous. They are called away from their focus of security work. In the meantime, there is no one around to cover for them.
Although they can lodge a complaint to MOM, I have been informed that some employers tend to side with the residents. Lodging a complaint may also threaten the officer's job security, so most would rather accept the extra work.
Beyond the abovementioned issues, many security officers have to work up to 12 hours a day for six days a week to alleviate a persistent manpower crunch. The long hours and lack of rest time make the job unappealing, which only perpetuates the problem.
I hope the Bill will introduce regulations to make it explicitly illegal for security officers to be tasked with extra work beyond the agreed job scope.
But it takes more than laws to eradicate the undesirable mentality that such workers are at the beck and call of the privileged who engage their services. We must continue to address this problem through multiple angles. This includes drawing awareness to the problem through education and by enforcing stiff penalties against those who abuse their positions of power towards the vulnerable.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, my last point is on granting reformed ex-offenders the chance to qualify for security jobs.
A few residents shared with me about their distresses with job hunting at my Meet-the-People Sessions. They were keen to be security officers, given the high demand for such jobs. They were willing to attend the necessary courses to obtain the relevant skills. However, because they have a criminal record, they have had difficulties obtaining a security officer licence.
Can the Ministry clarify whether a criminal record automatically disqualifies one from working in the security industry? This information is not immediately clear from the Security Officer Licence application website. However, past media reports suggest that this is indeed the case.
While security is an industry that requires a high amount of integrity and trust, writing someone off for having a criminal record seems to run contrary to our advocacy for giving second chances and for the Yellow Ribbon initiative.
I recognise that the public and buyers of service may be uncomfortable with ex-offenders as private security guards, due to the perception that ex-offenders may recidivate. Be that as it may, if the industry further evolves and develops sub-specialties in roles, surely we can find positions for ex-offenders in the industry. These include appropriate roles that give them an opportunity to perform and show that they have reintegrated into society, without the perceived risk of putting a known thief to guard one's belongings. From there, they can further professionalise and assume greater responsibilities, having demonstrated that they have turned over a new leaf, perhaps through licensing and so on.
In conclusion, Mdm Deputy Speaker, when we occasionally encounter a problem at work or in public places, one of our first instincts, besides calling the Police, is to approach the security officer for help. When a child goes missing in a mall, the parents would ask the security officer for help to look for the child. When one encounters a stalker, they head immediately to the nearest security officer for protection.
It is ironic that despite our reliance on security officers for safety, they command little respect and recognition for their work. This must change. Our security officers must have more protection, more training and we must prevent haphazard designation of work that is unrelated to their job. I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Fahmi Aliman.
Mr Mohd Fahmi Aliman (Marine Parade): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to speak in support of the amendments to the Private Security Industry (Amendment) Bill.
The Labour Movement welcomes the key amendments which will enhance the protection of security officers, as well as the shift towards the industry-led accreditation of security consultants. Mdm Deputy Speaker, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] During COVID-19, many security officers have stepped up to take on more tasks to ensure our well-being, including temperature-taking, crowd control and the checking of SafeEntry check-ins. These steps have been essential in helping our community curb the spread of COVID-19. However, these additional tasks have also meant that our security officers have increased interactions with the public, including those who may be hostile.
Recently, we have seen a few cases in the news of abuse towards security officers. This is worrying, and the Labour Movement condemns these acts of intimidation and abuse.
Abuse towards security officers may be more commonplace than we think. The results of a survey conducted by the Union of Security Employees, which were released in March this year, found that two in five security officers were exposed to some form of abuse in their line of work.
The amendments to enhance the protection for security officers are thus timely. While there have always been existing laws to protect all from harassment and abuse, no special provision has been given before this specifically for security officers. That being said, I would like to ask MHA what will be done to ensure that security officers and members of the public will be made aware of these amendments so that our security officers will know their rights and be able to better assert themselves while carrying out their duties.
(In English): The second amendment, the shift towards the industry-led accreditation of security consultants is an important step for the private security industry. With this amendment, the certification of security consultants would now reside within the industry, which potentially signals an increased availability of qualified security consultants who can help buyers buy security correctly: conduct a proper security assessment, install the right technology and deploying ably trained manpower to leverage the technology. This Assessment, Technology and Manpower or ATM approach can improve security outcomes significantly and lower overall security costs through increased productivity.
The ATM approach also complements outcome-based contracting, where clients specify outcomes rather than go by the traditional procurement method of specifying headcounts. Outcome-based contracts also advocate for the use of technology and job redesign which can help to make the work of security officers more efficient and effective. With the use of technology such as the remote gate guarding, facial recognition, visitor management system and remote video surveillance, the service buyer has been able to achieve the same or better outcomes.
The transition to outcome-based contracting can be daunting for many service buyers. Many are unsure how to craft an outcome-based tender specifications that may be intimidated by the upfront cost of purchasing technology. Furthermore, it can also prove challenging to convince all stakeholders that the transition to outcome-based contracting will be a fruitful one. For example, many residents in condominiums may still feel that having security officers on-site 24/7 is important.
However, after undertaking the transition, the benefits often outweigh the initial adjustment period. One such example of a security agency that was able to help their clients better procure security services via outcome-based sourcing is Focus Security. With the use of technology such as a vehicle management system at the entrance to the residential site, they were able to cut down the manpower needed by two while continuing to deliver similar outcomes.
In addition to increased productivity, a better-designed deployment plan coupled with technology adoption will help minimise the risk of abuse of security officers who will no longer need to manually enforce rules in a public-facing setting. For example, illegal parking can be better managed through gantries, signages and CCTV with Video Analytics rather than a patrolling security officer who is tasked with requesting that errant drivers move their cars.
Thus, I would like to ask MHA if there are any plans to encourage the adoption of outcome-based contracting and technology to help make our security officers' work safer and more effective.
In conclusion, I would like to reiterate my support for the amendments to the Private Security Industry (Amendment) Bill. The proposed amendments will send a clear signal that any abuse will not be tolerated and enhance the pool of qualified security consultants who can help buyers better procure security services.
As a Labour Movement, we applaud these amendments and continue to work to improve wages, welfare and work conditions for security officers together with our tripartite partners.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill, which seeks to enhance protection accorded to our security officers.
Madam, as a former Police officer and a current trustee of the Union of Security Employees (USE), I have many regular interactions with security officers, who share with me candidly the various forms of abuse that they face regularly throughout the course of their work.
As guardians of the premises where they are deployed, it is common for them to have to deal with difficult stakeholders who could have malicious intent, are uncooperative, or are just plain rude.
Members in this House may remember several high-profile cases of abuse towards security officers, such as in 2019, when a viral video emerged of an investment banker verbally abusing a security officer working in a condominium over a $10 parking fee for visitors.
Madam, unfortunately, for every case that goes viral and captures public attention, countless more go unreported. The COVID-19 pandemic has made the situation worse. In a joint survey conducted by USE and the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS), cases of abuse against security employees have surged by as much as one-third since the pandemic started.
We must send a clear message that any abuse of security officers will not be tolerated. I, therefore, fully support the proposed enhancements to the Act, which will introduce new offences to address common types of harassment and abuse faced by our security officers in the course of their duties.
Madam, the same survey by the union and SUSS found that 40% of officers surveyed had faced some sort of abuse in the course of their work. I would like to ask, on average, how many reports does the Police receive annually, with regard to security officers being abused?
Although abuse of security officers may happen frequently, my sense is that the number of Police reports made against abusers are few and far between. And possibly only a tiny handful of abusive incidents ever translate into arrests and prosecutions. Madam, why is this so?
One key issue is likely to be a lack of clear evidence. How can we get past the usual impasse of one person's word against the other? What can we do to enhance current procedures to make it easier for security officers to take abusers to task, especially considering the proposed new offences?
My suggestion: body-worn cameras. These cameras have shown to be effective in breaking the deadlock, allowing organisations and individuals to report incidents with confidence.
The Police introduced body-worn cameras for its frontline Police officers back in 2015. These cameras capture both audio and video, and are worn in a visible manner on the front of the officer's uniform.
Madam, I think it is time for security officers to put on similar cameras, much like our regular Police officers today. The cameras can serve as a deterrent against potential abuse of our security officers. The footages can also serve as evidence for police reports to be made against the offender.
Madam, in addition to protecting our security officers, we must also address the acute manpower shortage faced by the private security industry. According to a report by the TODAY newspaper, many security officers work up to 12 hours a day, which is the limit under our labour laws, due to insufficient manpower.
The lack of manpower has an impact on the safety of the premises that our security officers protect. Overworked and tired officers may miss out on threats due to fatigue. The lean workforce also means that security officers sometimes must patrol alone and may not be able to call for timely help if they are attacked.
I would like to ask the Minister of State what is being done to attract more people to join the private security industry. As a Member of Parliament, I sometimes receive appeals from residents whose application for a security officer's licence was rejected by the Police because they had a past conviction.
I would like to ask, on average, how many appeals for a security officer’s licence were made by ex-convicts in the past five years and what is the average success rate for such appeals?
Madam, perhaps, as highlighted by Mr Yip Hon Weng earlier in his speech, there may be a case to be made for persons previously convicted of minor offences to be given a chance to take on the role of security officers. I hope that the Ministry can review this without compromising on the stringent selection criteria for our security professionals.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, our security officers play a very important frontline role in protecting the premises where they are deployed. They help keep us safe. While we make the timely legislative amendments to enhance the protection of our security officers, it is also important for us to consider other measures to improve the safety and well-being of our security professionals.
The ability to prosecute abusers is one crucial deterrent, but just as important is the ability to de-escalate situations before they become unacceptable or unlawful behaviour. With that, I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Raj Joshua Thomas.
Mr Raj Joshua Thomas (Nominated Member): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I declare my interest as President of the Security Association Singapore (SAS) and a member of the board of directors of a security company.
At the outset, Madam, I would like to register my strong and wholehearted support for the Bill. The Bill introduces two key amendments. First, three new offences will be enacted to protect security officers while they are executing their duties. Second, it will no longer be required for security consultants to be licensed under the Act.
By way of background to the first set of amendments, the security industry associations and union had lobbied MHA for some years to consider amending the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) to include security officers in the definition of \"public service officers\". This had also been raised by Mr Patrick Tay in this House, as well as Mr Zainal Sapari. So, clearly the stakeholders were delighted when MHA suggested that we instead introduce protections for security officers under the PSIA.
The new sections 17A to 17C will make it offences to assault, hurt or harass security officers whilst they are carrying out their duties. Section 17D provides for circumstances where enhanced penalties may apply. What is significant is that the penalties prescribed in each section are higher than that stipulated for similar offences under the POHA. This is an important recognition that it is particularly egregious to harass, or to assault or to hurt a security officer while he is carrying out his functions, because the role that he plays is essential and critical to the orderly functioning of society.
To a certain extent, these provisions are a corollary to the amendments made to the Private Security Industry (Conduct) Regulations in 2019. Those amendments introduced penalties, including fines and jail terms, for security officers caught being remiss in the conduct of their duties. The rationale for those amendments was to hold security officers up to a high level of conduct, if they were remiss while on duty, precisely because of their critical functions. It is, therefore, fair and fitting that even as we underscore with those amendments the importance of security officers’ duties, that we also move the current amendments to afford greater protections for them.
The urgency for these new provisions is apparent. The Union of Security Employees (USE) and the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS) conducted two surveys that had been referred to by several speakers today. Madam, the findings are nothing short of appalling. Last year’s findings showed that a third of security officers faced abuse and this year’s findings found that the frequency had increased to 40%, with the increase being attributed to the greater role that security officers were required to undertake due to the pandemic measures. Older officers were found to face abuse on a more frequent basis.
The media has reported on specific cases. The Minister of State mentioned in his speech the incident in 2019 where Mr Andrew Lim, a security supervisor at Roxy Square, was punched in the face by one Stuart Boyd Mills. Madam, the footage of the incident is chilling. The sheer force of the punch knocked SS Andrew to the ground. Mills was later convicted and sentenced to a week’s jail under POHA.
In another even more unfortunate incident, 74-year-old Security Officer Chew Choo Chian caught and reprimanded one Teo Chin Lai for urinating behind a door of a Bukit Panjang shopping centre. Teo punched SO Chew in the chest and SO Chew fell backwards and suffered injury to his cervical spine. Sadly, SO Chew died from his injuries six weeks later. Of course, causing grievous hurt as in this case is not part of the amendments to the PSIA, and will still fall under the Penal Code, but my point is that security officers, as frontline workers and as enforcers of rules, are often subject to physical abuse, which has caused injury and has even been fatal on occasion.
As regards incidents of verbal abuse and harassment, these are abundant and a simple search on Google will pull up numerous media articles, videos and accounts of such behaviour.
Madam, I have often found it ironic that the security officers’ uniform, ostensibly a symbol of authority, has instead become looked at by members of the public as a lightning rod for abuse. Today’s amendments will change this. So, I would like to say to all our security officers: your uniform, your PLRD ID are now symbols of the protection that you now have. In the course of your duties, if you are verbally abused, if you are harassed, assaulted or hurt, you are now protected by law. So, carry out your duties proudly, responsibly, professionally and if you are subject to any form of abuse, report it and action will be taken.
There are various ways for reporting to be done. As these are now statutory offences, ultimately at some point, the abused officer will have to make a Police report. But as mentioned by several speakers earlier, the USE is rolling out an easy-to-use app, where officers can now report abuse that they have faced and they can seek advice on how they can proceed to commence the process. This app will be launched by the end of the year.
Madam, there are also other initiatives to uplift the wages and working conditions of our security officers. Chief amongst these is the Progressive Wage Model that the Security Tripartite Cluster will announce soon. Another important initiative was launched by Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad in July this year: the Security Industry Workplace Safety and Health Guidelines, which was drafted by a committee co-chaired by SAS and USE. Third, MOM also launched the Workcare Grant in May this year, which was mentioned by Members earlier. These initiatives go a long way to build workplaces and working conditions that are reasonable, fair and that empower officers to do their best at work.
However, Madam, given that the nature of the industry is one of an outsourced service, there is another dimension to the exploitation of security officers that has been unaddressed for decades, and which may well be the most prevalent and yet also, perhaps, the most insidious and difficult to tackle.
Current legislation looks at protecting employees vis-à-vis their employers. However, security officers are engaged not to work at their employer’s offices, but to work at a third party’s premises to provide specific services. The services that are to be provided and their incumbent terms and conditions are, therefore, the subject of a separate service contract between the security agency and the security buyer. Often, where a service buyer engages a managing agent to manage its site, these service contracts are proposed by the managing agent based on their existing templates.
The problem arises because many of these service contracts contain clauses that directly affect security officers’ employment and employability. SAS recently called out some of these discriminatory and unfair clauses in a tender document that was put out by managing agent Savills Property Management on behalf of its client, Hillview Heights condominium. We identified three specific clauses of concern: an immediate removal clause allowing the managing agent to essentially, summarily dismiss security officers, a clause that appeared to discriminate on race and a clause that appeared to discriminate on age.
But these types of contractual stipulations, Madam, are, in fact, not only found in security contracts, but also in other outsourced services contracts and are actually quite ubiquitous. I do not exaggerate when I say that most, if not all, outsourced services contracts contain some form of discriminatory clauses or immediate removal clauses. These are accompanied with unfettered discretion given to managing agents or security buyers to decide to reject officers deployed to a site or to demand that they be removed immediately.
Madam, many officers apply for security officer jobs based on particular sites or locales. This is because, given that they work 12-hour shifts, they prefer to have a work site near their home so that they can reduce their commuting time to as low as possible. So, imagine, Madam, when that officer arrives at site, and is told that he has been rejected and no reason needs to be given to him. Or he is told that he has been rejected after working at a site for some time, again with no reason needing to be provided to him. An employer, Madam, would not be able to do that. There are processes that need to be abided by for such summary dismissal. But the managing agents and buyers have been able to do this with impunity.
Madam, it bears reading out an immediate removal clause ad verbatim to illustrate to the House the truly awesome powers that buyers and managing agents have over the employment and employability of security officers. I quote: \"The MCST or its appointed Managing Agent shall be at liberty to require the Contractor to remove forthwith from the Estate any person employed by the Contractor who, in the opinion of the MCST or its appointed Managing Agent, has misconduct himself, or is incompetent and/or negligent in the performance of his duties, or whose employment is considered by the MCST or its appointed Managing Agent to be undesirable.\"
As can be seen, Madam, the right to dismiss is absolute, it is arbitrary, with no due process or right of appeal or review.
These types of clauses, therefore, empower managing agents and buyers to hold security officers and other outsourced workers at site in terrorem, or in terror, in fear. Officers who are beholden to these managing agents are often asked to take on non-security functions which they do carry out because of the fear that they may be dismissed by the managing agent if they refuse.
The USE has called this out many times before, giving the examples of security officers being asked, on a routine basis, to buy food for the managing agents, clear notice boards or clean animal poo. Member Yip Hon Weng also mentioned earlier some other examples of errands that officers are asked to perform. All of these are quite clearly not security functions under the PSIA and are unlikely to be services that the officers or the security agencies are contracted to do in the first place.
Madam, I had raised this lacuna of application of the fair employment and fair consideration guidelines last year with MOM and TAFEP. While we agreed that there was indeed a gap and that something ought to be done, the recent announcement that the TAFEP Guidelines would be enshrined in legislation now provides an ideal platform for these issues to be addressed as well.
In this regard, I urge that MOM includes in the new legislation measures that prevent managing agents and buyers from demanding the immediate removal of outsourced workers at site; that if they do request a change, that they are required to provide reasons in writing and that there should be a mechanism for appeal and review against such requests. Of course, discriminatory stipulations in service contracts like those on age, gender and race should also be proscribed by the new law and should not be allowed in outsourced services tender documents and service contracts.
Separately, I was happy to read that pursuant to our feedback to TAFEP, that TAFEP has strongly recommended to MOM to review the offending managing agent's work pass privileges. In this regard, I am heartened that there is current recourse for security officers and security agencies subject to unfair and discriminatory clauses in that they can head to TAFEP for assistance. I thank TAFEP for its proactiveness in acting to address unfair practices and to protect our officers. MOM has also confirmed in the Minister’s written answer to Miss Cheng Li Hui's Parliamentary Question yesterday that investigations are ongoing against the managing agent and that MOM takes a serious view of workplace discrimination.
In addition to this, I would also like to urge security agencies not to just accept any contractual terms just to secure a contract, especially when these terms are detrimental to our officers. Agencies that merely chase contracts without regard for the working conditions of security officers on the ground and how they are treated by managing agents and buyers will ultimately gain the reputation as poor employers and will not be able to attract good or eventually any officers.
I would also like to urge security agencies that are responsible and that reject such unfair contracts to publicly declare their commitment to fair employment and fair consideration in outsourced services contracts. This will make it easier for our security officers to identify responsible employers, and to shun security agencies that sacrifice the welfare and dignity of their officers for the sake of just getting more business. Industry needs to be committed and to work together to make things better for our officers. The status quo is unacceptable. Security agencies need to do our part to clean up our own industry, to wipe out unfair employment practices, unfair working conditions and to end the exploitation of our officers.
Madam, I will move on now to speak about the removal of the requirement for security consultants to be licensed under the PSIA. I hope I will be able to address some of the questions and concerns raised by, in particular, Member Mariam Jaafar.
Again, Madam, I had been intimately involved in initiatives surrounding this amendment. The Minister of State had mentioned that security consultants will now be encouraged to seek accreditation under the Security Consultants Accreditation Programme or SCAP, which I chair.
By way of background, the SCAP was formed pursuant to an MOU between MHA, the Association of Certified Security Agencies and the SAS. The SCAP adopted the structure of SAS’ long running Certified Security Professional certification, which SAS discontinued in favour of SCAP. SCAP also adopted the existing Continuous Professional Development framework, which aims to ensure that accredited persons remain current and well-acquainted with developments in the industry, in particular, with regard to emerging and evolving technologies. In order for a consultant to be able to renew his accreditation, he would need to meet the CPD requirements for the previous year.
In order to further ensure professionalism and standards, as well as give the public an avenue to report errant consultants, the SCAP Board will introduce a Code of Conduct to guide how consultants should carry out their work, including ethical considerations.
As I mentioned, I chair the SCAP Board, which also includes representatives from the other security trade association, SUSS, the Security Industry Institute and experienced security consultants. MHA and the SPF’s Centre for Protective Security attend as observers, and the Board consults closely with them on all decisions.
Admission is either by experience or by experience and passing an examination. To directly address Member Mariam Jaafar’s concern about standards, the examination is set and marked by SPF. In the first examination that was held in July, we had a one-third failure rate, so the bar is set very high, and intentionally so, because we only want truly competent and qualified persons to be accredited.
To-date, the Board has accredited 17 consultants. There are 10 persons who have applied as of today for the next examination scheduled in December 2021. And we expect to have accredited around 50 to 70 consultants by the end of next year.
Most importantly, the removal of security consultants from a statutory licensing regime in favour of an industry-led initiative is an important move towards self-regulation for this particular profession. This ensures that the security consultants profession develops in a manner that is relevant to the industry and to clients’ needs without unnecessary Government bureaucracy and administration.
As President of SAS, I am thankful for the trust and confidence that MHA has in the industry to allow us to lead this self-regulation and I assure Members of this House that the industry will step up and do well. Hopefully, this can serve as an example, a model and, perhaps, an inspiration for other industries to self-regulate in appropriate areas.
What then is the role that security consultants play in the transformation of the security industry? It is important to note that the development of a core of security consultants is one pillar out of four pillars in the Security Industry Transformation Map. As Members know, and as mentioned by Member Mohd Fahmi Aliman, one of the biggest drives in the PWM sectors is to move away from headcount-based contracts to outcome-based contracts.
In headcount-based contracts, buyers stipulate the number of security officers they require. In outcome-based contracts, buyers stipulate only the expected outcomes and leave it to vendors to propose solutions that optimise manpower and technology resources. In order for a vendor to propose such holistic solutions, it would first need to conduct a security risk assessment – and the person who carries this out is the security consultant.
There are, of course, many benefits to outcome-based contracts: more efficient and effective security solutions, job redesign for security officers as well as the possibility to move towards more reasonable working hours, a fairer contracting regime. This is why outcome-based contracts are in and of themselves another pillar of the Industry Transformation Map. But in order to make that move towards outcome-based contracts, we need to have a core of security consultants to carry out the first steps.
Madam, next year, SAS will launch an online-based tender generator and repository called OBX, which will provide an easy-to-use platform that will help security buyers make that jump to outcome-based contracting. We are glad to have gotten strong support from SPF and Enterprise Singapore for this initiative. But we will also need to ensure that as this platform provides that big push towards OBCs, that there is a sufficient number of consultants to service these new contracts.
In this regard, SCAP is working hard to accredit consultants and ensure that they have a high level of competence and the technical expertise to provide the best holistic solutions to clients.
Madam, please allow me to conclude by coming back to the amendments introducing protections for security officers. In my maiden speech earlier this year, I urged that we make it a priority to ensure that all our workers have a working environment that affords them respect and dignity. I urged that we take steps to make sure that we take care of those who take care of us.
The amendments introduced today will go a long way to bring us towards that aspiration. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Dr Wan Rizal.
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Madam, I rise in support of the Bill. Security officers play a vital role as the first line of defence for many of Singapore’s residents. They are on the lookout for any suspicious activities. They guard our homes, our businesses against unwanted incidents and crimes.
With their responsibilities, we need to first acknowledge that security officers are not Police officers. They do not have the power to arrest. They do not carry arms. When they are carrying out their responsibilities, most of the security officers fend for themselves before any reinforcement arrives.
We need to realise that these officers are someone’s parents, children, grandparents, relatives and friends. The Bill offers them greater protection and harsher penalties to those who cause harm to them, be it physically or not. I am in full support of the Bill.
However, even as we enhance this Bill to protect their rights better, there are a few broad issues that I still find to be concerning.
First, can the Minister of State give us an overview of the number of abuse and harassment cases reported against security officers by themselves, members of the public or security agencies over the past three years? Presenting this data would show the severity of the issue and the challenges security officers and agencies face.
Moving on from that point, what are some actions taken thus far against those who abuse or harass security officers?
Madam, the second point that I would like to raise is that, in this House, we can pass Bills and legislation to better protect the rights of Singaporeans from being abused or harassed. At the same time, victims must, they must come forward to report to the authorities about their abuse. There must never be any impediments for victims to lodge a report or complaint.
