1 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked\tthe Minister for Manpower how the Ministry can improve the process by which workers, including foreign workers, can be protected against errant employers who do not insure them or compensate them for injuries and/or owe them their salaries.
2 Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin asked\tthe Minister for Manpower (a) from 2012 to 2017, how many employers have been prosecuted in the Labour Court for respectively failing to compensate injured workers or insure them adequately; (b) what is being done to reduce the incidence of errant employers who ignore Labour Court orders and default on compensation for injured workers; and (c) how does the Ministry assist low-wage local and migrant workers who cannot afford further legal action to recover their unpaid wages.
\tThe Minister for Manpower (Mr Lim Swee Say):\tMdm Speaker, may I take Question Nos 1 and 2 together, please?
Mdm Speaker:\tYes, please.
\tMr Lim Swee Say: Mdm Speaker, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) received about 9,000 salary-related claims involving some 4,500 employers in 2016. So, 9,000 claims and 4,500 employers. Through mediation by MOM and adjudication by the Labour Court, we have been able to resolve more than 95% of these claims.
The remaining 5% of the salary-related claims were unresolved because one of the employers has appealed the Labour Court order and the case is now with the High Court, eight are still in business but have yet to comply with their orders, while a vast majority − 199 out of 208 employers − had either ceased operations or faced impending business closure due to financial difficulties. Therefore, out of the 208 employers, 199 either have closed down or are going to close down soon. We are left with only nine employers, one of whom is appealing against the Labour Court order and eight have yet to comply with the orders. All these companies have been debarred from hiring foreign workers until they comply with the Labour Court orders. The debarment also applies to culpable directors even if they were to start new companies.
We are also investigating those employers who are still in business because non-payment of salary is an offence under the Employment Act. While it is not our intention to criminalise every non-payment of salary, especially if it is the result of a business failure, we do prosecute serious or repeated cases for deterrence.
In the last three years, 158 employers have been prosecuted and convicted for salary-related offences. Such offences carry a fine of between $3,000 and $15,000 per charge, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or both.
Let me now turn to work injury cases. In 2016, over 99.9% of the approximately 16,000 injured workers had their cases successfully resolved. However, five out of about 16,000 cases did not because their employers had failed to purchase work injury compensation insurance and were unable to pay due to financial difficulties. MOM takes such offences seriously and prosecutes such employers under the Work Injury Compensation Act (WICA) and debars the companies and individual directors from hiring foreign workers, until they compensate their workers. Such offences carry a maximum penalty of $10,000, or imprisonment of up to 12 months, or both. In the last five years, 14 employers have been prosecuted for non-insurance and non-compensation or work injury.
Madam, in most of the unresolved cases of unpaid salary or work injury compensation, the chance of workers recovering payments from their employers is slim. This is not because the employers could just ignore and refuse to pay up, but because they are mostly in deep financial difficulties, as I have explained earlier.
For cases where there is still some hope of enforcing the orders for unpaid salary or work injury compensation, the workers are required to apply for the Writ of Seizure and Sale through the State Courts. This is the same process that applies to all unpaid Civil Court orders, including those made by the State Courts. In other words, the Labour Court orders are not less enforceable, compared to those issued or made by the State Courts. All civil claims have to go through the same process.
For those who need help, MOM assists the workers by advising them on the process and preparing the necessary documents. Eligible low-wage local workers may seek legal assistance from the Legal Aid Bureau, whereas foreign workers may approach the Migrant Workers' Centre (MWC). Workers can also apply to the State Courts Registrar to waive or defer the costs of enforcing the order or to recover these costs from the sales proceeds. Meanwhile, foreign workers with valid salary claims are also allowed to change employers. More than 2,200 of such requests were granted in the past three years.
Mdm Speaker, while we are relieved that the vast majority of unpaid salary, or 95%, and work injury cases, or 99.9%, are successfully resolved, we are, however, concerned with workers who are unable to recover their claims because their employers no longer have the financial means to pay. We will continue to strengthen our support for them.
Currently, foreign workers can already receive financial relief from MWC. Likewise, for local low-wage workers, as announced in this House in August last year, those with unresolved salary claims will be able to receive short-term relief from the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM) when it comes into operation in April this year. As for workers with more serious injury, if they fail to receive their work injury compensation and are in financial difficulties, we will continue to assist them through the Workers' Fund managed by MOM.
On the part of the workers, I urge them to bring their cases to MOM as early as possible. This will greatly improve the chances of successfully resolving their claims before the employers reach dire financial straits.
Mdm Speaker:\tMs Denise Phua.
\tMs Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): I would like to thank the Minister for his comprehensive answer and that he has got most of the ground covered. Just a couple of supplementary questions.
First, for the upstream actions by MOM, is there a more certain way by which the Ministry can assure and ensure that the insurance coverage is for both local and foreign employees? As it is, I think there seems to be a gap somewhere, where some of the employers did not have their workers covered and, therefore, some of the issues arose.
The second question is downstream. Looking at the comprehensive slew of measures that the Minister has described, I am not sure if many people know about them and so, is there a way by which MOM can facilitate and publicise a lot more on the actions that can be taken, especially for workers who are from foreign lands and who may not be clued in and where the language might be an issue? I think there needs to be a lot more work to be done in communicating the slew of measures that the Minister had mentioned. For example, I think the Minister is familiar with the cases that were mentioned about the Bangladeshi workers who had been told to —
Mdm Speaker:\tMs Phua, please keep your supplementary questions short.
\tMs Denise Phua Lay Peng:\tThey have been told to go and seize the assets of the errant employers. So, I would appreciate if the Minister could consider publicising the slew of measures a lot more.
Mdm Speaker:\tCan I just remind Members to keep your supplementary questions short? There is no need to add long preambles to supplementary questions, please. Minister, your reply, please.
\tMr Lim Swee Say: Mdm Speaker, on the issue of insurance coverage for work injury, I want to assure the House that the compliance rate is high. And that is the reason why 99.9% of the cases had no problems. Out of the 16,000 cases, only five cases had problems.
Having said that, we do take such non-compliance seriously. That is why for every single case of non-compliance and non-payment, even for the first-time offender, MOM would prosecute the employer. We do need to send a very clear message.
Of course, some may wonder why MOM cannot ensure 100% coverage. Our challenge is that when a company purchases WICA coverage for its employees, the insurance policy does not go by name. It is a group insurance. Along the way, during the year, there are workers who leave the company and workers who join the company. As a result, the responsibility of making sure that workers are covered has to rest with the employer. It is impossible for MOM to comb through every WICA policy and to cross-check with the movement of staff, and so on.
Having said that, we want to assure this House that the compliance rate is high. For the five cases, all of the five employers have been or are being prosecuted.
I also want to assure the House that we take every of these five cases very seriously. For the information of this House, these five cases involve four foreign workers and one local worker. For the four foreign workers, we continue to pursue the cases, and one employer has just paid up and another case is now with the State Courts. We are also helping the workers to find employment in Singapore and, at the same time, continue to find ways to resolve their outstanding claims. In the case of the local worker, we have started actions to enforce the payment.
We are keeping track of these five cases to make sure that we derive the best outcome possible.
In the case of the foreign workers mentioned by the Member, the media reports may have created a few misperceptions. First, the media reports said that the employers could just ignore and refuse to pay. I want to assure this House that no employer can afford to ignore and refuse to pay. As far as MOM is concerned, if I assess that this employer has the ability to pay, we will pursue it to the fullest. I do not have to wait for the workers to enforce the order from the State Courts. As MOM, I am already able to prosecute the employers because non-payment of salary, in itself, is an offence. So, I want to assure this House, please do not go away with the impression that any employer out there can afford to refuse and ignore the Labour Court orders. I assure Members that this has never been the case and we will make sure it will never happen in the future.
Second, in this particular case, we did try very hard to help the worker. The issue is that this worker has outstanding salary for 11 months. The employer stopped paying him in October 2015 and it took him 11 months to come to MOM. By the time he came to MOM, the company was already in serious trouble. Notwithstanding this, there were 10 workers involved. The employer made an offer − paid each and every one of them $2,000 as a partial payment and, through the MWC, we offered to pay an ex-gratia payment of another $1,000. Every worker affected is guaranteed of at least $3,000; that is, $2,000 of partial payment from the employer and $1,000 from MWC. The rest of it, the employer promised that he would pay up in instalments, through best effort. Nine out of the 10 workers accepted this because they were realistic; they know the situation the company is in and they accepted it. At least two of them are now still working in Singapore with new employers.
This particular claimant rejected the partial offer by the employer. He wanted to recover the full sum, which comes to about $7,500. As a result, he declined the offer by the employer. We are now in the process of helping him to file the claim and enforce the Labour Court order, knowing that the chance of recovery is very slim. The company has already ceased operations.
I want to assure the House that we do take every case very seriously. What the workers can do, the best thing the workers can do to help themselves, is to come to us early. Eleven months is too long to wait because by the time the employer has stopped paying you for 11 months, there is a high chance that the company is in deep financial difficulty. By and large, most workers will come to MOM after two to three months. As a result, we were able to resolve 95% of them.
I also agree with Ms Denise Phua's point that we should step up more in terms of educating the employer, the workers and members of public that in Singapore, we do take the welfare of our workers − whether foreign or local − very seriously. Salary is hard-earned money. Compensation for work injury is very important because when the worker is injured, it may affect his ability to work. To not pay him the compensation is unacceptable.
I want to assure this House that we will continue to strengthen the system. Yes, I think the system today, by and large, is working well; 95% percent for unpaid salary and 99.9% for work injury, but I can assure this House that we will come up with more measures to link them up with MWC.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Ang Hin Kee.
\tMr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio):\tCan I seek a clarification from the Minister? For the cases where the businesses ceased operations and majority of them ceased operations, will the owners or the directors be allowed to start new businesses or take up directorships in other businesses while they continue to not pay the salaries that were owed to the workers that were approved by the Labour Court?
\tMr Lim Swee Say:\tMdm Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, the debarment we impose on the companies also applies to culpable directors. What is meant by \"culpable directors\"? This refers to directors who deserve blame for not paying salary, regardless of whether it is due to negligence, intentional or otherwise. In other words, if you are a director of a company and you have contributed to the non-payment of salary, the debarment applies to this director as well. So, this director can go on to open and start a new company, the debarment will follow him to the new company until he pays up the outstanding salary to the ex-employees.
Mdm Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
\tMs Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Mdm Speaker, a supplementary question for the Minister. I would like to follow up on what the Minister was saying about salaries being unpaid by employers who are in some financial problems. We are seeing some of those from our residents these days. They have noticed that for those employers who have their fair share of foreign workers as well as local, the foreign workers, ironically, have a sort of a safety milestone in the sense that when the employer decides to cancel their work pass, I think MOM will have to make sure that the employer pays them what is due to them, in terms of salaries and all that.
The shedding of foreign workers could come at an earlier stage whereas the local workers may continue to work in the firm. Some of our residents are seeing that this payment of the foreign workers, their full packages and so on when their Work Permits are cancelled, this could be something risky for them as local employees will continue while the company's situation deteriorates.
I believe the Minister did mention he is alive to the situation. So, I would like to ask him whether the Ministry is reviewing this framework to, for example, have a mechanism in place that where you see an employer starting to cancel passes of foreign workers and so on, that the company is still able to make their payments to the local workers who remain with the company.
\tMr Lim Swee Say: Mdm Speaker, I think it is not quite possible for MOM to be able to assess the financial health of an organisation or a company to assess whether the company is able to continue paying salaries. What MOM does is this – we always encourage our workers, \"The moment your employers stop paying you any salary, please come to us as early as you can\". This is our message and that remains our message.
Ms Lim may wish to advise her residents that anytime their employers stop paying them their salary, they can come to MOM straightaway. They do not have to wait for two or three months. The moment it is overdue, you have the right to exercise that option. That is the best way.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon):\tMdm Speaker, just one quick supplementary. Moving forward, will MOM consider requiring all companies which employ Work Permit holders to place a security bond or a deposit with MOM, which can specifically be used when companies ignore the Labour Court orders for compensation to the workers?
\tMr Lim Swee Say:\tMdm Speaker, currently, employers of foreign workers already have to place a security bond of $5,000 per worker. Last year, 115 foreign workers were owed salaries, unpaid and unresolved. Of that number, 28 of them were Work Permit holders with security bonds. We managed to get the security bond insurer to offer $2,000 to pay each of the workers. So, what Member Louis Ng mentioned is effectively already in practice today.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Difficulty in Selling HDB Flats Due to Ethnic Integration Policy","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"3 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked\tthe Minister for National Development whether there are any plans to assist flat owners who are unable to sell their HDB flat due to the quota imposed under the Ethnic Integration Policy.
4 Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar asked\tthe Minister for National Development whether there are plans to review and introduce greater flexibility on the Ethnic Integration Policy for HDB flats in light of the sluggish property market where some home owners are finding it even more difficult to sell their flats.
\tThe Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong):\tMdm Speaker, with your permission, I will take Question Nos 3 and 4 together?
Mdm Speaker:\tYes, please.
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Madam, the Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP) was introduced in 1989 to ensure a balanced mix of ethnic groups living in our Housing and Development Board (HDB) estates, so as to promote racial harmony and strengthen social cohesion. These objectives are still relevant today.
Most flat sellers, from our experience, are still able to secure buyers from eligible ethnic groups, given the large volume of resale transactions annually. In the current property market, flat sellers may need to plan ahead and give themselves more time to secure a buyer. Nevertheless, HDB has and will continue to exercise flexibility for households of mixed parentage or marriages, or where there are exceptional circumstances.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Lim Biow Chuan.
\tMr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten):\tI have been told by my residents that when they bought the flat from HDB, they paid the same price as the other owners. Now that they are trying to sell it, because of the EIP, they have to sell it at a lower price and they are unable to fetch a fair market value for their flats due to this policy. So, would the Ministry of National Development (MND) consider giving them a grant to top up the difference between the fair market value and the actual sale price that they sell the flat for because they are selling at a loss compared to when they bought the property at the time from HDB?
\tMr Lawrence Wong:\tMadam, when buyers bought the flat, the EIP policy was already made clear and the flat was valued with that policy in mind, to begin with. If they were to sell the flat today, it is with the same policy. Nothing has changed. I think it is easy to point at the EIP as the cause for a lower sale price but there may be many other reasons. Even in today's current market situation, there are people who are not subject to EIP limits but are selling their flats at somewhat lower prices because of the general property market conditions. It is probably premature or not fair to point the finger at the EIP per se but recognise that the property market conditions are the way they are. And buyers, therefore, need to plan ahead and think very carefully about these decisions.
Mdm Speaker: Dr Intan Mokhtar.
\tDr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio):\tI fully appreciate the intent of the EIP and I support it. But would it be possible, looking at the property market at this moment, to consider reviewing the EIP, not just to look at EIP for each individual block but reviewing the EIP to look at it as EIP for that cluster of blocks? Because if we are talking about integration, it is not just integration of races within a block, but the neighbourhood.
\tMr Lawrence Wong: Madam, I appreciate what the Member has said, that the EIP policy is important and it is something that has worked well in our context. I would say it is still relevant today, perhaps even more relevant, given what we see around the world, even in mature countries where ethnic tensions can come up quite easily.
Having said that, as I mentioned earlier, we have already exercised flexibility on EIP appeals. Over the years, from 2014 to 2016, we received about 1,500 appeal cases and about four-fifths of them were rejected, which means that one-fifth were successful. This was, in fact, a question raised by one of the Members of the House which we had addressed and clarified. I cannot get into the specifics of which and why some cases are successful and others are not. Each case is unique and we look at it case by case.
But for many of the cases that we have turned down, we have found that, in fact, if you look at the resale transactions, there were transactions from buyers of that particular ethnic group. So, it is not fair to say that there are no buyers from that particular ethnic group and, therefore, I cannot sell, because the resale market transactions do indicate that buyers from that ethnic group are, indeed, making resale transactions. We will continue this approach. I think that EIP remains, but we exercise flexibility 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":"Waiting Time for Childcare Centre Places","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"5 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked\tthe Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the current range of waiting time for enrolment in childcare centres; (b) whether there is a shortage of childcare teachers currently and, if so, what is the Ministry doing to increase the number of childcare teachers; and (c) whether a comprehensive study has been done on the needs of childcare centres and how their capacity can be maximised.
\tThe Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Tan Chuan-Jin): Mdm Speaker, since 2012, the number of childcare places has increased significantly by over 40% across Singapore to over 130,000. Many childcare centres now have available vacancies to enrol children at short notice. However, for few housing estates with high childcare demand, parents may still experience waiting times that range from a few weeks to a few months. In particular, parents may have to wait longer if they prefer a specific centre due to its location, operator or other reasons. A fair proportion of the children in the queues for the more popular centres are already enrolled in some other centres.
To further reduce waiting times, we will continue to inject more childcare capacity in housing estates with high demand. This includes the four recently announced large centres in Punggol, Sengkang and Bukit Panjang. Future HDB Build-To-Order (BTO) housing developments have also been planned with larger childcare centres to meet the needs of our young families.
Over the past few years, the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) has been working closely with operators and training agencies on various initiatives to attract, retain and also develop our educators. For example, the polytechnics have increased student intake for early childhood diploma courses by more than 70% last year, from 380 to 675 places. Last October, ECDA launched a comprehensive Early Childhood Manpower Plan to provide more professional development opportunities for early childhood educators, a more supportive working environment and greater respect and recognition for educators.
To understand and address ground challenges, ECDA conducts very regular consultations with the sector, including townhall sessions, surveys and centre visits. For example, the Early Childhood Manpower Plan was developed in consultation with key sector partners, such as unions, industry associations and operators. ECDA will continue to work closely and collaboratively with the sector.
Mdm Speaker: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
\tEr Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Mdm Speaker, I have four supplementary questions. The reason I raise this question is because almost every other week, I receive feedback from residents requesting for help.
My first question is: are there any plans to review the salary of teachers? It seems that from the operators, they told me there is a shortage of teachers. And when I talk to the teachers, they said there is a disparity in the salary between childcare teachers and the school teachers, although they are both degree holders.
Second, would there be any more new mega childcare centres in Yishun, because the one that we have, I understand, is fully subscribed?
Third, will the Ministry work with HDB to have bigger childcare centres for new BTOs, because in every new BTO, the childcare capacity is only about 100, which is insufficient?
The last question is, will the Ministry work with HDB to have the childcare centre in a new BTO to be in operation when they hand over the keys, because there is always a delay? After a few months, then the childcare centre is in operation.
\tMr Tan Chuan-Jin: Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. Perhaps, let me just give a perspective about waiting time for children to be enrolled in childcare centres. We do acknowledge that in certain estates, there is high demand and a bit of mismatch, but perhaps just let me give context as well. For example, in hotspot areas, such as Punggol and Sengkang, it ranges from a few weeks to a few months.
There are a range of factors that affect waiting time. For example, centre vacancy, demand in estates and parents' preferences for particular centres also matter a great deal, or manpower requirements. We have about 13,800 children currently registered on the wait list, requesting for a childcare place by February 2017. About 40% of them are currently enrolled in a childcare centre but whose parents indicated preference for another centre. And then, the rest are first-timers. But for first-timers themselves as well, some may also be queuing ahead of time and not necessarily having an immediate childcare need.
This is just to provide context. When we say that there is a waiting list, there are a range of reasons as well. But specifically, we do know that in high-demand areas, there are certain concerns.
One of the areas that the Member had raised is with regard to salary. Salary is one factor in terms of attracting people into the sector. ECDA regularly undertakes manpower surveys to help operators better understand the wage levels and human resource practices across the sector. The findings are shared, so that we can encourage operators to keep up with human resource practices and to make sure that they remain competitive.
We understand that salaries have shifted upwards, led by the Anchor Operators (AOPs). That is something that we are working on with the AOPs. But it is uneven across the sector. Salaries for entry-level diploma trained teachers are also comparable to other sectors and competitive. We do recognise that salaries do play an important part and we should endeavour to see how best to raise that where possible.
It is not just salaries alone. Beyond salaries, there are also a range of initiatives to recognise and develop the teachers. For example, the Skills Framework for Early Childhood Care and Education spells out the career pathways, specific skills and competencies required for various job roles and, therefore, encouraging competency-based career development for educators. Also, the Professional Development Programme and the ECDA Fellows Scheme select competent preschool teachers and exemplary leaders respectively to contribute to the centres or sector and recognise their work through awards and allowances.
There are a range of measures that we are putting in place through the Manpower Plan to try to level up and make sure that the sector is attractive, so that we can draw more people into the sector.
In terms of some of the other questions, whether there are more mega centres, we are building five large childcare centres in Jurong West, Punggol, Sengkang, Woodlands and Yishun. This was announced last year at the Committee of Supply 2015. This is to provide accessible, affordable and quality childcare services. They will add about 1,900 new places. Each centre can take 300 to 500 children. Four large childcare centres in Punggol, Yishun, Sengkang and Woodlands have started operations. The remaining centre in Jurong West will commence operations in the first quarter of 2017. We are adding four more new large childcare centres announced last month as part of our overall efforts to meet the needs of young families. They will be in Punggol, Sengkang and Bukit Panjang, and they will add about 2,700 new places in these estates and are expected to open by the end of 2018.
We continue to work very closely with stakeholders, as I mentioned earlier, to review the demand and provide the spaces where possible. Going forward, what we are doing is to work very closely with HDB. We will be revisiting the planning norms to make sure that HDB estates, as they emerge, especially with a younger profile, the demand for childcare places can be met by increasing the number of places.
The other question, which is a pertinent one, because I experienced it myself as well, is that when the HDB flats are ready, can the childcare centres be ready at the same time? I recognise that point. That is a very fair consideration. That is also something that we are working closely with HDB on, to try to minimise that gap between when the flats and centres are ready. But as Members also realise, for flats, when they are ready, actually the people are streaming in over a fairly long period of time, perhaps up to six to nine months. We do recognise that we should try to get it ready as far as possible, so that when the families come in, the childcare centres or the kindergartens can be operational as soon as possible.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Ang Hin Kee.
\tMr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio):\tI would just like to clarify, earlier the Minister mentioned that his Ministry is increasing the capacity of training in the polytechnics for early childhood educators. I wonder if the Ministry has a dedicated policy to also expand the capacity in privately-run operations, whether it is the SEED Institute, KLC International Institute and the other institutes that train early childhood educators. Will we be also expanding their capacity, so that the pipeline of teachers coming into the industry will be ensured?
\tMr Tan Chuan-Jin:\tMdm Speaker, the manpower situation is something that we are monitoring closely. We do have very direct levers with our institutions of education. With regard to the polytechnics, we are increasing the capacity. With the private institutions, we are discussing with them on the various measures and we will continue to collaborate with them where possible. If we are able to increase the capacity, we will be more than happy to see that happen.
Mdm Speaker: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
\tEr Dr Lee Bee Wah:\tMdm Speaker, I think the Minister did not answer my question: is there any new mega childcare centre in Yishun coming up? Because the one that the Minister mentioned, yes, it is in operation and it is over-subscribed, long queue.
\tMr Tan Chuan-Jin:\tMdm Speaker, as I mentioned, we are reviewing the various demand in the respective areas. Yishun will be one area that we are looking at. It is not just in terms of mega childcare centres but it is also in terms of the range of the other childcare centres that are part of the overall landscape. We do urge the advisors to also support us when we do put forward requirements for use of space for some of these childcare centres to be built. When we are ready, we will be more than happy to let Members know in advance of time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Alternative Care Arrangements when Childcare Centres Close Due to Hand, Foot and Mouth Disease","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Mr Ang Hin Kee asked\tthe Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the current status of the Hand, Foot and Mouth Disease (HFMD) in childcare centres and preschools; (b) whether more support can be given to parents who have to make alternative arrangements when their children are unable to attend school; and (c) how effective has the Ministry been in tackling challenges faced by parents who have insufficient childcare leave, whose children contracted HFMD more than once in a year, or who are unable to seek childcare support from family members.
\tThe Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Tan Chuan-Jin): Mdm Speaker, the Hand, Foot and Mouth Disease (HFMD) is a generally mild disease which is endemic in Singapore. Preventive measures are in place to minimise the transmission of HFMD in preschools. It is a regulatory requirement for preschools to conform to the Ministry of Health's (MOH) guidelines for the prevention and control of infectious diseases. I would want to repeat that while it is endemic, it is generally a mild disease. Guidelines include conducting daily health and temperature checks upon arrival, ensuring appropriate hand-washing by staff and children, and having an unwell child rest at the designated sickbay while waiting for the parent or an authorised person to bring the child home.