With that, I would like to ask the Minister of State if there will be a proper protocol, perhaps a whistle-blowing channel, for security officers to use to report incidents of abuse or harassment?
I ask this as I would like to ensure that all security officers are free to report any cases of harassment or abuse that they might face in their line of duty without compromising their careers with the security agencies and their clients.
Madam, I would also like to highlight the skills of the security officers in their line of duty. This is not to say that they are ill-equipped with the skills needed to be security officers, as we know they are required to undergo courses and trainings to face evolving challenges.
Given the severity of abuse cases among security officers, will there be an upgrade of the framework that can be applied to officers across the board if they face any problems of abuse and harassment? Should security agencies invest then in body-worn cameras to better equip officers against possible perpetrators?
Finally, we know that security officers work round the clock and man 12-hour shifts. This would induce lethargy among officers. Will the Ministry introduce any limit to working hours, including mandated off days or off hours, for officers, without affecting their salary?
Madam, notwithstanding the queries I had presented, I am in full support of this Bill.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Minister of State Desmond Tan.
Mr Desmond Tan: Mdm Deputy Speaker, I thank the Members for their comments and views and for their strong support for the Bill.
Please allow me to address the questions from the Members in turn.
Dr Wan Rizal and Mr Melvin Yong asked for an overview of the number of abuse and harassment cases reported against security officers in recent years. Dr Rizal also asked what actions were taken against these offenders.
As mentioned in my earlier speech, in the last three years, there was an average of about 150 cases of abuse while security officers were on duty per year. Depending on the facts and circumstances of each case, the action taken against offenders may range from stern warnings to Court prosecutions.
Let me now address Members’ questions on the new offences.
Mr Louis Ng asked what counts as the execution and discharge of a security officer’s duty. This refers to the functions of a security officer as defined in section 13 of the PSIA, as he has alluded to, and includes broad roles such as patrolling or guarding another person’s property, or to check individuals seeking entry to any place. This could extend to certain other functions, including SMM functions, such as denying entry to persons who do not wear masks.
Mr Desmond Choo asked whether the new section 17C PSIA applies to abuse committed while a security officer is off duty and whether MHA will consider including other harassment activities covered by POHA section 3, such as doxxing, or section 5 in the new PSIA offences.
I have to say that the introduction of offences in PSIA expressly provides targeted protection for security officers against common types of abuse and harassment faced by the security officers at their work.
If a security officer is abused while off duty, but the abuse is in relation to the execution of the officer’s duties under section 13 of the PSIA, then an offence under the new section 17C PSIA may be made out. The key here is the abuse or harassment must be in relation to the work or the duty that he performs. I want to assure Mr Desmond Choo that we will continue to monitor the ground situation to ensure that security officers get adequate protection.
Mr Louis Ng also asked why the new section 17C PSIA offence allows the accused to prove that he had no reason to believe that his actions would be perceived by the target person. Mr Ng noted that this is not a defence for a section 3 POHA offence. Mr Ang Wei Neng raised concerns about shifting the burden of proof and suggested that, for a similar offence, section 17C PSIA may accord security officers with a higher level of protection than public servants.
To clarify, stipulating defences does not shift the burden of proof to the accused. The prosecution still needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that an offence has been committed. The defences make it clear that the accused may be absolved under certain specific circumstances. That said, it is not the case that the accused can simply claim that he or she did not believe that his or her actions would be perceived by the target person.
Rather, the defence under the new section 17C PSIA requires the accused to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he did not know and had no reason to believe that the words or behaviour used, or the communication made, would be heard, seen or otherwise perceived by the target person. An example of this scenario can be found in illustration (b) of section 3 POHA and I read:
\"Character X writes a letter containing threatening words towards Y intending to send the letter to person Y to cause him alarm. X decides not to send the letter and throws it away. Person Y finds the letter and is alarmed. X is not guilty of an offence as he had no reason to believe that the letter would be seen by Y.\"
The proposed section 17C PSIA is not intended to mirror POHA completely and takes into consideration the nature of security officers’ work.
Nevertheless, the defences available for a section 17C PSIA offence are similarly available for offences against public servants, under section 6 POHA. Hence, there is no higher protection as suggested. Although a similar defence is not present in section 3 POHA, it is also clear from illustration (b) that I have read of that section that if an accused had no reason to believe that an offensive communication would be perceived by the target person, the offence under that section would not be made out.
Mr Darryl David asked why and how section 17C PSIA differentiates itself from section 6 POHA for security officers who are essentially carrying out the same job functions. He asked if this would lead to differentiated level of protection of security officers.
To clarify, some security officers are already considered Public Service Workers under POHA, such as those deployed at public healthcare institutions, step-down care institutions or educational institutions.
Security officers who are executing duties in the capacity of Public Service Workers are excluded from the new section 17C PSIA offence, to avoid overlap with section 6 POHA. This group of security officers continue to be accorded protection under POHA, with the same penalties as the new section 17C PSIA harassment offence.
Mr Ang asked if Police reports must be made before the Police investigates into the new PSIA offences and whether the Police would be more inclined to charge persons for the new section 17C PSIA offence. Yes, reports should be lodged in such cases. I would like to emphasise that the Police have treated all cases and allegations of harassment and abuse against security officers equally and seriously, and will continue to do so.
Ms Joan Pereira suggested that offenders should be made to serve community service and undergo mandatory social education programmes. The Criminal Procedure Code already allows for the Courts to issue community orders for suitable cases. Such community orders include mandatory treatment orders for psychiatric conditions and community service orders, which can also be combined with short detention orders.
Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Yip asked if ex-offenders are automatically disqualified and how many are employed in the security industry. Given that the security officers are placed in a position of trust, the Police need to ensure that they are competent and suitable for the roles that they are licensed to perform. Depending on the merits of each application, the Police may and have granted licences under suitable conditions, including to ex-offenders.
Between 2017 and 2021, the Police received an average of 300 security officer licence application appeals per year, including from ex-offenders, of which about a fifth were successful. We will continue to look at each application on their merits and to ensure eligible applicants, including ex-offenders, can continue to join this industry.
Mr Yip Hon Weng, Ms Joan Pereira, Mr Melvin Yong and Dr Wan Rizal asked about and gave suggestions on the use of body-worn cameras. These are issues that should be discussed by the service buyer and service provider, taking into account various factors, such as the needs of the buyer, the deployment locations as well as the costs involved.
We have, in MHA, strongly encouraged the industry to make use of technology, like body-worn cameras, to facilitate better onsite management or investigation into allegations of abuse. And the industry has responded, as we have seen an increasing trend of security agencies deploying body-worn cameras for their security operations. Between 2019 and 2021, the Police approved 43 requests made by 15 licensed security agencies for the use of body-worn cameras at various deployment sites for their security officers.
As part of the Security Industry Transformation Map efforts to uplift the industry, Government agencies, such as ESG, have supported security agencies in the adoption of such relevant technologies.
Mr Yong and Ms Mariam Jaafar asked what is being done to further improve work conditions and make the private security sector more attractive.
This Bill is just one of the initiatives under the security ITM to help transform and raise industry standards, improve wages and, also, improve the work conditions and environment for our security officers. The Government has and will continue to work closely with tripartite partners through the Security Tripartite Cluster to uplift wages and skills upgrading of our security officers. For example, on wages, the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) has improved wages for about 40,000 security officers. Real median monthly gross wages for security officers grew cumulatively by 36% from 2014 to 2019, outstripping the 21% growth for workers in general.
Ms Sylvia Lim, Mr Yip Hon Weng, Mr Darryl David and Dr Wan Rizal also asked about skills upgrading and training for our security officers. It is indeed an important area. And on this area, tripartite partners have introduced courses to train security officers in public management, such as customer orientation, problem-solving and collaboration skills, as well as identifying relevant skills to combat evolving security threats and including terrorism threats. Security agencies that need help in redesigning jobs, incorporating technology and upskilling their officers can also leverage on WSG's Job Redesign Reskilling Programme for Security Officers.
Regarding working conditions, Dr Rizal also asked if the Ministry will introduce any limit to security officers' working hours, including mandated off days and hours. I would like to assure Dr Rizal that these are currently covered under the Employment Act. Tripartite partners have also taken concrete steps to address security officers' long working hours. The most recent is the removal of overtime exemption in January 2021.
Previously, with the exemption, security officers could work up to 95 hours of overtime per month and now, overtime is capped at 72 hours per month. So, the cap on overtime hours will hopefully improve the working conditions and increase attractiveness into the demanding industry.
On Mr David and Mr Raj Joshua Thomas' suggestions for rest areas for security officers, we are unable to mandate minimum rest areas due to the practical infrastructure constraints of certain premises, but we have encouraged buyers of outsourced services to set up proper rest areas for outsourced workers at their premises through the Workcare Grant. MHA and our tripartite partners will continue to monitor the ground situation to ensure that our security officers' welfare is not neglected, and will not hesitate to intervene where necessary.
On Mr Fahmi's further query on the adoption of outcome-based contracting (OBC) to make security officers' work safer and more effective, MHA had shared in our response to a Parliamentary Question in July that the Government has already taken the lead in the adoption of OBC. MHA will continue to work closely with industry partners in the engagement and training of buyers on OBC, to push for OBC adoption in both the public as well as the private sectors.
Dr Wan Rizal and Mr Yong asked about protocols or whistle-blowing channels for security officers to report incidents of abuse or harassment. There are a few ways to do so. One, affected personnel can report all legitimate cases of abuse and harassment to the Police. Two, a one-stop email helpline launched by the Security Industry Council, where cases would be attended to by the Union of Security Employees (USE).
As Mr Abdul Samad shared, affected officers can also approach the USE Mediation Centre directly for help. And soon, as also mentioned by Mr Desmond Choo, Mr Thomas and Mr Abdul Samad, through a new mobile application by USE.
There is no need to set up a new unit under the Police Licensing and Regulatory Department to manage complaints on misconduct of security officers, as suggested by Mr Ang, at this moment. Members of the public can continue to lodge such reports with the Police directly.
Mr Ang and Mr Fahmi asked what will be done to ensure that security officers and members of the public are aware of the new legislative amendments. In coming up with the Bill, the Ministry has consulted and worked closely with the industry and union on public campaigns to reinforce the anti-abuse message and we will continue to amplify this message.
Last, I echo the point made by Ms Sylvia Lim, Mr Desmond Choo, Ms Joan Pereira, Mr Yip, Mr Thomas, Mr Abdul Samad and all the other Members that we, as members of the public, should equally play our part in exercising patience and respecting our security officers who are simply doing their jobs in keeping Singapore safe and secure.
Finally, I will address questions relating to the changes to the regulatory regime for security services. Ms Mariam Jaafar raised potential concerns about industry-led accreditation for security consultants. To clarify, we are removing persons who only provide security consultancy services from regulation under the PSIA. Persons who provide any other services that fall under Section 18 of the PSIA would still have to be licensed.
Since the launch of the industry-led Security Consultants Accreditation Programme (SCAP), the SCAP Board developed a code of ethics to guide the way security consultants interact with clients, and a Continuous Professional Development framework that consists courses in areas such as OBC and contingency planning, to ensure that accredited security consultants have the updated competencies required.
As affirmed by Mr Thomas, there is a high bar for admission into SCAP. The SPF Centre for Protective Security guides the SCAP Board in administering these admission assessments to ensure that all accredited consultants have sufficient level of experience and competency in security consultancy work. MHA and SPF will continue to work closely with the security associations to maintain oversight of standards in the security consultancy industry.
Ms Mariam Jaafar had other queries on how to encourage the industry to go for accreditation and what will be done to educate service buyers to fairly assess security service providers who have accredited security consultants. We will be doing this through outcome-based contracting, where industry partners need to advocate that the use of technology and job redesign is to improve the overall effectiveness and professionalism of the security sector.
In gist, the Ministry is empowering the industry to take charge in developing security consultancy as a professional discipline.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, the Bill is an important piece of legislation that will provide much needed protection for our security officers and update the regulatory regime for security services in the face of an evolving security industry.
I would like to thank the security industry associations, the Union of Security Employees and Government agencies for working with us closely on this Bill and the Security ITM initiatives to professionalise and transform the private security industry.
Once again, I thank Members for their overwhelming support for this Bill. Our security officers play an important role in keeping us safe and our premises secured. They deserve not just protection from harassment, alarm and distress. They deserve our respect.
We can all start by acknowledging our security officers by their names today, when we see them in our residences or at our workplaces and thanking them for doing what they do. Madam, 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 Desmond Tan]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Exempted Business","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the proceedings on the business set down on the Order Paper for today be exempted at this day's sitting from the provisions of Standing Order No 2.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah.] (proc text)]
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Coroners (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"The Second Minister for Law (Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai): Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time\".
Sir, the Coroners Act was introduced as a standalone Act on coronial matters in 2010. Before that Act, Coroner's Inquiries were dealt with under the Criminal Procedure Code. The 2010 Act updated our coronial system to clarify its role and also, strengthen its procedures, so that it could better serve the public interest.
The Act made three key changes. First, the Coroner's Inquiry became fact-finding, rather than fault-finding. Second, the Coroner was empowered to tap on the technical expertise of forensic pathologists or assessors, to facilitate more effective coronial investigations. Third, it re-scoped the Coroner's jurisdiction, giving it a clearer focus.
This Act had served us well over the last decade. In that period, however, through usage, we have received some feedback that some aspects of the Act could be further streamlined, enhanced and allow for greater flexibility.
This Bill seeks to do so in two ways: first, to make viewing of the body by the Coroner discretionary rather than mandatory in all cases; second, to empower the Minister for Law to exempt selected deaths from certain provisions of the Act. Let me take Members through these two broad changes.
Currently, section 12 of the Act requires the Coroner to view the body as soon as possible, in all cases, after a death is reported to him. This is to ensure that the deceased is correctly identified. However, today, the viewing of the body by the Coroner may not be necessary in all cases in order to correctly identify the body. We have other safeguards, which use technology to ensure the correct identification of bodies.
Today, when a death is reported to the Police, the following steps take place. The Police Investigation Officer (IO) will investigate the deceased's identity at the scene by, for example, interviewing the next-of-kin, and also obtaining the deceased's NRIC or passport. The Police IO will then record the deceased's particulars on a tag, which will be attached to the body at the scene. At the mortuary, the Police IO will present the deceased's NRIC or other identification documents to the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) staff for registration. Two additional body tags will also be attached to the body in the mortuary: first, a Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) tag to track the body's movement within the mortuary; and, two, a QR code body tag to confirm the deceased's identity.
A Body Identification Form (BIF), which includes details such as the deceased's full name and NRIC number, will be generated upon registration. A photograph of the deceased's face and the body tags will also be taken and attached to the BIF. The same Police IO, who recorded the deceased's particulars at the scene, will verify the accuracy of the BIF, before the BIF is sent to the Coroner. The Coroner will then check the BIF against the report filed by the Police IO.
These steps and safeguards are sufficient to ensure correct identification of the deceased. Indeed, as far as we can tell, there have been so far no cases of misidentification since this set of protocols, processes and safeguards were put in place.
Clause 2 of the Bill, which makes the body-viewing by the Coroner discretionary, will (a) expedite the release of the body to the family; and (b) save resources for the Police, HSA and the Coroner. The Coroner will still be able to view the body if the Coroner considers this to be necessary. For example, the Coroner may wish to view the body in a case where foul play is suspected, or where the death may have wider implications on international relations.
In addition, the amendment will not affect the Coroner's duty to carry out a preliminary investigation into the cause of and circumstances connected with the death. During the preliminary investigation, the Coroner will consult the HSA forensic pathologist and the Police IO. The Coroner will generally ask the Police IO about the scene investigations and any witness accounts. Where the deceased's identity is unclear, the Coroner may then direct further steps, such as checking missing persons records, fingerprint identification and also forensic analysis, as may be appropriate. The forensic pathologist will generally study the CT scan carried out on the body in the mortuary and the deceased's medical records, to determine the possible cause of death.
Sir, I next move on to the next tranche of amendments under the Bill. This is introduced by the new section 17A. It aims to deal with a situation where the deceased, firstly, had sustained an injury, contracted a disease or suffered a condition outside Singapore, that apparently caused the death; or, second, held certain positions in a foreign state, such as being a government minister; or was the spouse or child of persons holding certain positions in a foreign state. In such situations, it is possible that a foreign state may request Singapore not to conduct a post-mortem examination on the body, so that the foreign state may itself carry out its own examination.
At present, under the scope of our Act today, it is not possible to accede to such requests. The Act requires the Coroner to certify the cause of death based on the findings of the Coroner's Inquiry – if one is held – or based on the available evidence if a Coroner's Inquiry is not held. However, there may be some cases where a post-mortem examination might be necessary to determine the cause of death, for example, if there are no external visible manifest signs of injury or disease. In such cases, a post-mortem examination must be carried out before the Coroner can release the body.
The new section 17A proposed provides flexibility for Singapore to accede to requests in appropriate cases, by allowing the Minister to issue a certificate to exempt the death from certain provisions of the Act.
In order for this to happen, three conditions must be fulfilled.
First, the Minister must be satisfied that the deceased had sustained an injury, contracted a disease or suffered a condition, outside Singapore, that apparently caused the death. Alternatively, the Minister must be satisfied that the deceased had certain positions in the foreign state, such as being a government minister, or was the spouse or child of certain persons in such positions.
Second, a foreign state must make a request for the Minister's certificate – so it is triggered by the foreign state; not by any individual, but by the foreign state – and give an undertaking regarding the retention or transport of the body, or any other matter, that the Minister may require.
Third, the Minister must be satisfied, after having regard to the circumstances of the case and any undertaking given by the foreign state, that it is not in the public interest for the provisions of the Act to apply to the deceased. In other words, the assessment is made as to whether there is a public interest, notwithstanding the request by the foreign state, for the examination to take place in Singapore.
In deciding whether to issue a certificate, the Minister may consider various factors, such as the forensic pathologist's views on the death; the Police's investigative findings on the death; the Public Prosecutor's views as to the likelihood of any criminal prosecutions in relation to the death and the likely impact of an exemption on such prosecutions. And fourthly, the purpose for which the request was made by the foreign state. If the Minister issues a certificate, a post-mortem examination must not be conducted and the body must be released immediately to the foreign state.
The Bill does not change the default position under the Act, which is that the Coroner will investigate deaths falling within the Coroner's jurisdiction. It is only in exceptional cases that the default position may be departed from under the new section 17A; and the three conditions I have mentioned above must be met and, in particular, I stress that the Minister must be satisfied that it would not be in our public interest for the usual coronial process to apply to the deceased.
Sir, in conclusion, this Bill streamlines the coronial process and introduces greater flexibility, and also represents the latest instalment in our efforts to improve on the coronial system, to better serve the public interest. Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill. I only have one area of clarification that I seek from the hon Minister. The Minister proposed to vest with him the power to exempt certain deaths from the application of the Coroners Act. Principally, the deaths that are proposed to be exempted from the Act are persons who died in Singapore, arising from conditions contracted outside Singapore or are for persons who are or were part of foreign government; this includes the spouse or child of the person too.
My concern is how this proposal squares with the existing framework of the Coroners Act dealing with the Public Prosecutor's powers.
When the hon Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs and Law, Prof Ho Peng Kee moved the Coroners Bill in 2010, he stated, as recounted by the hon Minister, that the Coroner's role is purely fact-finding. It is not the job of the Coroner to decide who is criminally responsible for the death. He stressed that it is the Public Prosecutor who has the constitutional responsibility of who should be prosecuted for being responsible for the death.
That was why the current Act provides for the Public Prosecutor to have wide-ranging powers, which includes the power to direct a Coroner to order a post-mortem examination, direct a forensic pathologist to investigate the cause of and circumstances connected with the death and direct a Coroner to hold an inquiry into any death occurring in Singapore.
I am concerned about a situation where the Minister and the Public Prosecutor may not be ad idem on the issue of whether the death should be exempt from the Act. Would it not be preferable for the Minister to be only allowed to use his power, as contemplated under this Bill, only after the Public Prosecutor had consented.
This is the case in the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act (CLTPA). As Members would know, the CLTPA may be invoked by the Minister to detain a person who is believed to have engaged in criminal acts affecting public safety, peace and good order. This same person may well be subject to prosecution by the Public Prosecutor, exercising his constitutional powers. That is why it is provided in the Act that the Minister may only order a detention upon procuring the Public Prosecutor's consent. In fact, it is expressly provided in the Act that nothing in that Act derogates from the powers of the Public Prosecutor with regard to the control and direction of criminal prosecutions.
I will be grateful for the hon Minister's explanation on this matter. Notwithstanding my comments, I support the Bill.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Bill seeks to make two changes to the investigations of deaths that are defined as reportable. I have concerns about both provisions and would like the Ministry's clarifications.
First, it is proposed by clause 2 that section 12 be amended to make the viewing of the body by the Coroner optional. That is, when the Coroner is conducting his preliminary investigations into a reportable death, he can decide not to view the body at all. As for the rationale for this change, it was stated in the MinLaw release that this would \"expedite the process of the body to the family and will also save resources for the Police, the Health Sciences Authority and the Coroner\".
Sir, it would thus appear that the move to make viewing of the body optional is motivated, at least in part, by resource constraints. However, we must ask, to what extent will this change result in any compromise of investigations of deaths? Despite what the Minister said earlier, it is not clear, to me at least, on what basis or the kinds of cases that are appropriate for a Coroner to decide that viewing of the body is not required. Could the Minister please elaborate further on how the Coroner would be supported to ensure that he or she does not inadvertently miss or overlook important evidence that further investigations into the death may be warranted?
The second change brought about by this Bill is to give the Minister for Law the power to issue a certificate for the release of the body of a deceased person at the request of a foreign state. Clause 3 of the Bill will introduce a new section 17A to the Act, to provide that if a foreign state has requested release of the body of a deceased in Singapore, then the Minister can consider issuing such a certificate in two situations. First, where the deceased had sustained an injury, contracted a disease or suffered a condition outside Singapore that appears to have caused the death; or, second, where the deceased person was or formerly was a head of state, head of government, government minister, government official or spouse or child of these persons or a diplomatic agent of a foreign state. If the Minister sees it fit to issue such a certificate for the release of the body of the deceased, then all investigations into the death must stop. A post-mortem should not be carried out and any Coroner's Inquiry into the death should cease.
According to the media release by MinLaw on 13 September, one of the reasons is that the foreign state may wish to conduct its own post-mortem examination on the citizen or resident who happened to die in Singapore after sustaining an injury, contracting a disease or suffering a condition outside of Singapore. I have two observations to make on this.
First, it should be noted that the proposed section 17A phrases the conditions of (a)(i) and (a)(ii) as alternatives.
So, for example, if the deceased happens to be an incumbent or a former head of government, it is not necessary that the deceased should have sustained an injury or illness outside of Singapore that appeared to lead to his death. The deceased's very status as a current or former head of government is enough to bring up such a case within the new regime even if the cause of death has no overseas nexus.
Secondly, there could well be circumstances where a foreign state could request the return of the body of a deceased government official because it does not want a post-mortem or inquiry to be done by an independent party. This could be motivated by a desire to preserve the dignity of a formal leader, but could also be motivated by less noble reasons, for example, to cover up a death deliberately caused to a political opponent. We cannot dismiss this possibility and it is certainly not far-fetched that political adversaries could be killed through poisoning or other nefarious means. The likelihood of the death of a foreign leader occurring in Singapore is not low as Singapore is a noted destination for medical treatment. It goes without saying that when a death occurs in Singapore, important evidence surrounding the death may well be located in Singapore. Furthermore, such evidence may not be immediately available after the death as the Police may need time to uncover it. Thus, there are risks associated with a quick handover of records and evidence to the foreign state.
Sir, I note that under the Bill, the Minister retains the discretion whether or not to issue the certificate to release the body to a requesting foreign state. He can order investigations in Singapore to continue if he believes it to be in the public interest to do so. He can also subsequently revoke an earlier certificate for release. These are important provisions.
As a member of the international community, we have a part to play to ensure that history is accurately recorded and that the world is not misled by fake news about the death of national leaders and officials. The Minister will need to be alive to this risk, even as he will likely face pressure from the requesting foreign state.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Coroners Act came into effect in January 2011. I would like to seek the Minister’s clarifications on two of the amendments which this amendment Bill seeks to introduce.
On the first amendment which is to give the Minister flexibility to issue a certificate for the release of a dead body to a foreign state in certain circumstances, I would like to ask the Minister what were the circumstances that prompted this particular amendment. Was there any recent incident where a foreign state objected to or requested for exemption from the Coroner holding an inquiry? What were the difficult circumstances in that case, if at all, or those cases which prompted the Government to wish to give the Government the discretion not to hold such an inquiry?
I would also like to ask the Minister, in making such an amendment, whether the Government has done a study of the likely reciprocity from other countries based on their current laws. Will there, for instance, be mutual reciprocity? I would also like to ask the Minister whether the proposed discretion is widely available in other countries.
I would like to ask what safeguards are in place to ensure that our Minister, in making such a decision, will not succumb to any strong pressure from a foreign state to release the body of a dead person when there are mysterious or suspicious circumstances leading to his or her death.
Finally, will the Minister’s rationalisation of whether or not it is in the public interest for the discretion to be exercised, be made publicly available?
Next, on the dispensing of the need for the Coroner to view the body for preliminary investigation, this Bill introduces a new section 12 such that the Coroner does not have to view the body when making this preliminary investigation.
According to MinLaw, there are two reasons for the suggested change: (a) the viewing of the body serves \"to ensure that the deceased is correctly identified. However, there are already existing safeguards to ensure the correct identification of bodies\", which the Minister has touched on today; and (b) this will expedite the process of releasing the body to the family, and will also save resources for the Police, the Health Sciences Authority and the Coroner.
In the debate to the Coroners’ Bill in 2010, the Senior Minister of State introducing the Bill, Assoc Prof Ho Peng Kee, said that: \"…this provision will enable the Coroner to harness technology in appropriate cases, where the Coroner may be indisposed to be physically present to view the body, without having to cause unnecessary delay to the progress of time-sensitive investigations. This will expedite the release of the body to the next-of-kin after the Coroner has viewed and identified it. But let me assure Dr Lam that the norm will still be the current practice of the Coroner going down physically, right to the mortuary every morning to view and identify the body, and that includes weekends and public holidays.\"
The Minister was replying to a Member Dr Lam Pin Min’s question and comment about whether letting the Coroner view and identify a body by video in lieu of viewing in-person, to decide whether an inquiry is needed, trivialises the investigative process.
Needless to say, viewing the body is an important step in determining whether a death happened due to natural causes or whether an inquiry into the cause of death is needed.
Comparing Assoc Prof Ho Peng Kee’s remarks on the default practice of the Coroner going down physically to the mortuary to view and identify the body, to the present proposed amendments, there appears to be a significant mindset shift on this.
Sir, I would like to ask the Minister with this amendment, whether there is an intention to stop the Coroner’s daily attendance at the mortuary as a default practice, if it is not already happening, and let some other means, as what the Minister has explained, like video link to take over as a daily default practice in place. If not, what is the expectation of the Government with respect to when the Coroner is expected to attend in person?
I would like to know whether the proposed change arises from a significant resource shortage for the Police, the Health Sciences Authority and the Coroner’s office. If so, will the Minister elaborate on this resource shortage?
If \"saving resources for the Police, the Health Sciences Authority and the Coroner\" was a key consideration, would ramping up on resourcing be a more robust solution than making this key step a discretionary one?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, I support this Bill, which will allow for greater flexibility in the Coroner’s discharge of duties. This flexibility will save the valuable resources of the Coroner, Police, Health Sciences Authority and all other related parties.
That said, I have three quick points of clarification.
My first point is on the Coroner’s investigation process. Body viewing is one of the steps the Coroner must take in investigating and determining the cause and circumstances surrounding a reported death. Having a proper procedure in place is important because it provides reassurance to the deceased’s family and similarly protects the Coroner from any allegations of wrongdoing or negligence.
With the amendment to make such body viewing discretionary, can the Minister share what remaining mandatory requirements the Coroner has to fulfil in its preliminary investigation?
My second point is on the safeguards to ensure correct identification of bodies. I note that existing safeguards to ensure the correct identification will remain. As Minister has shared, these safeguards include the tagging of the body with the deceased’s particulars at the scene and at the mortuary, the Police signing off on a Body Identification Form and sending it to the Coroner.
Can the Minister share if additional steps will be taken to strengthen the existing safeguards to ensure correct identification notwithstanding the removal of the mandatory body viewing requirement?
My third point is on the revocation of certificates to release the bodies of deceased persons to foreign states. The new section 17A provides the Minister’s power to issue a Minister’s certificate to release the bodies of a deceased person to foreign states in certain cases. Under the new section 17A(4), the Minister also has the power to revoke any Minister’s certificate previously issued.
Can the Minister clarify under what circumstances would the Minister’s certificate be revoked? Is there a time limit in exercising the revocation?
If the certificate is revoked after the body has been buried, cremated, or transported out of the country, can the Minister share what methods and procedures are in place to ensure that the quality of the resumed investigation under the new section 17A(4)(a) will not be compromised?
Sir, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister Edwin Tong.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Members for their quick, short and sharp speeches. I will try to make my answers equally short.
Mr Ng asked what were the mandatory requirements for the preliminary investigation. There are no mandatory steps in this. But it really depends on the particular circumstances of the death and the context in which it occurs, and whether or not there are particular areas of concern that the Coroner has, which will then drive the steps to be taken in the preliminary investigation.
Mr Ng, Ms Lim and Mr Tan asked about the current process, whether there are safeguards, whether we are doing this because there is a manpower issue, and it is driven entirely by this.
First of all, I will remind Members what I said at the outset, that we have been doing this for a couple of years now, since the Coroners Act came into force in 2010, using a variety of different steps, technology, video usage, RFID, QR coding. And I think I described the process in some detail earlier. We looked at that, we looked at the records, we looked at the reliability of that system and, as I said just now, we found that as far as we could tell, there were no misidentifications using this system. This then gave us enough confidence to propose this suggestion.
It is not to say that because of this that there will be a flood of non-inspections or non-viewing of the bodies as a result of this. I think it just gives the Coroner the discretion, on a case-by-case basis, assessing the probative value of each of the different sources of identification, making an overall assessment and deciding whether or not it is sufficiently safe not to actually view the body.
I do not think I will go into the specific steps again. I think Members can take reference from what I had said earlier.
Ms Lim had asked about the exemption, section 17A. Ms Lim, to paraphrase her, suggested that there might be circumstances where the request could be motivated by less noble reasons, nefarious reasons, I think, was the phrase that was used. I would like to assure Ms Lim that if such a situation arises, then it would not, obviously, be in the public interest for us to accede to that request. If there are suspicious circumstances surrounding a head of state's or a foreign government minister's death in Singapore, then, obviously, it is not in our country's interest to give up on the investigation and to let the foreign state take over the investigations and, in fact, to completely remove the body from Singapore altogether. So, I think that she should be reasonably assuaged.
On the suggestion that there might be a quick handover, there are steps in section 17A(2) which sets out the different checks that the Minister will have regard to prior to issuing the certificate and this includes looking at information from a forensic pathologist, even directing the forensic pathologist to investigate the apparent cause, to have some degree of satisfaction, and also the Minister may direct the Police to provide any further assistance that a pathologist might require.
So, all of these steps give us the assurance that the death has not occurred in nefarious or unusual circumstances, and there is enough, sufficient public interest for us to accede to the request.
Mr Tan asked about the rationale of section 17A. The point is this. There are circumstances where a foreign state may have a legitimate interest in the death and request that Singapore does not conduct our post-mortem examination. For example, the foreign state may wish to maintain the integrity of the body – I think Ms Lim mentioned \"preserve the dignity\" – so that it may conduct its own post-mortem examination on its resident or citizen.
On other occasions, the death may have taken place in Singapore, but the cause of death is really only tangentially connected to Singapore and is instead more closely connected with events and circumstances overseas.
Mr Tan asked whether it is motivated by any particular occasion. It is really a question of comity, as far as we can to try and accommodate in appropriate situations. The point here is, at this point in time, the Act does not allow any leeway, whatsoever. What these amendments do is not to say that in all such requests they will be granted but it creates the possibility of acceding to these requests when they come in.
Mr Pillai asked about the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act or CLTPA. I understand where Mr Pillai is coming from, when he says that why is there no similar requirement for the Public Prosecutor (PP)'s consent in this case.
Well, first of all, the PP's views, whether or not they are going to be conducting further investigations, its sense of whether there is any impropriety which merits further review or investigation, will all be taken into account.
It is not the same framework as the CLTPA here because in that situation, we are dealing with consent to detain a person. Here, it is in relation to a request by a foreign party to not conduct a post-mortem here and to release the body to a foreign state. And, of course, the whole gamut of matters that surround the public interest criteria, including whether or not the PP's view is that there should be a further investigation, will be taken into account.
I would add that the Minister is very unlikely to reach a conclusion that it is in our public interest, where circumstances surrounding the death is either unknown, unclear or it is not apparently the reason, as set out, through a disease or manifest cause and where there might be a suspicion of foul play, then in those situations, in assessing public interest, the Minister will obviously have to consider the PP's position as far as these considerations are concerned.
Mr Ng asked for a clarification of the circumstances in which the Minister's certificate might be revoked. When deciding whether to issue the certificate in the first place, in other words, before we have to get into a situation where we have to decide what happens when we revoke it, the question as to what is public interest, whether it is appropriate in this case, whether we should be granting the certificate, will be judiciously considered. This minimises the possibility of having to subsequently reconsider similar circumstances, as far as possible.
Obviously, there could be a change in circumstances. There could be a scenario where the foreign state, for example, withdraws the request for the certificate or that there is now some other material that is known now, that was not available at that point in time. Obviously, these are matters which might arise.
There is no time limit prescribed for the revocation. But, obviously, the Minister will have to consider the time elapsed that has gone by, the prejudice, if any, that may have been incurred as a result of the body's movement and whether it is practical in the first place, if the body had already gone back, had undertaken a foreign post-mortem examination and it is not feasible to have that review done in Singapore thereafter.
So, all of these factors will be taken into account, but for flexibility purposes, there is not a prescribed timeframe in the framework of this Bill for the revocation.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I think I have addressed all of the questions raised by Members. 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 Edwin Tong Chun Fai]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That at its rising today, Parliament do stand adjourned to a date to be fixed.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Motorcycle Ownership","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\"
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my speech today calls for the Government to make motorcycle ownership more affordable, in particular, for fellow Singaporeans who are reliant on this mode of transportation for their livelihood. Largely, my speech will focus on reviewing and making necessary and reasonable changes to the current Vehicle Quota System (VQS), namely Category D of the Certificate of Entitlement, better known among Singaporeans in short as the COE. Additionally, I would also like to raise two other related proposals.
The VQS was introduced and implemented in 1990 with the objective of regulating the growth of the vehicle population in Singapore. Under the current VQS, the COE are categorised into, A, B, C, D and E. Categories A and B are for cars. Category C is for goods vehicle and buses. Category D is for motorcycles and Category E for all vehicles except motorcycles.
Sir, the COE for motorcycles has been getting more attention compared to other vehicles in recent years and the attention has heightened in the recent two months due to the skyrocketing prices. I have brought up the issue of motorcycle’s COE multiple times in this Chamber in the form of Parliamentary Questions (PQs) and Committee of Supply (COS) cuts.
This time around I am tabling this matter as an Adjournment Motion as I strongly feel that this issue needs to be conveyed, explained and discussed more in depth with the hope that MOT will consider reviewing motorcycle’s COE system which is Cat D. At this point, I would like to reiterate that the intention of calling for this review is mainly to benefit our fellow Singaporeans who depend on motorcycles to feed their family.
Sir, let us explore the trend for motorcycle’s COE prices over the years. In 2001, the lowest COE prices for Cat D was $509 in December while highest was $1,313 in January. Ten years on, 2011, the lowest price was in December, $1,481 and highest in March, $2,534. This year, 2021, the COE price in January was $7,501 and it has skyrocketed in the last couple of months, to $8,899 and $9,689 for August and September, respectively.
According to MOM’s statistics for 2020, there were 220,000 residents who declared themselves as engaging in \"own account work\", that is, they are self-employed or freelancers. A number of these residents are likely to be motorcyclists engaged in delivery and dispatch services with one of the existing platforms. In addition, there are riders who are direct employees of various companies. There are no clear indicators on the number of Singaporeans who are riding commercially.
However, browsing through the job listings for riders on the MyCareersFuture website, I noticed that the monthly salaries offered range between $1,000 and $2,500. That is to say, that someone who wants to purchase a Class 2B motorcycle so that he can earn an income as a dispatch rider, will need to set aside four to 10 months of a salary he has not yet earned just to afford the latest COE for a motorcycle. When we take into consideration the road tax, insurance and other costs involved in purchasing a new bike, the number can go up to 14 months. More than a year of working just to afford a vehicle that is needed.
There is the option of second-hand motorcycles. However, those are not cheap either. A three-year-old motorcycle can go for around $10,000. A motorcycle with three years left on the COE can cost around $5,000. After buying a second-hand motorcycle, the new owner will soon be faced with a decision on whether to renew the COE when it expires. And again, the difficult choice has to be made between buying a new machine or a second-hand vehicle. They can also rent motorcycles, but that is not a sustainable option in the medium to long term, given the rental rates of around $70 daily. One month’s salary does not even cover the rental costs. And this is before we consider the cost of petrol, parking, ERP and more.
The COE remains the largest cost factor in the purchasing of a motorcycle. In this regard, I am making a few proposals towards improving the COE system for Cat D. I am mindful that the ultimate goal is not to lead to an increase in the number of motorcycles on the road. Rather, my intention is to improve the well-being of our fellow Singaporeans who rely on riding motorcycles to make a living.
I am reiterating my call for MOT to consider categorising the COE for motorcycles into classes according to engine capacity, similar to how the licences to ride motorcycles are categorised. This is a proposal I first mentioned in a cut I filed for the 2016 COS debates. I am also renewing my call for the number of COEs available for each category to be allocated in accordance with the percentage of these vehicles on our roads. Under the current practice, all motorcycles are grouped into a single Category D regardless of its engine capacity.
When I raised this point in 2016, then Senior Minister of State for Transport Ng Chee Meng had replied, given that 70% of the motorcycle population in Singapore had an engine capacity below 200 cc, introducing such a differentiation would lead to rigidity and, subsequently, lead to higher volatility in the COE prices for motorcycles.
This volatility has already set in as we can see from the COE prices for motorcycles, especially in the last few months. In this regard, I call upon MOT to consider my proposal towards making a proper and fairer allocation of quotas among the three different classes of motorcycles, according to the demand of the respective classes.
Sir, my second proposal to MOT is to consider abolishing COE bidding for Class 2B motorcycles with engine capacity 200c and below, and to replace it with a balloting system. This is to ensure that the cost of motorcycle ownership in this category is affordable for those who need it for income.
In 2014, I filed a Parliamentary Question (PQ) asking if the COE for Class 2B motorcycles can be abolished and the reply was that the COE is needed to regulate the motorcycle population. I have thus refined my proposal to propose balloting as a substitute for the bidding process.
I understand that in 2013, then Minister of State for Transport Josephine Teo had replied to a PQ about a balloting system for the COE for cars and said that it was not viable as it could encourage a black market. Mrs Teo also said that it was not possible to set a price for balloted COEs to deter speculators and yet remain feasible for genuine buyers. That was for cars.
However, I believe that an introduction of a balloting system with conditions attached, similar to what is done for Build-To-Order (BTO) flats, could be a way to regulate the Class 2B motorcycle population. Like BTO buyers, prospective owners of Class 2B motorcycles are more likely to be first-time buyers with a genuine need.
However, if MOT intends to retain the bidding system, I would like to ask the Ministry to consider allowing motorcycle buyers to bid for COE under their own name rather than through the dealership. This is to address the issue of possible speculation by dealers.
LTA has maintained that there is no evidence of speculation. However, the number of expired or unused Category D COEs and the fact that the COE prices rose significantly in the May 2021 exercise despite the higher number of motorcycles COEs on offer, are signs that LTA may need to update its information.
Next, Sir, I would like to propose that MOT consider allowing the extension or renewal of another five years for motorcycles whose COE was initially renewed for only five years, provided that the motorcycle is used primarily for the earning of income.
The current practice is that a motorcycle's COE can be renewed either for (a) a continuous period of 10 years or (b) for five years only. However, if the COE is renewed for five years, it cannot be renewed for another five years upon the expiry of the first five years.
I understand that this additional legislation is only available for Category C vehicles, that is, goods vehicles and buses, and is subject to the statutory lifespan for this class of vehicles currently set at 20 years.
Given that there is a segment of our population that depends on their motorcycles for work, I am asking for the same flexibility offered to owners of goods vehicles and buses to be extended to the riders as well.
In addition to the changes I am proposing to the COE system for Category D, I have two other proposals which I believe will benefit Singaporeans who rely on the motorcycle for work.
First, I would like to reiterate my call for the Preferential Additional Registration Fee (PARF) rebate for motorcycles with Additional Registration Fee (ARF).
I note that then Minister for Transport Khaw Boon Wan had said that given the ARF for motorcycles are about 15% of the Open Market Value (OMV), the PARF rebate value would be too low to incentivise deregistration for motorcycle owners.
But I am of the view that most motorcycle owners who choose to deregister their vehicles early would still value receiving the PARF rebate, given that most of them do not earn a high income.
There should be also consistency in the payment of ARF and the PARF rebates for all vehicles.
Sir, my second proposal is to have allocated areas for dispatch and delivery riders to temporarily park their motorcycles while they are making their deliveries in the Central Business District (CBD) area, regional business hubs such as Changi Business Park and International Business Park, to name a few, as well as shopping malls located in housing estates, especially in the public housing estates.
Most of the time, dispatch and delivery riders do not park at the prepared car parks at the area mentioned above because they will or might incur parking charges and also due to time factors, both of which will affect their earnings.
In situations where they have been issued a fine for indiscriminate parking, it will further add into their expenses. Additionally, indiscriminate parking also poses a safety hazard for other road users.
Having a designated area for dispatch and delivery riders to park their motorcycles would reduce incidences of indiscriminate parking, enhance the safety of pedestrians and other road users and is also time-saving for these riders. In short, an allocation of such an area will enhance the work routine and life circumstances for these riders.
Sir, I will now speak in our national language.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Today, I would like to highlight the problems faced by Singaporeans who depend on motorcycles to support themselves and feed their families.
In particular, I will concentrate on the Certificate of Entitlement system, better known as COE. In particular, I would propose several ways to improve the COE system for Category D, which is for motorcycles.
I have questioned multiple times as well as given my opinions and proposals on the COE for motorcycles in this Chamber. I will highlight this again because the issue of motorcycle COEs involves as well as impacts motorcycle owners who need their vehicles to earn a living to support their lives and their families.
COE prices for Category D have continued to rise and have skyrocketed recently. In 2001, the lowest price was $509 in December and the highest was recorded in January with $1,313. Ten years later, in 2011, the lowest price was recorded in December, which was $1,481, and the highest price in March was $2,534. This year, the price reached $7,501 in January and continued to soar to $8,899 in August and $9,689 for September.
Sir, I have several proposals to improve the COE system for motorcycles.
Firstly, I would like to propose to divide motorcycle COEs into three categories, much like the existing categories for the motorcycle riding licence system. Further, I suggest that the number of COEs available be allocated in accordance with the percentage of motorcycles on the roads in each category. This is not a new proposal. In 2016, the Senior Minister of State for Transport at the time had replied that the move would lead to rigidity and further volatility in the COE prices for motorcycles. However, it is clear that the situation mentioned by the Senior Minister of State still happened recently in the current COE system. So, I hope that MOT will consider my suggestion so that we can create a fairer system for motorcyclists in Singapore.
The second proposal is abolishing COE bidding for Class 2B motorcycles, that is, motorcycles which use engines below 200 cc, and replace them with a conditional balloting system. I understand that the then Minister of State for Transport had once replied to a question about balloting system for the COE for cars. She explained that such a system will cause problems like a black market and also mentioned the difficulty of determining a suitable price for the COEs. In my opinion, we should consider the creation of a system similar to the one used to purchase BTO flats. Those who wish to buy BTO flats and those who wish to buy Class 2B motorcycles are both definitely first-time buyers.
If MOT does not wish to make changes to the existing bidding system, I would like to suggest that every possible buyer be allowed to participate in the bidding and not just rely on motorcycle dealerships. This move could reduce the negative effects caused by speculation on the part of the motorcycle dealers. Although LTA maintained that there is no evidence of speculation, the number of COEs that had been obtained but remain unused, as well as the increase in COE prices in May despite a higher number of COEs on offer, indicate the possibility that this problem really exists.
Next, I would like to suggest a renewal or extension for COEs that had already been renewed for only five years, for motorcycles that are used primarily for work. Presently, such renewals or extensions are only offered for Category C vehicles, that is, goods vehicles and buses.
Besides the COE, I would like to submit two more proposals. First, I propose that a Preferential Additional Registration Fee (PARF) be also extended to motorcyclists who de-register their motorcycles early. As MOT had explained previously, given that the ARF for motorcycles is only 15% of its Open Market Value (OMV), the amount of PARF that motorcyclists can receive is not high enough to incentivise them to de-register their motorcycles. Since most of them who work as delivery workers do not earn a high income, any PARF rebates, even a modest amount, will be appreciated. More importantly, policies should be implemented consistently across all vehicles.
Secondly, I propose to have allocated parking lots made available for dispatch workers in areas such as the Central Business District (CBD), regional business hubs such as Changi Business Park as well as shopping malls located in housing estates especially public housing estates. Riders often avoid using the available parking lots because they want to save money and time. In situations where riders are fined for parking their motorcycles indiscriminately, those fines will further impact their livelihood. By setting up allocated motorcycle parking lots for dispatch workers in such areas, it can help them perform their duties without compromising public safety, save delivery time and, at the same, enhance their work routine and their life circumstances.
(In English): Sir, in conclusion, the Singapore Government has set targets for the number of vehicles on the road, including for motorcycles. Towards this end, policies such as the COE, the ARF, Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) and such, have been introduced and continuously refined towards this goal.
At the same time, you must recognise there is a segment of our population that relies on motorcycles to make a living and they have been affected negatively by the impact of the policies.
In my speech, I have proposed several refinements to existing policies; some of these are not new but they have been updated. I hope the Government will look into these proposals towards improving the conditions of our fellow Singaporeans who have had to endure challenging circumstances. [Applause.]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Baey Yam Keng.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the high motorcycle Certificate of Entitlement, or COE, prices since bidding resumed in July 2020, have considerably led to concerns of several Members of this House. Besides Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap, various Members, including Mr Chong Kee Hiong, Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, Ms Joan Pereira and Mr Abdul Samad have raised similar concerns and offered various suggestions.
We have also heard similar feedback from members of the public and the industry and have responded both in this House and through the media.
In land-scarce Singapore, unfortunately, we do not have the luxury of letting everyone own private vehicles, be it cars or motorcycles. The COE system is a market-based mechanism that allows us to allocate limited resources efficiently. While it is not a perfect solution, the system has generally worked and COE prices fluctuate based on supply and demand, as should be the case.
That said, we are mindful that motorcycle owners could have different needs from owners of other vehicle types. This is why there is a separate Category D for motorcycle buyers so that they need not compete with commercial vehicle and private car owners.
So, unlike the other categories, Category D COEs do not contribute to Category E COEs, or the open category, which means that the quota of COEs is determined largely by the number of deregistered COEs in the preceding quarter.
The high prices observed for motorcycle COEs of late indicate strong demand. It would indeed be a cause for concern if the COE prices are propped up because dealers are bidding for more COEs than they need and are not using them.
However, we have observed very high utilisation rates over the past year, which suggests that the higher premiums are a result of higher demand. Let me explain.
Successful bidders of Category D COEs are issued temporary COEs or TCOEs, which need to be used to register motorcycles. These TCOEs will expire if they are not used by the bidders to purchase and register motorcycles within the six-month validity period and their bid deposits will be forfeited.
Since COE bidding resumed in July 2020, the proportion of utilised TCOEs has been high at approximately 99% as compared to the historical average of about 91%. This remains the case even for the TCOEs that just expired at the end of September 2021 where the utilisation rate was 99.7%. These were the COEs that were secured in March 2021. We will continue to closely monitor the utilisation rate of TCOEs issued in recent months over the respective six-month validity period.