Centres with two or more suspected or confirmed HFMD cases are required to report the cases to the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) and to MOH. Centres are also required to implement enhanced measures to manage the outbreak of HFMD and are encouraged to conduct self-assessments on health and hygiene.
Centres that experience a high number of sustained cases over a period of time may be required to close. We understand that this would cause inconvenience to parents. However, it is a useful step to break the cycle of transmission of the disease. Over the past three years, there have not been more than five centre closures every year. Additionally, there have not been local cases in preschools with severe complications due to HFMD.
To support working parents in caring for their young children, the Government has enhanced child and infant care leave provisions over the years. Each working parent with children below the age of seven has six days of childcare leave per year, or a total of 12 days of childcare leave for every couple. Each parent is also entitled to six days of unpaid infant care leave per year during the child's first two years. These childcare and infant care leave provisions are in addition to the parents' annual leave provisions. We also recognise that grandparents and relatives, too, can play an important role in supporting working parents by providing alternative care for their young children.
Companies, too, have an important role to play in supporting their employees to manage their work and family responsibilities. The proportion of firms providing ad hoc flexible work arrangements rose from 70% in 2015 to over three-quarters at 77% in 2016. These firms employ 82% of all employees, and this is up from 76% in 2015. This is an encouraging development and we want to encourage employers to continue on that trend.
Employers who wish to implement flexible work arrangements can tap on various resources, such as the WorkPro Work-Life Grant. The tripartite partners also published the Tripartite Advisory on Flexible Work Arrangements to help employers, supervisors and employees implement flexible work arrangements. We want to see this continue to grow. We urge parents to tap on these flexible work arrangements and enhanced leave provisions to better manage their work and parenthood responsibilities in caring for their children.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Ang Hin Kee.
\tMr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio):\tI thank the Minister for his elaborate answer. I have one clarification which is, in many of the other services industry, you have services such as home care services whereby physiotherapists go to people's home to provide care. Will ECDA be exploring the option of having a list of potential nannies or care-givers who can be deployed to homes in the event that the parents have exhausted their leave or are unable to take leave to be at home with their child? Because many a times, because of work reason or other reasons, they have already exhausted what available resource they have, and having such external resource may be the only other means for them to care for the children when they contracted HFMD.
\tMr Tan Chuan-Jin: Mdm Speaker, generally, MOH's advice is for such children to remain at home during the time that the centre is closed and this is to ensure that they do not transmit HFMD to other children whom they come into contact with.
Apart from taking leave and arranging for flexible work to care for the children, we do encourage parents to explore grandparents, relatives, friends, domestic helpers, fellow parents to pool together efforts to care for the children. We understand the inconvenience affected parents face should a centre close for 10 days, for example. However, we do seek their understanding that this is a necessary step to break the cycle of transmission of the disease to other children and other families.
But more directly to the Member's question on whether we plan to provide such services, I think that is beyond the remit of ECDA to do so. Right now, as far as we can see, it is an inconvenience but I think parents, by and large, try to manage where they can. We do urge parents to explore the various possibilities. One of the key measures we mentioned is for companies to take a much more expansive approach in terms of their flexible work arrangements, and we are encouraged that that will continue to develop.
We also encourage parents to look at informal arrangements amongst themselves because when a particular childcare centre has some of these closure requirements, the parents could pool efforts among themselves to try to share the responsibilities.
So, there is a range of different possibilities available. But in terms of taking a very specific step for ECDA to provide for such care services, I would suggest that the Member's question is with regard to students affected by HFMD, but there are also other illnesses that children contract from time to time, and parents do sometimes face inconvenience. I do not think it is possible for ECDA to provide that service. I guess if there is a very genuine demand, whether there will be companies or others or private sector sort of solutions that will emerge from that, then, that is something that might occur. As of now, as far as we can see, while there are inconveniences, parents try to manage within that range of possibilities that are available to them.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increasing Incidence of Drivers Going Against Traffic Flow","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"7 Ms Joan Pereira asked\tthe Minister for Transport (a) how many incidents of drivers going against the flow of traffic have there been in the last three years; (b) how many accidents have occurred due to this problem; (c) how does the Ministry assess the quality and clarity of its road signs; and (d) how does the Ministry decide if and when signs have to be installed or improved.
8 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked\tthe Minister for Transport whether LTA engages experts in behavioural and vision sciences to contribute their expertise in the design of road signs and junctions so as to minimise the risk of drivers inadvertently going against the flow of traffic.
\tThe Second Minister for Transport (Mr Ng Chee Meng) (for the Minister for Transport):\tMdm Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 7 and 8 together?
Mdm Speaker:\tYes, please.
\tMr Ng Chee Meng: The Traffic Police does not generally track and categorise accidents by the cause of vehicles going against the flow of traffic. However, for fatal accidents specifically, their data show that three have occurred in the past three years as a result of this behaviour.
The Land Transport Authority (LTA) takes reference from international standards in the design and installation of road signs and markings. In addition, LTA engages independent specialist road safety engineers to review the clarity and effectiveness of our road signs and markings for new roads and undertakes regular safety audits of existing roads. Drivers should be extra careful and slow down if they are not familiar with the roads.
Mdm Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong):\tI thank the Second Minister for his answer. Some of my residents have mentioned that when the number of traffic signs adds up and as the junction has more turnings, it gets more complicated, especially for older residents. Would the Ministry consider studying further how drivers of different ages, different experience levels, react to cluttered traffic junctions and road signs, both in the day time and at night?
\tMr Ng Chee Meng:\tMdm Speaker, on a yearly basis, LTA reviews up to 24 roads based on accident trends that occur each year. On top of that, we also take into account public feedback and review specific roads that residents may have issues with, to lend better clarity and ease of use. If I may offer to the Member, perhaps, we can take this offline, and if specific areas require review, LTA will gladly do so.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review Maximum Penalty for Driving Against Traffic Flow","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"9 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked\tthe Minister for Home Affairs in respect of motorists driving against the flow of traffic, whether the maximum penalty of five years of imprisonment and a fine for causing death by a rash act should be reviewed.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs (Mr Desmond Lee) (for the Minister for Home Affairs):\tMadam, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) is conducting a review of penalties under the Road Traffic Act in order to take a tougher stance against irresponsible motorists. The review will also consider the adequacy of the penalties for driving dangerously against the flow of traffic. This review was announced on 1 December last year and MHA will make an announcement 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":"Adequate Advance Notice for Families of Death Row Inmates before Executions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Mr Kok Heng Leun asked\tthe Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether families of death row inmates can be provided with at least three weeks' notice before the sentence is carried out to allow them sufficient time to come to terms with the sentence and make necessary arrangements; (b) what processes are in place to help such families deal with the trauma of the loss of their loved ones; and (c) whether family members of death row inmates can be allowed to have physical contact during the last few visits after the date of execution has been set.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs (Mr Desmond Lee) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Madam, after being notified of the date on which the sentence would be carried out, the inmate's family is allowed to visit the inmate more frequently and for an extended period of time at each visit. The Singapore Prison Service facilitates requests from the inmate and his family as much as possible, while ensuring the safety and security of inmates and their families. Physical contact has not been allowed for reasons connected with safety.
There will be a period of time between conviction and the carrying out of the sentence to allow the full legal process to be completed, including any clemency petition. Throughout the inmates' stay in prison, families visit the inmates and also communicate with them. Inmates are also notified at every stage of the legal and clemency process. Counsellors are attached to each family to support them during the period leading up to and after the carrying out of the sentence.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Kok Heng Leun.
\tMr Kok Heng Leun (Nominated Member): I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. The reason for asking for a longer notice period is to give the families sufficient time to make the necessary preparations, as well as for the grief process. At the moment, they will be informed on Monday, and usually Tuesdays to Thursdays are when the extended visits are allowed. So, I am asking whether it could be extended a bit more so that they would have more time to deal with that process.
The second supplementary question is that I understand that some death row inmates' family members would be grateful for just one opportunity to be able to have that physical contact. In fact, the Government has made an exception once to permit one death row inmate's mother's physical contact, to hold the hands of her son. So, would the Ministry consider granting this possibility during the last visits, if the family members and the death row inmates so desire?
\tMr Desmond Lee: Madam, I thank the Member for the questions. The Singapore Prison Service considers various factors in determining how far in advance to inform the inmate's next-of-kin. Often, this includes the time needed for his next-of-kin and family to travel to Singapore if they live overseas.
I would like to assure the Member that the Singapore Prison Service carefully considers the time required for the next-of-kin to travel to Singapore. But as I have said in my reply earlier, between conviction and the actual carrying out of the sentence, there is a certain duration of time. Throughout that duration, families and next-of-kin are given opportunities to communicate and to visit the inmates.
On the question of whether physical contact will be allowed, I have said earlier that the practice has been no, because of operational security and the safety of visitors. But we will always assess requests from families and next-of-kin as they are provided.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Kok Heng Leun.
\tMr Kok Heng Leun: I thank the Senior Minister of State. I just want to clarify. So, yes, if the family members do ask for the opportunity for physical contact, the Singapore Prison Service would consider. So, they could put up an application or ask for it.
Secondly, I would also like to say that it is that period of knowing when the sentence would come, that one week is actually quite a stressful and traumatic period. So, this is the period that we need to give them a bit more time and space to handle the process.
\tMr Desmond Lee: I thank the Member for his feedback.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact on Singapore of US Pull-out from Trans-Pacific Partnership","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked\tthe Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade) what is the impact on Singapore's economy in the wake of the challenging global trade situation including the US' intention to pull out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the threat of a trade war between the US and China and increasing calls for protectionism by many developed countries.
12 Assoc Prof Randolph Tan asked\tthe Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade) whether the Ministry has a strategy to deal with the potential impact on Singapore's trade from the decision by the new US administration to pull out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
13 Mr Pritam Singh asked\tthe Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade) (a) whether the Government will continue to pursue the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) with like-minded countries; and (b) what is the Government's assessment of the efficacy of TPP without the participation of the US.
\tThe Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade) (Mr Lim Hng Kiang):\tMdm Speaker, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 11, 12 and 13 together?
Mdm Speaker:\tYes, please.
\tMr Lim Hng Kiang: Mdm Speaker, we are witnessing a rise in anti-globalisation sentiments in Europe and the US. If protectionist approaches become the norm or a trade war among major economies ensues, then global trade will be adversely affected, with knock-on effects on economic growth worldwide.
Small and open economies like Singapore are especially vulnerable. Protectionist barriers to trade would curtail Singapore's ability to tap on demand in export markets or serve as an intermediary for global trade flows. This would have an adverse impact on our economy, of which two-thirds of our gross domestic product (GDP) is driven by external demand.
On the other hand, our external linkages can also make us more resilient in facing these headwinds. Over the years, we have carefully built up our regional and global connectivity with multiple regions across the world. We have also developed an efficient, stable, pro-business environment, with effective and consistent business and investment frameworks. This allows us to tap on the growth opportunities in Asia and elsewhere, for mutual benefit with like-minded partners. Amidst the current rise of anti-trade sentiments, Singapore will stay the course to remain open and connected, to be an attractive global city that welcomes the best companies, talent and investments.
We remain firmly committed to pursuing a rules-based global trading system and achieving greater regional integration. We will do our part to ensure that markets remain open, so that companies in Singapore can continue to scale up and internationalise.
The agreement that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) parties negotiated was one of several such pathways to achieve stronger trade linkages that will promote growth opportunities and job creation in the member countries. With the US' withdrawal, the TPP agreement, as signed, cannot come into effect. This is a setback for the global trade liberalising agenda but need not be the ultimate outcome. Each TPP partner will now have to carefully study the new balance of benefits without the US' participation and consider the value of an agreement among the remaining 11 partners. In addition to consulting with other TPP partners to find a mutually beneficial pathway forward, Singapore is also actively engaged in other regional integration initiatives, such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC).
Mdm Speaker, we will also continue to work with like-minded partners at the World Trade Organization (WTO) as advocates of a rules-based multilateral trading system. On the bilateral front, Singapore has an existing network of 21 free trade agreements (FTAs) in force, including with the eight TPP countries and the US. These speak to our deep ties with key trading partners and will help us stay connected as the environment evolves. We will also actively pursue other forms of economic cooperation initiatives, including industrial parks and other projects in the region, to create more opportunities for our companies to collaborate and grow.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Mdm Speaker, I thank the Minister for the comprehensive reply. Could the Minister give an update on the progress of RCEP and the proposal for the Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific? I understand that the last round of negotiation of RCEP was held in Tianjin back in October 2016. What would be the next step?
\tMr Lim Hng Kiang: RCEP is progressing a bit slowly. We were planning to complete it within a reasonable timeframe of about three to four years. It is going to take us a bit longer. The reason is because we are trying to put together the FTAs that ASEAN has with the various dialogue partners. So, the problem or challenge is not within ASEAN because we already have FTAs with our corresponding dialogue partners. The challenge is with the dialogue partners not having FTAs among themselves. For example, between China and India, they do not have an FTA. So, they are coming together for the first time. One can imagine, with two huge economies starting from scratch, that is a huge challenge.
On the FTA for the Asia Pacific, this is a process that is only beginning to take place. The original idea was to have several pathways, one of which was TPP, the second is RCEP, and then we will merge the various pathways to form the FTA for the Asia Pacific. Now, with the setback in the TPP, we have to find other pathways to reach our ultimate objective of an FTA for the Asia Pacific.
Mdm Speaker: Assoc Prof Randolph Tan.
\tAssoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member):\tI thank the Minister for his reply. I do not think it is an exaggeration to say that TPP is actually an agreement that is way ahead of its time. I think that could be one of the reasons for the obstacles that we are seeing now. I am also aware that a TPP agreement is no longer possible in its current form, but what about the TPP model? Is Singapore pursuing the TPP model with other like-minded countries? For instance, Australia and Japan actually ratified the agreement after it was made clear that the US' new administration would no longer go ahead. Is there a possibility that we can pursue the TPP model with these countries?
\tMr Lim Hng Kiang: The TPP initiative put together three separate objectives. One is market access, which is the typical objective of an FTA. The second objective is to put in place rules that are more relevant to commerce in the 21st century, and I think this is what is very innovative about TPP. The third is, of course, the geo-strategic objective of putting economies across the Pacific and integrate them together.
So, I agree with the Member that TPP was a very ambitious undertaking and it took us nearly six years to cobble it together. First, to find a balance of benefits that people can live with in providing market access but, more importantly, to sit down and set out the rules for commerce in the 21st century ‒ rules for intellectual property, environment, labour, e-commerce, and many of these rules. Third, of course, is the strategic objective of putting economies across the Pacific and integrate them.
So, to find a new set of countries with similar ambitions is not easy. Whether we can proceed with TPP-11, as I mentioned, depends on the assessment of the benefits that the 11 countries will now have to calculate without the US as the major market. TPP was negotiated with market access of all the countries but, of course, with the US as a major market for which many countries want additional market access. Now, with that market access no longer available, the set of benefits will change for each country. So, everyone will have to make their new calculations.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): I thank the Minister for his reply. I just have one question and it relates to a Channel NewsAsia article that appeared after Prime Minister Lee's meeting with the leaders of the Pacific Rim countries. The headline was \"Singapore to amend legislation to bring TPP into effect by next year\".
Can I just clarify, for the TPP-11 countries, is there any timeline for them to come to an agreement whether they want to proceed with an agreement which takes the shape or form of the TPP or not?
\tMr Lim Hng Kiang: The original agreement was that we will all try and get our ratification process done within two years of the signing of the Agreement, which was 5 or 6 February last year. So, that was the original target. It is in line with that original target that we said that we would be among the first few countries that would ratify the TPP in line with the other countries.
And now, with the US' withdrawal, countries would have to recalculate. One possible pathway is for countries, the TPP-11, to continue their ratification process and wait until the US is ready or changes its mind, then they will join. That is one possible pathway. The second is, of course, to have a bilateral agreement with the US, as the US now wishes to embark on more bilateral agreements rather than plurilateral agreements. The third is, of course, the option of a TPP-11. So, it depends on the perspective of individual countries.
For some of the TPP countries, for example, Singapore and Australia, we already have bilateral FTA agreements with US, so the TPP is incremental and gives us an incremental market access. Our main bilateral trade in goods and services and investments are covered by the bilateral FTAs that we have. So, every country will have to reassess its situation.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
\tMr Liang Eng Hwa (Holland-Bukit Timah):\tMadam, my follow-up question is on bilateral trade agreements. Given that multilateral trade agreements are so difficult to stitch and ratify with many varying political interests, political cycles and not to mention, the long-drawn process, would the Ministry now take a different strategy or perhaps a separate strategy to pursue more bilateral trade agreements with countries, especially those economies that could be potentially our new markets, like South America, Latin America and Africa, for example? Would there be a separate track or effort to do that as well?
\tMr Lim Hng Kiang: We have always taken both bilateral, plurilateral as well as multilateral positions, especially with WTO. On bilateral, we have, as I mentioned just now, 21 FTAs, and these cover all our major trading partners. We have one current bilateral FTA that we are negotiating with Sri Lanka. We continue to do bilateral FTAs and to pursue new markets.
We also work on plurilateral tracks, for example, the RCEP. In the ASEAN+1 FTA with the six dialogue partners, we are trying to cobble these together into a bigger plurilateral FTA called the RCEP so as to try and harmonise the rules and try to make it less of a \"spaghetti bowl\" of FTAs, to make the processes more business-friendly to our companies. So, we take all three approaches, as well as work actively with WTO for multilateral tracks, particularly in trade facilitations.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Patrick Tay.
\tMr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (West Coast):\tMdm Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister, in light of the US' withdrawal from the TPP, what is the impact to workers and unions in Singapore?
\tMr Lim Hng Kiang: Mdm Speaker, as I mentioned just now, what we forgo in not continuing with the TPP is the incremental benefits that we would have achieved in the TPP over-and-above the existing benefits that we have with the bilateral FTAs with the nine other countries within the TPP group.
I think as far as the workers are concerned, what is more important for them is to understand the environment that we are facing, the headwinds, and work together with the Government, employers and companies to deal with these headwinds. The approach that we have taken through our Industry Transformation Maps, through the 23 sectoral plans, these are concrete ways in which all three parties can work together and still continue to provide good jobs for our workers.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
\tMr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member):\tMadam, just one supplementary question: does the withdrawal of the US from TPP set back any prospect of reviving the Doha Round of WTO negotiations? How does the Minister assess any prospect of advancing the Doha Round in the current context?
\tMr Lim Hng Kiang:\tWe are making modest headway through the Doha process by taking subsets of the Doha agenda and seeing whether we can proceed successfully on the subsets. For example, in 2013, we got together and agreed on the trade facilitation agreements, and I think we are quite close to ratifying it. We should be able to ratify it by this year. Similarly, we are taking other subset agendas to try to see if we can cobble it into an agreement. So, that continues. What the US brings to WTO in terms of leadership, I think that has yet to be demonstrated.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Early Warning Systems for Better Management of Flash Floods","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"14 Assoc Prof Randolph Tan asked\tthe Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) whether the Ministry conducts regular spot checks for works which undermine the capacity of the public drainage system to deal with floods; (b) whether there is an effective system that triggers early warnings about flood threats that particular works can pose; and (c) whether the penalties to deal with errant contractors are on par with the severity of the potential damage from the resultant flooding.
15 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked\tthe Minister for the Environment and Water Resources in light of recent flash floods across the island and global climate change, whether the Ministry will work with other agencies to reduce incidents of flash floods in key areas of Singapore.
\tThe Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M):\tMdm Speaker, can I take Question Nos 14 and 15 together, please?
Mdm Speaker:\tYes, please.
\tMr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Thank you. Over the past few decades, we are observing upward trends in rainfall intensities and frequency of heavy rain events. This, coupled with growing urbanisation which increases stormwater run-off, has made flood management more challenging.
To reduce flood risk, the Public Utilities Board (PUB) adopts a holistic \"source-pathway-receptor\" approach that addresses flood protection, not just through drains and canals, that is, the pathway; but also in areas generating stormwater run-off, that is, the source; and areas where floods may occur, that is, the receptor.
First, the pathways. Since 2011, PUB has raised drainage design standards for new developments and redevelopments, which would increase their drainage systems' capacity by up to 50%. PUB has also been carrying out improvement works to progressively increase the capacity of existing drains and canals and rehabilitate older drains. In the last three years, drainage improvement works at 192 locations have been completed and there are ongoing projects at 90 other locations.
Given land scarcity, we cannot rely solely on more and bigger drains to mitigate floods. As such, PUB also requires developers to implement \"source\" solutions to better manage storm-water discharges from developments. These include on-site detention measures for larger developments. In addition, PUB also requires \"receptor\" solutions, such as higher platform levels, crest protection and flood barriers, especially for critical installations. These help to protect developments when floods occur.
Keeping our drains free flowing is the joint responsibility of all stakeholders, be they public agencies, private developers and contractors, and members of the public. PUB works closely with the National Environment Agency’s (NEA) Department of Public Cleanliness to regularly remove debris, litter and leaves from the drains. It also encourages the public to keep our environment litter-free and give feedback on drain conditions.
In reply to Mr Ang Wei Neng's question, PUB does indeed work with the major development agencies to get their contractors to conduct checks on the public drains near their construction sites to ensure that the drains are free of debris. This is supplemented by PUB's audit checks on approved drainage works on site. During critical stages, such as drainage diversion works and decommissioning of existing drains, more frequent checks are carried out. PUB also leverages on technology, for example, closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras, to facilitate the monitoring of work sites.
Mr Ang mentioned the recent flash floods, of which one recent occurrence is at Upper Thomson Road. PUB has investigated and found out that it was due to unauthorised work, which affected our public drainage system. PUB takes a serious view of such unauthorised works and will not hesitate to take action against errant parties under the Sewerage and Drainage Act. Any person found guilty may be fined up to $50,000 for unauthorised works affecting the public drainage system and up to $20,000 for unauthorised alteration or interference to the public drainage system. Such penalties and reputational damage, as well as being liable for civil penalties if they cause third-party damage, have been sufficient and effective in the past, and PUB will continue to review the amounts from time to time.
While PUB continues with efforts to reduce flood risks, we should be realistic to note that it is not possible to eliminate floods altogether. Localised conditions, exceptionally heavy downpour, tides and errant behaviour all contribute to flash floods now and then. As such, our focus is also to help members of the public better manage floods when they occur. To this end, PUB has put in place monitoring and alert systems to keep the public updated, through a network of water level sensors and CCTVs. Members of the public can subscribe to receive SMS alerts from selected water level sensors via PUB's website. These sensors are placed in flood-prone areas and hotspots, and could provide the public with early information on the rising water levels in drains in selected flood-prone areas.
In the event of a flash flood, PUB works closely with the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and the Police to monitor road conditions and provide real-time updates on PUB's Facebook and Twitter pages and via radio broadcast, as well as LTA's Expressway Monitoring Advisory System (EMAS) on the roads.
Our stormwater management strategies have served us well. Despite increased urbanisation and more variable weather, flood-prone areas have been reduced from 3,200 hectares in the 1970s to 30.5 hectares today. PUB will continue its efforts to reduce flood-prone areas and ensure the proper functioning of the drainage system. However, measures, such as drain upgrading, canals and centralised detention tanks, take time to implement and may not be able to cope with all extremities in rainfall.
As such, I urge all parties to play a part in ensuring that our drains are free-flowing, and to appreciate the importance of source and receptor requirements in their developments. Finally, we need to work together to manage floods when they occur through better and more extensive alerts. Through concerted efforts, we can minimise flood risks and better manage flood events.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Mdm Speaker, I thank the Minister for the very comprehensive reply. The Minister mentioned about improvements to pathways in 90 locations. Recently, there were floods in Paya Lebar and Tanjong Pagar, besides Upper Thomson. So, are Paya Lebar and Tanjong Pagar part of the 90 locations? That is the first clarification.
The second clarification is: the Minister mentioned that for the flood at Upper Thomson, PUB had concluded that the errant contractor diverted the drainage and caused the flood. So, has PUB taken action to prosecute the contractor?
\tMr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: For the Paya Lebar flood on 24 December 2016, it was caused by intense rain which overwhelmed the upstream section of the Geylang River, thereby causing low-lying areas to flood. Drainage improvement works have been ongoing in Geylang River. The expected completion of the drainage upgrading works is in the third-quarter of 2018. The flood protection to Paya Lebar areas will be enhanced then.
On the action against the contractor, we are taking steps right now to put up the charges. We will be investigating and putting up the charges when we are ready.
Mdm Speaker: Assoc Prof Randolph Tan.
\tAssoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member):\t Mdm Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister specifically about unauthorised works, as he mentioned increasing urbanisation. What is the danger that some of these unauthorised works and the impact that they have on the drainage system will not be discovered until way into the future?
\tMr Masagos Zulkifli B M M:\tThe flash flood at Upper Thomson Road on 24 December 2016 was due to localised constriction at a temporary diversion drain built by the contractor, Sato Kogyo, and this affected the public drainage system. The temporary diversion constructed by the contractor within the worksite was under-sized. More importantly, it did not inform PUB before commencement of works. The public drainage system across Upper Thomson Road was also found to be altered by the contractor without PUB's approval. PUB, therefore, will be taking action against the contractor.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Places for Autistic Students in Special Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"16 Mr Desmond Choo asked\tthe Minister for Education (Schools) (a) whether there are sufficient places for autistic students awaiting entry into special needs institutions; (b) what is the current average waiting time; and (c) what are the plans to make available more educational opportunities and support for students with autism.
\tThe Minister of State for Education (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Education (Schools)): Mdm Speaker, in recent years, we are seeing an increase in the number of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), resulting in an increase in demand for Special Education (SPED) school places for these children. Many of these children with ASD attend different SPED schools, including those that serve students with other disabilities.
Overall, there are sufficient places in our SPED schools. But some parents have a preference to place their child with ASD into a SPED school of their choice and, in particular, an ASD-specific school. The waiting time for admission into these schools can range from three months to more than a year, depending on the school's capacity and the relative demand, as well as student factors, such as the complexity of the particular child's needs and the availability of the right mix of staff to support his or her needs. Where there is a waitlist, MOE has, upon request, facilitated placement into an alternative SPED school which is appropriate for the child's specific disability profile.
Children diagnosed with ASD have diverse needs and may require more specialised and intensive intervention to support their learning. To cater to these needs, the Ministry of Education (MOE) is working with various volunteer welfare organisations (VWOs) to expand the overall capacity of the ASD-specific schools. We are also working closely with the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) and SPED schools to recruit more teachers and allied professionals. MOE, together with NCSS, will continue to closely monitor SPED school places, infrastructure, quality, as well as staffing levels to ensure the timely placement of students with moderate to severe ASD needs.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Desmond Choo.
\tMr Desmond Choo (Tampines):\tMdm Speaker, two points for clarification. First, I would like to ask the Minister of State if there is a specific planning ratio of students with ASD to the number of places in the schools. Second, how are the manpower planning programmes put in place, because we do understand that it is difficult to recruit, train and hire the correct and qualified people to staff these places?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Mdm Speaker, I thank the Member for his questions. With respect to both issues, the needs of the children are very diverse and the label \"ASD\" is insufficient to adequately describe the complexity of the needs these children may have, from the mild to the moderate to the severe, as well as the co-existence of other challenges, other diseases and other disabilities that the child may have at the same time.
So, there is no fixed planning ratio that you can apply across the whole spectrum of diseases, needs, children and disability profile. The different schools have developed different expertise in particular needs, particular profiles, particular disabilities and particular diseases. They have their own norms to cater to the functional outcomes of executing their curricular plans and serving the needs of their children. This also applies to the manpower planning issue. As we can imagine, the two are very closely related.
There is a difficulty in hiring and identifying staff that have the appropriate aptitude and skills, as well as the enthusiasm for this type of work. But we are confident that we will be able to do so, going into the future.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh (Aljunied):\tJust a quick question for the Minister of State. Earlier, in his initial reply, he mentioned that the Ministry has seen an increase in the number of students across the autism spectrum. Does the Minister of State have a sense of those numbers? What are the numbers currently?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary:\tMdm Speaker, I do not have the exact numbers in front of me. If the Member would like to file a question for that, I would certainly have them ready for him. The increase in ASD is a phenomenon that is being noticed around the world in all types of communities. We are no different.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Patrick Tay.
\tMr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (West Coast):\tMdm Speaker, I wish to make a suggestion to the Minister of State. Quite a number of residents that I meet during our house visits do feedback that there is a shortage of such places, particularly in the western part of Singapore. I urge the Minister of State that in coming up with new centres, to consider building them in the west.
\tDr Janil Puthucheary:\tMdm Speaker, I thank the Member for the feedback and I appreciate the difficulty that some parents may have, especially if they have to travel a significant distance. The issue for the SPED schools and the children that they serve is that the expertise is quite profile-specific. For some of the children with certain types of profiles of disease and disability, their numbers are not large and so, the centres which have the expertise are effectively serving the entire nation. Going forward, in planning, we will look at the skills-mix as well as the staffing mix of all the SPED schools to see what we can do to optimise the delivery of these services for these children.
Mdm Speaker: Dr Intan Mokhtar.
\tDr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio):\tI would like to ask the Minister of State this: if we look at Pathlight School, for example, they have a very successful model of helping children with autism and \tother specific special needs. Would the Ministry consider working closely with Pathlight School to set up more schools, where the Ministry would put in a lot more support in terms of funding and manpower resource?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary:\tMdm Speaker, indeed, we do work closely with Pathlight and all the SPED schools to learn the best practices from their approach, to customising curriculum to providing specific intervention and support for the children. Certainly, while the total capacity within the SPED schools is more than sufficient to cater to the children, we do have to pay some attention to the skills and facilities to ensure that each child will have a place appropriate to their profile of needs and challenges. That is part of the panel that is looking at the implementation of compulsory education for special needs children, going forward.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Zaqy Mohamad.
\tMr Zaqy Mohamad (Chua Chu Kang):\tThe Minister of State mentioned about the increased capacity in due course. Does the Minister of State have a timeline and what sort of waiting time could parents expect? Also, does the Ministry have a sense of how many are on the waitlist and who do not have a place in school? I know some on the waitlist actually have places somewhere else. There are also those on the waitlist who are not in school. Do we have a sense of that?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: I do not have the exact numbers for the Member's last part of the question, Mdm Speaker. I would reassure him on the point he made that there is a place available within the SPED space. A large part of the issue for the waiting lists currently is the choice the parents have and assert, with respect to which of the SPED schools they would like to place their children in.
In terms of total capacity, the spaces are there, the facilities are there. But it is really looking forward towards the timeline of the implementation of compulsory education for special needs children and ensuring that we have the skill ability and the manpower ability across the various schools to make sure that each child has an appropriate place and, hopefully, to reduce the anxiety that some parents may have about finding a particular place in a particular school, when there are several schools that can manage that child's needs.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
\tMr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member):\tJust one question. In relation to the skills shortages that we have discussed, is the Government looking into the possibility of establishing in Singapore a basic degree course in special needs education? Based on my understanding, there is a Master's degree course and an Advanced Degree course, but not a basic degree course in special needs education.
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Mdm Speaker, the National Institute of Education (NIE) does conduct a basic diploma in special education, and then, going on to a Master's as well. We do have some ability to do some training here in Singapore, but we also do tap on the skills and training available overseas or returning Singaporeans for people who want to come and work in special education. So, there is a good mix of backgrounds and skills within the educators and professionals that serve in the special education space.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Eligibility Criteria for Learning Higher Mother Tongue in Primary Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"17 Mr Low Thia Khiang asked\tthe Minister for Education (Schools) whether the Ministry reviews the criteria used by individual primary schools to determine whether students are allowed to take up Higher Mother Tongue to ensure that reasonable consideration is given to students' interest in the subject instead of it being a purely results-driven process.
\tThe Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Education (Ms Low Yen Ling) (for the Minister for Education (Schools)): Mdm Speaker, we are encouraged and heartened that parents and students see the value of learning the Mother Tongue language. This is a positive sign for a strong bilingual foundation.
The Higher Mother Tongue curriculum is designed to stretch students who have a keen ability and strong interest in the language. In their consideration of Higher Mother Tongue, schools take into consideration both the interest and the ability of the students. This is because Higher Mother Tongue means additional curriculum time and heavier learning load. The subject can be overwhelming to students who are not interested or not ready to take up the subject. In addition, schools are also guided by the learning profiles of the students and the schools are very mindful of the interest and the overall well-being of the child.
In addition, the Ministry of Education (MOE) regularly reminds our schools of the considerations that should guide their offer of various subjects to their students. We also provide close guidance and work closely with schools that need additional support in this area.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Low Thia Khiang.
\tMr Low Thia Khiang (Aljunied):\tSupplementary questions. Firstly, what are the guidelines or criteria for the schools for students who wish to take up Higher Chinese? What is the weightage like? How much weightage is given to a student's interest and family support, for example, and the other consideration of the results of the various subjects?
Secondly, what is MOE's policy on students wanting to opt for Higher Chinese? Do they encourage students to do so and, if so, are there schemes to guide schools to encourage students who are qualified to take up Higher Chinese?
\tMs Low Yen Ling:\tI want to thank the Member for the supplementary questions. First off, let me give some context to Higher Chinese language (HCL). The HCL curriculum was developed at the lower primary levels to support the needs of our Special Assistance Plan (SAP) primary schools, of which we have 15 currently. They admit students who are inclined towards learning Chinese at a higher level. Since the HCL curriculum is available, some other non-SAP primary schools have also offered it to students with stronger aptitude and interest in the language.
Allow me to reiterate that the two key criteria are strong interest and keen ability in taking up HCL. We all know learning language is not just for conversing or writing. It is also culturally-driven. So, it is important that the student has a strong affinity and interest in that subject, so that we can nurture the joy of learning in the children and sustain their interest in the HCL even after they leave school.
To this end, we are heartened by the enthusiasm that parents and students have shown for the HCL. We want to assure the Member and the House that our schools are deeply committed to the teaching and learning of Higher Mother Tongue languages. We do so because it is not just mastering a higher level of Chinese, but also deepening bilingualism, which is an integral part of our national identity and cultural heritage.
Another point that I would like to reassure the Member and the House is that our schools strive to cater to students of different learning capabilities and also home languages, depending on whether they speak English or Mandarin at home. Students are able to take their Mother Tongue at the level which best suits their ability. The Member may ask why is that important. This differentiated approach is very important because it allows the school to customise the level of support for the child's learning. When the learning is pitched at their level and ability, the students can learn the Mother Tongue language to as high a level as they can, and are also given adequate opportunities and support. This is important so that we can help to nurture the children's learning of the Mother Tongue and sustain their interest in this language, even beyond school.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Low Thia Khiang.
\tMr Low Thia Khiang:\tThere were complaints by parents that even when students got over 90 marks for Chinese language and when they are interested and motivated to learn the language, they are not admitted to the Higher Chinese class. What is the explanation by the Ministry?
\tMs Low Yen Ling: I want to thank Mr Low for the supplementary question. In the case of St Hilda's Primary School, the cut-off mark was unusually high, as the school sought to ensure a high level of ability in the students who wanted to take HCL. We acknowledge St Hilda's Primary School's good intentions in making sure that the students who want to take HCL are well-suited and \tare also ready to take on the subject because it also entails extra curriculum time and a heavier study load for the child. With feedback and guidance from MOE, the school has very quickly reviewed its criteria and will be opening another HCL class to cater to the growing desire for HCL.
MOE is very glad that the school is taking positive steps very swiftly to enlarge its pool of HCL students. The broader point is that it really reflects the school's commitment in terms of the teaching and learning of the Mother Tongue language, not just Chinese language but all three Mother Tongue languages. This is why, other than the MOE curriculum, we also have the three Mother Tongue languages promotion committees to supplement the efforts on the ground.
Mdm Speaker: Order. End of Question Time.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Patents (Amendment) Bill ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Patents Act (Chapter 221 of 2005 Revised Edition)\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Senior Minister of State for Law (Ms Indranee Rajah); read the First time; to be read a Second time after the conclusion of proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for Financial Year 2017/2018, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Early Childhood Development Centres Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to regulate the operation of early childhood development centres, to provide for other connected or incidental matters, to repeal the Child Care Centres Act (Chapter 37A of the 2012 Revised Edition) and to make consequential and related amendments to certain other Acts\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Tan Chuan-Jin); read the First time; to be read a Second time after the conclusion of proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for Financial Year 2017/2018, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Architects (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Architects Act (Chapter 12 of the 2000 Revised Edition)\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong); read the First time; to be read a Second time after the conclusion of proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for Financial Year 2017/2018, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Town Councils (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Town Councils Act (Chapter 329A of the 2000 Revised Edition)\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee); read the First time; to be read a Second time after the conclusion of proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for Financial Year 2017/2018, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Time Limit for Minister's Speech","subTitle":"Suspension of Standing Orders","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien):\tMdm Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move that the proceedings on the item under discussion be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 48(8) to remove the time limit in respect of Minister Chan Chun Sing's speech?
Mdm Speaker: I give my consent. Does the Leader of the House have the general assent of Members present to so move?
[(proc text) Hon Members indicated assent. (proc text)]
[(proc text) With the consent of Mdm Speaker, and the general assent of Members present, (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the proceedings on the item under discussion be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 48(8) in respect of Minister Chan Chun Sing's speech\". – [Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien]. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Presidential Elections (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker: Minister Chan Chun Sing.
The Minister, Prime Minister's Office (Mr Chan Chun Sing): Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time\".
The amendments proposed today to the Presidential Elections Act can be grouped into three categories. The first category of amendments gives effect to the amendments made by the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 2016. The second category of amendments improve election procedures during the conduct of Presidential elections. The third category of amendments aligns the Act with provisions of the Parliamentary Elections Act relating to election advertising, publication of election survey results and exit polls.
I will also be making two announcements on the Presidential elections at the end of my speech. These announcements do not require amendments to the law.
Let me begin with the first category of amendments, the category arising from the constitutional amendments made in November last year. The amendment Bill was passed in November after robust debate, putting in place the framework for the changes to the Elected Presidency. The amendments being proposed here today put in place the nuts and bolts of the framework agreed to in November. I will now take Members through the key changes being proposed.
The new section 5A provides that the new Schedule, inserted by clause 22, has effect for the purpose of determining whether an election is reserved under the new Article 19B(1) of the Constitution. The new Schedule sets out the terms of office that are counted and the communities that the Presidents who hold these terms belong to. The first term of office to be counted is the last term of office of President Wee Kim Wee, during which he became the first President to exercise the functions created by the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Act 1991. The Schedule stipulates that Dr Wee Kim Wee and Mr Ong Teng Cheong belong to the Chinese community; Mr SR Nathan, who served two terms, belongs to the Indian community, Dr Tony Tan belongs to the Chinese community.
The Prime Minister had, in November, announced this during the Second Reading of the Constitutional (Amendment) Bill.
The Returning Officer is responsible for updating the Schedule after every election. For this purpose, if a community certificate was issued to a person, that person is considered to belong to the community stated on the community certificate. If no community certificate was issued to the person, the person is considered not to belong to the Chinese community, the Malay community, nor the Indian or other minority communities.
The new section 5B links the reserved election mechanism in the new Article 19B of the Constitution to writs of election issued under the Act and provides for open elections to be held if a reserved election wholly fails.
In an open election, a person does not have to belong to any of the three communities − Chinese, Malay, Indian or Other Minority communities − to qualify to be elected as President.
Clause 4 amends section 6(3) to require that nomination day must be at least 10 days after the date of the Writ of Election. This is an increase from the current five days. This provides the Presidential Elections Committee (PEC) with more time to assess whether potential candidates should be issued a Certificate of Eligibility.
We are also introducing changes to the certification process for the Presidential election. The new Division 2 − consisting of new sections 8 to 8D − relates to the PEC and the application process for a Certificate of Eligibility.
The key changes are as follows. First, the deadline for applying for a Certificate of Eligibility is extended from the current three days to five days after the date of the Writ of Election. The extension of deadline will give prospective candidates more time to prepare their applications. Second, the PEC must be satisfied that the applicant has met the service requirements under new Article 19(2)(g) of the Constitution before it issues the Certificate of Eligibility. Third, persons who wish to contest in the Presidential elections must submit applications to both the PEC and to the Community Committee. PEC must reject an application for a Certificate of Eligibility if the applicant did not submit a community declaration to the Community Committee.
The community declaration is essential to the functioning of the certification process for the reserved election system. I will elaborate on the community declaration next.
The community certification process serves two main purposes. First, to determine the community to which every person elected as President belongs, for the purposes of determining whether a future election is reserved under the new Article 19B(1) of the Constitution. Second, to ensure that, in a reserved election, only persons belonging to the community to which the election is reserved, qualify to stand for election. With your permission, Mdm Speaker, may I ask the Clerks to distribute the first handout?
Mdm Speaker:\tYes, please. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Mr Chan Chun Sing: All prospective candidates in all elections, regardless of a reserved election or open election, have to submit a community declaration. A declaration is essential even in open elections because the hiatus-triggered model requires that the community of each President to be counted, for the purposes of calculating when the next reserved election is.
A person making a community declaration must make one, and only one, of the following four statements as set out in the new section 8F(2)(a)-(d). The four statements are as follows. First, that the person considers himself to be a member of the Chinese community and wishes to apply for a community certificate stating that the person belongs to the Chinese community. Second, that the person considers himself to be a member of the Malay community and wishes to apply for a community certificate stating that the person belongs to the Malay community. Third, that the person considers himself to be a member of the Indian or Other Minority communities and wishes to apply for a community certificate stating that the person belongs to the Indian or Other Minority communities. Fourth, that the person does not consider himself to be a member of the Chinese community, the Malay community, or the Indian or Other Minority communities.
The statements require, where the applicant considers himself to be a member of the three main communities, that is, Chinese, Malay, or Indian and Other Minority communities, to state that he wishes to apply for a community certificate stating that he belongs to that particular community. It should be pointed out that, in open elections, a declarant can still run for elections, even if he does not receive a community certificate, if he meets all other eligibility criteria.
The deadline for submission of the community declaration is five days after the date of the Writ of Election, similar to the deadline to apply for the Certificate of Eligibility to the PEC.
The Community Committee must decline to accept a community declaration if the declarant did not apply to the PEC for a Certificate of Eligibility.
Let me now elaborate on the composition of this new Community Committee. The Community Committee will consist of 16 persons: the Chairman; five members belonging to the Chinese community; five members belonging to the Malay community; and five members belonging to the Indian or Other Minority communities.
The Chairman and members of the Community Committee will be appointed by the Prime Minister on the nomination of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights (PCMR). The PCMR will make its nominations after consulting such organisations of the Chinese, Malay, or Indian and Other Minority communities as the PCMR sees fit.
The five members belonging to the Chinese community who are on the Community Committee make up the Chinese Community sub-committee. The same arrangement applies to the Malay and Indian and Other Minority communities' sub-committees.
In a reserved election, the Community Committee will accept a community declaration only if the declarant considers himself to belong to the community to which the election is reserved. The Community Committee will then refer the declaration to the sub-committee for that community. If the sub-committee is satisfied that the declarant belongs to that community, the Community Committee will issue the declarant with a community certificate to that effect.
In non-reserved elections or open elections, the Community Committee will refer community declarations to the appropriate sub-committee, except where a declarant does not consider himself to be a member of any of the three main communities.
If the sub-committee for a community is satisfied that a declarant belongs to that community, the Community Committee will issue the declarant with a community certificate to that effect.
If the sub-committee is not satisfied, the Community Committee can refuse to issue a community certificate, or can invite the declarant to submit another community declaration.
In the case of a declarant who does not consider himself to be a member of any of the three main communities, the Community Committee can either accept the community declaration, or invite the person to submit another community declaration.
In both instances where the Community Committee may invite the declarant to submit another community declaration, it may only do so once.
The approach of the Community Committee and sub-committees, in assessing whether declarants belong to a particular community, should be that of inclusion. The approach should be to welcome and embrace individuals who identify themselves with a particular community. This would apply, for example, in cases where declarants are of mixed-race parentage and have significant links with the communities of both parents.
The method of certifying race through community committees has worked well for our Group Representation Constituency (GRC) system; it should similarly serve us well in the Presidential elections.
Let me now move on to explain the new items that prospective candidates must submit. Clause 6 amends section 9 to add certain items to the nomination papers that a prospective candidate must submit.
The first item is a statutory declaration in which the prospective candidate declares that he understands the role of the President as set out in the Constitution. This ensures that the prospective candidate is aware of the constitutional powers of the President, and is also aware of the constitutional limits of the Presidential office. It will serve as a declaration to the electorate that the prospective candidate is aware that he should not be drawn into making statements or promises which exceed the constitutionally-prescribed role of the President. As making a false statutory declaration is an offence, a prospective candidate's submission of the declaration signals that the candidate has studied and understood the responsibilities of the office.
The second additional item relates to the community certification process. In a reserved election, a prospective candidate must submit a community certificate stating that he belongs to the community to which the election is reserved.
In open elections, a prospective candidate who applied for a community certificate in his community declaration must submit either: (a) a community certificate; or (b) the Community Committee's written decision rejecting the application.
A prospective candidate who did not apply for a community certificate in his community declaration must submit: (a) the Community Committee's written notification that his declaration is accepted; as well as (b) a statutory declaration stating that he does not consider himself to belong to the Chinese community, the Malay community or the Indian or Other Minority communities.
Clause 19 amends section 71 to provide that an election can be declared void if the elected candidate made a materially false or misleading statement of fact, or omitted to state a material fact, to PEC. This new ground for avoidance is identical to the ground for removing a President in the new Article 22L(3)(e) of the Constitution.
Clause 20 repeals and re-enacts section 73 to further provide that only PEC can apply to void an election on the ground stated in the new section 71(f). This is because the false statement, or the omission of the material fact, is made to PEC, and so it would be the appropriate party to apply to the Election Judge to void an election.
Let me now address the second category of amendments. These amendments are being made to improve the election procedures. I will go through the key amendments.
The Government is making changes to the design of the ballot paper to improve the process of voting, adjudication and counting.
Clause 8 amends section 23 to stipulate that the ballot paper must have a clearly demarcated area for a voter to mark his vote for a candidate. Clause 10 amends section 25 to state that a voter's mark must only be made in the area demarcated on the ballot paper for that purpose. This ties in with the amendments to section 33 on how ballot papers are to be adjudicated and counted. Clause 14 amends section 33 to require the Returning Officer to only consider the marks made by voters in the area demarcated on ballot papers for voters to mark their votes. Under the amended section, if a voter makes a mark outside of this area, the Returning Officer must disregard that mark when determining whether the voter has given his vote to any candidate. In previous elections, disputes have arisen over whether a mark over a candidate's photo or name should count towards a vote for that individual. The changes will provide clarity in dealing with these situations.
Clause 9 inserts a new section 23A to formalise the inclusion of candidates' photographs on ballot papers and to stipulate the conditions that must be satisfied before a candidate's photograph will be included on that ballot paper. Photographs of the candidates on the ballot paper were first introduced in the 2011 Presidential election. This practice has been welcomed by voters, as they were able to more easily identify the candidate they are voting for on the ballot paper.
The amendment Bill also sets out certain actions to deal with contingency situations pertaining to ballot boxes.
Clause 12 amends section 32A to empower the Returning Officer to extend the time for the sealed ballot boxes from overseas polling stations to reach Singapore. The amendments to that section confer a discretion on the Returning Officer to extend the time by another seven days for the overseas ballot boxes to reach Singapore if two conditions are fulfilled. First, the total number of overseas electors is material to the election outcome. Second, the Returning Officer is satisfied that any of the overseas ballot boxes are not likely to reach Singapore within the initial 10-day period.
Clause 13 repeals and re-enacts section 32B to remove the requirement for a candidate or his counting agent to apply to the Returning Officer for a recount of votes. Currently, the law provides for a candidate or his counting agent to apply for a recount of votes if the criteria for recount is met, that is, if the difference between the number of votes given to the candidate with the most votes and the number of votes given to any other candidate at the election is 2% or less of the total number of votes cast in Singapore, excluding rejected votes and tendered votes, at the election. With the amendment, the Returning Officer must carry out a recount of the votes if the criterion for recount is met. This will avoid unnecessary delays to the recount process.
Clause 15 inserts new sections 36DA and 36DB to deal with the loss or destruction of ballot boxes. If any sealed ballot box containing votes cast at a polling station, whether in Singapore or overseas, is lost or destroyed while it is being transported from a polling station to a counting place, the Returning Officer must, first, abandon the counting of all the votes cast at the affected polling station, and this includes the votes cast at the affected polling station that were not in the lost or destroyed ballot box; and second, re-start the poll for the affected polling station if it will be material to the outcome of the election.
The third category of amendments is being made to the Act to align the Act with certain provisions of the Parliamentary Elections Act relating to election advertising, publication of election survey results and exit polls. Clauses 17 and 18 insert new sections dealing with those issues.