Mr Deputy Speaker, the COE supply from July 2020 to July 2021 was also about 30% higher. This was because we returned the additional COE quota accumulated when bidding was suspended during circuit breaker from April to June 2020, together with the closure of vehicle showrooms.
This return of the additional quota was completed with the second bidding exercise in July 2021. So, for the current August to October 2021 period, the COE supply is 28% lower than the preceding quarter, May to July 2021 period, with the supply being predominantly determined by deregistration. So, this combination of increased demand and the lower COE supply would likely have contributed to the higher premiums in the bidding exercises since August but has receded somewhat in the most recent bidding exercise.
Sir, any adjustment to the COE system will have knock-on effects and potentially unintended consequences on the consumer. Hence, it is important to assess whether the market-based COE system is working as intended or if there is some market failure.
Let me address Mr Faisal's suggestions in turn.
First, Mr Faisal suggested splitting the motorcycle COEs into sub-categories according to vehicle classes in the same manner as riding or driving licences, as well as allocate the COE supply for each category according to the percentage of these vehicles on our roads. This is not new. Former Member of Parliament, Mr Zainal Sapari had in 2015 suggested this as well as Mr Abdul Samad who just filed a Parliamentary Question for this Sitting. Ms Joan Pereira had also spoken about separate quotas for motorcycles based on the different categorisation. Mr Chong Kee Hiong also asked to create a new category of COEs for motorcycles used for delivery work.
We have explained the considerations in the past and these considerations remain relevant today. Let me reiterate.
Unlike cars, the quota for motorcycle COEs is relatively small. For example, for August to October 2021, about 440 Cat D COEs were available in each bidding exercise. If we were to divide this further, there will be even smaller quotas for each sub-category. This will likely result in greater volatility and potential increases in COE prices. Of note, allocating sub-category quotas based on the prevailing split in motorcycle population has its challenges. The percentage of Class 2B motorcycles registered fluctuates across the years and even from month to month. It would, therefore, be very difficult for us to arbitrarily select an allocation basis.
Second, Mr Faisal also suggested abolishing COEs for all Class 2B motorcycles and to replace it with a balloting system. I understand that the intent is to make COEs affordable for those who need a motorcycle for livelihoods but this is not necessarily better. Such a two-tiered COE system is not equitable since other types of vehicles, such as cars and commercial vehicles, can also be used for livelihoods. More importantly, such a system requires us to arbitrarily set a price. This is different from BTO flat prices. If the price is too low, it will increase demand and crowd out those who truly need the motorcycle for a living and are prepared to pay a bit more for the value it brings.
Third, on allowing motorcycle buyers to bid for COE under their own name, this is already allowed as individuals can bid for COEs through the ATMs. However, many motorcycle buyers still choose to go through dealers as this will allow them to get their motorcycles immediately, using the TCOEs that the dealer has already secured. The removal of this option could have unintended consequences for buyers and will have to be studied carefully.
Fourth, the five-year COE renewal option is something we created for vehicle owners who need their vehicles for only five years instead of 10 years. If we were to allow COEs to be renewed for five years repeatedly, there will be fewer COEs recycled for bidding. This would tilt the current balance between existing and prospective vehicle owners.
Fifth, on establishing a Preferential Additional Registration Fee (PARF) rebate for motorcycles, such suggestions to extend the PARF scheme for cars to other vehicles have been raised in this House before.
The PARF system is intended to encourage early turnover of older vehicles and to keep our car population relatively young. PARF needs to be taken in totality with the significantly higher ARF on cars. Motorcycles pay significantly lower ARF with a base rate of 15% of the vehicle's OMV, compared to 100% for car.
We do not have plans to extend the PARF scheme to other vehicle types.
We have already kept related costs for motorcycles lower. The six-monthly road tax amount is $31 for Class 2B motorcycles as compared to $156 for cars of engine capacity less than 600 cc. ERP rates for motorcycles are also generally half that of cars.
Last but not least, on the issue of parking. The parking provisions depend on the nature of the development and the geographical zone, including whether it is near public transport.
We acknowledge that the food delivery sector has grown rapidly in recent years and that commercial developments have their own circumstances and needs as well. Commercial building owners are strongly encouraged to set aside motorcycle parking lots for food delivery riders and to provide a reasonable parking grace period for them.
Mr Deputy Speaker, we understand the concerns on the impact of COE prices on motorcycle owners who ride for a living and are mindful of the needs of motorcycle owners. I would like to assure the House that we are monitoring this situation closely and will take action if warranted.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 7.38 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":"Shorter Wait Times for Households who Need Migrant Domestic Workers for Care Needs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"17 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Government will take urgent steps to allow more migrant domestic workers (MDWs) into Singapore to reduce the current waiting time for Singaporean households urgently requiring the services of MDWs especially to look after seniors and young children who critically require appropriate caregiving services.
Dr Tan See Leng: MOM is doing our best to facilitate the entry of as many migrant domestic workers (MDWs) as possible, within the parameters allowed by the Multi-Ministry Taskforce. We have completed rescheduling MDWs whose entry approvals were postponed in May, for them to enter before the end of the year. We will continue to give priority to households with urgent and very challenging caregiving needs, particularly sick elderly and family members with special needs.
We will also be accepting new entry applications for vaccinated MDWs from 15 October 2021, for entry into Singapore from 1 November 2021. But as entry approvals continue to be limited for public health reasons, it could take around three to six months before their MDWs can enter, depending on the COVID-19 situation at source and locally. If the situation improves in the region, we can approve more to enter.
To meet the demand for MDWs, the Association of Employment Agencies (Singapore) (AEA(S)) started a pilot programme in July 2021. Under this commercial initiative, the AEA(S) works with its overseas business partners to implement additional safe management measures prior to the MDWs’ entry into Singapore. Households which need their MDWs urgently can consider this programme.
The pilot has shown to be effective at reducing the risk of COVID-19 importation. AEA(S) and its partner employment agencies (EAs) are doing their best to scale up the pilot, as well as to expand the programme to include MDWs from other countries. However, they will need time to find suitable business partners to facilitate the ground processes in overseas countries and ensure that it remains effective at minimising importation risk.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Arrangements for Students Served a Quarantine Order or Stay-Home Notice to Take National Examinations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"20 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education whether students taking national exams such as the PSLE and \"O/N/A\" levels and who are served a Quarantine Order or Stay-Home Notice will be permitted to undertake their exams in a centralised, dedicated quarantine facility instead of being prohibited from taking the exams altogether.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: MOE and the Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board (SEAB) have announced the updated arrangements on 26 September 2021 for those who may be affected by COVID-19 for the coming national examinations. These include special arrangements to allow students to take their national year-end examinations while on Quarantine Order (QO), Leave of Absence or Approved Absence in a safe manner, starting from the PSLE which began on 30 September 2021, and for GCE \"N(A)/N(T)\", \"O\" and \"A\" level examinations thereafter.
Students on QO will be allowed to sit for national written examinations under stringent conditions including a rigorous testing regime and safe management measures. These includes a negative Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) entry swab at the beginning of the QO, and students completing a self-swab with Antigen Rapid Tests (ART) kits at home and test Ag- within 24 hours before each of their examination papers. Safe management measures and other precautions are also put in place at the examination venues to ensure the safe conduct of the national examinations.
In the immediate period before the national examinations, travelling should be avoided. In addition, Stay-Home Notice is mandatory for persons after returning from overseas trips. SEAB will, however, make an exception if a student needs to travel for compassionate reasons, for example, demise of close relatives. For these candidates on SHN, SEAB will apply similar arrangements as that for candidates on QO to allow them to sit for their national written examinations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Raising Awareness amongst Pharmacists to Spot Signs of Domestic Violence and Teaching Domestic Violence Victims to Seek Help with Non-verbal Cues or Code Words","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"21 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Social and Family Development what more can be done to raise the awareness and expand the current pool of trained pharmacists to identify signs of violence among their customers.
22 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Ministry will be looking into raising the awareness among domestic violence survivors to use code words or any non-verbal cues, as adopted in other jurisdictions, to seek assistance.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: I will address both the Member’s questions on family violence in this reply.
It takes a whole-of-society effort to tackle family violence. The multi-stakeholder Taskforce on Family Violence (Taskforce), which I co-chaired with Minister of State for Home Affairs, Assoc Prof Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim, released its report late last month, detailing a set of 16 recommendations aimed at improving immediate support for survivors of family violence, enhancing protection for them, preventing violence from recurring and raising awareness of early warning signs. The Taskforce’s report and recommendations, which build on the existing work by the Government and community partners in the area of family violence, seek to strengthen efforts in tackling family violence over the next few years. We do not condone violence against any person and these recommendations are intended to support all persons affected by family violence, regardless of nationality, gender, race, religion or sexual orientation. The Government is considering the set of recommendations carefully and will respond to the Taskforce’s report thereafter.
It is heartening to know that many community partners, agencies and individuals feel strongly about tackling family violence. MSF actively seeks out and collaborates with community partners and organisations to strengthen community detection of violence and refers persons experiencing violence to available support. For instance, MSF worked with Unity Pharmacy to provide Family Violence Awareness Training to over 40 pharmacists in November 2020 and more than 120 retail assistants in April 2021. The intent is to equip them with skills to detect signs and symptoms of family violence among customers who approach them for medication or advice. MSF has rolled out the Family Violence Awareness Training to more partners this year, including staff and volunteers from educational institutions, grassroots and religious organisations. These included PCF Sparkletots, ITE College Central, EtonHouse Community Fund, the People’s Association, MUIS and the Presbyterian Church in Singapore.
Beyond training various partners to recognise signs and symptoms of family violence, MSF has also worked with FairPrice and Unity Pharmacy to make available brochures and posters on family violence across their retail outlets, to reach out to customers who may not feel comfortable approaching staff members directly for help.
MSF will continue to expand our outreach to more organisations, particularly partners that are likely to have direct contact with survivors of family violence or with groups that are at a higher risk of family violence. MSF is reaching out to other pharmacies to explore such efforts and welcomes other organisations to step forward and partner us.
I would also like to thank the Member for his earlier suggestion in March this year on the use of non-verbal cues, such as a discreet \"signal for help\", by students during virtual lessons to indicate that they are experiencing abuse at home.
The Taskforce agrees that this is something worth doing and has included this in its recommendations. MSF has already started looking into ways to make it easier for persons experiencing family violence to signal that they need help promptly and discreetly. We will release further details later this year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact on Businesses from Delays in Reopening of Economy in COVID-19 Endemic Stage","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"23 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for Trade and Industry as we transit into a state of COVID-19 endemic (a) what is the impact on our economy in 2022 for any delay of border reopening; and (b) what measures are taken in the transition to ensure that SMEs can tide through this period.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Singapore is a small, globally connected economy that thrives on the flow of people and goods. As we move towards COVID-19 resilience with a high rate of vaccination, we will be gradually easing our border restrictions. We had earlier introduced Vaccinated Travel Lanes with Germany and Brunei, and have recently included more countries in Categories II and III following a review of their COVID-19 situations. This facilitates travel with more countries, and we will continue to establish VTL and other travel arrangements with key destinations.
Keeping Singapore connected to the world is important for three reasons.
First, Singapore’s strategic position as a business hub depends on our connectivity with the world. Many companies here serve global or regional markets. Continued restrictions on business travel will hamper their ability to operate effectively.
Second, the recovery of our travel-dependent sectors such as aviation, tourism, and meetings, incentives, conferences and exhibitions (MICE) relies on foreign visitors. These sectors employ many Singaporeans and have borne the brunt of the ongoing pandemic.
Third, we will need to ease labour shortages, particularly in the construction sector, which has been experiencing serious project delays or disruptions, including many BTO projects. Many families are also awaiting domestic workers to help care for their loved ones.
By progressively and carefully restoring international connections with the rest of the world, we not only help our economy emerge stronger, but also help to meet the housing and care needs of Singaporeans.
In the meantime, the Government has implemented a comprehensive suite of measures to help firms, especially our SMEs, to tide through this challenging period.
These include:
(a) Grants like the Jobs Support Scheme and the Rental Support Scheme to help firms defray costs and retain workers;
(b) Financing schemes like the Temporary Bridging Loan to help address cashflow needs; and
(c) Development grants like the Enterprise Development Grant and the Enhanced Training Support Package to help firms transform and uplift their businesses.
To alleviate the tight foreign manpower situation, the Government has relaxed regulatory conditions to help firms retain their work permit holders. We are also facilitating the safe inflow of new workers from a range of source countries.
We are prepared to consider other ways to help our firms as needs arise. Singapore has weathered many crises in the past. We have done it before, and I am confident that as long as we stay united and resilient, we will emerge from COVID-19 stronger than before.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Tracking Food Insecurity Experienced by some Singaporean Households","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"24 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Social and Family Development given a recent NGO finding that more than 10% of Singaporean households have experienced food insecurity (a) how does the Ministry track this issue; (b) whether there can be an update on the steps being taken to address it; and (c) what has been the trend in light of the prolonged COVID-19 situation.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: While MSF does not specifically track the number of Singaporean households experiencing food insecurity, Singapore has performed favourably in international comparisons of food insecurity. For instance, the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation’s 2021 report on the State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World estimated that 4.5% of Singapore’s population in Singapore faced at least moderate food insecurity. This was lower than other developed economies like Australia, New Zealand and the United States.
MSF recognises that there are vulnerable groups within our community who require assistance and we support them in a number of ways. Low-income households with difficulties meeting their basic living needs can approach the Social Service Offices (SSOs) for assistance. Those who are eligible for ComCare will receive comprehensive support, which include cash assistance for basic living expenses such as food-related expenditures, employment assistance, as well as support with household and medical bills.
SSOs also link households up with other Government agencies and Social Service Agencies (SSAs) for additional support. Examples include MOH’s Meals-on-Wheels programme, which delivers cooked meals to homebound seniors with limited social support, and MOE’s School Meals Programme for Primary and Secondary school students on the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS). SSOs, Family Service Centres, Community Justice Centre and Citizens’ Consultative Committees also provide interim cash and supermarket vouchers for households facing immediate needs.
As part of the support to households affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government distributed grocery and food vouchers to lower-income families under the Care and Support Package and the Community Development Councils Vouchers Scheme. These measures were part of the suite of Budget relief schemes, such as the COVID-19 Recovery Grant, for affected workers suffering income or job loss and helped the lower-income cope with household expenditures, including food expenses.
MSF works closely with our community partners to strengthen support for food insecure households. In 2019, MSF convened a cross-sector Charity Food Workgroup, comprising food charities, Government agencies, corporates and volunteers. The workgroup is developing a food directory and database, and piloting \"local food coordinators\". The objective of these initiatives is to better identify and match households with food needs to food support organisations, and ensure that beneficiaries receive the correct type and amount of food support that meets their dietary needs.
During the 2020 circuit breaker, the Charity Food Workgroup worked closely with Government agencies, social service agencies, food charities and volunteer groups to ensure the continuity of food support. The SG Cares Community Network subsequently activated agencies and volunteers to proactively reach out to all 50,000 rental households across Singapore. Households that indicated food needs were linked up to further support, including food charities or meal delivery services for those with mobility or health issues. Going forward, MSF will be scaling up Community Link to strengthen support for 14,000 families with young children living in rental housing. We will not only connect families with food needs to food support, but also support them in addressing the underlying causes of their food insecurity, such as unemployment or health issues.
It takes a whole-of-society effort to look out for one another. If anyone encounters a neighbour, friend or family member who needs support, they can call the ComCare hotline at 1800-222-0000 or refer them to the nearest SSO or Family Service Centre for assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Mitigating Steep Rise in Electricity Prices for Households Despite Natural Gas Price Increases","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"25 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Trade and Industry having regard to the more than doubling of natural gas prices to date which is expected to cause electricity prices in Singapore to be higher in the next quarter, what further steps will be taken to (i) ensure that the price of electricity does not rise steeply for this period (ii) ameliorate the impact of higher electricity prices on Singaporean households which are particularly affected by the economic effect of the COVID-19 pandemic and (iii) encourage Singaporean households to be more energy efficient at the same time.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Over the last one and a half years, fuel prices have more than doubled. Many jurisdictions, including China, Japan, the European Union and the United Kingdom have been affected. As an energy importer, Singapore will also be impacted by price movements in the global energy market.
We cushion the impact of short-term spikes in fuel prices in two ways. One, power generation companies buy the bulk of their natural gas under multi-year gas supply contracts. Two, they pass on some of this price stability to consumers through fixed price plans.
Nonetheless, sustained high fuel prices will eventually feed into our electricity prices. We are importing close to 100% of our energy needs today. In spite of best efforts to deploy solar energy in Singapore, we are land constrained and will need to continue to rely on energy imports one way or another, and be subject to global price movements. Fuel prices have been low for some time and had dipped to their lowest in the last 20 years earlier this year, but as we have seen, may rise as global demand recovers.
At the same time, wholesale electricity prices have been depressed below the cost of producing electricity in the last five years, due to the overcapacity in generation. With rising demand from sectors such as data centres, 5G networks and electric vehicles, we will see electricity prices rise and normalise. No company that is commercially run will sell electricity below cost perpetually.
Eligible households will receive GST Voucher – U-Save rebates to support them with their utility expenses. This year, we provided an additional 50% of rebates through the GST Voucher U-Save Special Payment which was disbursed in April and July 2021.
At the same time, we encourage households to use electricity prudently in various ways.
SP Services has been progressively replacing households’ analogue (cumulative) electricity meters with advanced electricity meters which allow households to track their electricity consumption through the SP Utilities Mobile App. This will help households better understand their electricity usage patterns and encourage them to be more energy efficient.
In addition, NEA provides online resources via the E2Singapore website to help households to design energy-efficient homes and adopt energy-saving habits. For example, they can use the Life Cycle Cost Calculator to compare the energy efficiency levels of different home appliances. They can also refer to the Resource Efficiency Guide for New Home Owners for energy-efficient home renovation tips.
Last November, NEA and PUB launched the Climate Friendly Households Programme to encourage the 1-room to 3-room HDB households to switch to using resource-efficient appliances. Each eligible household is given e-vouchers to offset their cost of purchasing LED lights, energy-efficient refrigerators and water-efficient shower fittings.
We encourage all Singaporeans to adopt energy conservation as a way of life – from designing an energy-efficient home, to choosing energy-efficient appliances and adopting energy-saving habits.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Review of New Rail Financing Framework for Downtown MRT Line","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"26 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Transport (a) when will the ongoing review of the New Rail Financing Framework for the Downtown MRT Line be completed; (b) whether the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has worsened the operating loss for the Downtown Line; and (c) what will be the impact on the Downtown Line's rail reliability if there is a sustained and continued operating loss for the operator.
Mr S Iswaran: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the ridership for all our rail lines, including the Downtown Line. Even though ridership improved slightly in 2021, it remains significantly lower than pre-COVID-19 levels. Nonetheless, the rail operators have largely preserved service capacity and headways to ensure that commuters can maintain safe distancing. Rail reliability also continues to be high, at more than one million train-km between failures. To ensure commuter safety, the operators have also incurred additional costs, for instance, by stepping up cleaning efforts.
The financial impact has been partly cushioned by Government relief measures such as the Jobs Support Scheme. I would like to thank all our public transport operators for working alongside us to manage the pandemic.
The Downtown Line is on the first version of the New Rail Financing Framework, which has evolved over the years to take into account changes in the operating context. We are currently reviewing the arrangement for the Downtown Line, with a view to ensuring that the operator runs the line reliably with high productivity and that the line is sustainable. More details will be announced in due course, when the review is completed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Ensure Mix of Students from Different Financial Backgrounds in Schools Given Stronger Emphasis on Distance for Primary 1 Registration","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"27 Dr Shahira Abdullah asked the Minister for Education with regard to distance being a major factor in the new Primary 1 registration process and as families with financial means are able to move nearer to the more popular or oversubscribed schools, whether the Ministry will consider measures to avoid such schools from having a homogenous high-income background demographic.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Our primary motivation for reserving 40 places in Phase 2C is to allow more children from families with no prior connections to be able to study at a school near their homes.
This helps to keep our schools open to children of different backgrounds, as a diverse group of children can be admitted through the different phases in the P1 Registration Exercise.
The P1 Registration Framework by itself cannot guarantee an ideal mix of social-economic backgrounds amongst the students in a school. Instead, the framework reflects a careful balance between different considerations, such as having siblings study in the same school, alumni ties to the school, proximity between the school and homes, as well as various forms of voluntary contributions to the school and the community.
All our schools are well-resourced with good teachers, suitable facilities and funding for school programmes to cater to the diverse strengths and interests of our students. We take particular efforts to do more for our students who may have greater learning needs or come from more disadvantaged backgrounds and are committed to providing every student a quality and holistic education, regardless of the school he or she attends.
To enable schools to benefit from fresh perspectives and share good practices at the leadership level, our Principals are also typically rotated after contributing in the same school for between four and eight years. This allows Principals sufficient time to review and put in place programmes to benefit their school before moving to lead a new one.
MOE has also been enhancing opportunities for our students to have meaningful interactions with peers from diverse backgrounds, through inter-school activities and collaborations, such as Co-Curricular Activities and Values-in-Action (VIA) projects. MOE has also set up the Junior Sports Academy, a national sports talent development programme for Primary 4 and Primary 5 students, and regularly runs Outdoor Adventure Learning cohort camps that pair different schools together. These efforts provide a common educational experience and interaction space for students of different backgrounds to forge friendships across schools and backgrounds.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Lessons Learnt from Abrupt Exit of oBike and New Requirements for Licensees for Similar Public-subscribed Transport Schemes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"28 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport (a) what are the lessons learned from the abrupt exit of oBike from Singapore; and (b) what are the protective measures which LTA may now require of all operators of similar public-subscribed transport schemes in the interest of (i) consumers for loss of deposit payments (ii) local service providers for unpaid services rendered and (iii) public authorities for arranging disposal of abandoned equipment.
Mr S Iswaran: When dockless bicycle sharing services first entered Singapore, they offered Singaporeans another convenient travel option. At that time, LTA deliberately adopted a light touch regulatory approach towards this new innovative business model. Many users have used the services for their commuting needs. However, the proliferation of the services also led to indiscriminate parking and many stranded bicycles. To address these disamenities, we started licensing bicycle-sharing operators in 2018 under the Parking Places Act. That was when oBike made the commercial decision to close its operations.
In February 2020, the Shared Mobility Enterprises Act was passed to enhance the licensing regime for shared mobility devices. Under the regime, licensees are required to have plans to remove their devices in a timely manner should they exit the market. They are also required to furnish a performance bond to LTA to ensure compliance with their licence conditions, or be used to offset the impact of a sudden exit. Whilst all current licensees do not require deposits from consumers, the enhanced regulations also allow LTA to prohibit bicycle-sharing licensees from doing so should the need arise. This strengthened regulatory framework provides a foundation for sustainable and responsible device-sharing operations in Singapore.
In addition, companies and consumers with claims against any operator can seek redress through the civil courts. Consumers may also seek assistance from the Consumer Association of Singapore (CASE).
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singaporeans and Permanent Residents Domiciled Overseas Entering Singapore to Serve National Service","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"29 Mr Alex Yam asked the Minister for Defence (a) since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, how many Singaporeans and Permanent Residents who are domiciled overseas with approval from the Ministry returned to register or enlist for National Service; (b) what are the quarantine and Stay-Home Notice procedures for those returning; (c) how much is the average expenditure incurred; and (d) whether the Ministry will consider waiving or assisting with the expenses incurred for their dedicated Stay-Home Notice accommodation.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: Between January 2020 and August 2021, 1,082 pre-enlistees based overseas have returned to Singapore for their National Service (NS) enlistment. They adhere to the same prevailing national travel health control measures as all other returning Singapore Citizens (SCs) and Permanent Residents (PRs). This includes bearing the cost of their quarantine and Stay-Home Notice since 1 January 2021, when the Government ceased the waiver of such costs incurred by returning SCs and PRs.
The costs average about $2,200 per person. Returnees who have exceptional grounds such as financial difficulty can submit an appeal to the Immigration & Checkpoints Authority (ICA) for consideration to waive these costs. ICA has acceded to deserving appeals by overseas-based pre-enlistees, on a case-by-case basis.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore's Potential to be COVID-19 Vaccines R&D and Production Hub","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"30 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is Singapore's current onshore vaccine manufacturing capabilities; (b) to what extent these encompass the production process and supply chain for COVID-19 vaccines; and (c) whether and how soon Singapore can be positioned as a vaccine research and development and manufacturing hub for future and next-generation vaccines as part of future pandemic preparedness.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Singapore currently does not produce finished vaccines, although we manufacture active components that go into making the final product, for example, bacteria antigens. We are anchoring more vaccine manufacturing activities here not only to meet local demand but also to supply to the world. For example, BioNTech’s new plant in Singapore will begin manufacturing COVID-19 vaccines from 2023, while Thermo Fisher and Sanofi will manufacture a range of vaccines.
We are strengthening our research and innovation ecosystem to complement and support our biopharma manufacturing activities. For example, MOH launched the Programme for Research in Epidemic Preparedness and Response (PREPARE) this year. One of the thrusts of this programme is to develop research and technology platforms that can be used for both infectious and non-infectious disease vaccines. This would deepen our research capabilities, enhance Singapore’s attractiveness as a vaccine development partner and improve our access to potential vaccines during future epidemics.
Collectively, these efforts will strengthen and secure Singapore’s position as a leading pharmaceutical hub.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Prevent Personal Information from TraceTogether Usage from Being Hacked","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"31 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Prime Minister in view of the increasing use of TraceTogether at many locations (a) what are the risks of all the personal information being hacked and appropriated at various data collection centres; and (b) what measures are in place to prevent such attacks.
Mrs Josephine Teo (for the Prime Minister): Bluetooth proximity data recorded by TraceTogether is encrypted, stored locally on the user’s phone or token and automatically deleted after 25 days. The data remains on the personal device unless required by the relevant authorities for contact tracing or other legally permitted purposes. In such instances, the data is uploaded to and stored on Government servers, where it is safeguarded in accordance with the public sector cybersecurity and data security requirements, including the recommendations made by the Public Sector Data Security Review Committee. In particular:
(a) The TraceTogether databases are encrypted;
(b) Additional field level encryption or hashing are applied to personal identifiers;
(c) All access to the data is logged and monitored; and
(d) Systems are required to undergo penetration testing annually.
Additionally, under the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act, public officers who recklessly or knowingly disclose personal digital contact tracing data without authorisation, or who misuse the data, may be liable to a fine of up to $20,000 or imprisonment of up to two years, or both.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Employment Disputes before Written Employment Contracts were Mandated in April 2016","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"32 Mr Abdul Samad asked the Minister for Manpower (a) since 2016, whether there is an increasing trend in the number of employment disputes involving employees employed before 1 April 2016 with their employers where there is no written employment contract; and (b) whether Key Employment Terms (KETs) specified in the Employment Act can be mandated for all workers employed by companies before 1 April 2016 to protect all parties should there be any workplace grievance or dispute pertaining to the employment contract.
Dr Tan See Leng: The requirement for employers to provide Key Employment Terms (KETs) to all employees was introduced on 1 April 2016. The tripartite partners had considered mandating KETs for employees hired prior to 1 April 2016 but decided against it after taking into consideration the administrative burden on employers, especially the SMEs. Furthermore, most employees would eventually be covered under the requirement for employers to provide KETs when they change employer or when their contracts are renewed after 1 April 2016.
The vast majority of disputes handled by the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM) are not related to the lack of clarity regarding contractual issues but involve non-payment of salary or for overtime work. In addition, for our lower-wage workers, MOM carries out WorkRight inspections, to check on compliance, including the issuing of KETs. It has, likewise, not observed any disputes arising from failure to provide KETs to persons employed before 1 April 2016.
Notwithstanding that the legal requirement for KETs does not cover employees hired before 1 April 2016, the tripartite partners continue to strongly encourage employers to issue KETs to such employees. MOM will also review this exclusion at the next review of the Employment Act.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Work Permit Holders Obtaining Skills Certification in Singapore Instead of Overseas Testing Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"33 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development (a) to date, how many work permit holders (WPHs) have been permitted to obtain their skills certification in Singapore instead of Overseas Testing Centres (OTCs); (b) how many of these WPHs successfully obtained their skills certification in Singapore; (c) what are the main reasons for those who fail to obtain their skills certification; and (d) whether the Ministry will consider (i) making this a permanent programme and (ii) allowing WPHs from more countries to obtain their skills certification in Singapore instead of OTCs.
Mr Desmond Lee: BCA has worked with MOM to temporarily allow new construction Work Permit Holders (WPHs) from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to obtain their skills certification in Singapore instead of at Overseas Testing Centres (OTCs) in the PRC, from 7 May 2021 until the end of this year. This temporary flexibility has been extended to other approved sources of construction WPHs on a case-by-case basis. Agencies will review whether this arrangement can be made permanent, while continuing to ensure that workers are equipped with the basic knowledge and skills required to work in our construction industry.
These workers must obtain their skills certification within a year of their work pass issuance. To encourage employers to get their workers certified earlier, employers have to pay higher levy rates if their workers do not obtain their skills certification within three months of their work pass issuance.
To date, about 3,500 WPHs have been permitted to obtain their skills certification in Singapore. About 1,700 of these workers have arrived in Singapore and about 90% have yet to attempt the certification test. So far, slightly more than 100 of them have obtained their skills certification.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of Buy Now Pay Later Regulatory Framework","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"34 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Prime Minister (a) what is the progress of MAS’ review of the \"Buy Now Pay Later\" (BNPL) regulatory framework; (b) what is the current value of such transactions in Singapore; and (c) whether such BNPL services have resulted in greater indebtedness in society.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): \"Buy Now Pay Later\" or BNPL schemes allow consumers to pay for their purchases via instalments.
Currently, BNPL schemes do not pose significant risk to household indebtedness. They are not yet widely used relative to other payment methods. For example, industry estimates put the total value of BNPL transactions in 2020 at around $114 million. This is a very small fraction of the $92 billion in credit and debit card payments over the same period.
Further, the current features of BNPL schemes in Singapore are effective in mitigating the risk of excessive debt accumulation by consumers. For example, BNPL users’ accounts are subject to credit limits. They will typically be suspended by the BNPL provider – that means no further use of that BNPL scheme – once a payment is overdue. Late payment fees apply, but these are typically capped. As BNPL schemes do not charge compounding interest on the outstanding amount, the risk of rapid debt accumulation is also not large. As of end 2020, the total outstanding value of BNPL transactions was about S$12 million. This includes the value of instalments that had yet to fall due.
MAS is, nonetheless, assessing whether a regulatory framework is necessary to guide the evolution of BNPL schemes as they become more widely used in Singapore. This could include adoption of fair dealing practices by BNPL schemes. For instance, clear disclosure at the point of account opening is helpful in ensuring that consumers are fully aware of the late fees chargeable if they do not pay on time. MAS has been engaging BNPL providers and has been reviewing the experience in other jurisdictions where such schemes are more prevalent.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Profile of and Penalties for Those Arrested for Involvement in Illegal International Soccer Gaming","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"35 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the age group of Singaporeans who were recently arrested for their involvement in illegal international soccer gaming; and (b) whether the current penalties for such offences are adequate to serve as a deterrent.
Mr K Shanmugam: Police conducted a series of operations in June and July 2021 to combat illegal football gambling. Seventy-two individuals aged between 18 and 63 years old were arrested for their suspected involvement in unlawful gambling activities. Investigations are ongoing.
Currently, under the Remote Gambling Act, an operator of illegal remote gambling services is liable for a fine of not less than $20,000 and not more than $500,000, or to imprisonment not exceeding seven years, or to both. An agent who facilitates others to gamble illegally is liable for a fine of not less than $20,000 and not more than $200,000, or imprisonment not exceeding five years, or to both.
In April 2020, MHA announced a review of our gambling laws to ensure that our laws and regulatory approach towards gambling keep pace with the evolving gambling landscape. As part of the upcoming proposed amendments to gambling legislation, MHA is reviewing the penalties for illegal gambling, with a view to increasing them to strengthen deterrence. The outcome of our review will be announced at the end of this year, when we table amendments to the gambling legislation to Parliament for consideration.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Training and Courses for Counsellors Deployed to Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"36 Dr Shahira Abdullah asked the Minister for Education (a) what are the reasons behind the Ministry’s decision to deploy counsellors who have not attended programmes that are fully certified by the Singapore Association for Counselling (SAC) as training for registered counsellors; (b) how does the Ministry assess the adequacy of training provided under NIE’s Diploma in School Counselling programme vis-à-vis the national competency assessment framework for counsellors; and (c) whether there are plans to gradually upskill all school counsellors to attend fully certified and recognised programmes by SAC and qualify as a registered counsellor.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: MOE recruits both trained and untrained applicants for School Counsellors (SC). Untrained applicants undergo the Diploma in School Counselling (DSC) programme conducted by the National Institute of Education (NIE) before they are deployed as SCs in the schools. The DSC programme is specially designed for school counselling to equip the trainees to work effectively and meet the needs of our children and youths in the educational setting.
NIE has a wealth of knowledge and experience in research and training in counselling psychology within the school context. They have been offering the Master of Arts (Counselling and Guidance) programme since early 2000, which is recognised by professionals and the Singapore Association for Counselling (SAC).
Counsellors in Singapore are not required to register with SAC as it is not an accreditation or licensure body. MOE too does not require School Counsellors to register with SAC. Registration is voluntary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Current Occupancy Rates at Hospices and Adequacy of Hospice Capacity Given Ageing Population","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"37 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the current occupancy rate of our hospices; (b) whether there are sufficient beds to meet the demand of our rapidly ageing population; and (c) how is the training, recruitment and retention of care professionals in our hospices.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: There are currently a total of 255 inpatient beds for palliative care, of which 155 are in hospices and the remaining 100 in community hospitals. The occupancy rate has been close to 70% over the past year. We will continue to ensure sufficient inpatient and home palliative care capacity to meet the future needs of our population. We should also raise awareness that palliative care can be done at home.
MOH and the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) work with our partners to attract and retain their workforce by enhancing the attractiveness of the sector and ensuring that remuneration is competitive. The hospices can also tap on various support measures, including training and productivity enhancement development grants, to build capabilities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Preparations to Train and Build Up Pool of Informal Caregivers Given Anticipated Demand as Population Ages","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"38 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry has any projections for the anticipated increase in informal caregivers needed over the next 10 to 20 years as the population ages; (b) if so, what are the projected figures; and (c) how is the Government intending to build up the capacity and capability of care workers to relieve the elderly care load on women and men who are currently having to give up their jobs to care for their ageing parents.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Based on MOM's 2020 Labour Force Survey, about 119,000 residents outside of the labour force cited care for family members or childcare as the main reasons for not working.
Our population’s care needs will increase as we age, with one in four Singaporeans aged 65 and above by 2030. Caregiving arrangements vary depending on each family’s circumstances. Some hire help, but some prefer to look after their aged loved ones themselves. We will support the different caregiving needs through increasing and strengthening care services, including respite care services, and enhancing support for caregivers. For example, MOH is reviewing the Home Caregiving Grant to provide more help for targeted groups.
Since 2015, we have added 4,600 day care places and 3,100 home care places. We are also piloting new respite care options in addition to existing ones at eldercare centres and nursing homes. To ensure sufficient and qualified manpower for these services, MOH and the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) help providers through schemes to support local recruitment, branding of the sector and salary enhancements. Providers can also tap on training grants and sponsorships to build capabilities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Training More Healthcare Personnel to Look After Dementia Patients with Ageing Population","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Health (a) whether there is a plan to train more healthcare personnel to look after dementia patients in view of the ageing population; and (b) what are the measures that have been put in place to support the projected increase in dementia care needed.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: MOH adopts a multi-pronged approach in the provision of dementia care, which includes increasing care capacity and capability in the hospitals and the community, increasing awareness on dementia and supporting caregivers of people living with dementia (PLWD).
To increase the accessibility of dementia care services in the community, dementia shared care teams have been set up in the public hospitals to support our primary and community care providers in dementia care management through training and capability building. This includes training of community mental health teams, polyclinics and general practitioners in dementia assessment and intervention. In addition, the Graduate Diploma in Mental Health (GDMH), jointly organised by Institute of Mental Health (IMH) and the National University of Singapore (NUS), provides General Practitioners with structured training on the management of mental health conditions, including dementia. Dementia services are currently also available in the polyclinics.
For patients who require specialist care, the capacity of outpatient Memory Clinic services at public hospitals has increased since 2012. In addition, a new inpatient service for patients with behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) has been introduced in three acute hospitals and two Community Hospitals.
Together with the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC), we have worked with our community care partners to establish community outreach teams and community intervention teams to reach out and provide education and intervention to PLWD and their caregivers. To further support PLWD and their caregivers to continue to live well and provide care, respectively, in the community, we have rolled out Dementia-Friendly Communities and increased the number of Dementia Day Care places in the past few years. For individuals who require residential care, dementia-friendly designs have been incorporated into our newer and upcoming government-built nursing homes to enhance the quality of care at these facilities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Response to Rating of Singapore by Climate Action Tracker as \"Critically Insufficient\"","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"40 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment what is the Government’s response to the September 2021 overall rating of Singapore by Climate Action Tracker as \"Critically Insufficient\", the bottom category, in its overall ratings.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: We are reviewing the methodology used by Climate Action Tracker (CAT) in rating Singapore’s climate targets and policies. Our preliminary view is that the CAT assessment framework does not account for Singapore’s unique challenges as a small, densely populated city-state with limited access to alternative energy sources. These are important considerations in contextualising Singapore’s climate and sustainability efforts. Such constraints in transitioning to alternative energy sources are recognised under Article 4.10 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
To put the numbers in context, Singapore’s population density is more than ten times higher than the next densest country being evaluated by CAT, South Korea. As a city-state with no hinterland and limited resources, we must make provisions for an array of needs, from industry, housing, utilities, air and seaports, to national defence, all within 728 square kilometres.
Even when we compare ourselves with equally dense global cities, we are at a distinct disadvantage, as we have no ready access to renewable energy sources.
London is about two-thirds as dense as Singapore, but is able to tap on various distant offshore wind farms that lie outside their administrative boundaries. For example, the London Array, an offshore wind farm located more than 100 kilometres away from the city, generates enough clean electricity to power around 500,000 homes.
Hong Kong draws about a quarter of its electricity from nuclear power plants in China’s Guangdong province, and relies on Shenzhen as its adjacent manufacturing hub.
Singapore is exploring ways to harness greener energy options such as solar energy, clean energy imports and low-carbon alternatives. In July this year, we officially opened one of the world’s largest floating solar farms on Tengeh Reservoir. We are aggressively accelerating the deployment of solar panels on building rooftops and other untapped spaces including canals and roads. Even as we are pushing the bounds of innovation, our best efforts will only increase the proportion of solar in our power supply by only a couple of percentage points, from less than 1% in 2019 to around 3% by 2030.
While we have no choice but to rely on fossil fuels as we explore other green energy options, we remain committed to keeping our energy mix as clean as possible. The share of coal in Singapore’s energy mix is just 1.2%. This is significantly lower than other countries that fare better on CAT’s list, such as Japan and Germany, where the proportion is nearly 30%.
Greening our energy grid is just one way in which Singapore is striving to overcome our natural limitations. We are also pressing ahead with the Singapore Green Plan 2030, a whole-of-nation roadmap to advance our sustainability development agenda and achieve net zero. These include greening 80% of our buildings by 2030 and phasing out internal combustion engine vehicles by 2040. We are reviewing the post-2023 carbon tax level and trajectory, in consultation with industry and expert groups, to further spur the reduction of our carbon emissions, incentivise industry innovation and promote green growth. The revised post-2023 carbon tax level and trajectory will be announced at Budget next year.
The Government has also set aside significant funds to finance climate and sustainability efforts, which are not reflected in CAT’s assessment. In our S$25 billion Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2025 Plan, sustainability features is a key focus area. To encourage the channelling of private capital to such efforts, MAS’ Green Finance Action Plan supports the mainstreaming of green and sustainable financing, the establishment of green finance centres of excellence, and the development of capabilities to originate innovative sustainable financing solutions and climate-resilient investment strategies.
As a responsible member of the international community, Singapore is determined to play our part and contribute our fair share in the global fight against climate change. We do this by setting ambitious but realistic goals, and following through with tangible actions even when they are difficult or challenging. As a low-lying island state, we are particularly vulnerable to the detrimental effects of climate change. Our plans are not static and, even as we implement existing initiatives, we will continually review and enhance our climate targets and preparations over time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trend of Migrant Domestic Workers Seeking Transfer of Employer before Contracts End","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"41 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Manpower (a) over the past six months and 12 months, whether there had been an increase in migrant domestic workers requesting for transfers before their contracts ended; (b) what are the typical reasons for making such requests; and (c) whether the Government will consider enhancing regulations to protect local employers with real care needs from premature terminations by migrant domestic workers for frivolous reasons.
Dr Tan See Leng: An employer’s consent is required before a migrant domestic worker (MDW) can be transferred to another employer. An employer may agree to the transfer of an MDW for various reasons. For example, when the employer’s family caregiving needs change, when the employer has relocated overseas, where the MDW was not able to meet the needs of the household, or if she was not able to get along with the household members and vice versa.
Over the past 12 months, the number of MDWs transferred to new employers per month has remained stable.
We understand the disruptions to households when their MDWs are transferred. Employers have to incur additional costs to hire a replacement MDW. Those with caregiving needs will have to make alternative caregiving arrangements while waiting for the arrival of the replacement MDW.
MOM has been working on various fronts to help employers achieve a better match with their MDWs.
First, we make available to prospective employers the employment history of the MDWs they are looking to hire, including key job scope and reasons for leaving past employment. For example, a prospective employer will be able to see if an MDW left her previous employment because the employer no longer needed her services or whether the MDW herself wished to end the employment.
Second, to encourage employment agencies (EAs) to take greater ownership of matching outcomes, MOM is working on an initiative to require employment agencies to provide an option to refund 50% of the service fees charged to employers if an MDW employment ends within the first six months. This will be implemented by early next year.
Third, we understand that employers are concerned that some MDWs may deliberately perform badly at work to get their employers to terminate their employment. MOM facilitates the sharing of feedback between employers via the employer reference channel. Employers may leave their contact details for prospective employers to contact them for feedback on the work performance of their previous MDWs.
We understand the difficulties employers go through if an MDW seeks a transfer before the end of the contract. To help alleviate the financial burden incurred by employers, MOM recently introduced a policy to allow employers to share the Stay-Home Notice (SHN) and related COVID-19 tests costs incurred by an MDW when she entered Singapore, if the change of employer takes place prematurely.
The recent concerns over MDWs changing employers mid-contract partly stem from the limited number of MDWs entering Singapore. MOM will continue to do our best to facilitate the entry of more MDWs within the parameters permitted by the Multi-Ministry Task Force to safeguard public health.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Allowing Motorists with Class 3A Licences to be Trained and Licensed to Drive Buses with Automatic Transmission","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"42 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Home Affairs in view that Singapore’s public bus fleet has fully shifted to automatic transmission (a) whether the Road Traffic Rules can be amended to allow motorists with a Class 3A driving licence to undergo training to obtain a Class 4A driving licence; and (b) if so, when can such changes to the Road Traffic Rules take effect.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Class 4A licence allows a person to drive public buses. Before a person can obtain a Class 4A licence, the person needs to have a Class 3 driving licence which allows the person to drive cars and small vans with either manual or automatic transmission. This has been the requirement because public bus fleets had consisted of a mix of buses with automatic and manual transmission.
As the Member has noted in the question, our public bus fleets have fully shifted to automatic transmission. The Traffic Police, or TP, will be changing the regulations such that both Class 3 and 3A licence holders may undergo training to obtain a Class 4A driving licence. We will provide an update when ready.
In the meantime, holders of Class 3A licence may appeal to TP through the Public Transport Operators, to allow them to undergo training to obtain a Class 4A driving licence. Between April 2019 and July 2021, TP approved 57 out of 60 such appeals; the remaining three appeals were rejected as the applicants had outstanding driving offences.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Implication of AUKUS Nuclear Submarine Deal for Singapore and ASEAN","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs what is the impact of the Australia-UK-US submarine purchase pact (AUKUS) on Singapore and ASEAN.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: Singapore and ASEAN share a close and multi-faceted relationship with Australia, the UK and the US. All three countries are Dialogue Partners of ASEAN and have contributed to the region’s peace and security over the years. Australia and the UK are also members of the Five Power Defence Arrangements, which celebrates its 50th anniversary this year. We hope that the newly established enhanced trilateral security partnership amongst Australia, the UK and the US (AUKUS) will contribute constructively to the peace and stability of the region, and complement the existing regional architecture which is open and inclusive.
Singapore and ASEAN also share good and substantive relations with ASEAN’s other Dialogue Partners including China. China is the largest trading partner for all ASEAN Member States and ASEAN has also become China’s largest trading partner. We welcome engagement with all stakeholders as we work together to uphold ASEAN Centrality in regional cooperation.
Singapore has consistently articulated the importance of a peaceful, stable and secure region anchored by an open, inclusive and rules-based order in accordance with international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Although competition between major powers may be inevitable, there is room for cooperation and constructive engagement between them and with other stakeholders in the region. ASEAN and our Dialogue Partners will benefit from our collective efforts to enhance regional peace, security and stability.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effectiveness of Community Work Definition in Family Service Centre Code of Social Work Practice","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"44 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Ministry is studying the effectiveness of \"community work\" as defined in the Family Service Centre Code of Social Work Practice; and (b) whether the Ministry is considering providing more funding to family service centres to do community work.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Family Service Centres (FSCs) partner individuals and families to address their social needs. FSC social workers carry out social work intervention through case work, group work and community work.
Community work involves FSCs tapping on local community strengths and networks to build the community, promote individual and community’s well-being, as well as support individuals and families in need.
Community work can range from outreach activities and assessment of community needs and assets, to community projects such as food distribution for low-income families, in collaboration with other agencies and partners. One example is the FSCs’ partnership with the SG Cares Community Network to conduct outreach to public rental households during the COVID-19 pandemic last year.
In view of the diversity of community needs, FSCs have the flexibility to determine the type and nature of community work required based on the needs of their local community. Given the variation of practices, MSF does not currently use a standardised rubric to evaluate the effectiveness of community work.
That said, MSF convened a workgroup in 2019 comprising social work professionals from the FSCs and academia to develop an FSC-Code of Social Work Practice (CSWP) Community Work practice guide. This guide further elaborates on how to operationalise and evaluate community work within an FSC setting and seeks to document best practices in community work. MSF intends to roll out this practice guide in 2022. After the guide is rolled out, MSF intends to work with FSCs to review the impact and effectiveness of their various community work projects.
FSCs are funded for case work, group work and community work, and have the flexibility to internally reallocate resources amongst these interventions according to their needs. The resourcing required for specific community work projects varies, given the diverse nature of the assessed needs and projects. FSCs also tap on community partnerships and resources to deliver community work projects. MSF conducts regular reviews of funding to FSCs to ensure they have the resources they need to carry out their work. Over and above the funded community work services, FSCs have also been able to contribute to areas of community needs through their parent organisations’ services and cooperation with other community partners and member organisations of the National Council of Social Service.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Restrictions on Redevelopment Given Recent Focus on Sustainability and the Environment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"45 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for National Development in light of the recent focus on sustainability and the environment (a) whether the Ministry will consider putting some restrictions on redevelopment; and (b) in particular, whether the Ministry will consider an age floor before en bloc schemes can be considered.
Mr Desmond Lee: Present regulations on collective sales already take into account the age of the development. Generally, under the Land Titles (Strata) Act, developments that are 10 years in age or more are required to obtain consent from 80% of owners before the collective sale can proceed. The consent threshold is increased to 90% for developments less than 10 years in age. To date, the vast majority of collective sales have involved developments aged 30 years and older.
There are also safeguards to ensure that development is undertaken in an environmentally responsible manner, while meeting the housing needs of Singaporeans. At the planning stage, every development proposal goes through a robust evaluation process. The proposal will be assessed on its potential environmental impact, along with other aspects such as traffic, public health and heritage, before planning approval is given. In addition, we promote the adoption of sustainable construction practices. For example, BCA’s Code of Practice for Demolition provides guidelines for recovery of waste from demolition. BCA’s Green Mark scheme also awards points to developments with resource-efficient building designs, as well as those which conserve existing structures on-site.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Corrupt Transactions Involving Former LTA Deputy Group Director on Standards and Safety of Thomson-East Coast and Cross Island MRT Lines","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"46 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Transport what are the implications on the standards and safety of the Thomson-East Coast and Cross Island MRT Lines arising from the actions of a former deputy group director of LTA who has admitted in Court to numerous corrupt transactions involving contractors working on the Lines.