Clause 24 makes consequential amendments to the Parliamentary Elections Act in relation to the registration of overseas electors. The consequential amendments are mainly to section 13A of that Act. The time within which an elector has to register as an overseas elector or apply to change the overseas polling station allotted to the elector is being extended to two days after the Writ of Election. This will give overseas voters more time to register or change their allotted polling station.
Madam, that covers all the legislative amendments. As I highlighted earlier, I would also like to make two announcements on the Presidential elections. The first is on campaign methods and the second on the date of the Presidential elections. These two areas will not involve amendments to the law or affect this Bill under consideration.
First, the Government will take up the broad thrust of the Constitutional Commission's recommendation on election campaign methods. In its report, the Constitutional Commission stated, and I quote, \"Presidential candidates should be required to conduct their campaigns with rectitude and dignity as befits the office and comports with the unifying role and purpose of the Presidency.\"
The Government fully agrees with the Commission that campaigning for the Presidential election has to be consistent with the President's position as a symbol of national unity. The Government also agrees with the Commission that there should be a difference in the campaign methods for Presidential elections and Parliamentary elections. As the Commission said, a \"Parliamentary election is a contest of ideas and policies, where candidates have to communicate their policies to the electorate and persuade voters as to the strengths of their own proposals as well as the weaknesses of those put forward by other candidates. This clash of ideas and policies makes for a lively but inevitably divisive contest.\"
The Commission also said, and I quote:
(a) \"in contrast, candidates for Presidential elections have no policy agenda to advance\";
(b) \"the President plays no role in setting the national agenda nor does he make policy decisions as to the course that the nation should chart\";
(c) \"[t]hose are matters which properly fall within the remit of the elected Government\";
(d) \"there is little, if any, need for the vigorous contest of ideas that takes place during a Parliamentary election\".
The Commission considered that rules could be enacted which prescribed a \"white list\" of approved campaign methods, such as televised speeches, and explicitly stated that it was not clear if the holding of rallies is either necessary or helpful in dealing with divisiveness.
The Government agrees with the Commission that there should be a clear distinction in campaign methods for Presidential elections and Parliamentary elections. Campaign methods for the Presidential elections must not inflame emotions and must be in keeping with the decorum and dignity of the office of the President, given the important unifying and custodial roles of the President.
The possibility of changes to campaign rules was raised at the end of the debate on the constitutional amendment Bill last November. What was clear is that there is support from both sides of this House that campaigning for Singapore's Presidency should be depoliticised and fundamentally different from campaigning during Parliamentary elections. The Government agrees with the Members of this House on our shared goal to differentiate the campaigning methods of the Presidential Elections from that of the General Elections.
As Presidential elections are contested on a national level and not on a local constituency level, we will encourage the use of platforms and channels that reach out to voters at a national level. Television enables candidates to have wide national reach, and to broadcast their messages more effectively to the entire nation. At the last Presidential Election 2011, there were individual campaign broadcasts and a televised forum. To help candidates reach out to voters, the Government will increase the amount of television airtime for candidates and study different options to achieve this.
Candidates can also use the wide array of social media platforms to reach voters. They can also hold indoor private sessions to engage specific groups of voters. The format of such indoor private sessions is up to the candidates themselves.
The Government will no longer designate any rally sites during Presidential elections. This is in line with the Government's and Constitutional Commission's position not to encourage rallies, which, by their nature and format, may be divisive and not congruent with the unifying role of the Elected Presidency.
Nevertheless, candidates who wish to hold rallies may still do so. They will have to apply to Police for a permit. Police will assess the application based on public order and security considerations. As there will not be any designated and pre-security assessed rally sites, Police may require slightly more time to evaluate applications to hold rallies. Even though this can be announced closer to the start of the application process, the Government is announcing it early for transparency and prospective candidates' early awareness.
My second announcement has to do with the election period for the Presidential elections. With your permission, Mdm Speaker, may I ask the Clerks to distribute the second handout?
Mdm Speaker:\tYes, please. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The current President's term of office expires on 31 August 2017. In the past, polling day typically fell on the last week of August. In 2011, the writ was issued in the first week of August. Campaigning began after National Day and was conducted during the month-long National Day celebrations. Given the slightly longer time required for the new process and to avoid holding Presidential election campaigns during the National Day celebrations period, we will adjust the timing of the polls for the forthcoming elections.
The Government will issue the writ for the election later in August, before President Tony Tan's term expires on 31 August 2017 so that if the election is contested, polling day will take place in September instead of August. This resets the clock, so that, in future, Presidential elections campaigning will take place outside of the National Day period, assuming Presidents serve their full six-year terms.
We have been advised by the Attorney-General that there can be an interval between the expiry of the incumbent's term and the assumption of office by the new President. If a new President is not elected by the time President Tony Tan's term expires on 31 August 2017, Article 22N of the Constitution provides for an acting President until a new President is elected and assumes office. The Constitution provides for the Chairman of the Council of Presidential Advisers or, if he is unavailable, the Speaker, to be the acting President. The acting President, it should be made clear, cannot exercise the functions of the President under Article 22N indefinitely. We have sought the Attorney-General’s Chamber’s (AGC) advice on this proposal to adjust the timing of the polls for the Presidential elections this year. AGC has confirmed that this can be done under the current laws.
Some Members might ask why the Government cannot simply extend the current President's term to deal with the adjustment to the campaigning period. According to Article 20 of the Constitution, the new President shall hold office for a term of six years from the date on which he assumes office. We cannot extend President Tan's term beyond six years unless we amend the Constitution.
The period during which the acting President shall exercise the functions of the office of President should not exceed one month, from 1 September 2017 to the date of assumption of office by the person declared elected as President.
Madam, let me now say a few words in Malay and Mandarin.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Over the past year, we have received a range of useful feedback from the Malay community and other Singaporeans on the amendments to the elected Presidency. I am pleased that society, as a whole, understands the objectives and rationale behind the proposed amendments.
We want to maintain and protect our multiracial society because this is what makes Singapore unique. We want to preserve meritocracy because it is a crucial concept to Singapore. Singapore is a country where anyone can fulfil their potential due to their own hard work and abilities, and not because of their ancestry, their connections, their race or their religion. Therefore, this system that we want to establish will carefully balance two factors − meritocracy and multiracialism. The same high standards will be imposed on all candidates regardless of race.
The upcoming Presidential election has been reserved for Malay candidates and, should there be a contest, Polling Day will be held in September. This step is taken so that the Presidential election campaign will take place outside the period of National Day celebrations. I hope that eligible Malay candidates will step forward to contest to become a Head of State that can unite our people and provide inspiration to all of us.
As a young nation, we must be bold enough to constantly adapt our institutions according to our needs. This is the spirit of our Pioneer Generation and that same spirit must always be present in future generations.
I will now continue my speech in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Last November, Parliament passed the Constitution Amendment Bill after three days of intense debate. Since then, the Government has received feedback from various sectors of society. Many Singaporeans are very concerned about how we balance meritocracy and multiracialism.
The Government is heartened to see that the Chinese community, as the majority race, has exercised maturity and showed support for the change. It demonstrated that our Chinese community uphold the values of multiracialism and inclusiveness. These values are very important to Singapore. I would like to thank the Chinese community and the community leaders for playing a critical role in this issue.
It is obviously not easy. Singapore is a young nation and our institutions and systems must be adaptable and flexible according to our needs. We should follow the example of our forefathers and do this for the future generations.
The Government agrees with the Constitutional Commission's view that the campaign for Presidential elections must be in line with the unifying role of the President. All sides of this House support that the campaigning for the Presidential election should not be politicised and should be different from the campaigning during the General Election.
In order to clearly differentiate these two elections, the Government will no longer designate any rally site during Presidential elections. Nevertheless, if candidates still wish to hold rallies, they must apply to the Police for a permit.
The Government will increase the television campaigning time during the elections. Candidates can also use social media to reach the voters. Just as before, they can also hold indoor sessions to engage specific groups of voters.
In the past, the Polling Day of the Presidential elections typically fell in the last week of August. Campaigning was conducted in August, coinciding with National Day and the National Day celebrations.
The Government feels that these two should happen separately. To prevent the clash of timings, this year's Polling Day will be in September. Our laws allow us to do this and our Government institutions are also able to handle this transition period smoothly.
(In English): Mdm Speaker, the amendments I have described today are either consequential to the constitutional amendments made in November, or to improve the processes during elections.
We are drawing closer to our first reserved elections for our President. The changes to the system have taken more than a year to be discussed and fleshed out since they were first publicly mooted. The time taken, along with the range of people that were consulted in the process, signals the Government's intent in refining the system and ensuring that the office of President is held by a person with the necessary qualities and experience to exercise the powers and duties of the highest office in the country; that the office of the President continues to reflect the multiracial nature of Singapore; and that this office continues to be a unifying symbol for all Singaporeans, regardless of race, language or religion. Madam, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker: Mr Vikram Nair.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): Mdm Speaker, I speak in support of the Bill. In November last year, following the report of the Constitutional Commission headed by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, we passed landmark amendments to our Constitution in relation to the elected Presidency.
One of the major changes was accepting the Commission's recommendation of the concept of a \"reserved election\" in the event a particular race had not had the chance to hold the office of President after five terms. This was to ensure that all the major communities would be represented in the office of elected President.
While there were differences of opinion on whether or not such a \"reserved\" election was appropriate, almost everyone agreed with the principle that every major community ought to be able to represent the country as President. Indeed, the critics mainly argued that such a system was unnecessary because Singaporeans were unlikely to vote along racial lines and there is no reason to institute such a system.
During my speech on the constitutional amendments, I had supported the concept of the reserved election because I believed it was a self-correcting safety net. If the critics were right that race was irrelevant, and members of each of the races were able to prevail in an open election, then this safety net would never be triggered. On the other hand, if there was no President of a certain community after five terms, then it would be triggered, and hopefully, a person of that community would come forward. In the long run, as Singaporeans get used to having Presidents of different communities, hopefully, race will matter less and minority candidates would start winning open elections, making the reserved election mechanism redundant.
This Bill before Parliament makes the consequential changes to the Presidential Elections Act to implement, among other things, the concept of the reserved election. In my speech, I will focus on these amendments, and given they are unique to Singapore, seek clarification on some of the areas that may be open to interpretation.
This Bill creates a new committee called the \"Community Committee\", a committee that is made up of three sub-committees, with five members from each of the Chinese, Malay and Indian and Other Minority committees. It also creates a Chairman for this Committee. The language used in the proposed section 8E of the Bill is that this committee is to be appointed by the Prime Minister on the nomination of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights. For each of the committees, the Presidential Council for Minority Rights is required to consult such community organisations as it sees fit.
This is slightly unusual drafting because the typical constitutional convention is for the President to act on the advice of the Prime Minister, whereas this particular provision requires the Prime Minister to appoint based on the nomination of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights.
One clarification I wish to seek from the Minister is whether this is a decision in which it is intended that the Prime Minister is to exercise discretion, in which case it is expected that the Presidential Council for Minority Rights would put forward more than one nominee for the post as Chairman, from which the Prime Minister will select one, and more than five individuals for each of the five sub-committees from which the Prime Minister will select five. On the other hand, if the intention is to leave this decision to the Presidential Council for Minority Rights, then they may only nominate one person for the position of Chairman, and five for each of the sub-committees, in which case it appears the Prime Minister will have no discretion on this matter.
Next, let me move to a new section 8F which sets out the mechanism by which the race of a candidate is to be determined. The mechanism starts with the candidate self-declaring the community to which he considers himself to be a member. The appropriate sub-committee then decides if it agrees with the declaration. Thereafter, there is also a mechanism permitting the Committee to ask the candidate to re-apply if it is of a different opinion.
Naturally, the mechanism is left flexible to deal with the complexity of race. It is part ethnicity and part identity. Thus, a Chinese person adopted at infancy by an Indian family may grow up identifying themselves as part of the Indian community, despite their ethnicity − indeed, interracial adoptions were common, particularly during the baby boom years when parents were unable to take care of all their children.
Another issue is people of mixed descent. People of mixed descent may face more challenges and as interracial marriages get more common. Indeed, I understand the number has doubled from the last decade. This may become a more controversial issue. Would it be possible, for example, for a person of mixed heritage, say Indian-Malay, to believe they belong to more than one community? Indeed, this would be the aspiration from the perspective of racial integration and permitting dual-ethnicities is logical if the person is able to identify with both communities and is accepted by both communities, but this may mean that dual-identities may then need to be recorded.
The Bill, as currently drafted, permits a person to identify with only one community but a person who identifies with more than one community may then have to make a decision and would this person then be able to change decision if, say, the reserved election were for different community in a subsequent term? This is a problem that, perhaps, may not be faced in the immediate future because we have several terms before the next reserved election. But it is one that we should prepare for.
The reserved election for Indians and Other Minority communities, in particular, may create issues in this regard. There is a common belief that this category includes everyone who does not fit into the other categories. Thus, everyone of mixed descent might feel they belong in this category based on ethnicity, whether or not they identify with a particular community.
However, I understand the original legislative intent when this category was created for the purposes of the GRC scheme was for this category to be based around minority communities that were established in Singapore and not based purely on ethnicity. This appears to be the intention of this Bill as well since section 8F(2)(d) allows the person to declare he does not identify with any of the communities above. Thus, I believe the category \"Other Minority\" communities refers to a community that is established in Singapore.
This would also mean, for example, we have, say, a foreign chief executive officer from a country with no community here who gets Singapore citizenship subsequently and decides he wants to apply, he would not qualify as a member of the \"Other Minority\" communities' category for purposes of a reserved election, but would still be able to apply in an open election under section 8F(2)(d). I think this is fair because the purpose of this reserved election is to ensure that all of our main communities feel represented in the highest office and, if a person is not part of a particular community, then they should contest in the open election.
What this means is that the definition of \"Other Minority\" communities is potentially a prickly matter. What would be the factors to be taken into account in determining whether a particular community is one of the \"Other Minority\" communities for purposes of section 8F(2)(c) of the amendment?
I would, therefore, be grateful for the Minister's clarification that the definition of \"Other Minority\" communities, as a provision, is not intended to be a \"catch-all\" for people who do not fit into the other categories by ethnicity, but is intended to be only for those who are part of the established minority communities in Singapore. If the Minister is also able to identify, of course, without limiting which groups may fall into the category of such communities at this point in time, that may also be helpful guidance as to what considerations need to be taken into account in determining whether a person is part of one of the \"Other Minority\" communities.
Mdm Speaker, I am just concluding my section in English. Race is never a pleasant topic because we all like to believe that we live in a place where race does not matter. However, minorities experience disadvantages all the time and it is heartening to know that active steps are being taken to ensure minority representation is possible at all levels, including the office of President.
It is my hope that we will one day reach a stage when a member of any race can contest and win the Presidential election without the need for a reserve election, but until we get there, this is a helpful way to ensure that members of each community get a chance to prove themselves in the highest office and help us move towards that ideal. Mdm Speaker, I will say a few words in Tamil.
(In Tamil): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Speaker, I will say a few words in Tamil on this Bill.
This Bill marks the consequential legislative amendments to implement the Constitutional changes to the elected Presidency. One of the important features is the mechanism to ensure that all the major racial groups in Singapore will have a chance to hold this office.
While being a minority in any country has its challenges, in Singapore, steps are taken to confront the challenges wherever possible to ensure that we have proper representation. Tamil is one of the four official languages, and Singapore is one of the few places where Tamil can be used in Parliament. In Parliament, the GRC system has ensured that Malays, Indians and other minority groups have always had a place and a position to speak up.
These new changes now ensure that even at the office of President, Indians and other minorities will have a good chance to be represented. It may be some 25 years before the reserved election for Indians comes up, and it may be that if an Indian gets elected as President before that, we may not even need the reserved election, but it is good to know that we have a system in place, should it ever be necessary.
Mdm Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Mdm Speaker, in November last year, Parliament debated the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Bill which provided for the Presidency to continue to be an elected office and for Presidential elections to be reserved for ethnic communities. The Workers' Party rejects both these concepts and thus opposed the Bill then.
As this Bill today seeks to entrench these further, we oppose this Bill.
Lest we be misunderstood or misconstrued, I should state once again that we wish to see multiracial representation in the office of our Head of State. However, such multi-racial representation should be achieved not by way of reserved elections but by the former system of appointing Presidents. We have canvassed our arguments during the debate on the Constitution amendments and we do not intend to rehash them today.
Let me move specifically to two aspects of this Bill which are very problematic. First, how to count reserved elections and, secondly, the eligibility criteria of candidates from the private sector.
First, how to count reserved elections. Clause 3 introduces a new section 5A that to determine whether an election is reserved under Article 19B of the Constitution, one has to refer to the new Schedule. The Schedule sets out a table showing President Wee Kim Wee as the first President to be counted. Together with the subsequent presidential terms of President Ong Teng Cheong, two terms of President SR Nathan and one term of President Tony Tan, these formed five terms where a non-Malay President was in office. Thus, the Government reaches the conclusion that this year's Presidential election will be reserved for Malays.
Madam, this is a conclusion that has left Singaporeans bewildered and suspicious. To recap, during the November debate, the Prime Minister told the House for the first time that the Government had received advice from AGC on how to apply the hiatus-triggered mechanism for reserved elections, that is, which President's term to count from. We were told that the advice was that counting should begin from President Wee Kim Wee, who was the first President to exercise the powers of an Elected President. This advice was surprising and illogical to many Singaporeans, given that President Wee Kim Wee was never elected to office. When I asked Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean then whether the Government would publish the AGC's advice for Singaporeans to better understand the reasoning, the Government appeared reluctant to do so and even asked me whether I was suggesting that the Prime Minister was not being truthful.
There has been a lot of public reaction to the announcement that this year's Presidential election would be reserved for Malay candidates. After the last Presidential elections six years ago, Singaporeans are right to be sceptical about the Government's motives now. In 2011, Dr Tony Tan was the Government's preferred choice but had to fight off three other candidates, scrapping through to victory with a mere 35.2% of the popular vote and a razor-thin margin of 0.35%. For the next Presidential election, we hear a sudden announcement by the Government that it would be reserved for Malay candidates based on reasoning which is totally unconvincing. How many people really believe that the Presidential election this year is reserved for Malays to ensure minority representation and why now?
Madam, three months have passed since that debate. I have been reflecting on the decision to use President Wee as a reference point. I realise that this decision to count from President Wee was not a matter of getting legal advice to interpret any existing laws. If one looks at this Bill and the Schedule, the Government is asking Parliament to simply make it the law that President Wee is the first one to be counted. Why not count from the first Elected President, Mr Ong Teng Cheong? Is it because if President Ong was the first one to be counted, we would have to go through this year's elections as an open election and risk the contest by Chinese or Indian candidates who may not be to the Government's liking? Is the decision to count from President Wee not an arbitrary and deliberate decision of the Government to achieve a desired outcome?
Next, eligibility criteria for private sector candidates. Clause 3 also introduces a new section 5C which deals with the eligibility criteria for Presidential candidates from the private sector. Section 5C touches on the definitions of shareholders' equity, profit after tax and insolvency events. These definitions are needed due to the new requirement for candidates to have run companies of shareholders' equity of at least $500 million which have been profitable. But what does section 5C provide? Basically, nothing but to say that Parliament is delegating its legislative authority to the Minister to make regulations.
Madam, as a general principle, Parliament can delegate its legislative power to a Minister to make rules, and regularly does so for matters of a technical or more operational nature. But what disturbs me is that these definitions are not just technical or operational. These definitions would determine who gets to run for President. More importantly, if one refers back to the Constitution (Amendment) Bill passed in November, it was provided in the new Article 19(6) that it is the Legislature that is supposed to specify how the PEC is to determine the value of shareholders' equity and profit after tax, and it is the Legislature that is supposed to specify what constitutes an insolvency event. Since the Constitution entrusts these specific matters to the Legislature to deal with, it is not right for Parliament to simply delegate this responsibility to the Minister to do so. Parliament should not abdicate its responsibility and give a blank cheque to the Government to draw up these definitions.
Madam, as I mentioned at the start of my speech, the Workers' Party opposes the Bill. We will later call for our dissent to be specifically recorded.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Thomas Chua.
Mr Thomas Chua Kee Seng (Nominated Member) (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Speaker, the President is the symbol of our country and has to unite all Singaporeans regardless of race, language or religion, working together for the country's prosperity and progress. I have three suggestions with regard to the amendments to the Presidential Elections Bill.
First, regarding the neutrality and fairness of the selection process. New conditions have been included in the eligibility criteria, including the ethnic Chinese, all candidates need to submit a community declaration to a 16-member Community Committee, and they can only be considered eligible for an election after their ethnicity has been confirmed. The 16 individuals are the so-called inspectors during the election process. Hence, the selection of the committee members should be done with great care.
Notwithstanding their ethnicity, these 16 individuals must be equipped with fundamental qualities, such as values, character, capabilities and, especially, good standing in their particular ethnic community. Ideally, they should not belong to any political party; some should have served a long time in community organisations or business chambers. They should be familiar with social matters and have opportunities to interact with people from various backgrounds and have a wealth of experience in community engagement.
They should belong to different age groups and should have young people among them. New media is now predominant, and the presentation and rules of the game vary greatly between the real world and the virtual world. To include in the Committee young people with stable values, who are conversant with Internet technology and have an interest in social issues, will enable their views to wield more influence in every sector of society and in the new media.
As for the other criteria for members of the Committee, I hope the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) will consolidate the feedback from the community at large before deciding on a complete set of criteria.
Second, interracial marriages. Singapore is a multiracial society. Interracial marriages and bringing in new immigrants will bring about ethnic integration. This is a good thing. Winning the respect of the community depends on one's character and behaviour. If there is an outstanding individual who has superlative abilities and is willing to serve the society, even if his or her parents are of different ethnic groups, surely both communities will be proud of him or her. Likewise, if a person has reprehensible character and conduct, no group will find him acceptable. We have to pay attention to the selection process of the Presidential candidates. Besides ethnicity, character and capability are even more important. Thus, should there be any candidates originating from interracial background participating in the next presidential election, I hope the Committee could give careful considerations when confirming the community that they belong to, to avoid losing talents.
The third suggestion is to extend the nomination and campaign period. From our first elected President Mr Wee Kim Wee onwards, none of our five Presidents was a Malay. Hence, the next Presidential election will be reserved for Malay candidates. Being a Chinese, I am not familiar with developments within the Malay community and there are many Chinese voters like myself. During the last Presidential election, I took a taxi to the airport. On the way, the taxi driver said something which has left a deep impression on me. He said, \"The President has to represent Singapore to meet leaders of different countries and his photograph will be hanging on the wall for five years. His wife's photograph will also be displayed for five years. Thus, we cannot make a hasty decision. We must elect someone who is pleasing to the eye.\" While this may sound simplistic, it does reflect the views of the general public towards the Presidential election.
Presidential elections and Parliamentary elections are very different. Many of the candidates who run for General Elections have served in the grassroots for a long time and have had direct interactions with the voters. Some newer candidates have also been mentored by senior Members of Parliament (MPs) and have an all-rounded understanding of the roles, responsibilities and the working process. The number of MPs is large and they are from diverse backgrounds as well, enabling them to get the support from voters of different backgrounds.
However, there is only one President. Moreover, for the coming election, the candidates can only be a Malay. If the election period is short, many may not be interested in the election because they are not familiar with the background of the candidates. Whether the President can command the respect and admiration of all Singaporeans and can unite Singaporeans to forge a better tomorrow, could be a question mark. Hence, I suggest that due to the unique nature of the next Presidential election, the nomination and election period should be extended, allowing more people to understand the background of the candidates. I believe that gold will always shine and talent will always obtain trust. However, as the issue pertains to the population at large, they do need time to understand the candidates.
Mdm Speaker, with regard to the Elected President system, the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SCCCI), the Singapore Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SMCCI) and the Singapore Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SICCI) have arrived at a consensus. We feel that meritocracy and multiracialism are the two pillars of Singapore's success. Singapore's style of government has been tried and tested over the years. The business community is most concerned about social stability and racial harmony; only then can economic growth be ensured. Hence, I support the amendment to the Presidential Elections Bill and hope that it can be refined continuously.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mdm Speaker, the Workers' Party opposes this Bill. The Workers' Party believes that Singapore is best served by an appointed President and a system that will allow the Government to appoint a President regardless of race or religion.
One of the most significant aspects of this Bill is the establishment of a Community Committee which ensures that, in a reserved election, only persons who see themselves as belonging to a particular community for which the election is reserved, qualify to stand for the Presidential election.
As the PEC and, by extension, the Community Committee's decisions are not justiciable in a Court of law, Parliament is effectively the last place for Singaporeans to gain an insight into how the Community Committee and sub-committees will operate in practice, and how decisions are made by these committees in reserved elections will be the focus of my speech.
Clause 8(g) is scant on details as to how the relevant Community Committee/sub-committees will assess a potential candidate as to whether he or she is a member of a particular minority community. With the prospect of reserved elections for minorities, it should be reasonable to assume that the Government expects form to follow function. It cannot be the Government's intention that a bare declaration that a candidate considers himself or herself to be part of a particular community as stated in clause 8(f) would carry overwhelming weight for candidature to the highest office in the land.
To this end, clause 8(g)(4) states that the Committee must be guided by the merits of the application by a prospective Presidential candidate. But what defines a meritorious application and on what basis will an application be deemed so? What factors are assessed to determine if an applicant sees himself or herself as a member of particular community?
To begin with, and in step with the Government's decision to institute reserved elections, the Government must concede that language is an important criterion that is intricately tied to race. To that end, does a minority applicant's language abilities in his or her Mother Tongue matter to the relevant community sub-committees the same way it does for Singaporean students through their educational journey? Would an applicant be expected to have passed his or her Mother Tongue at the GCE \"O\" and \"A\" levels? For example, should a Presidential candidate who sees himself as part of the Indian community pass muster if he or she can barely get by in Tamil or the other Ministry of Education-recognised Indian languages? Can the Minister confirm if language proficiency is a consideration for the Community Committee and, if it is not, why not?
Secondly, the President's spouse is, for all intents and purposes, a customary but central part of the Presidency, reflected most vividly with the portraits of both the President and First Lady prominently displayed in all Government buildings. Former Speaker of Parliament, Mr Abdullah Tarmugi, put it differently when he told The Straits Times about his possible candidacy in the upcoming reserved Presidential elections, and I quote, \"I will be lying if I say that friends have not been asking me about it… If you look at the people who qualify, it is not that big a pool… I have got to think of my own preferences, my life, my family and my privacy. This is not a journey I take myself.\" The last point is worth repeating and it needs to be stressed: This is not a journey I take myself\".
On that note, has the Government deliberated whether the background of an aspiring President's spouse is a factor for the Community Committee's consideration in assessing whether that applicant is a member of a particular community? For example, in the case of an interracial marriage, what if the spouse of the applicant does not see himself or herself to be part of the Indian community whereas the aspiring Presidential candidate does? What if a spouse has converted to Islam in order to marry but does not partake in the practices of the faith?
Mdm Speaker, these questions are central to the symbolic role of the President as a unifier of the country and even more so after the Government has determined that some Presidential elections ought to be reserved for specific races. Should there be residual doubts about how the Community Committee makes its decisions, the presidency could be anything but a unifying office not just for Singaporeans in general but the respective minority race in particular.
A third aspect of the Community Committee I wish to clarify with the Minister is whether the Community Committee would expect an applicant to be active in community work and what this entails. This expectation has also been referred to by one academic who was quoted in the media as saying that if an applicant has not been, and I quote, \"in the public eye, and is not active in community work, it is much harder to make the case for seeking election to the highest office of the land.\" What are the expectations of community service amongst the candidates and, if so, are the expectations the same with regard to all four classes of candidates, namely, public sector, public sector deliberative track, private sector and the private sector deliberative track?
Fourthly, during the recent debate on the Constitution, one People's Action Party (PAP) MP suggested that the presidency ought to be reserved for individuals born in Singapore. The Government did not address this point during the debate but perhaps it can today. Can the Government at least affirm that the PEC shall not issue a certificate of eligibility to any male candidate who has not performed two years of National Service? This would be in line with the reality that National Service brings Singaporeans of all races together towards a common purpose and would serve as an important foundation for the life experience of any future President.
Fifthly, Mdm Speaker, I take the position that because minority candidates are likely to be few to begin with, many candidates are likely to enter Presidential elections through the public sector track or public sector deliberative track rather than the more stringent private sector track with its $500 million threshold. This may render hollow the Government's claims that it is not relaxing the criteria to make it easier for minorities to assume the presidency as a result of the latest constitutional changes. If so, the more accurate statement would be that the stringent private sector requirements simply do not apply for public sector track or public sector deliberative track candidates, minority or otherwise. What this point does reiterate however, is the importance of the Government sharing what criteria would be used by PEC to determine if a public sector deliberative track minority candidate qualifies for candidature as President in the first place.
Finally, the idea of race poses other considerations in certain cases of reserved elections involving public sector track or public sector deliberative track candidates. For example, in the case of Mdm Speaker, should the hon Speaker decide to stand as a candidate, what happens to the very existence of Marsiling-Yew Tee GRC which, by law, requires a Malay MP as one of its political representatives in Parliament? Should it be passed, does this Bill herald a new precedent in marked contrast to the scenario in Jurong GRC some years ago when the late PAP MP Mr Ong Chit Chung passed on?
Does the Bill and the prospect of reserved Presidential elections change the Government's thinking on the question: will a by-election be called in a GRC when the minority member of a GRC steps down to contest in a Presidential election? Can the Government set out its position on this matter in light of the introduction of reserved Presidential elections?
Mdm Speaker: Mr Chen Show Mao.
Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied): Madam, the Constitution (Amendment) Bill last November effected changes to the Constitution relating to our Elected Presidency. This Bill proposes to put in place nuts and bolts to give effect to these changes and to improve election procedures. Today, I ask about election procedures.
Clause 15 of the Bill proposes to abandon the counting of ballots cast at a polling station if one of the ballot boxes is lost or destroyed in transit from the polling station to a counting centre, and to restart the polling, if necessary. In this connection, I would like the Minister to confirm if the smallest unit to which electors are allotted in our Presidential Election is the ballot box, a unit smaller than the polling station. If so, I would like to make the following points on election procedures.
On the abandonment of counting, the Bill provides that in the event a ballot box is lost or destroyed in transit, the counting of all the votes cast at the affected polling station, including the votes cast that were not in the lost or destroyed ballot box, would be abandoned. The voting for the affected polling station would be restarted if the difference in the vote count of the two leading Presidential candidates, without counting the votes cast at the affected polling station, is less than the sum of: (a) the total number of electors allotted to the affected polling station and entitled to vote in the election; and (b) the total number of overseas electors entitled to vote in the election.
If electors are allotted to the level of ballot boxes, should we not provide that any re-vote would take place only if the total number of electors affected by the lost or destroyed ballot box, rather than the entire polling station, proved material? In other words, why not limit as much as we can the electoral impact of any lost or destroyed ballot boxes?
In the last Presidential Elections of 2011, the difference between the ballots cast for President Tony Tan and Dr Tan Cheng Bock was just some 7,000 votes. It is not unreasonable to expect that fewer than 4,000 electors allotted to an affected polling station and another 4,000 electors registered to vote overseas, would trigger a re-vote at the polling station in a close election under the proposed amendments. Why give leverage to persons who tamper with the ballot boxes seeking to influence the results of our Presidential Elections? Why amplify their powers to do so in close elections?
The restart of polling. How about the manner in which the polling would be restarted once it has been determined that the affected number of votes is material? Currently, in a different context, our laws provide that polling may be abandoned and restarted on another day in our Presidential or Parliamentary Elections in the case of riot or open violence, storm, flood, fire, fire, health hazard or some other difficulties in the physical conduct of voting. In such cases, our laws provide that the abandonment and the restart of polling must be carried out in the prescribed manner and among other things, only those electors who \"have not already voted\", shall be entitled to vote when the polling restarts. In contrast, in the Bill before us today, it is not clear to me if electors who have voted at the polling station and whose ballots remain available for counting because they are not in the lost or destroyed ballot box, whether they would also vote again when polling restarts in this case.
Instead, the Bill says, \"The Minister may prescribe the manner in which the abandonment of the counting of votes, the restart of polling, or the counting of votes is to be carried out\". Does this mean the Minister would have the discretion to decide whether all electors allotted to the affected polling station would vote again upon the restart of polls, or limit the re-vote to only the electors allotted to the lost or destroyed ballot box? And if the Minister indeed has that discretion, is that not too much discretion, especially in a close election?
Mdm Speaker: Ms Rahayu Mahzam.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong):\tMdm Speaker, allow me to begin in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Following the Prime Minister's announcement early last year about the proposal to review the Elected Presidency, a Constitutional Commission was formed to study this matter. This Commission submitted a very detailed Report and suggested several changes. The Report was then studied by the Government, which also produced a White Paper as its response to the Report.
The issue of the review to the Elected Presidency was intensively debated within and outside of Parliament. After three days of debates in Parliament, amendments to the Constitution that made changes to the Elected Presidency were passed.
We have now reached the stage where we amend the Presidential Elections Act. In general, I support this amendment. Nonetheless, I feel that it is important for us to think about the fundamental issues that were raised during the debates on the Elected Presidency. Regardless of any view on this matter, we cannot deny that the discussions that we had together as one people have sparked an awareness about the important things in our lives within a multiracial society. We have not reached the ideal state where everything is perfect, and the efforts to forge interracial relations is a work-in-progress, especially in the context of an ever-changing world. We can see the challenges in other countries, and we need to prepare our people to overcome those challenges.
Here, I would like to take the opportunity to echo what was stated by Minister K Shanmugam recently. During a discussion at the symposium organised by the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), he asked that Singaporeans, as a society, remain committed in protecting our minorities. He also spoke about how minorities should also play their part and not become exclusive. This view is stated in the context of discussing the issue of xenophobia and extremist views.
However, I feel that this message shows how important it is for us to always be sensitive and conscious of the collective responsibility to continue efforts to strengthen interracial relations. This is our shared responsibility. Therefore, although we may have different views on other issues, we can come together and resolve to preserve our identity as a multiracial society.
(In English): Following the Prime Minister's announcement on the proposal to review the Elected Presidency, an independent Constitutional Commission conducted a thorough review which culminated in a very detailed report. This report not only gave me an insight into the diversity of views on the matter, but also a better understanding of the Elected Presidency in Singapore.
In the wake of the Government's White Paper in response to the Constitutional Commission Report, I engaged in numerous discussions with many Singaporeans on the issue in my personal capacity, and as well as an MP. I had shared my reflections and observations during the debates at the Second Reading of the Constitution (Amendment) Bill. After a very intensive debate during that Reading, the Bill was passed, and we are already now looking at the specific amendments in the Presidential Elections (Amendment) Bill.
I stand in support of this Bill. I just have several clarifications and observations which I wish to make.
Firstly, I refer to clauses 8G and 8H, in particular, 8G(4d) and 8H(9). I also note clause 8J. I would like to seek a clarification on whether there will be an opportunity for an applicant to present further facts to the Community Committee or the sub-committee in the event the applicant's application for a community certificate is rejected. In particular, clause 8H(9) appears to suggest that the applicant may not make another community declaration upon rejection except on the invitation of the Community Committee. Can the applicant request for a further invitation?
Secondly, I would like to recap the findings and proposals made by the Constitutional Commission on the rules governing election campaigns for the Presidency. The Commission had, among other things, proposed that there be rules to regulate campaigning methods, with a view to tempering divisiveness of the election process and ensuring that campaigning remains consistent with the role of the President as a symbol of national unity and which preserves the dignity associated with the highest office of the land.
The Commission had also proposed that certain laws be enacted for candidates to make explicit declaration on their understanding of the constitutional role of the President, make it an offence for candidates to make promises or take positions that are incompatible with the office of President and impose a regime of sanctions. I see merit in the proposals made by the Commission to avoid divisive campaigning and giving misinformation about the President's role to the public. I, therefore, welcome and am happy to note the amendments that clause 6, with regard to the statutory declarations required of the candidate, and clause 17 on election advertising. I am also happy to hear that there will be some adjustments made to allow for more national airtime for the Presidential candidates. These are useful measures in the right direction to regulate campaign conduct.
In conclusion, I wish to highlight that in the course of our discussions on the Elected Presidency, there was an awareness that we could do better in maintaining our race relations in Singapore. We are not race-blind, we are not there yet. The discussion on minority representation for the Elected Presidency system has created an openness to talk about something that used to be perceived as a sensitive topic, such as race. It made us a bit uncomfortable to think about the current state of affairs but it had pushed us to think about issues a bit more.
What is heartening for me is that at the core of the discussions is a great desire to see Singapore embrace its multiracial, multicultural and multi-religious identity. There was a firm acknowledgment of our commitment to make Singapore a place for all races, and I think this is worth reflecting on and would be a galvanising force to rally people to decide on what is best for Singapore.
We should continue to take positive steps to work towards our vision of being race-blind. I believe that with the continued effort, we can and will make Singapore a place where the people remain united, regardless of race or religion. Mdm Speaker, I support this Bill.
Mdm Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.45 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 4.28 pm until 4.45 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.45 pm
[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]
[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
Mr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Mdm Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. When I was in London late last year, I had the opportunity to have dinner with some MPs of the United Kingdom (UK) from both the Labour and Conservative parties. Some of them were ex-Ministers. Some have been MPs for decades. We discussed several issues, including why the majority of UK's European Union (EU) Referendum's opinion polls were wrong.
Many reasons were cited, including the following: (a) opinion polls predicted that the majority of UK residents would vote against Brexit to stay in the EU. But these results were skewed as a significant group of the Brexit camp did not voice their true opinions in the surveys. They did not want to be perceived as being anti-EU when the mainstream media and experts were saying otherwise; (b) this lulled the \"Remain\" camp into a state of complacency and many chose not to vote, thinking it would be a safe result.
In short, opinion polls are very prone to errors. More importantly, the opinion poll results clearly affect the behaviour of the voters before polling day. History repeated itself when the majority of the opinion polls in the United States had predicted a win for Mrs Hillary Clinton but Mr Trump won surprisingly and convincingly.
These are the reasons why I support the insertion of sections 60B and 60C under clause 18 to ban election surveys and exit polls for the period between the issuance of Writ of Election and the close of all the polling stations on the polling day of the election. Election surveys are exciting, newsworthy and lucrative to the companies that conduct the survey but may not be helpful. In fact, it may be harmful. However, the British MPs disagreed with me. The British and Americans are so used to election surveys that it would be hard to ban them.
For Singapore, it is best not to start having election surveys. This is a uniquely Singapore phenomenon, and so is the reserved election.
Next, I would like to move on to the proposed amendments in section 9 of the Bill under clause 6 which proposes that every hopeful Presidential candidate has to declare in his nomination papers that \"he understands the President's role under the Constitution, including any particular aspect of the President's role stated in the prescribed form.\"
I would like to clarify with the Minister: which aspects of the President's role would be stated in the prescribed form, which the candidate is expected to understand? When would the prescribed form be released to the public? Why is there a need for an additional requirement? What would be the consequences if a Presidential candidate, during his or her campaign, says things or makes election promises that contravene certain aspects of the President's role under the Constitution? Would the candidate be disqualified during the campaign or after the campaign when the candidate has already won the election? Or would the candidate be able to get away with a fine only after polling day?
For that matter, I had wanted to ask what would be the changes to the election rules that govern the Presidential Election prior to the Minister's speech during the Second Reading. I am glad that the Minister has made two announcements regarding the Presidential Election, especially the election rules. It is a worthy move that makes it more transparent, upfront and give all stakeholders ample time to clarify, adapt and comply.
Mdm Speaker, please allow me to continue my speech in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Speaker, the President holds the highest office in Singapore. Hence, the Presidential elections should be different from local elections. The Presidential candidates need to reach as many Singaporeans as possible within a short period of time, and the best channel is through TV broadcast. Just as I was pondering asking the Minister when the new election regulations would be announced, Minister Chan revealed them at the Second Reading. It came unexpectedly. However, I am glad that he has made the announcement early to make it more transparent and fair. It also allows potential candidates to have ample time to prepare.
I noted that the Minister did not specify the frequency of the TV broadcast. Since TV broadcast will be the main channel by which the candidates can reach the voters, the TV broadcast frequency should at least be doubled, compared to the last Presidential Election. At the same time, there should be at least two live telecast debates among the candidates so as to give Singaporeans enough opportunities to assess the candidates' capabilities and persuasiveness. I hope the Minister can consider this suggestion.
In today's digital age, the candidates can always go online and use various social media platforms to reach the voters. Although TV broadcast and online communications allow the candidates to engage the voters extensively, many Singaporeans would still prefer to see the candidates in person. Certainly, the candidates could go to shopping malls or hawker centres during peak hours to meet and talk to Singaporeans. However, there remain space and environmental constraints. I would like to ask the Minister, under the new regulations, whether the candidates can apply to hold rallies at large sites, such as the Singapore Indoor Stadium, to have face-to-face dialogues with the people. If that is permissible, I hope that the Police can simplify the application procedures.
I understand that it is not possible for the candidates to meet every voter face to face. Nonetheless, I hope that under the new election rules, Presidential candidates could still have the option to access large sites for the purpose of having live interaction with the masses.
We know that the coming Presidential election will be reserved for the Malay community for the first time. If we follow the previous election schedule, polling day may conflict with the Hajj period. This will not be very wise. For this reason, I support the proposal to postpone the polling day of the Presidential election.
I also have some questions regarding the functions and responsibilities of the Acting President. When Dr Tony Tan steps down as the President on 31 August 2017, the Chairman of the Council of Presidential Advisers will assume the role of the Acting President, until the new President is elected in mid or end September. Does the Acting President have the same powers as the Elected President? If so, some critics might have conspiracy theories that the Government will, in this interim period, ask the Acting President to approve the use of the Reserves or make key appointments such as the Police Commissioner or Chief Justice.
To be sensible, there is no need to rush to access Past Reserves or to appoint key Government officials so hastily. So, I hope that the Minister can assure us that the Government will not ask the Acting President to exercise his custodial powers during the September transition period. This is to preempt such rumours from surfacing in the first place.
(In English): In summary, I support the Bill and I applaud the early announcement on the changes to the election rules of the Presidential Election. However, I hope that the Minister can clarify the purpose of asking the Presidential candidate to declare their understanding of the President's role as stated in the Constitution and the implications of the declaration.
At the same time, I hope that the Minister could ensure that Presidential candidates are not denied the opportunity to meet the masses face to face during the campaign period. Lastly, I would like the Minister to assure Singaporeans that the Government would not exploit the potential weakness of the system during the September period before the next Elected President takes office.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Madam, I stand in support this Bill. However, I would like to seek a few clarifications and also offer some suggestions.
I hope that the decision-making process of the Community Committee can be transparent. I trust that the Community Committee will carry out its functions in a fair and equitable manner. Hence, there should be no issues and difficulties in allowing the decisions and processes to be transparent.
In today's liberal social media where opinions and questions are openly raised and disseminated, it would be advisable for the Government to provide answers and clarity, before doubt and misinformation cloud the minds of people. To this end, the Community Committee should be transparent in its processes. May I suggest that the Community Committee inform the declarant as to why the Community Committee concluded that the declarant is not a member of the particular Community that he or she has declared to be of?
I have as well additional reasons for suggesting why the Community Committee should reveal the reasons that guided it to the conclusion to reject a declaration form.
First, the declarant does not appear to have any recourse if he or she believes the decision made by the Community Committee is incorrect or unjustly concluded. As per section 8J(2), the Community Committee's decision is final and not subject to any appeal or review by the Court. Further, the Community Committee is granted very comprehensive immunity as well, subject to the exception of malice, which is a high threshold to satisfy in a procedural or administrative context.
Secondly, unless invited by the Community Committee, the declarant may submit his or her form only once. Hence, it would be considerate to produce the reasons behind the rejection in order to demonstrate that the Community Committee considered the form and relevant documents or evidence rigorously and fairly in an application where the declarant has probably only one chance.
Thirdly, the Community Committee, which is statutorily unencumbered by legal forms or evidence laws as per section 8G(4), appears to be able to make its decision with fewer considerations or constraints. Hence, it would be helpful for the declarant and the public to know of the reasons behind the rejection. This would surely help preserve the credibility of the Community Committee.
Madam, may I also seek clarifications on section 8L of the Bill? I note that the Community Committee may regulate its own procedure. Could the use of this power be clarified and what possible regulations of procedure do we envisage?
Next, I note that a defect in the appointment of any member of the Community Committee would not invalidate \"any proceedings of the Community Committee\". The phrase \"any proceedings\" appear to include decisions on accepting or rejecting a declaration form. May I know why a defect in this particular appointment should be tolerated when a strict and stringent approach has always been adopted in election matters?
Madam, ancillary to this Bill is the powers of the PEC. Like how the Community Committee determines if a person is of a particular community, the PEC functions as another gatekeeper. May I propose that PEC also reveal its reasons for rejecting any candidate for not being \"a person of integrity, good character and reputation\" as per Article 19(2)(e) of the Constitution? As a group of persons who are not democratically elected by the citizens of Singapore, it is only appropriate for the PEC to account to the electorate on the reasons that guided the PEC to limiting the nominees to such persons only.
Madam, I believe that the declarant ought to know the reasons behind being rejected by the Community Committee in a system where he or she probably only has one chance and where the decision is final and not subject to any appeal or judicial review. Madam, the above comments notwithstanding, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mdm Speaker: Minister Chan Chun Sing.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Madam, first, I would like to thank all the Members for speaking up on this Bill. As I emphasised at the start of my speech, this Bill makes amendments to the Presidential Elections Act that operationalise the changes that were made to the Constitution in November last year. The principles underlying the changes were passed by the House last year, and the debate on those changes have passed. This is not the place to reignite those debates. And I hope that the debate would take place on the changes in the Bill today.
With that, let me deal with the specific matters raised by the Members. These can be grouped into two broad sets of issues. The first set of issues relates to the Community Committee provisions. The second set of issues relates to the election processes. If I have time, I will cover some of the queries on the campaigning method and the timing of the election.
Let me begin with the first set of issues: the Community Committee. First, let me thank Ms Rahayu Mahzam for making the points that it is important for us to make efforts to maintain our multiracial and multicultural identity, and that we need to always take care of the rights of minorities. We will continue to work hard to ensure that each Singaporean feels cherished in our society, regardless of which community they are from.
Ms Rahayu also had a question on whether an applicant can request for a further invitation to submit a community declaration upon rejection. As the proposed new section 8H(9) points out, the invitation comes from the Community Committee and is unsolicited. An applicant cannot request for an invitation.
I also thank Mr Thomas Chua for raising two points in his speech relating to the Community Committee.
First, the Government agrees that the Community Committee has to be diverse and each sub-committee has to be representative of the community it represents. The five members who belong to the Chinese community are to be appointed by the Prime Minister on the nomination of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights (PCMR) after consulting such organisations of the Chinese community as the Council sees fit. This will ensure that the views of the Chinese community will be taken into account in the nomination process.
Second, the Government also agrees with Mr Thomas Chua that qualified persons must not face difficulties with applications for community certificates simply because they are of mixed parentage. If a citizen whose parents belong to two different communities decides to run and decides to apply for a community certificate, the relevant community sub-committee should adopt an inclusive attitude towards his application.
I would also like to thank Mr Louis Ng for the two suggestions he made in his speech. First, I agree with Mr Ng that the process should be as transparent as possible. All these are set out in regulations. We are amending this Bill first before setting out the necessary regulations governing how the PEC and the Community Committee will conduct their meetings. The regulations will also set out the process for applying for the certificates and the information to be furnished by the prospective candidates.
However, we will not be making the Community Committee release grounds as to why it decides to accept or not accept the community declaration of a prospective candidate. The Constitutional Commission suggested that we adapt the mechanism for determining a prospective candidate's community from the Parliamentary Elections Act, and the mechanism in the Parliamentary Elections Act does not require the Community Committee to release grounds. This has worked well over the years and we see no need to disturb this.
Second, Mr Louis Ng suggested that the PEC should set out its reasons for rejecting a candidate. Indeed, the Constitutional Commission said that \"it would be desirable for the PEC to give reasons when it rejects applications for Certificates of Eligibility\", as this will \"provide a measure of transparency and accountability to the process.\"
However, the Commission did not think that the PEC should publicise its reasons for rejecting an application, because that could discourage persons from stepping forward to run for office, for fear of the embarrassment of being rejected in their application for a Certificate of Eligibility and then having the reasons for the rejection made public. The Commission suggested that \"a more measured solution would be to require the PEC to furnish to the unsuccessful applicant its reasons for denying the Certificate of Eligibility, and to leave the applicant to decide for himself or herself whether he or she wishes to make those reasons public.\" The Government broadly agreed with this suggestion in the White Paper; the PEC should set out its grounds when it rejects a prospective candidate's application, but not publicise it. As this is governed by subsidiary legislation, we will proceed to amend the relevant regulations after this Bill is passed.