Mr S Iswaran: I thank the Member for her question. I have addressed it in my reply to Question No 71 for oral answer on the Order Paper for 13 September 2021. [Please refer to \"Names of Companies Involved in Case where Former LTA Deputy Group Director was Jailed for Taking Bribes\", Official Report, 13 September 2021, Vol 95, Issue 37, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer Not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Take-up Rates for Digitalisation, Productivity and Succession Schemes for Hawkers in Past Three Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"48 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) for the past three years, what are the take-up rates for hawkers’ digitalisation, productivity and succession schemes such as Hawkers Go Digital, Hawkers’ Productivity Grant, Food Delivery Support Scheme and Incubation Stall Programme by (i) ethnic groups and (ii) age groups of hawker stall owners; and (b) whether the Ministry tracks the overall digitalisation progress by adoption of food delivery and e-payment methods by hawkers’ ethnic groups and age groups, and, if so, what is this progress.
49 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the Ministry tracks the current range of, median and average commission costs charged by food delivery platforms and, if so, what is the data; and (b) to date, what is the number and percentage of hawkers who have taken up the various Food Delivery Support Packages.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: From 2019 to 2021, 39 aspiring hawkers enrolled in the Incubation Stall Programme, while close to 400 participated in the Hawkers’ Development Programme. About 70% of the participants were below 50 years old, of whom about half were between 20 and 40 years old. This is lower than the median age of existing cooked food stallholders of 60 years old.
More than 700 cooked food stallholders have tapped on the Hawkers’ Productivity Grant to purchase kitchen automation equipment and service innovation systems, such as queue management and wireless paging systems. More than 70% of these stallholders are above 50 years old, many of whom have given feedback to NEA that the investments have enhanced their workflow and mitigated the physical demands of their work.
On the digitalisation front, as of July 2021, more than 4,000 cooked food stallholders have adopted e-payment under the Hawkers Go Digital Programme. For food delivery services, about 1,400 cooked food stallholders have applied for NEA’s Food Delivery Support Scheme (FDSS), which provides $500 in funding to help stallholders defray the cost of getting on board food delivery platforms. Two in three applicants were 50 years old and above.
Some platforms servicing hawkers may charge zero commission, while others may structure their commission charges according to the services offered. Under the FDSS, hawkers are free to make their own commercial arrangements and sign up with their preferred platforms. Under the Alliance for Action on online ordering, Grab, Deliveroo and FoodPanda will explore a common acquirer model with WhyQ for food delivery at 14 hawker centres. This will allow hawkers easier access to customers of all participating online ordering platforms, along with an integrated interface to receive and manage orders at zero commission costs to hawkers.
All our schemes and programmes are made available to stallholders regardless of ethnicity and we do not track the participation rate by ethnic groups. NEA and the SG Digital Office’s Digital Ambassadors will continue to actively reach out to and support hawkers in adopting digital solutions, such as e-payment and food delivery services.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criteria Used to Evaluate Success of Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"50 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what are the criteria used to evaluate the success of the Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centres (SEHCs); (b) from 2019 to 2020, what are the yearly mean, median and range of rents for SEHC stalls compared to NEA-run hawker centre stalls; (c) from 2018 to 2020, what is the yearly number of complaints received at SEHCs; and (d) of these, what are the percentages of hawkers raising such complaints and complaints that are successfully resolved respectively.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centre (SEHC) operators are required to meet monthly Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) on ensuring a minimum level of vibrancy, stall occupancy, footfall and timeliness in addressing feedback at the SEHCs.
The monthly stall rentals at the SEHCs range from $1,000 to $3,693. This is within the range of monthly rentals of non-subsidised stalls at comparable existing hawker centres. In 2019 and 2020, the median monthly stall rental in SEHCs was $2,000. This was also similar to median monthly stall rental at comparable existing hawker centres. As part of the support package for COVID-19, stallholders in SEHCs received five months and four months of rental waiver in 2020 and 2021 respectively, the same as those in existing hawker centres.
Between 2018 and 2020, each SEHC would receive on average four instances of feedback per month, mostly from patrons. SEHC operators are able to address at least 90% of the feedback within three working days as required. SEHC operators have been regularly engaging hawkers through Hawker Feedback Group sessions, held at least once every quarter to gather feedback from stallholders. The SEHC operators proactively work with stallholders to address any concerns raised and to improve their centres.
The SEHC model has brought benefits to both hawkers and patrons. SEHC operators have curated food stalls for quality and variety, and organised events to enhance footfall and vibrancy at their centres. During the pandemic, they have implemented initiatives to help hawkers get onto food delivery and tap on group-buys, and kept stall occupancy high at SEHCs. Some operators have also attracted new entrants to the hawker trade through their own incubation stall programmes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Centralise All Financial Institutions, Moneylenders and Credit-providing Companies under Single Regulatory Framework","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"51 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Prime Minister whether MAS will consider centralising all financial institutions, moneylenders and credit-providing companies under a single regulatory framework to level up the robustness of the financial system and protection to consumers.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): Our Government agencies work together to oversee the provision of consumer credit in Singapore. About 95% of credit granted to Singapore households by commercial entities is by financial institutions (FIs) regulated by MAS. The remaining 5% includes credit granted by licensed moneylenders regulated by the MinLaw; hire-purchase agreements regulated by MTI; and credit co-operatives overseen by MCCY.
We have over time streamlined the consumer safeguards implemented by these Government agencies, so they are largely consistent. They are guided by the shared objectives of encouraging financial prudence amongst consumers and enabling them to make informed choices on credit. For example, a single set of rules on loan tenures and loan-to-value ratios applies for motor vehicle loans, regardless of whether these are granted by FIs, hire-purchase companies or licensed moneylenders. For housing loans, which are mostly provided by FIs, MAS’ rules require all FIs to take into account borrowers’ total outstanding debt obligations, including housing loans from the HDB, motor vehicle loans under hire-purchase arrangements, and loans extended by licensed moneylenders. Likewise, for unsecured loans, caps are applied to the maximum amount of unsecured borrowings that an individual can obtain from an FI, a licensed moneylender or a credit co-operative. All lenders are also subject to fair dealing requirements such as disclosing key terms and conditions of the credit facility, including interest and late repayment charges.
Where there are some differences in specific requirements, these are intended to address the unique consumer protection needs of borrowers served by each channel of credit. For instance, licensed moneylenders, which typically provide unsecured credit to borrowers with weaker financial standing, are subject to additional safeguards of interest rate and fee caps. FIs regulated by MAS are not subject to these caps but may only provide unsecured credit to individuals with a minimum annual income of $20,000.
Our Government agencies will together continue to monitor developments in consumer credit and ensure consistency and coherence in our overall regulatory framework.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monetary Awards for Paralympians","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"52 Mr Alex Yam asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth since the previous Olympics and Paralympics in 2016 (a) whether there have been any changes to the monetary awards administered under the Singapore National Olympic Council and Singapore National Paralympic Council; (b) whether the disparity in the awards schemes can be reduced; and (c) whether the Government can do more to encourage major donors to better support disability sports and our Paralympians.
53 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth whether the Ministry will reconsider the practice of offering smaller monetary rewards for Paralympians compared to Olympians representing Singapore.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: The Major Games Award Programme (MAP) and the Athlete Achievement Award (AAA) are private award schemes. They are managed by the Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC) and the Singapore National Paralympic Council (SNPC) respectively, which are non-governmental organisations. The monetary rewards offered under the MAP and AAA are raised and decided respectively by the SNOC and SNPC. MCCY will support SNOC and SNPC to engage corporate and other entities to close the gap between the MAP and AAA.
The disparity in cash awards does not reflect how Government values our para-athletes vis-à-vis our able-bodied athletes.
The Government is committed to providing the best support for Team Singapore athletes – equally for both able-bodied and para-athletes – by building a High Performance Sports (HPS) system that enables them to pursue their sporting ambitions and achieve their goals. We also endeavour to enhance participation at the grassroots level, provide pathways to our athletes so that they can aspire to their own peaks and support each athlete as they compete on the international arena.
Today, the Government invests about $70 million annually into the HPS system that provides well-rounded and customised support for both our able-bodied and para-athletes. Our system is one that is merit-based and support is tailored to the needs of our athletes and the requirements of the sport. The Government also set up the One Team Singapore Fund (OTSF) in 2017 where we match sporting donations up to $50 million. The OTSF donations augment the HPS funding to both our abled-bodied and para-athletes. To date, the Government has matched approximately $15 million of donations.
We agree with the Members that our corporates and public’s support are essential to realise an inclusive society, including in sports. We look forward to more in our society working with us to build a Singapore where every individual has the opportunity to realise their talents and achieve their fullest potential.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Mental and Emotional Well-being Support for Singapore Athletes Before and After Major Sports Competitions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"54 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth what is the level of support provided to Singapore athletes in terms of mental and emotional wellness that will assist them in their preparation and recovery before and after major sports competitions.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: The Government is committed to supporting our Team Singapore athletes throughout their sporting journey. Athlete Life Management is an area of focus for the Singapore Sport Institute (SSI) and the National Youth Sports Institute (NYSI). It concerns itself with integrating sports performance with key aspects of an athlete’s life and total well-being, including mental well-being.
Preparation for major games must cater to the all-round needs of an athlete – going beyond physical readiness to mental readiness. On the latter, ahead of major competitions, SSI and NYSI assign Sport Psychologists and Athlete Life personnel to provide psychological and mental well-being support for our national athletes, which may include one-on-one consultations, and imparting skills to athletes to manage their mental and emotional conditions.
These strategies will be tailored to the competition conditions. For the recently concluded Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games, due to the COVID-19 movement restrictions, SSI Psychologists produced a travel essentials kit for athletes to track and monitor their mood, document their reflections and engage them in positive thinking.
After the Olympic Games, the Sport Psychologists conducted individual post-competition debriefs for the athletes. These sessions typically help the athletes to process their emotional responses to the performance outcomes, facilitate check-ins on their mental health and well-being, and encourage the athletes to plan ahead for their next milestones – be it the Southeast Asian Games, Asian Games or Paris 2024 Olympic Games. As the Tokyo Olympics also marked the last major outing for some of our athletes, such sessions also discussed transition plans to prepare them for their post-competition career.
SSI and NYSI are keenly aware that attention to the mental health of our athletes must be paid throughout their sporting journey and not just during competition seasons. To this end, in 2018, SSI introduced a mental health literacy programme which equips coaches and relevant personnel like sports administrators to help identify and support athletes who are experiencing issues with their mental well-being. NYSI has also added a Continuing Coach Education (CCE) module on the Youth Coaching Online platform to educate coaches in this aspect.
Sport Singapore also proactively checks on our athletes’ mental health. A well-being survey was added to the spexMedical check-up in 2020 to screen for possible psychological and mental distress, including eating and sleeping disorders. Potential cases are then flagged and assessed by SSI’s sport science team. If clinical expertise is required, they will be referred to the Singapore Sport and Exercise Medicine Centre (SSMC@SSI) for further follow-up with a trained psychiatrist or clinical psychologist.
Finally, SSI and NYSI also partner the respective National Sport Associations (NSAs) to build the mental resilience of our athletes by equipping them with coping mechanisms and adjustment capabilities so that they can self-regulate, recognise symptoms of weak mental health and practise self-care.
One boost to emotional well-being for our Team Singapore athletes is knowing that they have the support of Singaporeans when they have put in their best – and that it is not conditional on only winning medals. For the recent Tokyo Olympics, our athletes received many handmade encouragement cards from well-wishers. The steadfast support of fellow Singaporeans through the ups and downs provides an effective boost to mental and emotional wellness. I hope that our hon Member, along with other Singaporeans, will continue to cheer our athletes on and express support for them. It is a great boost to their well-being and spurs them on to continue to do their best for the nation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Celebrating Singaporean Athletes’ Victories and Honouring Efforts in Setbacks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"55 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth how can the Ministry encourage Singaporeans to both celebrate our athletes’ victories and honour their efforts in their setbacks.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Many Singaporeans followed and supported our athletes taking part in the recent Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Amidst COVID-19 restrictions, the use of social media tools was effective in sharing with Singaporeans the journey of our Team Singapore athletes at the games. For instance, MCCY and Sport Singapore social media platforms helped to keep Singaporeans updated on the progress of our athletes and captured some of the courtside action, alongside Mediacorp’s broadcast of the Games action on Channel 5 and meWATCH channels. Over 1,200 Team Nila volunteers rallied to watch the games live, organised Facebook Live shows to chat about our athletes, created videos to cheer them on and posted messages of support.
There were also organic ground-up efforts, like the Singapore Badminton and Singapore Water Polo FB Groups with a combined following of more than 6,000 members, who supported our athletes by sharing their progress on social media.
Singaporeans gathered to catch our athletes \"live\" in action at many ActiveSG centres and community centres. Some schools, such as Nanyang Primary School, screened the Games action during recess, to allow students to follow the competitions and cheer on our athletes. Our overseas fans also rallied alongside us to show support for our athletes, an example being the virtual cheering session organised by friends from Mihama Town in Aichi Prefecture for Pin Xiu’s 50-metre Backstroke-S2 event. This was attended by Pin Xiu’s family, the Mayor of Mihama Town Mr Saito Koichi, Parliamentary Secretary (Culture, Community and Youth) Mr Eric Chua, MFA mission officials, as well as Team Nila volunteers.
In the lead-up to the Games, Sport Singapore launched the \"One Day\" campaign, celebrating our athletes’ sporting journeys and paying tribute to their resilience and sacrifice in the pursuit of sporting excellence. The National Youth Sports Institute (NYSI) has also been featuring the sporting journeys of our youth athletes through video interviews and stories, showing how far these athletes have come.
It is important that we provide Singaporeans with opportunities to: (a) identify and connect with our athletes; (b) follow the action; and (c) lend encouragement to the athletes in their journeys, amidst their victories and disappointments. Our encouragement and support for our athletes count the most when the journey gets challenging.
Our contingents have since returned home from the Olympics and Paralympics Games, having flown the Singapore flag high competing with the world’s best athletes. Our athletes inspire us to chase our dreams. Their journeys exemplify grit, perseverance, resilience and never giving up.
We look forward to seeing more of our athletes in action at the upcoming Hanoi Southeast Asian Games and ASEAN Para Games, the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games, as well as Hangzhou 2022 Asian Games and Asian Para Games. Let us all continue to rally together as One Team Singapore to support our athletes in their sporting journeys.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Replacement of Stolen NRICs at Nominal Fee","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"56 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether the Ministry will consider allowing residents whose NRICs have been stolen as a result of third party data breaches to replace their NRIC at a nominal or discounted replacement fee.
Mr K Shanmugam: An individual’s NRIC number is a unique and permanent identifier used in many transactions and documents throughout the individual’s life. Therefore, the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) does not allow an individual to change his or her NRIC number, even if the number had been stolen during a data breach incident.
There are measures in place to prevent and mitigate the risk of subsequent identity theft, especially for financial transactions and sensitive transactions with public agencies. These include the use of additional information for identity verification, such as one-time passwords, personal identification numbers and biometrics.
Residents who have lost their physical NRIC have to apply to ICA for a replacement NRIC. ICA takes into consideration the reason for the loss of the NRIC in considering waivers of the replacement fee.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Use of NRICs in Applications for Phone and Telecommunication Services and Measures to Safeguard Consumers' Personal Data","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"57 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Communications and Information regarding the use of NRICs in applications for telecommunication access (a) what measures are in place to increase protection of users' information obtained by telecommunication providers; (b) whether the Ministry will consider allowing other forms of identification, such as driver licences, which have less personal information; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider imposing penalties and compensation to users based on the severity of breaches.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) requires telecommunication licensees (telcos) to maintain accurate records of the identity of their subscribers, including a copy of their NRIC, passport or employment pass. This requirement is not unique to Singapore, nor to the telcos. As is the case for telcos in other countries, or sectors like banking and healthcare, it is necessary to have accurate information on customer identity to help combat fraud and crimes.
Organisations that maintain personal records, including NRIC information, are expected to implement the necessary safeguards for their IT systems and put in place processes for internal monitoring. Where personal data, such as NRIC numbers, is stored alongside sensitive data, more stringent security measures should be put in place. Some examples of such measures include encryption, access-logging and multi-factor authentication for systems. The Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) has issued guidance on the stringent security measures required in its Guide to Data Protection Practices for ICT Systems. The PDPC has meted out higher financial penalties to organisations found with inadequate safeguards to protect sensitive personal data.
The Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) was amended last year to strengthen enforcement powers and introduce additional safeguards which organisations must comply with. This includes informing affected individuals of a data breach so they can take timely steps to protect themselves. As organisations have a responsibility to their customers to ensure proper service recovery, the PDPC has recommended that organisations put in place breach management plans. Affected individuals also have the right of private action for relief in civil proceedings under the PDPA.
In instances where the collection of residents’ personal particulars is required, one option the Government has implemented is Myinfo. This allows residents to consent to sharing Government-verified information securely and seamlessly, removing the need for physical documents. We are working with telcos to facilitate the use of Myinfo.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Loss of In-person Schooling Experience on Future Career Prospects of Students","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"58 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Education whether his Ministry will conduct a study on the impact of lost conventional in-person schooling on the future career prospects of school children because of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and identify steps that may be taken to address these problems so that they do not run the danger of becoming a \"lost generation\".
Mr Chan Chun Sing: MOE is closely monitoring the disruptions to schooling caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and has taken steps to ensure that students’ learning and development is not unduly compromised. We do so by keeping schools open as far as possible and by ensuring that learning can still take place as effectively as possible even under home-based learning (HBL) conditions. When students return to school, teachers ensure that students can make up for the in-person learning that they could not conduct online. While the Common Last Topics were removed from our national examinations, recovery is in place as these topics will be taught post-examination and also via the Student Learning Space. This will ensure preparedness for the next level of learning.
Therefore, we do not see a significant negative impact on students’ learning as a result of the pandemic. We have surveyed our students on their full HBL experiences and majority of them have indicated that their learning has not been severely affected. The overall performance of our students in the 2020 national examinations was also comparable to that of previous years, affirming that there were no major learning losses.
Amidst these challenges, the crisis has presented us an opportunity to emerge stronger. Both teachers and students have become more skilful in harnessing the strengths of Blended Learning to develop future-ready skills. Many of our students have also become more self-directed and independent in their learning, and more resilient to disruptions. These growths will stand them in good stead when confronted with future challenges in life and careers. We are confident that this generation of students remain as well prepared, if not more so, as past generations for the challenges ahead of them.
To answer Mr Murali’s question directly, there will be some impact on learning with the loss of conventional in-person schooling, especially the loss of CCAs and other informal interpersonal interactions. That is why we try to resume those activities where we can. But our assessment is that the impact is not major thus far, but we cannot take for granted that the negative impact will not cumulate. We will continue to take steps to ameliorate these issues with the help of technology, the commitment of our teachers and the support of our parents.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Academic Assessment of Home-schooled Children","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"59 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Education whether beyond just releasing the results of the Primary 4 examinations for children approved to undergo home schooling, the Singapore Examinations Assessment Board can provide further insight on areas of improvement or performance of these children so that the parents or educators of these children will be able to guide these home-schooled children to do better.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: All Singapore Citizen children who are granted approval to be home-schooled, are required to take a Mid-Term Assessment when they are in Primary 4 (P4). This is for parents to have a broad understanding of their child’s educational progress mid-way through primary education in preparation for the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) at Primary 6.
In preparation for the Assessment, the Ministry provides parents with an Information Booklet for each subject when the child is in Primary 3, specifying the test format and specimen questions which help to illustrate the knowledge and skills assessed. This helps parents to guide their child’s academic development.
Beyond the individual results of the Assessment, an examiner’s report for each subject summarising the key strengths and weaknesses of the cohort performances of P4 home-schoolers in the P4 Mid-Term Assessment is produced. Parents may request for MOE to share information from these reports, to help them understand and bridge their home-schooled children’s learning gaps. For home-schooled children who may not have performed well in the assessment, MOE will follow up with parents to understand their educational plans going forward.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Sufficiency of Number of Practising Psychiatrists and Psychologists in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"60 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry considers the number of practising psychiatrists and psychologists in Singapore to be sufficient; (b) if not, what is being done to increase the numbers; and (c) what measures are being taken to address burnout in mental health practitioners.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: There are 2631 psychiatrists registered with the Singapore Medical Council as at end-2020 and 5512 psychologists on the Singapore Psychological Society register as at September 2021. This works out to be 4.6 psychiatrists and 9.7 psychologists per 100,000 in the population.
There is no international consensus on the optimal ratio of psychiatrists and psychologists to population. MOH will continue to work with stakeholders and agencies such as MOE and MSF to assess the need and monitor the number of mental health professionals to ensure appropriate access to and quality of mental health services.
All our healthcare workers including mental health practitioners as well as those supporting their colleagues at the frontline, have worked very hard to care for their patients throughout this period. Notwithstanding their passion and strong sense of mission, our healthcare workers face tremendous stress and are at risk of burnout. To address burnout among our healthcare workers, mental health practitioners and other healthcare staff, our public healthcare institutions have stepped up their outreach to staff on the support measures available to them. This includes counselling services, staff helplines, and peer support programmes. Let us continue to demonstrate our recognition and appreciation to all our healthcare workers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Source: SMC 2020 Annual Report.","2 : Source: Singapore Register of Psychologists, maintained by the Singapore Psychological Society."],"footNoteQuestions":["60"],"questionNo":"60"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Incidents of Children Stealing to Fund Mobile Gaming Addictions over Past Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"61 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether incidents of children stealing to fuel their mobile gaming addictions are on the rise over the past five years; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider banning the sale of top-up cards at convenience stores to minors unless they are accompanied by a parent.
Mr K Shanmugam: In general, the number of young persons below 18 years old arrested for theft-related offences has been on a downward trend. Over the past five years, there were also no theft reports specifically attributed to mobile gaming addiction.
From the perspective of crime control, there are no plans to ban the sale of top-up cards with stored value to children. We will, however, continue to work with relevant agencies dealing with child and youth issues and adjust where necessary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Factoring Different Actuarial Risks into HDB Home Protection Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"62 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Home Protection Scheme (HPS) can take into account that different conditions have differing actuarial risk on a continuum with a view to including policyholders with pre-existing conditions; and (b) whether an individual who previously qualifies for HPS on his first HDB home but later developed a medical condition can be considered for HPS inclusion when right-sizing to a second HDB home.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Home Protection Scheme (HPS) is a mortgage-reducing insurance which protects CPF members and their families from losing their HDB flats in the event of the member’s death, terminal illness or total permanent disability. Today, HPS covers nearly all applicants, including some with pre-existing medical conditions, without premium loading.
HPS coverage is not extended to applicants with serious pre-existing medical conditions to ensure the affordability of premiums for members and the viability of the scheme. For flat owners who face difficulties with their mortgage repayments, HDB has various assistance measures available to help them.
When a member sells his or her HDB flat and immediately right-sizes to a new HDB flat, but is not eligible for new HPS cover due to health reasons, the previous HPS cover can be ported over to the new HDB flat.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Technical Assistance from HDB to Reduce Diffusion of Second-hand Smoke into Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"63 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development what forms of technical assistance does HDB provide to flat occupants to reduce the diffusion of second-hand smoke at its source or prevent smoke from entering their flats.
Mr Desmond Lee: When second-hand tobacco smoke drifts from one HDB unit to another, it could cause discomfort and nuisance to neighbours. When approached by residents affected by second-hand tobacco smoke from neighbouring homes, HDB, together with Town Councils and NEA, would first encourage neighbours to speak to each other to try to resolve the matter. Where necessary, a Joint Advisory on Smoking in Homes will be issued to the flat reported to be emitting second-hand smoke, encouraging considerate behaviour and emphasising the harmful impact that second-hand smoke may have on their neighbours.
If this does not work, the agencies will advise the affected neighbour to seek mediation, followed by a filing at the Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal.