Mr Vikram Nair made two points in his speech. First, he asked about the Prime Minister's appointment of the members of the Community Committee upon the nomination of the PCMR. The intention under the new section 8E is for the PCMR to nominate one person for the position of Chairman and five for each of the sub-committees, and the Prime Minister will appoint them to the Community Committee accordingly.
This mirrors the approach taken with regard to the nomination of the Chairman and Members of the Malay Community Committee and the Indian and Other Minority Communities Committee by the PCMR and their appointment by the President, as set out in the Parliamentary Elections Act.
Second, Mr Vikram Nair sought a clarification that the \"other minority communities\" provision is not intended to be a catch-all for people who do not fit into other categories by ethnicity, but is intended to be only for those who are part of the established minority communities in Singapore. He also asked about which groups may fall into the category of such communities at this point in time.
Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean provided an answer to this in the debates on the Constitutional Amendments last November. He made clear then that the \"other minority communities\" refer to groups that have some degree of history, permanence and established presence in Singapore, such as the Eurasian community.
Ms Sylvia Lim made two points. First, she asked, as she did last November during the debate on the changes to the Constitution, about the advice from AGC to the Government on the counting of terms. At the same debate, Deputy Prime Minister Teo had confirmed to Ms Lim that the advice referred to by the Prime Minister in his speech was, indeed, AGC's advice, and invited Ms Lim to challenge it judicially if she thought that it was not correct advice. Ms Lim then suggested that there might be something controversial or confidential that the Government was unwilling to publish.
The Government is confident of the advice rendered by the Attorney-General. We proceeded on that basis during the debates on the constitutional changes in this House. Prime Minister Lee explained to all why we needed the hiatus-triggered mechanism, and we passed the Constitution (Amendment) Bill. We are here today to put the nuts and bolts in place for a decision made clear by the Prime Minister during the debates in November. And we will not go through this again.
Ms Sylvia Lim spoke about being bewildered. I have also gone round to solicit feedback from the public. I am rather bewildered that Ms Lim is bewildered, because I did not receive the sentiments that Ms Lim said she got. The feedback that I have received has not been like that. And if I may just make two points.
Ms Lim once again questioned the Attorney-General's advice. I am a bit bewildered by this. I would like to clarify: (a) is Ms Lim suggesting that the Attorney-General did not give the Government the appropriate advice? Or (b) that the Prime Minister has not been truthful with the Attorney-General's advice? If it is the first, then I think Ms Lim, as suggested by Deputy Prime Minister Teo, can challenge this in the Courts. But if it is the second, then I am afraid it is a very serious issue to cast aspersions on the integrity of our Prime Minister. Ms Lim is a lawyer; I am not a lawyer. You will know that when you get advice, you do not freely publicise your advice and you may have various reasons why you do not publicise all your advice. And as a lawyer, I think Ms Sylvia Lim will know this better than me. So, I think we should not impute motives on this Government or the Prime Minister.
On Ms Lim's second point, the proposed amendments state that the Minister must have regard to, to the extent that they are applicable, the prevailing accounting standards and the general law relating to the insolvency of companies. These are standards set by professionals. The Minister does not have unbridled power. And if you think about it, is this not even better than the Minister setting the rules by himself? We are adhering to the prevailing accounting standards set by the professional bodies and not by someone else outside the profession. So, if you ask me, I think this is an even stronger system than that proposed for the Minister to decide.
To give clarity and certainty, we will provide administrative guidelines to the applicants.
Mr Pritam Singh made several points. First, on language proficiency and other criteria, Mr Singh spoke about how it is up to the Community Committee to look at the prospective candidate holistically, and not home in on one factor. This is not new; it has worked well in the GRC context.
Second, as to whether the President has to be born in Singapore, we should be careful in differentiating between new citizens and those who are born in Singapore. All citizens pledge allegiance to Singapore. They are entitled to exercise their rights and are expected to live up to their responsibilities. The question of whether a new citizen is accepted as a unifying symbol of Singapore is one that should be left to the electorate to decide.
Third, constitutionally, there is no such thing as a First Lady position. There is only the President. If I may refer Members to the Hansard, in 2001, then-Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, in answering a question by Mr JB Jeyaretnam, had stated that \"The First Lady is not a position enshrined in the Singapore Constitution. It is a courtesy term that has been customarily used for the wife of the President, including previous Presidents, before the Elected Presidency was created.\"
Fourth, Mr Pritam Singh asked about the GRC system. Mdm Speaker, I beg your indulgence. This is totally unrelated to the Bill today but, since it was raised, I will deal with it.
When Mr Goh Chok Tong moved the Motion to explain the GRC system to this House, it was done with a very clear intent to achieve two purposes.
One, it was to ensure that this House has sufficient minority Members in the House as a system. Today, we have about one-third of our House with minority Members. That is more than what you would expect proportionally from adding up the percentage of Malays, Indians and Other Minorities. So, that was the first purpose ‒ to make sure that this House has sufficient minority represented. And, over the years, we have achieved this by leaning forward and having more than the minimum that we are expected to have.
The second reason for the GRC system was to make sure that none of the parties will campaign on issues on a race/religion platform, that we will all, regardless of party lines, campaign on the basis that we are all Singaporeans, that we will not use race, language or religion for political reasons.
These were the two very clear reasons why we established the GRC system in this House. The Members of the GRC team who are elected to serve their respective GRCs are expected to serve all their residents, regardless of race, language or religion.
Mr Goh Chok Tong was further asked: if one Member of the GRC team resigns or for whatever medical reason is incapacitated, does the GRC need to hold a by-election? And the answer was given that it is no, because, recalling the two specific reasons that we set up the GRC system: one was to ensure that this House has sufficient minority representation and, given our current circumstances, we have more than what we would expect by a pure proportional representation system; two, the aim was to make sure that no parties campaigned on the issues of race, language or religion; and three, all Members of the GRC team are expected to serve all their residents regardless of race, language and religion.
Madam, I beg your indulgence. This is totally unrelated. But since it was asked, I will put on record our reply. Today, we have 25 minority Members of Parliament out of 89 elected. Even if we have one less, there are 24 out of 89, which is 27% of Parliament.
Fifth, let me talk about public sector candidates which Mr Pritam Singh raised. I do not think the public sector candidates lack experience. Whether it is a public sector candidate or a private sector candidate, they all bring with them their respective suite of experience to the office of the President. They are senior people who have been exposed to a broad range of social, economic and security issues and they would likely have managed and led substantial organisations and regularly made decisions impacting thousands, as the Commission had noted. These officers would have \"experienced the contrary pulls and pressures of Government decision-making\".
Before I leave this point about the process, I also want to touch on one point which Ms Sylvia Lim raised. Ms Lim, in her speech, seemed to have suggested or imputed that this Government has all sorts of short-term political objectives to amend the Constitution and put in place this new system. Can I put it to the Member that this is not the style of this Government? We are here to build for the long haul. We are here to take care of the country for the long haul. We are but stewards entrusted with the responsibility to take Singapore forward.
The changes that we have made are significant ones. We made it not because there is an immediate issue that we have to address, but we made it with a view to make sure that issues like these do not come about, especially sensitive issues on race, language and religion.
As the debate in November had highlighted, we will be very happy to be proven wrong, that one of these days we are totally race-blind as we all aspire to be; just like you and for me. But we are all concerned for the future of this country. What if we are not and what if we are wrong? Then, it is our responsibility to do what we can to build a mechanism that best allows us to overcome these difficulties should they arise. It is not for short-term political advantage. If it is for short-term political advantage, let me ask the Members of this House, if we are politicians here calculating our short-term political advantage, would we expend political capital to do this?
By any measure, any sensible people whom we can talk to, they would know, that such amendments and the moving of this Bill carry with it high political risk, if not political cost. If this Government led by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is for short-term political advantage, would we do it? Would we expend our political capital to do this? We have no need to do it now because it is not as if we have faced a problem now, but we know the day when we face the problem, we may not have the chance to discuss this calmly as we do now.
So, I would urge Members of this House not to impute perhaps our own motives on why we are doing this. We have gone through this in November and I will repeat this again. We are here for the long haul. We are here to build systems for Singapore for the long haul, not for short-term political advantage, not for the political advantage of any particular parties. We are but stewards for our nation.
Let me continue to talk about the election processes.
I would like to thank Mr Ang Wei Neng for supporting the ban on election surveys and exit polls. To Mr Chen Show Mao, the polling station is the lowest unit because voters can drop their ballot papers in any of the ballot boxes in the polling station. This is why even if one box is destroyed and the number of the voters in the polling station is material to the outcome of the election results, we will restart the polls for the affected polling station.
Let me now touch on campaigning methods.
The third set of questions were on the campaign methods for the Presidential Elections. I thank Mr Ang Wei Neng and Ms Rahayu Mahzam for speaking on this issue. Let me speak on the specific points that the Members raised. The Government believes, like the taxi driver in Mr Thomas Chua's story, that electing a President is an important matter and that voters should be informed and not cavalier in exercising their vote. This is why we have amended the Act to make sure that prospective candidates have to state that they are aware of the limits set by the Constitution on the role of the President, and they will have no excuse if they decide to mislead the electorate on the proper role of the President. The voter must vote in an informed fashion.
It would be appropriate here to discuss Mr Ang Wei Neng's question about the statutory declaration that candidates have to make, stating that they understand the role of the Elected President under the Constitution.
The Constitutional Commission cited one observer as saying that it was \"misleading and a great disservice to the electorate\" when previous candidates promised to pursue particular policies if they were elected into office, despite such areas not being within the constitutional remit of the President's functions. Ms Rahayu alluded to the Commission's recommendations to deal with this and said that she saw merits in the proposals. What specifically did the Commission propose?
The Commission proposed that laws be enacted, which: (a) require candidates to explicitly declare that they understand the constitutional role of the President before they may be issued a Certificate of Eligibility in the form of a statutory declaration contained within the application form for the Certificate of Eligibility (CoE); (b) make it an offence for candidates to make promises or to take positions that are incompatible with the office of President; and (c) impose a regime of sanctions where a breach of election rules, including a breach of the prohibition in (b), could give rise to a range of possible consequences, including criminal sanctions, applications to an Election Judge for declaratory reliefs, and, in appropriate extreme cases, the revocation of a candidate's Certificate of Eligibility.
Although the Commission suggested criminal sanctions, the Government has decided to take up the first proposal of requiring the statutory declaration. The statutory declaration will ensure that the candidate has applied his mind to the Constitutional limits of the Presidency. It will then be inexcusable if he deliberately chooses to disregard the limits of the Constitution and makes promises or statements exceeding this role.
Let us be very clear about this. We have put this into the rules, and I take it that anyone who runs for the Presidency should understand the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. If someone tries to bypass the letter of the law, by violating the spirit of the law, I think I leave it to the good judgement of our electorate. That means that we have to double our efforts to help all Singaporeans understand the roles prescribed for our Elected Presidency. They are the Singapore Elected Presidency and not the elected presidency of some other countries, with their own unique defined roles.
The Singapore Elected Presidency has two main roles. One, a custodial function for the Reserves and appointments of key appointment holders in the Civil Service. Two, as a unifying symbol for our nation. These are the two cleared roles for the Elected Presidency of Singapore.
We will also step up educational efforts on the importance of the institution of the Elected President. As Mr Thomas Chua and Mr Ang Wei Neng had also rightly pointed out, there are fundamental differences between the Presidential Elections and the Parliamentary Elections. This is also a point made several times in the Constitutional Commission's Report, and attempts to draw parallels between the two can be attributed to persons being ill-informed, or worse, intentionally muddying the waters. Mr Ang Wei Neng asked whether we would be increasing the airtime on national TV for candidates, and suggested two televised debates among candidates.
The Government will increase the overall national TV airtime that candidates will have to allow the candidates a wide platform to share their views with the public. During Presidential Election 2011, there were two presidential campaign broadcasts for each candidate and one TV roundtable session which involved all four candidates.
The Government will discuss the provision of additional airtime for the candidates with Mediacorp. We will consider Mr Ang Wei Neng's suggestion on at least two televised debates when we discuss the format of the additional TV time with Mediacorp. The principle that the Government will adhere to is that we will provide candidates with more TV opportunities, which again, I emphasise, will allow for more effective national outreach.
And if I may add, if you just think about it, this actually facilitates and levels the playing field for those without established mechanisms to organise large outreach for themselves. The details will be made known closer to the elections, and candidates may reach out to voters on a variety of social media platforms, as currently allowed.
Mr Ang Wei Neng asked about whether candidates can continue to meet voters face to face, and if they can organise speeches in places like the indoor stadium. The answer is yes. They can continue to conduct private election meetings at indoor locations.
A meeting is considered private if it is not open to the general public. A private meeting will not require a permit under the Public Order Act. An example of a private meeting is where it is open to only a limited number of persons who are invited by name to attend the meeting. Candidates can hold such private meetings to engage specific groups of voters. No permit from the Police is required for private meetings. Permits from the Police will be required for meetings that are open to the general public. These would include election meetings that are organised on or behalf of a candidate and held during the election period, any time on or after Nomination Day but before the eve of Polling Day.
If a candidate intends to have a meeting that is open to the general public at the Indoor Stadium, he will have to obtain a permit from the Police.
Let me now touch on the timing of the polls that Mr Ang Wei Neng has spoken about.
Mr Ang Wei Neng asked for specifics on the interim period between President Tan stepping down at the end of his term and a new President being sworn into office. During the interim, the acting President will exercise the powers of the President. According to Article 22N of the Constitution, if the office of the President becomes vacant, the Chairman of the Council of Presidential Advisers or, if he is unavailable, the Speaker, shall exercise the functions of the office of the President during the period between the date the office of President becomes vacant and the assumption of the office by the person declared elected as President. The acting President will have the powers of the President.
Mr Ang suggested that the critics of the Government might have conspiracy theories that the Government will, in this interim period, ask the acting President to exercise his custodial powers. Let me quickly put such rumours to bed.
The Government will be observing a convention in relation to the Elected President. Unless absolutely necessary, for example, in a crisis situation that requires the use of the Reserves, the Government will respect that the rationale of the Elected Presidency is for an Elected President to be the second key to the Reserves and to key appointments.
Before I conclude, let me touch on some other points raised by various Members. Mr Vikram Nair talked about people from mixed parentage. Yes, indeed, that is point that Mr Thomas Chua has also mentioned. Should there be such a person, and there would be more, we encourage the Community Committee to adopt an inclusive approach. In fact, actually, by adopting an inclusive approach, we are allowing more people to be identified with a certain community. So, actually, our approach is quite different from the approach as suggested by some other Members who want to be even more clearly defined as to who forms what community.
If I were to take the House a step back. What is the intention? And how do we meet this intent? The intent is simply this. A person identifies himself or herself with that particular community. And that community accepts that this particular person is from that community. Once these two conditions are met, the person identifies himself or herself with the community and the community accepts the person as a member of that community, then, we have pretty much met our intent. In the hiatus-triggered mechanism, it will be counted towards that community.
That community would not need to feel shortchanged because someone from that community did not represent them. Because in the intervening years, if someone has come forward to be associated with that community, and that community has accepted that person, then that community would have deemed that it has its own representative within the hiatus-triggered mechanism. We are going to adopt an inclusive approach rather than trying to define extra lines, if you like, to do this.
On Mr Thomas Chua's point about giving ample notice, and this is the reason why the Government has announced as many of the processes and procedures that we can, as early as possible, for prospective candidates to be familiar with the new processes.
Mdm Speaker, let me conclude. The changes that are being made to the Act, such as those pertaining to the Community Committee, are largely consequential to the amendments made to the Constitution that were passed by this House last November. The Government is putting in place the final pieces of the changes to the Elected Presidency. This set of amendments is the result of the review of the election processes.
Today, we are gathered here to see how best to put in place the nuts and bolts to effect what we have discussed in November. Today is not the occasion for us to reopen the debate. And actually I am a bit confused. I thought the Workers' Party's proposal last November was for a Senate, but today, it was on an Appointed President. But never mind. This is not the occasion for us to do that today. Based on what we have passed in November, this proposed set of changes is to put in place the nuts and bolts for us to effect the changes that we have agreed to in November.
I spoke at the end of my speech about campaigning methods and the timing of the Presidential Election this year. These do not require legislative changes, but the Government is of the view that we should announce them as early as possible to give potential candidates ample notice.
Finally, I am heartened to hear Mr Thomas Chua's speech that the Chinese, Malay and Indian Chambers of Commerce are in agreement that meritocracy and multi-racialism are two important pillars of Singapore's success, and this is what I have spoken about in my Malay and Mandarin speeches.
This Government has never shied away from acting decisively to strengthen the institutions of the state to ensure a better Singapore for our people. We proceed to do so because we consider this to be in the best long-term interest of our country, and we will take time to explain the changes to our people.
The Government believes that the changes to the Elected Presidency will continue to ensure that the office will be held by someone who fulfils the stringent qualification criteria, ensuring meritocracy is not compromised, and will also be held by persons of different communities, reflecting the multiracial nature of Singapore.
Throughout the entire process of consultation and changes to the Elected Presidency, the Government has always kept the end goal in mind: ensuring that the Elected President continues to play an important stabiliser role in our system, making sure that our Reserves and our key positions are not compromised, and making sure that the Presidency is not politicised, and making sure that the President continues to be, as it was from its inception in the person of Mr Yusof Ishak, a symbol of our unity for the country.
With that, Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, and urge all Members to give their support to the Bill.
Mdm Speaker:\tMs Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim: Mdm Speaker, I have four clarifications for the Minister.
The first clarification concerns the eligibility criteria for private sector candidates running for President. I do not think the Minister has addressed my point directly and that is that the Constitution (Amendment) Bill that was passed in November specifically asked Parliament to make these definitions: to define the definition of profit after tax, and also shareholders' equity. The Bill in last November also required Parliament to prescribe what amounts to an insolvency event.
But what we find in the Bill today is that Parliament is passing this job on to the Minister to do and the purported guidelines in section 5C(2) and (3) are too general. They just talked about the Minister having to have regard to the general law, to accounting standards but these definitions are not before the House today. So, I would like the Minister to comment on whether he agrees with me that, actually, Parliament is not doing what the Constitution (Amendment) Bill has asked us to do with regard to these definitions for private sector candidates.
The second clarification concerns the counting of reserved elections. I think in Parliament in November, the Government has already accused me of the things that Minister Chan Chun Sing has just repeated and I have also answered that in November to say that I am not accusing the Government or the Prime Minister of not telling the truth or that the AGC's advice was not given. My point was simply that people find it hard to understand why Wee Kim Wee counts as the first Elected President. And if the advice from the AGC is such, it would be helpful if the Government could consent to publishing it so that people can understand or try to understand the reasoning. That was the point being made.
And the Minister talked about the fact that I am a lawyer and I can understand why clients may want to have confidential communications. But the fact also remains that clients can choose to waive the confidentiality if they find that there is a purpose in publishing it. So, I am just asking for more illumination on why we are counting from President Wee Kim Wee.
The third point which the Minister made was refuting what I had said was perception of Singaporeans, including myself, that the sudden announcement to count the coming election for President as reserved is in view of what happened at the elections in 2011. I thank him for his sermon on how the Government always thinks long term but I would like to put this question which I have received from my residents which I did put in November, but I do not think I received an answer to it, and that is if the Government is not passing these laws for short-term purposes, why does the Government not agree to defer these changes for one Presidential election? Since the Minister said it is not a short-term purpose, why not? I do not recall an answer to that.
The last clarification I would like to ask the Minister is in his opening speech earlier, I think he mentioned that both sides of the House agreed in November that there should be a difference between Presidential elections and Parliamentary elections. I am not sure what he actually meant by that. From what I recall, our position has been that the Head of State, we believe, if you want him to be a unifying figure, making him go through elections is inconsistent with that. I do not think that our Members went on to suggest how the campaign rules of Presidential elections could be refined because we do not believe that the President should go through an election.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Mdm Speaker, Ms Sylvia Lim's first point on eligibility criteria. What Parliament is doing and asking the Minister to do is to make sure that whatever prevailing accountancy rules that are being practised are adhered to. That surely is better than what we here, being not in the profession, were to make a set of rules and then have it updated. I think the accountants among us, the people in the financial industry among us, will know that the conventions, rules and practices in the industry evolve. We are setting ourselves, benchmarking ourselves to these high standards that are agreed to by the professional bodies. That, I think, is an even better and stronger set of measures than us setting something in place and having to update it as regularly as what the accounting professions might be capable of.
On the second point about the reserved election, I am glad that Ms Lim has confirmed that she is not casting any aspirations on Prime Minister Lee's integrity and if that is the case then the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Teo Chee Hean, have explained in November why the counting starts from the second term of President Wee Kim Wee's term. That is because President Wee Kim Wee was the first President to exercise the powers under the new Elected Presidency Act.
On the second related point, Ms Sylvia Lim asked whether clients can choose to waive the advice and I think I have answered her, which is that, as a lawyer, the Member would know that there will be circumstances where you can choose to release the advice and you can choose not to release the advice and what we have done is no different. So, unless she is going back to challenge and casting doubt on the Prime Minister's integrity, the Prime Minister has stated on record in this House that it has taken advice from the Attorney-General. We take the Prime Minister for it and it is the Prime Minister's prerogative as to whether he wishes to release the advice as the Member has said.
On the third point about the claim that this is a sudden announcement, I would just make two points: one, we have had this debate for a very long time, for more than one year. The process was transparent. We set up the Constitutional Commission. We invited the Workers' Party and members of the public to present. The Workers' Party's position was that it would not appear before the Constitutional Commission to present its views, but it will come to this House. Last year, the Workers' Party came to this House with a proposal for a Senate. We have debated that and we have made our own conclusions and we have moved on from there. So, I do not think this is a sudden movement.
The second response to the third point that the Member mentioned, Deputy Prime Minister Teo has also shared with this House why we are making the movement now. As what the Constitutional Commission says, if there is a reason for us to act, then it is the onus of this Government to act in the best interest of this country decisively. That is why we have decided to do it in this term of Government.
On the fourth point about the bipartisan support for us to try to depoliticise this, I would just refer Ms Lim to the Hansard, to the speeches made by Mr Leon Perera and I can show them to the Member afterwards which, in so many words, agreed with us that we want a Presidency that is depoliticised. And we should find ways to do so. And the Government has taken seriously the feedback from this House and the members of the public to see how we can depoliticise the Presidency. Because his role is to serve as a stabiliser, his role is to serve the custodial functions for this country in terms of its Reserves and key appointments. His role is to unite this country.
Mdm Speaker:\tMr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh: Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister for going through some of the points I have raised. The Minister mentioned that there would be regulations drawn up to define how the Community Committee would assess the applicants. Correct me if I am wrong in this understanding.
But there are two points that I made which the Minister did not address. One has to do with the National Service requirement and the second is how community work would be assessed. That is the first question.
The second question: I would like to press the Minister on this issue of language in the case of a reserved election. For example, if a Presidential election has been reserved for the Malay community, would it not be difficult for the Government to agree that Malay, as a language, would be an expectation of any candidate who would stand for that election, up to the level expected of students in schools in the education system?
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Mdm Speaker, may I respond to the two queries from Mr Pritam Singh.
First, on the issue of citizenship, I think I will repeat my point here. Every Singaporean, regardless of whether new citizens or old citizens, make the same pledge of allegiance to this country. They have the privileges of being a Singaporean. They have also the responsibilities of being a Singaporean. As to whether they can best represent and unite Singaporeans, I think it is best left to the judgement of the Singaporean electorate. And I think Singaporeans are wise and discerning, so I do not think we need to overly prescribe this.
The question about how the Community Committee works, I think we have established precedent because this is how we have assessed the eligibility of the Malay candidates and the Indian and the Other Minority candidates for the Parliamentary elections in the past. And that has served us well and the same mechanism will continue to work.
On the issue of language, I would say that the Community Committee and the respective sub-committees will need to assess the person holistically. Yes, language will be one of the criteria. But we are also keenly aware that all of us, regardless of our race, language or religion, may practise our religions slightly differently, may live our lifestyles differently. But the key is this: do the respective Chinese, Malay and Indian sub-committees consider the person belonging to their community, as a package, holistically? That is the key point.
As to how committees work, I would not want to prescribe their roles, and it will not be my remit to comment on how they should go about doing their function. But the philosophy has never changed. The philosophy is that, as a package, do you believe that this person belongs to your community? And I believe that the people in the committees are wise enough to know how to make that judgement call, considering all the factors that the Member has mentioned.
Mdm Speaker:\tMr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member):\tI would just like to make a point of clarification to Minister Chan in relation to what he just said. The speeches I made in November when we had the debate on the Constitution amendment were speeches in support of the Workers' Party's position for an Appointed President, for reverting to an Appointed President and an elected Senate. They were not offering specific suggestions about campaigning procedures for an Elected President. I was not agreeing with the notion that we should continue to elect the President, and here are my suggestions for the procedures to run that campaign. It was for supporting an Appointed President. And I would make the point, since it was brought up by Minster Chan who had made the observation, that the Constitutional Commission agreed with that point as well.
Mr Chan Chun Sing:\tI thank Mr Leon Perera for his clarifications. I am just a bit puzzled. The Member said that the November speeches were in support of the Appointed President. Is that what he mentioned just now? I thought the November debate was about the Senate. How does the Appointed President and Senate proposals work?
Mr Leon Perera:\tThe Workers' Party's proposal was for an Appointed President and an Elected Senate to exercise the custodial powers over Civil Service appointments and the Reserves that the Elected President currently holds. So, in fact, you are setting that out as a contradiction when there is no contradiction at all. We argued then for a reversion to an Appointed President and an Elected Senate to handle the custodial role and —
Mr Chan Chun Sing:\tSo, can I have it on record that you are now proposing that we have an Appointed President and a Senate? Is that correct? That is correct, right? Okay.
Mr Leon Perera:\tNot only is it correct, it is what we have argued all along. That was what we argued in November.
Mr Chan Chun Sing:\tOkay. So, then let me ask this: but you would agree with me that we want a depoliticised President to the extent that our efforts can? Because your line of questioning during November was that we tried our best to have a President that can act as a unifying figure for our country. Is that correct? Do you share that perspective that we would like a President that can unify us and be depoliticised to the extent possible?
Mr Leon Perera:\tI certainly agree with the goal. I think we do not disagree on the goal of having a unifying President as a symbol for Singapore. But what we disagreed about is the Elected Presidency. We argued then and we argue again that an election inevitably has a tendency to politicise the office of the President. An Appointed President, like what we had in the past, with President Yusof Ishak, like what the Constitutional Commission itself called for, is a better thing for Singapore.
Mr Chan Chun Sing:\tOkay, I understand. So, the Member wants to appoint a President and a Senate, but as we have gone through in November, that would also have the same risk of politicisation, maybe eight times over. But we are not to go there today but what we can agree I think on both sides of the House is, as the Member has mentioned, to the extent possible, we want a mechanism, an election process that allows us to have a unifying figure and a custodial figure and that is why we have proposed the slight adjustment to the campaigning methods today and I think we can agree on that.
Mdm Speaker:\tMs Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim:\tMadam, just to clarify once again: what the Minister just said is not correct. We do not agree to an election process for the President.
Mr Chan Chun Sing:\tMdm President [Laughter.] Madam, I think today is not the occasion for us to go through this again. I think we can all check the Hansard as to what was said between you and the rest of the debate. Today, we are here to put in place the nuts and bolts on how we can get an Elected President, see it working.
Mdm Speaker:\tYes, Deputy Prime Minister.
The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Teo Chee Hean):\tMdm Speaker, I had the privilege of answering the clarification from Mr Leon Perera towards the end of the debate and he specifically asked me whether we would consider the recommendations in the Constitutional Commission to make sure that election methods were not politicised, or election methods were such that the process was not politicised and referred to the speech made by Ms Rahayu. I do not have the Hansard with me, but I stood up and I remembered that I agreed with Mr Leon Perera that, indeed, we should look at these things and we would do so when we enact the processes within this Bill and, indeed, that is what we are doing. I am glad that Mr Perera agreed with me at that point in time.
Mr Chan Chun Sing:\tMdm President, I was about to — [Laughter.] Mdm Speaker, Mdm Speaker. Sorry, my bad. Mdm Speaker, just on the record, I was about to hand this to the Workers' Party. The exact quote was this, \"My second question\", from Mr Leon Perera, \"My second question pertains to a question we have repeated a few times. What are the strategies that the Government has to mitigate the risk of politicising the unifying office of the President\" and it goes on \"no doubt the politicisation may not have fully materialised for the past EPs that we have but there is a good reason to believe in future Presidential elections, if let us say, there are 10 candidates and let us say the winner gets 5% of the vote and let us say the campaign ends up becoming bitterly partisan, the office of the President could be politicised.\" So, it goes on. And Mr Teo Chee Hean's reply was and I quote, \"Turning to the risk of politicisation and a possible tightening of rules for the Presidential Elections, the risk of politicisation is that I have addressed it explicitly just now in my answer but I think what Mr Leon Perera suggests and what the Commission suggests also is to look at the rules and the way that the Presidential Elections are conducted. I think there is merit, and I agree with Mr Leon Perera there.\" I quote from Mr Teo Chee Hean.
Mdm Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera:\tI thank the Minister for sharing the extract from Hansard. But I think even as your own extract makes clear, referring back to the debate that Deputy Prime Minister Teo cited, I did not support the idea of an Elected Presidency and making procedural changes to reduce the politicisation risk in the election. I and my colleagues argued for the idea of an Appointed President because we argued and we still maintain that if you have an election, inevitably, that politicisation risk will emerge. There are various scenarios. I think one of them was touched on in the extract but, inevitably, there will be that risk. You can introduce procedural changes to campaign rules and so on and so forth and Minister Chan has shared some of those procedural changes today but it will not eliminate the procedural risk, that is why we argued then and we argue now that an Appointed President, like we had in the past, like President Yusof Ishak, is the best solution for Singapore.
Mdm Speaker: Deputy Prime Minister.
Mr Teo Chee Hean:\tMdm Speaker, I was very, very clear on that day. I think the Hansard speaks for itself. And when I agreed with Mr Leon Perera, he was listening to me very attentively. And we all know that Mr Perera, how shall I say, is not shy to stand up to clarify a matter if he has not agreed with it at that point in time. And at that point in time when I agreed with him that we should make processes to depoliticise the election of the President, he did not respond at that point in time.
Mr Leon Perera:\tI thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his comment, but I think the totality of all that I said during the debate does not support a position that we should have an Elected President but make procedural changes, such as the ones that have been announced today. The position that I articulated then, and I hold the same position now is that we should revert to an Appointed President because whatever procedural changes you make, you do not eliminate the political risk. So, I was not arguing that we should go down the path of procedural changes.
Mr Teo Chee Hean:\tCan I read the record for Mr Leon Perera's clarification?
Mdm Speaker:\tYes, Deputy Prime Minister. Mr Perera, you can sit down.
Mr Teo Chee Hean: And I quote, \"My second question pertains to a question we have repeated a few times. What are the strategies that the Government has to mitigate the risk of politicising the unifying office of the Presidency? No doubt, the politicisation may not have fully materialised for the past EPs that we had. But there is good reason to believe in future Presidential Elections, if let us say, there are 10 candidates and let us say, the winner gets 5% of the vote, or let us say, the campaign ends up becoming bitterly partisan, the office of the President could be politicised. I have not heard any strategy from any Member of the PAP on how this can be managed\". And it is quite clear, Mdm Speaker, that he is referring to electing the President.
I continue, in Mr Leon Perera's words, \"I think Ms Rahayu Mahzam came closest to that and to her credit, she talked about tightening up the rules for partisanship during the Presidential Election campaign. So, what would be the Government's strategy to mitigate that? That is my second question.\"
And, Madam, in my reply to him, I said, \"Turning to the risk of politicisation and the possible tightening of rules for the Presidential Elections, the risk of politicisation is that I have already addressed it explicitly just now in my answer but I think what Mr Leon Perera suggests and what the Commission suggests also is to look at the rules and the way that the Presidential Elections are conducted, I think there is merit and I agree with Mr Leon Perera there.\"
As I said, Madam, Mr Perera is not shy to stand up to disagree if he has been understood wrongly and he did not stand up to disagree with me at that point in time.
Mdm Speaker:\tMr Perera.
Mr Leon Perera: During the debate, what I did call for was for the Government to explain its strategy for managing the politicisation risk and I felt that whatever had been explained up to that point in time were not sufficient safeguards to manage the politicisation risk. I alluded to Ms Rahayu Mahzam's comments as being one attempt to explain the strategy, but I pointed to the fact that there had not been a proper strategy explained at that time.
I think some of the procedural changes that have been suggested today are an attempt to manage that politicisation risk but my statements then cannot be construed to mean that I support an Elected Presidency with procedural changes. What I am saying is that an Elected Presidency inherently has that risk, there is that inevitable tendency. There was no comprehensive strategy to manage that, and you can make procedural changes, you can make tweaks here and there but, at the end of the day, an election still runs the risk of becoming politicised even if you make all kinds of procedural changes. That is why an Appointed Presidency is still a better solution and the Constitutional Commission itself actually pointed that out. My statements in the November debate did not constitute support of an Elected Presidency with procedural safeguards.
Mr Teo Chee Hean:\tMadam, I thank Mr Leon Perera for agreeing that we should have political safeguards at that debate. He did not clarify. I thank him again for agreeing that we should have political safeguards.
Mdm Speaker:\tI will now put the question.
Ms Sylvia Lim:\tMdm Speaker.
Mdm Speaker: Ms Lim, let me just read the collection of voices first.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker:\tMs Sylvia Lim, do you want to voice your dissent?
Ms Sylvia Lim:\tYes, Mdm Speaker. The Workers' Party Members would like our dissent specifically recorded.
Mdm Speaker: Can you please put up your hands, for those who wish to dissent?
[(proc text) Hon Members Mr Low Thia Khiang, Ms Sylvia Lim, Mr Png Eng Huat, Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap, Mr Chen Show Mao, Mr Pritam Singh, Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong, Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong and Mr Leon Perera raised their hands for their dissent to be recorded. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker:\tYou may put down your hands.
Mr Kok Heng Leun (Nominated Member):\tSorry, I have a point to make. Can I just ask if I can just voice a point that I actually —
Mdm Speaker: Mr Kok, it is over already. We have also taken the vote. You cannot go back to clarification. Clarification time is over.
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Chan Chun Sing]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question for Third Reading put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker:\tDo Members wish to voice your dissent for your dissent to be recorded?
Ms Sylvia Lim:\tYes, Mdm Speaker, the Workers' Party Members would like our dissent specifically recorded.
Mdm Speaker: Can you please put up your hands?
[(proc text) Hon Members Mr Low Thia Khiang, Ms Sylvia Lim, Mr Png Eng Huat, Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap, Mr Chen Show Mao, Mr Pritam Singh, Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong, Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong and Mr Leon Perera raised their hands for their dissent to be recorded. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker:\tMr Kok, do you wish to record your dissent?
Mr Kok Heng Leun:\tCan I voice my abstention to this vote?
Mdm Speaker:\tYou cannot do it. It is either you vote for or against. But do you wish to record your dissent?
Mr Kok Heng Leun:\tYes, because I am still not convinced by the arguments for —
Mdm Speaker:\tYou are not going into the merits of the Bill, Mr Kok, it is over. So, do you wish to record your dissent?
Mr Kok Heng Leun:\tYes.
Mdm Speaker: Can you put up your hands again, those who wish to dissent?
[(proc text) Hon Members Mr Low Thia Khiang, Ms Sylvia Lim, Mr Png Eng Huat, Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap, Mr Chen Show Mao, Mr Pritam Singh, Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong, Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong, Mr Leon Perera and Mr Kok Heng Leun raised their hands for their dissent to be recorded. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker: Okay, you may put down your hands. It will be recorded.
[(proc text) Bill 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":"Planning (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker: Minister Lawrence Wong.
The Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
The Planning Act, administered by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) establishes the legal basis for the regulation of development, conservation, and land use planning in Singapore. As our built environment becomes denser and land development becomes more complex, URA has to apply a keener eye to guide development plans so as to safeguard the vibrancy and liveability of our urban space. The amendments proposed in this Bill have three broad aims.
First, to enhance the planning levers for URA to ensure a more liveable city; second, to strengthen the regulatory regime for development plans, including penalties to deal with violations of planning controls; and third, to calibrate and simplify the administrative processes involved in the execution of the Act. I will go through these three in more detail.
Firstly, let me touch on the first point of enhancing planning levers. Currently, URA may grant planning permission, subject to certain conditions and technical requirements that developers have to fulfil. This allows URA to establish and advance good practices and design specifications that serve the public good.
The Bill amends the Act to supplement the conditions that URA can place on developers seeking planning permission. These additional conditions aim chiefly to create a more liveable and walkable cityscape, for example, through the provision of public spaces and pedestrian connections, and guiding the external appearance of buildings, like the night lighting of building facades.
The Bill also clarifies the persons who are required to comply with a planning condition. Failure to comply with these conditions will amount to a breach of planning control, which is an offence. This is to ensure that the public can continue to enjoy the pleasant environment and connectivity that were planned for at the outset, even if developments undergo a change of owners.
That is the first limb, which is to enhance the planning levers. Next, let me touch on the provisions in the Bill to strengthen the regulatory regime and there are several amendments in this regard.
Let me begin with the role of Qualified Persons (QPs). The Bill introduces provisions relating to the responsibility of QPs, who are professionals, such as architects, engineers and surveyors. Currently, developers applying for planning or conservation permission are not required by the Act to appoint a QP to prepare the plans and make submissions to URA, although in practice, most of them do so. The Bill amends the Act to require that owners or developers appoint a QP to prepare these submissions to URA, in accordance with the Act's or URA's requirements.
The developer will similarly have to appoint a QP to supervise the development or works. And this QP will have to notify URA if the works deviate from the approved plans or planning conditions, take reasonable steps to prevent deviations, and submit reports or declarations as required by URA. This will minimise the need for subsequent rectification works, which can be costly for the developer or property owner. URA will be empowered to require the developer to submit as-built plans prepared by a land surveyor to facilitate cross-checking against plans which are initially approved.
With QPs engaged throughout the key stages of the development process and held accountable for the discharge of their professional work, the new provisions in the Bill will ensure that planning controls and regulatory standards are observed in the course of development. This serves to safeguard the quality of the environment and, at the same time, maintains good practices and overall standards in the industry. Minor works and simple applications may reasonably be exempted from these requirements.
Another aspect of strengthening the regulatory regime is to have enhanced powers of investigation which this Bill will provide for.
In particular, where URA officers believe that persons might have knowledge of a violation, the officers will be empowered to require these persons to attend interviews and question them. Apart from verbally examining witnesses and recording statements, URA will also be able to require the production of information or documents relevant to the violation, and to take video evidence on site. Where necessary, officers will be able to effect forced entry to carry out their investigation.
This broad set of provisions is aligned with the enforcement powers of other agencies.
There are also stricter penalties for unauthorised development or works because where violations are uncovered, the Bill puts in place a series of penalties for the offences under the Act.
The current level of fines is too low to serve as a strong deterrent against unlawful activity or conduct. For example, URA has increasingly encountered unauthorised dormitories, including some repeat offenders. The penalties for demolishing a conserved building must also be enhanced as any unauthorised demolition will result in an irrevocable loss of our built heritage.
With that in mind, the Bill will put in place stricter penalties. The maximum penalty for unauthorised development, works or subdivision for repeat offenders or for an offence involving the unauthorised use of any land or building for dormitory accommodation will be enhanced to include a custodial sentence. The maximum penalty for the partial or full demolition of a conserved building is a fine of $500,000 or a custodial sentence, or both.
The Bill also ensures that culpable parties are held to account by making it clear that permitting unauthorised development or works is an offence. An owner is presumed to have permitted unauthorised works carried out by his tenants or contractors, unless the owner can show that reasonable precaution was taken to prevent this. So, owners will have to exercise due diligence on their tenants and contractors.
The Bill will make explicit the lawful boundaries pertaining to residential rental and subletting.
Private residential properties should not be used for other purposes without planning approval, as there is a need to safeguard the living environment of residents in the neighbourhood. Where private residential properties are rented or sublet, URA has existing guidelines in place to ensure that these properties are not used to accommodate excessive numbers of occupants, and to make it clear that such properties are intended for long-term or permanent residence of at least six months.
This Bill inserts a new Schedule into the Act, which lists the uses of residential property that are illegal without permission. The uses listed are short-term accommodation and dormitory accommodation.
\"Dormitory accommodation\", which requires planning permission, is defined by the Bill to mean accommodation by seven or more persons. In other words, without planning permission, it will be illegal to have more than six tenants. This cap does not apply to families, as the amendment expressly excludes persons who are related, along with their domestic helpers and caregivers. For units currently housing seven or eight persons, URA will allow the tenancy agreements to run their natural course and will not clamp down on them before they expire.
This set of regulations will apply only to private developments and will not apply to the Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats, which come under a separate set of controls managed by HDB.
I have covered the second broad component of provisions which relate to strengthening the regulatory regime. Thirdly, there are a series of things we are doing in this Bill to streamline the administration of the Act.
First, it allows URA to give preliminary advice to developers and property owners or their QPs on their proposals prior to submission of their development applications. This would be an added service for developers or their QP to seek a preliminary indication from URA, at an earlier stage, as to whether their proposal satisfies the relevant regulations or guidelines. The Bill provides for this additional service that URA will provide.
Second, the Act currently allows URA to defer the payment of the development charge for charity organisations; and the Bill amends the Act to allow the deferral of this charge to be carried on to the next property owner, where the Minister approves of the deferral, for example, where the next owner is also a charitable organisation.
Madam, the amendments to the Planning Act will ensure that our planning controls and regulations are up-to-date and relevant in guiding the physical development of Singapore. It will allow URA to be more effective in regulating planning violations and ensuring that our physical living environment continues to be of a high quality.
URA has consulted with stakeholders and professional institutes, including the Real Estate Developers' Association of Singapore (REDAS) and the Singapore Institute of Architects (SIA), on the amendments to the Act. They have provided useful feedback, which have been taken into consideration in the drafting of this Bill. With that, Mdm Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker: Mr Alex Yam.
Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee):\tMdm Speaker, there is an old cautionary tale of an old man who wanted to buy an antique teapot. It was said that one day, this old man walked past a rundown knick-knack store and spotted an old ceramic teapot on display, his eyes gleamed and a grin spread across his face. He walked in briskly and said to the young man sitting rather boredly behind the counter and said: \"Young man, I will give you $1,000 for that teapot in the window.\" The young salesman replied: \"That old dusty teapot? Why would you want it?\" Without explaining, the old man told him, \"Wrap it up, I will be back in an hour with the cash,\" before leaving the shop.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair]
The young salesman thought to himself that it was incredible that someone would pay such an amount, but thinking perhaps the old man saw something of value, he quickly brushed the teapot and washed it out, wiping it so well that a shine returned. When the old man returned, the young man said, \"Sir, I have polished it up and it is almost like new. I think it is now worth $2,000!\" In horror and almost immediately crestfallen, the old man said, \"My friend, sadly, it is now worthless, for its worth was in the well-seasoned pot blackened by decades of tea-brewing. Now that it is new and polished, it is worthless to me.\"
Mr Deputy Speaker, our built environment is one that is more than functional. It plays a huge role in affecting a community, a nation, both psychologically as well as culturally. It marks where we have come from and where we are headed. Therefore, the Planning Bill has played an important role in ensuring that the built environment that we choose to live in, and not just one that we have no choice but to try to live in, is one that is dynamic and yet true to our history and our culture.
Like that teapot, old may not always mean worthless and new may not always be valuable. Even as the Bill aims to create a delightful cityscape and a more walkable city, I hope that we take a moment to also ponder at what we have lost or might lose in the search of progress, in search of orderliness. Many of our heritage districts are wonderful to behold, picturesque, but to put it bluntly, they may be all but in name. They are often sterile, clean, clinical representations of their past; sometimes commercialised to the point of soullessness.
Perhaps the grime is a mark of character of a building, of a district, that in our urge to be utilitarian and for progress, we lose some of what makes us, us. As the Bill hopes to give powers to both afford greater protection against unauthorised demolition or alterations to conserved buildings, and at the same time, create a delightful cityscape, we might have to ask ourselves how we can best achieve most in creating the cityscape that incorporates and, in fact, celebrates our built heritage.
Whether by private hands or in the public interest, historic buildings are sometimes disappearing, not just physically but also slowly being drained of their souls. So, I seek the Minister's response on how best we should, not just as a government, but as custodians of our nation's collective storehouse of memories and history, preserve not just the shell of buildings but also the inner spirit and souls of our heritage buildings.
Take the case in point of the Ellison Building at the corner of Bukit Timah and Selegie. It is perhaps a bit ironic that we have in one Ministry gazetted it as a heritage asset but, in another, has had to take the hard decision to demolish it for the public good.
In my recent work trips to the United Kingdom and Taiwan, private enterprise and some government initiatives have returned life to old derelict structures, imbuing them not just with a new vitality, but also one that continues with tradition and one that is exciting to a new audience, welcomed not just by locals but tourists alike. What more can we do so that our children and future generations of Singaporeans do not become poorer for the heritage that we lose?
The Planning (Amendment) Bill sends a stronger signal with a custodial sentence being introduced, and the fine imposed being raised, but losing our heritage cannot be adequately compensated by a jail-term or half a million dollars. We need more than that, perhaps a stripping away of the licence of the developer or contractor involved in the destruction but, more importantly, also to educate Singaporeans on the importance of our built heritage.
Let me now move on to a more enlightening topic in the Bill − that of lighting up our city. Who does not delight in a beautiful cityscape skyline? Most major cities have one that they are proud of. We have one that we should be proud of, too − a marriage of old and new − a story of our nation's development in one picture-perfect photo. But I hasten to ask, who is going to pay for it all? Under the new URA guidelines and requirements, new buildings will be required to conform to certain design aesthetics. Who would not agree that it would be nice to light up the skies every night? But just as we go about urging Singaporeans to conserve energy and utilities, lighting up the night sky may end up burning a fire in the wallet. So, greater clarity in this area on expenditure and control of expenditure, and use of utilities would be useful.
With regard to the provision of public areas and pedestrian connections, I spent a working visit to Hong Kong late last year traversing the city centre and the civic district without once emerging into the direct sunlight or the light year-end drizzle. From skylinks to underground passages, you could cover a large portion of the financial and civic district with ease. Aiming towards this would certainly benefit Singaporeans and visitors alike, considering our very equatorial climate and fondness for the rain.
I would like to seek the Minister's clarification on how disagreements between different building owners can be resolved, especially between newer buildings and older ones. If a building, especially older strata title ones, holds out from renovation or rebuilding, can the Ministry compel the building owners to make earlier provisions for connectivity, especially when the buildings serve as the middle of the sandwich between two newer developments that have already made provisions?
In Hong Kong, I am given to understand that a large portion of the connected buildings are owned or managed by the same developer and, of course, it makes sense for them to have the connectivity planned early. In previous cases in Singapore, we have also seen new buildings which were required under the guidelines to provide linkages, but abutting buildings refusing to link up, resulting in gaps for pedestrians. Will this be sufficiently addressed by the amendments, and will abutting buildings also be compelled to make good on bridging the gaps?
In terms of a peaceful living environment, one of the areas that perhaps gained most interest on infringements and enhanced powers of investigations provided to URA, has to do with how we keep the peace in our living environment, especially when there are units that have a higher proportion of subtenants. Many are understandably concerned about their neighbouring units being overcrowded, and their safe and peaceful living environment is made less so by strangers coming in and out or changing ever so often.
I have a number of clarifications to seek from the Minister. Firstly, the amendment introduces a new Fourth Schedule that lowers the maximum number from eight to six. A custodial sentence is also introduced for infringements. This is well and good, but I am unable at the moment to reconcile the numbers with the guidelines that are set out separately by HDB. In 4-room and larger HDB flats, the number of subtenants allowed is nine. So, if a 4-room flat can have nine subtenants, the new limitations on private property, some of which would be bigger, seem to be out of sync.
I am not advocating for the fact that we should increase the number of allowed subtenants to nine, but the question remains whether HDB guidelines should also correspondingly be revised to reflect this new reality in the Planning (Amendment) Bill. Why is this so? In terms of the new limitations, I am happy to learn from the Minister that those that already have more than six subtenants will be allowed to have their leases lapse.
In terms of now legislating the minimum six months for short-term accommodation leases, this brings it in line with HDB sub-leasing requirements. But I understand that the URA guidelines have been in place since 2009 as guidelines. Why has it taken eight years for it to be legislated? Why now? Is it because of an increase in number of violations or number of complaints that we are, therefore, required to now legislate this?