The Member is likely to be referring to a recent joint Call for Proposals issued by the Municipal Services Office (MSO) with the support of HDB, under the latter’s Cool Ideas Enterprise programme. The objective is to tap on technology to find innovative ways to tackle second-hand tobacco smoke. MSO welcomes proposals that can reduce second-hand smoke at its source, or prevent it from entering neighbouring units. MSO also welcomes proposals to help residents gather evidence that they can then use in the dispute resolution process, for example, non-intrusive means of identifying the source of cigarette smoke and measuring its impact on the affected households.
The Call for Proposals closes on 9 December, after which MSO will evaluate the proposals with HDB’s technical input to determine which are suitable for further development and trials. This complements ongoing efforts by an inter-agency committee led by MCCY to review the Community Dispute Management Framework. Among other things, the committee is looking at strengthening the effectiveness of community mediation and to make the last resort of filing a Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal case more accessible and expedient for claimants.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Consumer Price Index Changes by Income Groups","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"64 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Department of Statistics will consider tracking Consumer Price Index changes by different income groups.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Department of Statistics (DOS) already publishes data on Consumer Price Index changes for the lowest 20%, middle 60% and highest 20% household income groups on a half-yearly basis. The data can be found on DOS’ website.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Work and Plans of Inter-agency Task Force on Mental Wellness","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"65 Dr Shahira Abdullah asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the inter-agency task force on mental wellness is planning to establish a national suicide prevention strategy as part of the national mental well-being strategy; and (b) whether there are plans to transition this task force into a permanent national coordinating office for mental health and well-being under the Ministry, given the increasing prevalence of mental health conditions and suicides.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The new Interagency Taskforce on Mental Health and Well-being will look into developing a comprehensive strategy to strengthen the mental resilience and well-being of the population, including suicide prevention.
The Taskforce, which comprises members from various agencies across multiple sectors, will also serve as the platform to coordinate whole-of-Government efforts on mental health and well-being, focusing on cross-cutting issues that require multiple agencies to collaborate and collectively address.
The Taskforce was convened in July 2021 and will be proposing substantive recommendations that will be translated into our policies and practices. We will provide an update on the recommendations when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Protocols for Prescription of Anti-depressants to Patients Under 25 and Link between Anti-depressant Usage and Youth Suicide","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"66 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for Health (a) what are the current protocols in place for the prescription of anti-depressants to patients under 25 years old by primary care doctors; and (b) in view of the correlation between increased anti-depressant usage and youth suicide, whether the Ministry will consider reviewing the intervention pathway and protocols to enhance safeguards against the use of anti-depressants in youths and children too early or unnecessarily in their mental health recovery process.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: For children or adolescents seen in a primary care clinic with symptoms of depression, the polyclinic doctor or general practitioner (GP) will make a clinical assessment on the diagnosis and severity of the condition; subsequent recommendations for treatment or referral would be based on their clinical assessment.
Clinical practice guidelines developed by the professional community and experts in practice exist to guide doctors on how to prescribe, taking into consideration the risks and benefits of treatment. The Member may wish to refer to the MOH website for specific details.
MOH or the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) will investigate if it receives complaints on inappropriate prescription for mental health services.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Post-partum Depression Cases Over Last 10 Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"67 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry has figures on post-partum depression cases tracked over the years; (b) if so, what is the observed trend regarding the rate of post-partum depression in mothers over the past 10 years generally and by socio-economic segments; (c) whether the Government has any longitudinal studies on post-partum depression and its link to mental health conditions in mother and child in later years; and (d) if not, whether it will consider conducting studies on this.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Based on the data available, there has been a gradual decline in the annual number of cases of post-partum depression seen at our public hospitals over the last 10 years, from 421 cases in 2011 to 362 cases in 2020. Data from NUH showed that about one in five of these mothers require some financial assistance and this proportion has remained consistent.
One of the aims of the ongoing Growing Up in Singapore Towards Healthy Outcomes (GUSTO) study is to investigate the association between maternal emotional health and the child’s health and development in later years.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reasons for Spike in Electricity Futures Prices Traded on Singapore Exchange in July 2021","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"68 Mr Alex Yam asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what are the reasons for the spike in electricity futures prices traded on the Singapore Exchange in July 2021; (b) whether the Ministry has received any complaints from electricity retailers of potential manipulation in the market; and (c) whether the Ministry regulates the market to check on any price fixing or manipulation.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Electricity Futures Market (EFM) is operated by the Singapore Exchange (SGX) in line with its obligations as an approved exchange under the Securities and Futures Act (SFA). Under SFA, SGX is required to ensure that the markets it operates are fair, orderly and transparent and there is no market manipulation. SGX has assessed that the increased volatility in electricity futures prices in the month of July 2021 can be attributed to price movements in the underlying spot electricity market. In particular, SGX noted that this coincided with an unplanned gas curtailment which caused prices to increase in the underlying spot market. The gas curtailment was due to a temporary drop in gas production upstream which has since been resolved. The spot electricity prices have now stabilised. In its assessment, SGX did not observe any trading irregularities during this period of increased volatility in electricity futures prices.
MTI and the Energy Market Authority (EMA) have engaged the Independent Retailers’ Association on the recent price volatility. EMA requires all Open Electricity Market (OEM) electricity retailers to hedge at least 50% of their contracted load against wholesale electricity prices. Any exposure is taken at the retailer’s own risk. We encourage all electricity retailers to review their risk management practices and ensure that they are sufficiently hedged against price movements.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Percentage of Lorries Used to Ferry Passengers in the Rear with Rain Covers Installed","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"69 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Transport (a) what percentage of lorries that are used to ferry persons in the rear decks are fitted with rain covers installed on the sides of the rear deck in addition to their roof shelters; and (b) if this information is not currently available, whether the Ministry will start collecting and tracking this information.
Mr S Iswaran: As shared with the Member in Parliament last month, many employers have installed rain covers, which complement the mandatory canopies, to better shelter their workers from inclement weather.
We do not track the percentage of lorries ferrying workers in the rear decks which use rain covers. Such rain covers are detachable and can be easily installed or uninstalled. Hence, it is not practical or meaningful to collect or track such information.
We will take the Member’s suggestion to require lorries ferrying persons in the rear deck to be fitted with rain covers into consideration, together with other suggestions that have been raised by various stakeholders, as part of our continuing efforts to safeguard the welfare of workers. In the meantime, we strongly encourage all employers to do their part, including rescheduling trips when there are heavy rains.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Roll-out of and Adverse Reactions from COVID-19 Vaccine Booster Programme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"70 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Government can provide an update on the COVID-19 vaccine booster programme; and (b) whether there have been any adverse reactions to those receiving the vaccine booster so far.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The question has been addressed by oral reply to Question Nos 1 to 20 on the Order Paper for 4 October 2021. [Please refer to \"Update on Government Decisions and Measures as Singapore Moves into Endemic Stage of COVID-19 Situation\" and \"Updated Protocols for Serving Quarantine Orders at Home and Support Measures for Persons with Disabilities, the Young and the Elderly\", Official Report, 4 October 2021, Vol 95, Issue 39, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Guidelines for Home Recovery Programme for COVID-19-positive Individuals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"71 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the current number of people on Home Recovery for COVID-19; (b) whether there is a set of guidelines and instructions shared with these individuals so they are aware of what to do; (c) if so, how are these conveyed to them; (d) how frequently does the Ministry contact these individuals to monitor their health situation; and (e) what are the key milestones in the Home Recovery process.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The question has been addressed by oral reply to Question Nos 1 to 20 on the Order Paper for 4 October 2021. [Please refer to \"Update on Government Decisions and Measures as Singapore Moves into Endemic Stage of COVID-19 Situation\" and \"Updated Protocols for Serving Quarantine Orders at Home and Support Measures for Persons with Disabilities, the Young and the Elderly\", Official Report, 4 October 2021, Vol 95, Issue 39, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Efficacy of Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 Vaccine for Children aged five to 11","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"72 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Health whether HSA has received the recent data from Pfizer regarding the efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine in children aged five to 11 years old and, if so, whether the Government can share its views on Pfizer’s findings for this age group.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The question has been addressed by oral reply to Question Nos 1 to 20 on the Order Paper for 4 October 2021. [Please refer to \"Update on Government Decisions and Measures as Singapore Moves into Endemic Stage of COVID-19 Situation\" and \"Updated Protocols for Serving Quarantine Orders at Home and Support Measures for Persons with Disabilities, the Young and the Elderly\", Official Report, 4 October 2021, Vol 95, Issue 39, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Frequency of Rostered Routine Testing for Workers Differentiated based on COVID-19 Vaccination Status","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"73 Mr Abdul Samad asked the Minister for Manpower whether the frequency of Rostered Routine Testing for workers can be differentiated based on COVID-19 vaccination status.
Dr Tan See Leng: As we resume more activities, Rostered Routine Testing (RRT) remains a critical part of our surveillance strategy in mitigating COVID-19 transmission risks, even for vaccinated workers. More regular testing will help us to detect and isolate COVID-19 positive cases more quickly. This is especially given the infectiousness of the Delta variant, as observed locally where there have been shorter periods between each generation of infection.
A vaccination differentiated RRT regime has been progressively introduced for the Construction, Marine and Process (CMP) sectors and in dormitories since end August in preparation for the \"Vaccinate or Regular Test\" (VoRT) regime. The frequency of testing is guided by MOH’s framework for the VoRT regime. Since 13 September, unvaccinated workers undergo testing at a higher frequency as compared to vaccinated workers. For example, a vaccinated worker working in the process sector or living in a dormitory will be required to undergo a weekly test. On the other hand, unvaccinated workers living in dormitories will undergo additional ARTs at Day 3 and Day 11 on top of the baseline regime for vaccinated workers.
We will work with MOH to continue to review the testing regimes for vaccinated and unvaccinated workers, as well as explore further differentiating it for vaccinated recovered workers based on the latest scientific evidence and as the COVID-19 situation evolves. We understand that employers and workers are making great efforts and contributions towards regular testing of their vaccinated workers. We appreciate their efforts in helping all of us transit to a COVID-19-resilient nation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Alternative Work Venue Arrangements to Support Public Officers Who Do Not Have Suitable Home Environments to Work from Home","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Prime Minister (a) what alternative work venue arrangements exist to support public officers who do not have suitable venues at home for work-from-home (WFH); and (b) in the past one year, what proportion of otherwise WFH-eligible staff have taken up these alternatives.
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister): Officers who find their home environments unsuitable for work may seek approval to return to the workplace, subject to prevailing safe management measures such as staggered working hours and safe distancing. We do not track the proportion of staff who have taken up alternative work venue arrangements.
In addition, as a hybrid working arrangement is likely to continue, the Public Service is planning to launch a network of geographically distributed shared co-working spaces located in existing public agency-owned spaces that will be open to all Public Officers. These spaces will be close to officers’ homes, and provide alternative venues for officers to work and collaborate as One Public Service. Officers who find their home environments unsuitable for work may utilise these spaces when they are ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Entry of Malaysian Police Helicopter into Singapore's Airspace in September 2021","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Defence (a) whether any Malaysian Police helicopter entered Singapore's airspace in September 2021; (b) if so, what follow-up actions were taken by Singapore; and (c) whether any diplomatic note of protest was issued.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: On 11 September 2021, a Royal Malaysian Police helicopter was travelling in a South-Easterly direction towards Tanjung Pengelih in Southern Johor when it entered Singapore’s territorial airspace above the eastern part of Pulau Tekong without approval.
During the helicopter’s approach, the RSAF had issued calls to it to keep clear of our airspace, but there was no reply. RSAF F-16 aircraft were scrambled to investigate. After determining that our security was not compromised, the F-16 aircraft were stood down. The RSAF conducts 24/7 surveillance of Singapore’s skies to detect and respond to potential air threats. It responds to more than 350 such incidents every year.
MHA has registered with their Malaysian counterparts our concern over the Royal Malaysian Police helicopter’s unauthorised entry.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Programmes to Increase Awareness of CPF, Retirement Security, Financial Management and Savings for Older Former Prison Inmates","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Home Affairs given the shorter runway of employable age before retirement age faced by ex-inmates aged 55 years and above compared to other younger ex-inmates, what are the programmes in place to increase awareness on CPF, retirement security, financial management and savings for these older ex-inmates before their release from prison.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Singapore Prison Service (SPS) and Yellow Ribbon Singapore (YRSG) have programmes to help older offenders understand and meet their financial needs after release.
During incarceration, SPS will disseminate information on various schemes that may be relevant to older offenders, such as the Silver Support Scheme, and CareShield Life.
Most inmates, including older offenders, will undergo the Release Preparation Programme (RPP) before their release. Financial literacy constitutes one component of the RPP. Through the programme, offenders learn about budgeting and financial planning, with content tailored to Singapore’s context. This includes topics on CPF, employment and training assistance, as well as sources of financial support in the community.
About six months before release, SPS’ Personal Supervisors will engage inmates to discuss their post-release plans. During these engagements, financial planning and retirement security issues may be discussed. If the older offender requires financial support, referrals will be made to SPS’ Family Resource Centres for assistance and follow-up.
After release, SPS and YRSG work with various partners to deliver finance-related programmes for supervisees in the community. For example, SPS has a partnership with Barclays to implement the Financial Literacy Programme. Under this programme, offenders are equipped with basic budgeting and financial management skills. YRSG also partnered the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) in 2021 to roll out customised \"Seniors Go Digital\" training for older offenders. They learn basic digital literacy skills like using smartphone apps to access digital services offered on Government portals, as well as financial and payment services.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Traffic Accidents Involving Delivery Workers on Motorcycles, Power-assisted Bicycles and Personal Mobility Devices","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) in the past two years, how many road traffic accidents involved motorcyclists, power-assisted bicycles and personal mobility devices respectively; (b) whether the Ministry has information on how many of the riders are delivery worker; and (c) of these, how many have been hired via an online platform firm.
Mr K Shanmugam: From January 2019 to December 2020, there were 7,711, 102 and 250 road traffic accidents involving motorcyclists, power-assisted bicycles and personal mobility devices, respectively.
We do not have information on how many of these riders were delivery workers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Deaths by Suicides Recorded for Women Who Were Pregnant or Had Given Birth","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Home Affairs in the last five years, how many deaths by suicide were recorded for women who were pregnant or had given birth in the past one year.
Mr K Shanmugam: The number of deaths by suicide between 2016 and 2020 of females who had given birth in the year prior to death is in Table 1.
We do not have data on the number of deaths by suicide of females who were pregnant at the point of death.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Alleged Transfer of $10 Million from oBike Singapore to Hong Kong Office","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Home Affairs what was the justification given by oBike Singapore or their former management in respect of the alleged transfer of about $10 million from its Singapore office to Hong Kong before its abrupt closure, leading to AGC’s conclusion that there was no evidence of wrongdoing.
Mr K Shanmugam: Police investigation ascertained that there were fund transfers between oBike Asia Pte Ltd (oBike Singapore) and its parent company oBike Hong Kong Ltd (oBike Hong Kong). oBikeSingapore was settling its debts owed to oBike Hong Kong as it was oBike Hong Kong who had paid for the bicycles imported by oBike Singapore. The repayment of debts took place over a one-year period before oBike Singapore ceased operations. Investigations did not suggest that oBike Singapore was a shell company set up to transfer the deposit money from oBike users in Singapore to oBike Hong Kong without conducting a genuine business. There was an extensive bicycle-sharing business operated by oBike Singapore in Singapore.
On 26 November 2020, the liquidator FTI Consulting Pte Ltd (FTI) wound up oBike Singapore. FTI did not file a Police report with the CAD or make any findings of criminal offence.
Police consulted the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) on the evidence. As no offences were made out, the decision was taken to close the investigation and take no further action against oBike Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on First-time Drug Abusers under Enhanced Direct Supervision Order","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) to date, what are the respective number and percentage of first-time drug abusers who (i) underwent the Enhanced Direct Supervision Order (EDSO) instead of the Drug Rehabilitation Centre regime or were incarcerated (ii) reoffended within five years of their completing their EDSO (iii) complied with their EDSO (iv) were employed full-time during their EDSO and (v) who continued to be employed upon completion of their EDSO; and (b) what is the number of drug addicts who have voluntarily surrendered to the authorities due to the EDSO.
Mr K Shanmugam: From the introduction of the Enhanced Direct Supervision Order (EDSO) in September 2019 to 31 August 2021, 218 first-time drug abusers, comprising 9.7% of all first-time abusers arrested in that time period, were placed on the EDSO instead of being channelled to a Drug Rehabilitation Centre (DRC) or sentenced to imprisonment.
Of these, 120 supervisees (55%) have completed their EDSO, and 91 (41.7%) are still on their EDSO. The remaining seven supervisees (3.3%) had consumed drugs during their EDSO period and were admitted to a DRC or charged for drug consumption under section 8(b) of the Misuse of Drugs Act.
As the EDSO was only implemented in 2019 with the completion of the first batch of supervision orders in March 2021, we do not have data on the number of supervisees who have reoffended within the five-year period from the completion of their EDSO.
Based on information provided by the supervisees, 96 (80%) of the 120 supervisees who have completed their EDSO were engaged in full-time or part-time employment during the period of supervision. Of the 91 supervisees currently on their EDSO, 61 (67%) are employed full-time. CNB does not track the employment status of supervisees upon the completion of their supervision order.
Since 2019, 52 drug abusers have met the conditions for the Surrender Regime.1 Of these, nine drug abusers were subsequently placed on the EDSO. CNB does not track the specific reasons for surrender, whether it was due to the EDSO or other factors.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The conditions for the surrender regime are: a) abuser must not have surrendered himself or herself more than twice per lifetime; b) abuser must surrender to a CNB office or police station; c) abuser must test positive for controlled drugs; and d) abuser must not be wanted by authorities, under investigation, on bail, serving an ongoing Court sentence and be a current supervisee."],"footNoteQuestions":["7"],"questionNo":"7"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore's Stand on China's application to Join Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans‐Pacific Partnership","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether Singapore plans to support China’s application to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans‐Pacific Partnership (CPTPP); (b) if so, why; and (c) if not, why.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Singapore welcomes China’s interest to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). The CPTPP is an open and inclusive agreement that is open to accession by any economy that is willing and able to meet the high standards of the Agreement. Expansion of the Agreement will enhance further economic integration and boost plurilateral economic ties. It will also create the foundation of a Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific and beyond.
CPTPP parties will discuss matters on accession and any decision will be taken by consensus amongst the parties.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ratification of Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership by All Participating Countries","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Ministry expects the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) to be ratified by all the participating countries before the annual ASEAN summit in Brunei; and (b) what main impediments remain for RCEP ratification by the participating countries.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The ratification of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Agreement is dependent on the respective domestic process of each RCEP signatory. The RCEP Agreement will enter into force 60 days after a minimum of six ASEAN signatories and three ASEAN FTA Partner signatories ratify the Agreement and deposit their respective Instruments of Ratification (IORs) with the ASEAN Secretary-General.
Apart from Singapore, the ASEAN Secretariat has notified RCEP signatories of the deposit of China’s and Japan’s IORs. Notwithstanding the complications arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, the remaining RCEP signatories have indicated that they are targeting to ratify the Agreement within 2021, with entry-into-force targeted for early 2022. We will continue to work closely with other RCEP signatories towards this.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Point-to-point Trips for Private Hire Cars and for Taxis, and Proposal for Statutory Lifespan for Private Hire Cars","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Transport (a) for 2021 to date, what is the split in average daily number of point-to-point trips and total trips between private hire cars (PHCs) and taxis on a monthly basis; and (b) whether the Ministry is considering imposing a statutory lifespan for cars used as PHCs.
Mr S Iswaran: For the first eight months of 2021, there were 550,500 daily point-to-point trips on average, of which around 42% were taxi trips and around 58% were private hire car (PHC) trips.
The Government takes into consideration vehicle safety and road worthiness when determining whether to impose a statutory lifespan. A statutory lifespan of eight years has been imposed on taxis due to their high mileage compared to private cars including PHCs. Taxis have, on average, around twice the mileage of PHCs. There is thus no intention to impose a statutory lifespan for PHCs.
Nonetheless, under the point-to-point regulatory framework implemented in 2020, all PHCs are required to undergo annual vehicle inspections to ensure road worthiness, compared to once every two years for cars between three and 10 years old. We will continue to monitor the safety outcomes and review our regulations as necessary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Utilisation of Rail Manpower Development Package and Number of Workers Who Have Benefited Since November 2019 Launch","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether he can provide an update on the utilisation of the $100 million Rail Manpower Development Package; and (b) how many workers have benefited from the scheme since it was launched in November 2019.
Mr S Iswaran: The $100 million Rail Manpower Development Package (RMDP) was launched in November 2019 to help the rail workforce gear up for the future rail network. LTA has been working closely with the rail operators and NTWU to implement the five-year package, comprising three key initiatives.
First, the Rail Manpower Development Incentive (RMDI) to expand and accelerate training of rail workers in emerging areas such as data analytics and condition-based monitoring. To date, more than 2,300 workers have completed their RMDI training, on top of their regular training. LTA expects more than 3,000 rail workers to benefit by the end of the five-year period.
Second, LTA and the rail operators co-fund SGRail Industry Scholarships, Industrial Attachments and In-Service Sponsorships to build up Singapore’s rail engineering talent pipeline. To date, 15 Polytechnic and undergraduate Scholarships as well as 30 In-Service Sponsorships have been awarded. More than 150 students have been on industrial attachments with the rail operators.
Third, co-investments in hardware to enhance training efficiency and effectiveness. These will support technical hands-on training by rail operators, at Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) and/or the Singapore Rail Academy. The application exercise for the training hardware investment is currently ongoing and will close in October 2021.
As our rail network expands at an unprecedented pace over the next decade, we will need a larger skilled workforce to support the expanded rail network. LTA will continue to work closely with the rail operators and NTWU to equip our rail workers with the necessary skills as the industry digitalises and transforms.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Certificates of Entitlement Issued Monthly Broken Down by Engine Capacities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Transport from January to September 2021, what is the monthly number of Certificates of Entitlement (COEs) issued for the three different categories of motorcycles according to the engine capacities that correspond to class 2, 2A and 2B licences.
Mr S Iswaran: From January to September 2021, approximately 800 to 1,200 motorcycles were registered each month. Mass market Class 2B motorcycles account for about 65% to 75% of the registrations. Class 2A and Class 2 motorcycles make up about 10% to 20% and 5% to 10% of the registrations respectively.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Incorporating Eco-friendly Alternative Fuels into Singapore Green Plan 2030","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the production and usage of synthetic fuels are eco-friendly; and (b) whether such alternative fuels can be incorporated into the Singapore Green Plan 2030 if they are an eco-friendly alternative to traditional fossil fuels.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Synthetic fuels can be more eco-friendly than traditional fossil fuels when they are produced using waste-derived, low-carbon or renewable feedstock. For example, the Minister for Transport recently stated that sustainable aviation fuels, which are produced from resources such as waste oil, can reduce carbon emissions by up to 80% compared to conventional jet fuel, on a life-cycle basis. However, sustainable aviation fuels are two to five times more expensive than conventional jet fuel today.
Under the Singapore Green Plan 2030, we will strive to use cleaner energy to lower our carbon footprint. The extent to which eco-friendly synthetic fuels can be incorporated into our energy or fuel mix is dependent on technological, operational and commercial viability. We are actively exploring opportunities in R&D and alternative fuels pilots to support technological development, and to facilitate production, uptake and integration with traditional fuel options where viable.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Summonses Issued for Not Wearing Face Masks or Not Maintaining Sufficient Safe Distances while Smoking and Enforcement Approach Towards Unmasked Smokers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how many individuals in the past year have received summonses by NEA for not wearing face masks and/or maintaining sufficient safe distances while smoking; and (b) what is NEA’s enforcement approach towards unmasked smokers in public areas, including gatherings of such individuals in groups of five or less.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: We do not record nor track the activities that individuals were engaged in, such as smoking, when enforcement action is taken against them for violation of safe management measures.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Efforts to Recover Overpayments in Jobs Support Scheme and Plans for Non-recoverable Amounts","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for Finance (a) whether he can provide an update on the status of efforts in recovering the overpayments in the Jobs Support Scheme; and (b) what is the plan to address the amounts that are non-recoverable.
Mr Lawrence Wong: As of end-September 2021, the Government has recovered $361 million (97.6%) from 4,862 firms. The monies were recovered mainly through offsets against firms’ subsequent JSS payouts (where applicable), as well as returns in cash by large enterprises.
The Government expects to recover an additional $6.8 million (1.8%) by March 2022 bringing the total expected recovery of JSS overpayment to $367.8 million (99.4%). The recovery will be through offsets against future payouts of other enterprise support schemes, such as the Jobs Growth Incentive Scheme (JGI) and Wage Credit Scheme (WCS), as well as commitments by firms to repay the amounts.
For the remaining $2.2 million (0.6%) owed by 274 firms, the firms can either return these amounts in cash via lump-sum or instalment payments. As the firms’ circumstances vary, the Government will tailor our recovery approaches to the different types of circumstances and seek to recover as much as possible of the overpaid amounts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Group 2, Group 3 and Group 4 Cases Handled by Family Services Centres and Number of Social Workers Employed by these Centres in Past Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development for each year in the past five years (a) what is the total number of (i) group 2 cases (ii) group 3 cases and (iii) group 4 cases that are handled by the Family Service Centres (FSCs) respectively; and (b) what is the total number of social workers employed by the FSCs.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Social workers in Family Service Centres (FSCs) partner individuals and families to address their social needs. FSCs refer to the FSC-Code of Social Work Practice (FSC-CSWP) to classify each case into one of four case groups based on its assessed risk and complexity. Cases with higher risks and complexity of needs are assigned higher CSWP groupings. FSCs review the cases regularly and adjust the CSWP classifications accordingly.
From FY2018 to FY2020, the total number of active cases in each grouping1 managed by FSCs is in Table 1 below. We do not have data for the period before FY2018.
The total number of social workers handling cases2 in FSCs has increased steadily over the past five years, from 658 in FY2016 to 673 in FY2017, 680 in FY2018, 925 in FY2019 and 1,015 in FY2020.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The number of cases in each CSWP grouping is based on the average of reported figures at the end of each quarter in the FY.","2 : The data on the number of FSC caseworkers is based on the average of reported figures at the end of each half-year in the FY and may not account for staff turnover between reporting periods."],"footNoteQuestions":["16"],"questionNo":"16"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Annual Applications for Divorce and Counselling to Syariah Court and Factors Causing Divorce in Malay/Muslim Community from 2016 to 2020","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Social and Family Development and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) from 2016 to 2020, how many annual applications were received by the Syariah Court for divorces and counselling respectively; (b) of these, how many applicants eventually divorced; and (c) what are the three main reasons or factors that are the causes of divorce in the Malay/Muslim community within that time period.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Between 2016 and 2020, the Syariah Court received an annual average of about 3,300 registrations for the Marriage Counselling Programme and 1,900 applications for divorce. On average, about 1,600 of these cases ultimately ended in divorce.
The top three reasons for causes of Muslim divorces within that period are infidelity, financial problems and desertion.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Establish Portal to Make Available COVID-19-related Public Health Data for Scrutiny and Analysis","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Health in light of the move to \"living with COVID\" and scaling down the routine publication of COVID-19-related public health data, whether the Ministry will consider establishing a portal where such information, to the extent that they are collected, may, nevertheless, be made available for scrutiny and analysis.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question for written answer has been addressed by oral reply to Question Nos 1 to 20 on the Order Paper for 4 October 2021. [Please refer to \"Update on Government Decisions and Measures as Singapore Moves into Endemic Stage of COVID-19 Situation\" and \"Updated Protocols for Serving Quarantine Orders at Home and Support Measures for Persons with Disabilities, the Young and the Elderly\", Official Report, 4 October 2021, Vol 95, Issue 39, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Manpower and Infrastructure Plans to Ensure Sufficient Healthcare Support for Elderly","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"19 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Health in light of the ageing population, what are the upcoming manpower and infrastructure plans to ensure that there is sufficient healthcare support for the elderly living in the community.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: MOH has strengthened community support for seniors so that they may continue to age-in-place in the community. This includes strengthening of the network of eldercare centres and enhancing the range of community care services and primary care services.
Since May 2021, we had rolled out the Eldercare Centre (EC) service model, to serve as go-to points for seniors in the community. We will on-board an addition of more than 200 centres onto this model by 2024. They will promote active ageing, befriending of seniors and provide care services.
To support our seniors’ care needs, we have added 4,600 day care places and 3,100 home care places since 2015. For seniors requiring medical and clinical support, we have strengthened primary care infrastructure. There are currently 10 primary care networks involving over 600 GP clinics to help seniors manage chronic diseases. We are also expanding our network of polyclinics to 32 by 2030, some of which will be co-located with eldercare services such as nursing homes and/or senior care centres.
We are proactively building up manpower for the sector. Recently, we have announced funding support to raise salary competitiveness of the community care workforce. We have also embarked on a job redesign pilot to enhance opportunities for career progression.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Point-to-point Drivers and Riders Placed on Quarantine Order, Health Risk Alert and Health Risk Warning and Provided with Allowance","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Health (a) to date, what is the number of point-to-point (P2P) drivers and riders who have been placed on (i) Quarantine Order (QO), (ii) Health Risk Alert and (iii) Health Risk Warning (HRW) respectively; (b) of these P2P drivers and riders, how many have successfully been provided with QO allowance; and (c) as self-employed persons placed on HRW are asked to be self-isolated, whether the Ministry will consider extending the provision of QO allowance to them.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question for written answer has been addressed by oral reply to Question Nos 1 to 20 on the Order Paper for 4 October 2021. [Please refer to \"Update on Government Decisions and Measures as Singapore Moves into Endemic Stage of COVID-19 Situation\" and \"Updated Protocols for Serving Quarantine Orders at Home and Support Measures for Persons with Disabilities, the Young and the Elderly\", Official Report, 4 October 2021, Vol 95, Issue 39, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Prohibit Organisations from Storing Scans of Identification Documents Longer than Necessary in Light of MyRepublic Data Breach","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Communications and Information in light of the MyRepublic data breach, whether the Ministry intends to prohibit organisations from storing scans of identification documents like the NRIC beyond the period required for identity verification.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) already sets baseline requirements for organisations to cease retaining documents containing personal data when it is no longer needed for legal or business purposes. These include scans of identification documents.
Specifically, for telecommunication licensees, it is a licensing requirement to retain the identification record of a subscriber for at least 12 months following the termination of services by the subscriber. This is to ensure that agencies investigating fraudulent and/or criminal acts can review such identification records if telecommunication services were used for such purposes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Annual Number of Complaints Regarding Noise Disturbance from Asian Koel and Mitigation Measures to Minimise Roosting near Residential Areas","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"22 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) over the past five years, what is the annual number of complaints regarding noise disturbance from the Asian Koel; and (b) what are the mitigation measures implemented to minimise roosting near residential areas and its assessed effectiveness, considering its status as a native species protected under the Wild Animals and Birds Act.
Mr Desmond Lee: From 2016 to 2020, NParks received an average of about 640 cases of feedback annually regarding noise disturbance from the Asian Koel.
NParks adopts a holistic and science-based approach to manage the population of birds\tin Singapore, including the Asian Koel. At residential areas, NParks conducts surveys to identify hotspots where the Asian Koel is commonly found. To deter the birds from perching or foraging in these sites, NParks works with Town Councils and Management Corporation Strata Titles (MCSTs) to carry out habitat modification, such as tree pruning and replacement, as well as the harvesting of fruits to remove food sources. As the Asian Koel lays its eggs in crow nests, NParks also removes such nests to manage the population of these birds. These measures have been effective in managing the population of Asian Koels in residential areas, in a sustainable and humane manner.
NParks will continue to work closely with agencies to enhance its strategies to mitigate bird-related disamenities, while promoting harmonious co-existence with our native wildlife species.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Current State of Marine Biodiversity, Plans for More Marine and Wildlife Parks and Progress on Sisters’ Island Marine Park","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"23 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the current state of the marine biodiversity around Singapore; (b) whether there are plans to introduce more marine and wildlife parks; and (c) what is the progress on establishing the Sisters’ Island Marine Park.
Mr Desmond Lee: Singapore’s coastal and marine ecosystems support rich marine biodiversity, including more than 250 species of hard corals, 35 true mangrove species and 12 species of seagrass, which play an important role in supporting other marine species. Under the Marine Conservation Action Plan, NParks conserves key coastal and marine habitats in Singapore to safeguard native marine biodiversity. It also collaborates with research partners and volunteers to implement species recovery programmes for threatened marine species such as the Neptune’s Cup sponge, the Hawksbill turtle and selected coral species.
In 2014, NParks established the Sisters’ Islands Marine Park to promote conservation, research and outreach efforts related to our native marine biodiversity. Small Sister’s Island and the reefs west of Pulau Tekukor and St John’s Island have been designated for conservation and research efforts. At Big Sister’s Island, NParks is enhancing amenities and developing new features such as a floating pontoon boardwalk and intertidal pools to allow the public to enjoy and appreciate our marine biodiversity.
NParks, in consultation with the marine community, will continue to assess the need to introduce more marine parks to safeguard Singapore’s marine biodiversity.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress of Species Recovery Programme and Updates on Threatened Species Identified","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the progress of the Species Recovery Programme for terrestrial and marine native flora and fauna; and (b) whether the Ministry can provide further updates on the 46 threatened species of terrestrial and marine native flora and fauna that were identified in 2016 for this programme.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Species Recovery Programme is a key part of NParks’ efforts to strengthen the conservation of terrestrial and marine native flora and fauna. The programme aims to increase the number of these species through efforts such as reintroducing and propagating them into their original habitats, as well as suitable new habitats.
From 2016 to 2021, NParks increased the number of flora and fauna species for recovery efforts under the programme, from 46 to 120 species. NParks has seen some successes from its conservation efforts. For example, the Ormocarpum cochinchinense, a small native coastal shrub previously thought to be extinct in Singapore, has been propagated and planted in many of our parks and nature reserves. Similarly, the Sunda Slow Loris, which was previously classified as \"Critically Endangered\", is now \"Endangered\" in Singapore.
NParks will continue to step up its species recovery efforts to strengthen the conservation of Singapore’s native biodiversity. By 2030, NParks aims to increase its recovery efforts to 160 flora and fauna species.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress of Conservation of Native Seed Dispersers and Pollinators","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"25 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for National Development what is the state and progress of the conservation of native seed dispersers and pollinators that are aimed to enhance the resilience of the forest ecosystem.
Mr Desmond Lee: NParks adopts a science-based approach for the conservation of native seed dispersers and pollinators such as birds, butterflies, bees and bats.
Guided by the Nature Conservation Masterplan, these measures include habitat enhancement and restoration works at our parks and nature reserves. In September 2021, NParks conducted planting works at Bukit Gombak Park to provide new habitats and food sources for butterflies. NParks also plants native flowering plant species along roads. Under the Species Recovery Programme, NParks aims to increase the population of our native flora and fauna, including seed dispersers and pollinators such as the Gold-margined Stingless Bee and the Green Imperial Pigeon. These efforts have also enhanced the ecological habitats for seed dispersers and pollinators, and strengthened the ecological resilience of our forest ecosystems.
In addition, NParks works with stakeholders such as nature groups and academic experts to conduct studies on seed dispersers and pollinators to better understand their ecology. In 2019, NParks, in partnership with the National University of Singapore, conducted a study documenting past surveys of 75 species of bees and their host plants in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve and its adjacent nature parks. NParks is also working with stakeholders to study the Cave Nectar Bat, one of the few pollinating bats in Singapore. These studies will enhance our understanding of the role of these key pollinators in Singapore and contribute to their conservation efforts.
NParks will continue to safeguard core biodiversity areas and their buffers, and enhance connectivity between our green spaces, to strengthen ecological resilience. This will conserve key habitats and ensure healthier populations of native seed dispersers and pollinators.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Review of Proposal to Convert Vacant School Sites to Retirement Villages or Assisted Living Facilities for Aged","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for National Development whether he can provide an update on his Ministry’s study of the proposal made in Parliament on 9 July 2018 to convert vacant school sites to retirement villages or assisted living facilities for the aged.
Mr Desmond Lee: MND and MOH have been working together on plans to develop assisted living facilities to expand the range of housing and care options for our senior citizens.
MND, MOH and HDB have launched the Community Care Apartments (CCAs), a new public housing typology that integrates senior-friendly design features with care services, and facilitates community building through social programmes and communal spaces. The first CCA pilot at Bukit Batok was launched for sale in February 2021 and was well-received by seniors. We are now studying plans for a second pilot and will share more details in due course.
We are also studying private sector models of assisted living and possible sites to pilot them, including vacant school sites. As vacant school sites are not configured to support residential and care needs for seniors, they will require some retrofitting to convert them to private assisted living facilities. We have been evaluating the feasibility of tendering a vacant school site for a purpose, and engaging stakeholders such as developers and healthcare operators on the appropriate parameters for the site, as well as potential market interest from industry players and potential residents.
There are also alternative uses for vacant school sites, such as special education schools, community and welfare institutions, and offices. Hence, each site will need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the various needs, as well as the suitability of the buildings and site.
We will continue to study different models of retirement housing and assisted living developments to better meet the needs of our senior citizens, and will share more details on our plans when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Workers Who Found Employment Successfully through Foreign Construction Worker Directory System and Singapore Construction Manpower Exchange","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"27 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower (a) to date, how many and what percentage of workers successfully found employment respectively through the (i) Foreign Construction Worker Directory System and (ii) Singapore Construction Manpower Exchange; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider implementing such job-matching schemes to work permit holders in all sectors.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Singapore Construction Manpower Exchange (SCMX), set up in May 2020 by SCAL in partnership with MOM, has replaced the Foreign Construction Worker Directory System (FCWDS) as the platform to actively facilitate the matching of workers in the construction sector. It gives workers the opportunity to continue working in Singapore and saves employers the repatriation costs. Workers whose work permits have been terminated can register with SCMX and the existing employer must agree to the transfer. As of end-August 2021, around 420 workers have successfully found employment via the SCMX. These make up around 20% of the workers enrolled on the scheme.
Besides the construction sector, MOM has also partnered other trade associations, namely Singapore Business Federation (SBF), Association of Singapore Marine Industries (ASMI) and Association of Process Industries (ASPRI), to set up job-matching schemes for the manufacturing and services, marine-shipyard and process sectors respectively in March and August 2020. As of end-August 2021, around 340 workers have successfully found employment via these schemes. These make up around 50% of the workers enrolled on these schemes.
To encourage more workers to be retained in Singapore, from 1 September 2021, MOM, in partnership with SCAL has introduced a new six-month SCMX (Retention Scheme). Under this scheme, experienced workers whose previous employment has been terminated but wished to continue working in Singapore will be placed on the scheme, with safeguards in place against abuse, for example, workers who job-hopped and changed multiple employers within the past 12 months. These workers would not need to seek consent from their original employer and will be granted a 30-day stay during which SCAL will take over the responsibility for the workers, including repatriation if they are unable to find a suitable employer. MOM is in discussion with ASMI and ASPRI to explore setting up a similar retention scheme for the marine-shipyard and process sectors respectively.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Leading Causes of Workplace Accidents Due To Cost-cutting Measures Resulting in Safety Lapses","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"28 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Manpower (a) from January 2021 to date, what are the leading causes of workplace accidents; (b) what role is played by ancillary factors such as cost-cutting measures that result in safety lapses; and (c) what considerations have been given towards heavier punishments to deter such behaviour amongst companies.
Dr Tan See Leng: For the first six months this year, the leading causes of workplace fatal accidents are falls from height and vehicular-related accidents. For non-fatal workplace accidents, the leading causes are slips, trips and falls, and machinery-related accidents. The Ministry regularly publishes reports on workplace accidents and their causes. The next release will be in early October 2021. The Member can look at these published sources for more information.
Investigations into many accidents, including fatal ones, reveal safety lapses such as unguarded openings and open sides, and poor maintenance of heavy machinery. These suggest that adherence to safe work procedures has not been sustained. While the COVID-19 pandemic has led to cost pressures on affected businesses, it is unclear the degree to which this has contributed to safety lapses at the workplace. The Ministry does not condone any actions, cost-cutting or otherwise, that compromises safety. Employers are very clear that the safety of the workers must not be compromised under any circumstances, and the Ministry will not hesitate to take stern action against companies, officers and management for safety lapses.
The severity of the sentence that is imposed on an accused company or individual is, ultimately, a matter for the sentencing Court to decide. The Prosecution assists the Court in its deliberations by: (a) drawing the Court's attention to relevant case law and sentencing guidelines from the High Court, if any; (b) highlighting the aggravating and mitigating factors in the case, including the culpability of the accused and the potential and actual harm; and (c) submitting for an appropriate sentence, in line with the Ministry’s observations on developing trends and areas of safety concern.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Schemes Supporting Gig Workers Who Wish to Transit to Regular Employment and Challenges In Supporting these Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how many gig workers like food delivery workers who wish to transit to regular employment have benefited from Government schemes; and (b) what are the challenges involved in supporting this group.
Dr Tan See Leng: Platform workers are a diverse group and we are committed to supporting them in their plans. Many say they prefer such work because of the flexibility and autonomy it affords. For them, our recently established Advisory Committee on Platform Workers will consult widely and examine how they can be better supported.
For those looking to transit to regular employment, WSG and NTUC’s e2i offer career matching services including career coaching, employability workshops and job fairs. For example, in 2021, e2i conducted several Career Reinvention Workshops in collaboration with National Private Hire Vehicles Association (NPHVA) and NTUC Learning Hub to help platform drivers explore new career pathways. In addition, digital services like MCF can be accessed at all hours of the day. The whole range of SGUnited Jobs and Skills support is also available to them. We know that it is challenging for platform workers to transit to regular employment, and WSG will continue to put in its best effort to support their job search.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Efforts to Encourage Buyers of Outsourced Services to Abide by Fair Employment Guidelines","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"30 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower in view of the recent complaints received by the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) on tender documents containing discriminatory clauses on race and age, what more can be done to encourage buyers of outsourced services to practise fair employment guidelines.
Dr Tan See Leng: All employers are expected to abide by the principles of fair and merit-based employment set out in the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices (TGFEP). These include recruiting and selecting employees based on merit, irrespective of attributes that have no bearing on the individuals’ ability to do the job, such as race and age. We do not accept employers citing discriminatory requirements by their clients. They will still be considered in breach of the TGFEP.
The Government takes firm enforcement action against discriminatory employers. In the future, with the TGFEP requirements enshrined in law, the Government will be able to take a broader range of actions in the event of a breach, to hold errant employers accountable.
With respect to service buyers, MOM and TAFEP will also continue to follow up on complaints of discriminatory practices in tender documents and engage them. We will also consider suspending the work pass privileges of service buyers or their appointed agents.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Successful Job Applications via MyCareersFuture Broken Down by Low-Wage Workers and PMETs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"31 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Manpower for each year since the start of the MyCareersFuture initiative (a) how many job applications have been received through the portal; (b) how many job applications have been successful; and (c) what is the percentage of jobs that went to (i) low-wage workers and (ii) PMETs, with each category broken down by Singapore citizens and permanent residents.
Dr Tan See Leng: Employers and jobseekers adopt multiple strategies simultaneously, and do not rely on any single portal, including MyCareersFuture (MCF). To find suitable candidates, employers advertise job openings through a variety of channels, including print advertisements, online job portals and recruitment agencies.
Likewise, the sensible strategy for jobseekers is to apply for many job openings, across various platforms, in order to maximise their chances of success. For each successful jobseeker, there can only be one match. But this does not mean that the jobseeker did not benefit from having more options through various platforms. That is why it is not meaningful to compare the number of job applications received on MCF, to the number of such job applications that are successful.
We instead look more holistically at the proportion of active MCF users who have found jobs. This better reflects the results of their job search across all channels. From the launch of the MCF portal in 2018 to 2020, on average, there have been about 170,000 active local MCF users each year, of which half found new jobs.
The Member has asked for the profile of MCF users who have found new jobs. We do not ask MCF users to report their last-drawn wages. Of the MCF users who found new jobs, around three in four were formerly PMETs.
In our efforts to support locals in their job search, we do not draw lines between Singapore Citizens (SCs) and Permanent Residents (PRs). PRs may have spouses or dependants who are SCs and providing employment facilitation support allows them to continue supporting these SC family members. However, in response to the Member’s question, the proportion of SCs among MCF users who found new jobs (84%) is comparable to that in our resident labour force (85%).
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Pilot Scheme Allowing Eligible Migrant Workers Living in Dormitories to Visit Little India","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"32 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Manpower regarding the pilot scheme allowing eligible migrant workers living in dormitories to visit Little India (a) what KPIs must be met before the scheme can be expanded to more migrant workers; (b) what is the timeline for expansion of the scheme; (c) what are the other locations being considered so that non-South Asian workers can benefit from such a scheme; and (d) whether the Ministry will consider accelerating the expansion of the scheme in view of existing safeguards to limit infections among vaccinated migrant workers.
Dr Tan See Leng: We are mindful that our migrant workers have not been able to visit the community for some time, and that it is important for their well-being that they be able to do so.
This month, we took a first step, in the form of a pilot, to allow 500 workers to visit the community each week so that we do not increase the risk of cross-transmission of COVID-19 infection between the dormitories and the community. We will draw lessons from the pilot so that we can expand the community visits in a way that is safe for our migrant workers and the community. We are looking into ways so that the visits can have broader appeal to more migrant workers. We are committed to continue easing the movement restrictions for migrant workers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Minister for Manpower","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WS","content":"[(proc text) The following statements were in the reply given by the Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng) during Question Time for the combined reply to Parliamentary Questions on employment outcomes and support at the Sitting of 5 October 2021: (proc text)]
The Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): If you look at the headline numbers, our long-term unemployment continues to remain one of the lowest and even for our resident unemployment today, the numbers are, even though they are not at zero, it will never be at zero, but I think they are at a level that is round about pre-COVID-19 time. [Please refer to “Measures to Assist Employees Affected by COVID-19 and Digital Disruptions”, Official Report, 5 October 2021, Vol 95, Issue No 40, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
[(proc text) Written statement by Dr Tan See Leng circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5): (proc text)]
I wish to make the following factual correction to the reply given during Question Time for the combined reply to Parliamentary Questions on employment outcomes and support at the Sitting of 5 October 2021. My reply should read as follows:
The Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): If you look at the headline numbers, our long-term unemployment continues to remain one of the lowest and even for our resident unemployment today, the numbers are, even though they are not at zero, it will never be at zero, but I think they are at a level that is closing down to pre-COVID-19 time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[{"annexureID":2027,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex 1","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20211005/annex-Annex 1.pdf","fileName":"Annex 1.pdf","sectionType":"OA","file":null}],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":4641,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Don Wee","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20211005/vernacular-Don Wee Income Tax 5Octl2021-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Don Wee Income Tax 5Octl2021-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4642,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Desmond Tan","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20211005/vernacular-Desmond Tan Privte Security 5Oct2021-Chinese (mha).pdf","fileName":"Desmond Tan Privte Security 5Oct2021-Chinese (mha).pdf"},{"vernacularID":4643,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Ang Wei Neng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20211005/vernacular-Ang Wei Neng Private Security 5Oct2021-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Ang Wei Neng Private Security 5Oct2021-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4644,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Mariam Jaafar","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20211005/vernacular-5 Oct 2021 - Ms Mariam Jaafar - PSI (A) Bill.pdf","fileName":"5 Oct 2021 - Ms Mariam Jaafar - PSI (A) Bill.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4645,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Desmond Choo","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20211005/vernacular-Desmond Choo Private Security 5Oct2021-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Desmond Choo Private Security 5Oct2021-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4646,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Joan Pereira","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20211005/vernacular-Joan Pereira Private Security 5Oct2021 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Joan Pereira Private Security 5Oct2021 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4647,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Abdul Samad","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20211005/vernacular-5 Oct 2021 - Mr Abdul Samad - PSI (A) Bill.pdf","fileName":"5 Oct 2021 - Mr Abdul Samad - PSI (A) Bill.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4648,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Mohd Fahmi Aliman","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20211005/vernacular-5 Oct 2021 - Mr Mohd Fahmi Aliman - PSI (A) Bill.pdf","fileName":"5 Oct 2021 - Mr Mohd Fahmi Aliman - PSI (A) Bill.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4649,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20211005/vernacular-5 Oct 2021 - Mr Faisal Manap - Adjournment Motion .pdf","fileName":"5 Oct 2021 - Mr Faisal Manap - Adjournment Motion .pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}