This legislation will also make a rather popular travel arrangement seemingly legal. I am sure many of us who travel are familiar with the AirBnB concept or even couch-surfing. I know that the Ministry is currently studying and drafting legislation, or propose legislation on regulations on new markets, such as AirBnB. But by codifying the amendments to the Planning (Amendment) Bill now, does it run counter to what is being planned for any new legislation in the future? How will the URA, therefore, police current AirBnB listings now that they will all be considered legal subletting?
In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, from our national infrastructure and cityscape to where we live and who our neighbours are, the Planning (Amendment) Bill makes major changes to our built environment and how it would look like, now and into the future. Notwithstanding the questions I have raised, I give my support to the Bill.
Mr Deputy \tSpeaker: Ms Joan Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill, particularly for the amendments to address the provision of short-term accommodation, that is, for six consecutive months or less, in return for rent. With the insertion of the new subsection (3)(ca), failure to obtain written permission for this will be an offence. Many of my residents will appreciate this change, which states categorically that it will be illegal for owners to lease out their properties to short-term renters, unless they have a special permit.
I have received numerous negative feedback from my constituents about the disamenity caused by such visitors. They have expressed their concerns about compromised security in their estates, the loss of privacy and the occasional disturbances. Despite URA's guidelines forbidding such rentals, thousands of condominium and room listings can be found on rental portals, such as Airbnb, Roomorama, PandaBed and HomeAway. Many of them can be rented for durations as short as one night.
The Minister had shared with the House in a written reply in August last year that URA took enforcement action against 36 cases of unauthorised short-term subletting in private residential premises in 2014, 23 cases in 2015, and 44 cases in the first six months of 2016. These figures are very much lower than the number of complaints received by URA − 375 in 2014, 377 in 2015 and 161 in the first four months of 2016. I would like to ask the Minister why there is such a big gap in the numbers and whether URA has enough manpower and resources to follow up on the number of complaints.
Many of my residents have complained to me that the problem lies in the lack of follow up or enforcement. Usually, the Police and URA have the details, including the exact addresses and profiles of visitors. These beleaguered neighbours submit all the information required and hope for swift action to be taken. Unfortunately, the transient strangers continue to stream in. Due to the presence of these visitors, residents feel less safe and are perpetually on their guard. Such an uneasy atmosphere in an estate does not contribute to building neighbourly ties. Hence, I would like to suggest that the Minister consider giving the Management Corporation Strata Title (MCST) more power and greater means at its disposal for enforcement.
Finally, I would like to ask the Minister to elaborate on the penalties non-compliant property owners would face and what action will be taken against non-compliant owners who do not reside in Singapore and who continue to ignore warnings to desist from short-term rentals.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Mr Deputy Speaker, Singapore is a small, densely populated nation that relies heavily on good urban planning to maximise our space and resources. Barely half a century has passed since we implemented a proper framework, and our housing has been transformed from dirty slums and vulnerable kampungs to the beautiful high-rise buildings we have today. I welcome the changes to reduce the number of people to sublet to not more than six in private housing, and I am sure it will decrease the disamenities faced by the affected residents. After all, home is a place for us to rest after a long day. My question is: why not extend this to HDB flats?
Currently, for 4-room and bigger HDB units, the maximum number of persons residing is a maximum of nine people. Why the disparity? For private housing, it is six persons, but for HDB flats, which is even more compact, can house up to nine. I urge that this maximum number be whittled down to no more than six persons also. An overcrowded apartment can be very noisy and a constant source of stress and irritation to the neighbours. Residents have come to me with feedback about their neighbours' rowdy tenants. Furthermore, some of these tenants would leave footwear and other belongings along the common corridor, which is not only unsightly but inconveniences the other neighbours. During my recent house visit, a resident complained to me about a neighbour's sublet flat. She said that the tenants even spit and smoke at the lift lobby and loiter along the corridors. Quite often, it is because there are a lot of people in that flat.
On a related note, there needs to be stronger enforcement against home owners who rent out their homes as temporary accommodation to overseas visitors.
Currently, HDB and URA regulations dictate that renting a whole unit or individual rooms is only allowed for long-term stays of six months or more. This is a long-standing rule that applies to both private property and HDB housing. However, judging by the number of rentals still available online, this generally seems to be enforced only when people complain. In the meantime, many residents have to endure the ill effects. I have residents complaining to me about tourists on their floor, moving luggage in and out at odd hours of the day, disturbing their rest.
I would like to ask what is the Government's stand on such short-term renting? Instead of having this \"one-eye open, one-eye closed\" policy, we should state our stand clearly and take enforcement action immediately. Why wait until there are complaints for action to be taken? What I understood is that there are about 6,000 listings online. Trends like Airbnb rentals are rising, but I think we need to look into how to balance the two.
Some countries have designated certain apartment buildings for rental to foreigners. This way, locals know of the policy before they decide whether to buy that apartment. In Japan, hosts have to obey local laws set by Japan's Hotel Business Act which governs overnight stays. Just like these countries, we should look deeper into alternative ways to deal with this new trend. Meanwhile, everybody should stick to the law, and I hope that our relevant agencies will take action.
Next, moving on to structural issues, I would like to suggest extending this Planning Bill to include two things. First, imposing on the developer to build covered linkways from the condominium or executive condominium (EC) to the nearest bus stop. I think many of our new HDB Build-To-Order (BTO) flats have a covered linkway to the nearest bus stop but not the new condominium or new EC. And later on, when the residents shift in, they will ask for this new covered linkway which is very difficult for us to implement after that.
Second, facilitating linkages between buildings, like what Hong Kong's Planning Department does with their Urban Design Guidelines. This will make walking in the city more pleasant, with better connectivity. For those who have been to Hong Kong, I am sure you enjoy shopping and walking in Hong Kong much more than in Singapore because you can walk from one building to another building without walking under the sun because the buildings are all connected. I know that it is not easy, but we must start somewhere. We can learn from Hong Kong's experience.
On another point, I also wish this Bill could give more assistance to those who live in landed property and have difficulty obtaining access to do up their house, for example, plastering their external walls. I think all of us know that it is good practice to plaster the external walls so that you do not get water seepage. But I have seen cases from time to time, residents telling me that they really have problems in getting access because of the objections from neighbours and then when they go to URA or the Building and Construction Authority (BCA), no one can help them. I hope that with this Planning amendment, we can look into cases like this. And please allow me to summarise in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Deputy Speaker, our home should be our harbour. However, the neighbour's tenants can sometimes disturb the peace of other residents greatly.
This amendment provides that private housing can only house a maximum of six tenants. This will help to improve the situation faced by some residents. However, currently, 4-room or larger HDB flats can house a maximum of nine tenants. Tenants in HDB flats live in even closer proximity to their neighbours. Therefore, can the Government consider reducing the maximum number of people who can stay in an HDB flat to six as well?
On another note, short-term rental is becoming more and more popular. Although current rules dictate that no residence can be rented out for less than six months, there are plenty of such short-term listings online. Is the Government only able to act after people complain? Rather than adopting this \"one eye open, one eye closed\" approach, why do we not explore other solutions? For example, we can allow short-term rentals for certain apartments, as long as all the residents are agreeable to it.
Lastly, I hope that this amendment Bill will allow residents living in condominiums and ECs to enjoy covered linkways which connect their condominium or EC to the nearest bus-stop, just like HDB residents do. After all, the Government has always been encouraging Singaporeans to take public transportation.
(In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, with our limited land, urban planning is crucial to maintain a good quality of life and have good quality buildings. In this age of rapid developments, it is important that we frequently review the rules and update them whenever necessary. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the amendments.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Chong Kee Hiong.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of this Bill which will strengthen URA's enforcement powers and facilitate its administrative and planning processes. However, in my view there are some points for further review which I would like to share with the House.
The first is regarding the reduction of the permissible maximum number of unrelated persons for subletting, from the current eight to six persons.
I would like to suggest that this criterion be refined to take into account the size of the unit and the actual number of rooms per unit. The universal cap of six persons per unit may not be optimal. For smaller units, this could result in overcrowding. For bigger units, it is an unnecessary constraint which would deprive owners of additional rental income.
Casting a stronger focus on safety and hygiene, the Ministry could look into specifying available square footage per occupant and the level of amenities, such as toilets and bathrooms, provided on a per person basis. Such specifications will set the basic standards for living conditions and prevent owners from subdividing their units further to create more rooms. This will help to enhance not only the well-being of the occupants but of the neighbours as well.
Next, on the provision of dormitory accommodation for seven or more persons and short-term accommodation of six consecutive months or less for rent will be deemed a change of use for a dwelling-house for which failure to obtain written permission will be an offence.
With many rooms and residences in Singapore now being offered on Airbnb, it would be advisable to provide this group of owners with more clarity on whether they should withdraw their listings to avoid running afoul of the law.
Another area of concern is the proposed section 12A. The owner of a property must satisfy, on a balance of probabilities, that he has taken \"all reasonable precautions\" to prevent the contravention by the tenant or contractor, or demonstrate \"due diligence\" but could not have prevented the contravention by the tenant or contractors.
The challenge here is what constitutes \"all reasonable precautions\" or \"exercise due diligence\". These are grey areas that will only be decided if the case goes before a Court. The owner may think that he has taken \"all reasonable precautions\" but the authority may view otherwise.
Some of us may recall that many years ago, a number of landlords were charged for harbouring illegal immigrants. The law did not spell out the requirements and duty of the owners but merely stated the requirement of \"due diligence\". The Courts took pain in those years to interpret what constituted \"due diligence\". The result then was that the bulk of the cases were slapped with convictions rather than acquittal. Subsequently, in 2004 and 2007, section 57 of the Immigration Act was amended twice, and new sub-sections were inserted to explain the kind of acts that the house owners must carry out to avoid prosecution.
Similar ambiguity, if applied to section 12A, could cause undue stress on owners and result in unnecessary legal issues and costs. This is especially so if the owners are elderly, physically impaired or illiterate. In some cases, the owners have assigned power of attorney to a third party to lease to tenants and, in the event of a contravention of section 12A, does it mean that the owners would still be taken to task?
In my view, section 12A could be more prescriptive in listing out the due diligence steps that owners should take, such as requesting the tenant or contractor to sign an undertaking or affirm a statutory declaration.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, like any community or society, the locals expect to live in an environment that they are accustomed to, where they see familiar faces, understand one another's culture and respect one another's religion. It is the same whether you are in Singapore, Germany or the United Kingdom (UK).
Today, with the popularity of Airbnb, a Singaporean can, if there are no rules in place, wake up one day and find himself being stared at by, say, someone from another country staying next door and a new one every other week, month or so. I am sure it would raise his/her suspicions and he/she or would be asking himself or herself, \"What and who is this?\" And this is what will happen if we do not control property owners who turn their premises into a hostel or use it for Airbnb activities. Notwithstanding, Singapore also needs to embrace disruptive technologies or emerging opportunities, such as Airbnb and others, especially in an environment of softer growth and to capitalise on existing unproductive assets.
Hence, I am pleased that it is now spelt out in the Bill the rules that prohibit short-term lease to a large number of unrelated persons. With these rules in place, it will be easier to carry out enforcement against property owners who use their premises for prohibited activities. Perhaps, it would be good if the Minister could clarify what its policy will be on Airbnb going forward, if the owner of a premises applies for a licence to use it for vacation homes, for example?
Thanks to mainstream and social media, it is widely known that renting out homes for short-term stays is, in fact, forbidden. But this is not stopping Singaporean Airbnb listings from popping up ever so frequently. I think it is important that the Ministry takes a clear stand on it or it will be assumed that the regulation is a paper tiger. In this market where some flat owners are hard-pressed to get tenants, some of them have resorted to renting out their units to short-term travellers.
Next, I note that URA has been given more power in the decision-making process with regard to the physical appearance and design of buildings, with the goal of making Singapore a delightful and walkable city in relation to the latest rule on public spaces on private property to meet new design guidelines, such as providing ample shade, public seating and connectivity between buildings either above or below ground. But the question is: how will this affect the cost of development for the building owner? Will this deter old buildings from being redeveloped? In my constituency, there are quite a number of condominiums, for example, which may be affected by these changes in the Bill and also in the city-centre as well.
With so many different designs for buildings in Singapore, both residential and commercial, we need to have some coordination in their appearance. What can be done to ensure that there is some cohesion in the design, unless we are open to a bit of differentiation and chaos and that whether there is good connectivity for pedestrians to move from one to another and what it impacts as well?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Miss Cheryl Chan.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): Mr Deputy Speaker, the amendments in this Bill are encouraging and assist to explicitly explain certain details in existing rules which have been unclear or not legalised for enforcement to be carried out. With the rules clearly spelt out for enforcement purpose, it will positively support enforcement personnel to conduct their duties, hold the owners responsible and render early intervention to some local issues without wastage of our public resources.
The amendment on subletting of a property to an excessive number of unrelated persons in this Bill, I feel, is a welcome move. Not only does it assist enforcers to conduct their checks, it also prevents situations where safety is a concern and the relevant authorities were unable to gain access into properties to take the necessary actions. Such stories are not unheard of during my house visits and Meet-the-People sessions. Here, I would like to raise a few areas which I felt the Ministry should further consider, as enhanced enforcement powers may not suffice under some conditions.
One, in this amendment, it only refers to private properties and not HDB flats. But, with regard to concerns on overcrowding and safety, the size of a HDB flat generally poses more of these challenges, given its limited space compared to a landed property. I have received numerous feedback from residents living in HDB flats of suspected units housing more than the specified number of tenants allowed under the current guidelines. HDB had difficulties locating the owners, especially those who live overseas, and were unable to conduct the appropriate checks of the suspected units. I suggest that the Ministry consider applying the rule on the basis of the number of people per the built-up area, which is the gross floor area regardless of public or private property. In addition, all owners must be made to provide contactable details when declaring their property for rental and are held accountable if their tenants refuse to cooperate with the authorities.
Second, during my house visits, I have encountered units that are occupied by elderly couples or those living alone with a domestic helper. These people are understandably sometimes reluctant to provide access of their premises to the authorities due to uncertainty and lack of trust in strangers. The case in point is not a concern of excessive subletting but on other areas, like the need for the authorities to inspect the presence of mosquito breeding, building structure conformance and so on. Should the Bill be passed, how can the authorities assist these elderly persons to ensure that they are safeguarded through a process to provide access and not fear of being penalised for not complying on the first instance?
Third, while the current focus is about non-compliance being the responsibility of home owners and developers of the property, we may have neglected the role that the property agents play in such transactions. In cases where excessive subletting occurs, what is the probability that rental agreements were made without the assistance of a property agent and that the agent was unaware of tenancy conditions in the said property breaching the stipulated guidelines? And if proven so, will the property agent be equally liable for committing the offence as the home owner? I would urge the Ministry to consider having some of the enforcement terms as compulsory clauses within the rental agreements and the contractual agreements between the owner and the property agents. Tougher measures have to be taken against those who violate and possibly imposing a debarment period in which the owners are not allowed to rent their property.
Enforcement is often viewed as an essential process for checks on compliance when the rules or guidelines are in place. However, when it is not explicitly written in legal terms, it is usually difficult for the enforcers to take any recourse against those who offend. As such, I support the amendment and the introduction of sections 13, 19A and 20A. The requirement to appoint QPs is absolutely necessary as the process of compliance during planning, construction and the final building structure has tremendous implication on safety. Be it for conservation, commercial or residential purpose, safety is an aspect that we cannot compromise. If the buildings were not constructed in accordance with approved plans, the cost of rectification will be huge and, at times, irreplaceable.
It is likely that many owners are layman when it comes to building design and materials used, and they are ignorant of the building requirements and the terminologies. Many have dreams of what they hope their final design would be for their prized possession. However, many cannot articulate these details nor have any idea how the process may be like until they embark on some of these projects. Some errant developers may present false claims of their capabilities and hard sell before the contract is signed.
This was exactly the issue that one of my residents faced recently. Like most owners, they had entrusted the project solely to the contractors. Being a first-time owner of a landed property, they were unsure of the processes involved. Unknowingly, their trust in the contractor, whom they thought would have the architect and the QP appointed to supervise the project, turned out to be a nightmare for them.
Often, owners would not have sight of the new developments in the building rules and are technically challenged to understand the construction progress or even check against what materials had been used. This is even more difficult when the structures are embedded or concealed. Before they can reach the stage of obtaining the Temporary Occupation Permit (TOP), it would have entailed legal suits and caused home owners unwarranted stress, notwithstanding the strain it creates in our mediation and litigation systems.
To reduce the frequency of such incidences, I would like to ask the Minister on the validation process of the QPs, how to ensure their certifications are kept relevant and that these QPs have duly carried out their duties and tasks before they endorse and sign off on the approval documents. If the QPs and/or developers were found to have violated the rules, how can it be made known to the public so that future consumers would not fall prey to the unruly players?
On this note, Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill and look forward to the inclusion of these new clauses and that legalising the terms would help our enforcers to carry out their duties more efficiently, giving rise to safer buildings and developments in our city state.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Exempted Business","subTitle":"Motion","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the proceedings on the business set down on the Order Paper for today be exempted at this day's Sitting from the provisions of Standing Order No 2.\" ‒ [Mr Desmond Lee]. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Planning (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, I stand in support of the Bill. I will focus my speech on the short-term rentals, and I note that it is already illegal to lease a home for less than six months in Singapore.
However, what we are doing in this Bill is codifying this URA subletting guideline, and I have concerns about this. My concern is that this Bill might be passed too hastily. In May 2016, URA stated that the results of the public consultation on short-term rentals were \"split, with no clear consensus\". URA, by its own admission, added that \"this issue on short-term stays is complex, multi-faceted, has wide-ranging implications and it warrants a careful and balanced review,\" and, therefore, it \"needed more time to study the issue\". I stress that these statements were published not more than a year ago. While this Bill might be passed, can the Minister clarify if his Ministry will be studying this issue further, will he be conducting more public consultations and do a further review on this?
The sharing economy, while disruptive, is here to stay. We have witnessed this with Uber and Grab. Likewise, home-sharing concepts, like Airbnb and PandaBed, are here to stay. Passing the law to combat the real or perceived negativities of the home-sharing economy diverges from the approach that was taken against similarly disruptive entrants in Uber and Grab.
We are also ignoring the popularity of such \"disruptive\" home-sharing concepts, especially with the younger generation, and how this might ultimately also affect our tourism industry. Just taking into consideration Airbnb, do we really want to ban a company which, according to some media reports, boasts more than a million listings across 190 countries in 34,000 cities with more than 25 million guests served, from operating in Singapore?
At last year's National Day Rally, the Prime Minister noted that there are two ways to respond to disruption: (i) to close Singapore off and try to stop people from using the new technology, or (ii) embrace change and let the disruption happen, but help the incumbents adapt. The Prime Minister said that old models are not working. New models are coming in thick and fast, and we have to adjust and keep up because of technology and globalisation, and the disruption will happen over and over again, relentlessly. I hope that we do not close Singapore off to the home-sharing economy and stop Singaporeans and tourists from using such platforms in Singapore. I believe that we should embrace this disruption and explore ways to help all stakeholders adapt to the new normal. We should regulate rather than ban.
Given that home-sharing platforms have many users and customers, does URA have enough manpower to undertake full enforcement measures in the first place? How many enforcement officers does URA have to enforce this? Following the passing of this Bill, will it require all the listings ‒ all 6,000 or so, as my colleague Er Dr Lee Bee Wah has stated ‒ on these home-sharing platforms to be removed?
And, lastly, has URA conducted research on how other countries have regulated the home-sharing concept? Can the Minister share if we are considering following some of these regulations?
Lastly, Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for introducing a custodial sentence for repeat offenders of permitting unauthorised development and subdivision. This is necessary because recalcitrance at the expense of damaging Singapore's heritage and identity should never be tolerated. I am heartened by the addition of section 24B to the Act, which adds another layer of protection to conservation areas in Singapore.
I note that in discharging their duties, QPs are required to notify URA of any contravention or non-compliance with any provision, condition, requirement or plans in relation to this Act. Could the Minister consider adding a time factor into this obligation, to notify \"without delay\", \"immediately\" or \"as soon as practicable\"? I believe that the earlier the non-compliance is reported, the higher the chance that we could prevent or mitigate problems that may arise from that non-compliance. Sir, notwithstanding my comments, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Deputy Speaker, thanks for allowing me to participate in this debate. I support the Bill but have some suggestions for the Minister's consideration.
As echoed by other Members who have spoken earlier on this Bill, I, too, would like to mention that, firstly, under the new Fourth Schedule, URA will reduce the maximum number of unrelated persons a property can be rented to from eight to six. The intention is to deal with the recurrent problem of subletting to too many tenants, resulting in overcrowding. However, as properties vary greatly in terms of size and configuration, may I recommend that the Ministry limit the number of tenants based on the sizes and types of rooms of the residences?
Secondly, I would like to advise that we seek consistency in our criteria for both public and private housing. Currently, a Singapore Citizen is allowed to sublet the entire HDB flat after fulfilling the minimum occupation period. The maximum number of sub-tenants allowed in each flat is based on flat type. For 1-room and 2-room flats, four sub-tenants; for 3-room flats, six sub-tenants; and for 4-room and bigger flats, nine sub-tenants. Private properties should be subjected to similar caps as well.
Thirdly, I would like to request for greater protection for tenants. In the last few years, there have been cases of owners who collected deposits and sublet the same property to multiple tenants. Does the Ministry keep track of how many such cases of complaints have occurred in the past five years? Will the Ministry implement measures to deter such cases from recurring? In addition, often, owners and their tenants have disputes over whether the deposits should be returned, and some owners keep the deposits at the end of the leases without valid reasons. Would the Ministry consider setting up a Government-approved lease deposit account in which landlords are required to place their tenants' deposits? This will help enhance protection for tenants and facilitate recovery of their deposits.
I would also like to ask how many cases there have been of tenants subletting to other tenants in the last five years. What are the typical profiles of such tenants and what actions have been taken against them? If they are foreigners, would the Ministry consider banning them from working and living in Singapore? In addition, would the Minister share how many cases of disputes between neighbours involving Singapore residents and foreign tenants there were in the past five years? Does the Ministry keep track of the nature of the disputes so that we will be able to formulate better preventive measures?
Finally, would the Minister share with the House how the Ministry works with MCSTs, the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA), the Police and Neighbourhood Committees to enforce and regulate the private property rental market?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister Lawrence Wong.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Members of the House who have risen in support of the Bill and for sharing their views. Let me now address the points that were raised in the course of the debate.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I believe all the Members in this House would agree that a liveable and vibrant city must have attractive public spaces, good connectivity and also a built heritage that strengthens our sense of memories and shared experiences. And this is what the amendment in the Bill strives to achieve, by strengthening the planning levers under URA. So, in response to some of the queries raised by Members, I can confirm that URA will, indeed, make use of these provisions to require developers, where it comes to new developments, to put in place connectivity and better building standards, including more covered linkways between buildings or even to nearby bus stops. That is the very intention of this Bill and URA will, where meaningful to provide for such connectivity, require developers to do so for new developments.
For existing developments, the provisions in the Bill do not envisage an imposition on the existing buildings. But should the property owners of these existing buildings choose to redevelop their properties or choose to make additions and alterations in their properties, and they have to seek URA's planning permission to do so, then that would be an opportune time for URA to impose these new conditions.
I think many Members would be supportive of these additions and these provisions to impose conditions on developers to enhance connectivity and building standards. But there were some Members, in particular, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Alex Yam, who were concerned about the cost impact and how this will impact on the building and perhaps even on residents.
Generally, the cost of providing these features is a small component of the overall development costs. In addition, URA will not require every development to provide public space or connectivity. It will do so judiciously and where it is meaningful to do so. These requirements will only be applied, for example, to strategically located sites in key areas or where there is provision or if it is meaningful to provide for connectivity. In addition, the public spaces that are required may be excluded from the overall floor area, so there would be no impact on the development potential of the sites. So, there is a way to balance the different requirements, and we will be mindful that even as we impose these provisions, they do not lead to a significant escalation of costs.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked a separate matter about access to neighbouring property to execute works, such as the plastering of walls. I understand this is a concern very often found in private residential areas. It is really not so much a planning issue but a matter of resolving disputes between two property owners. URA cannot override the property owner's rights, but it will help to facilitate mediation between neighbours to resolve issues, if necessary.
That is my first reply on the broad area of planning levers. Next, let me touch on the points that Members have raised on the responsibilities of home owners, and potentially even extending that to other stakeholders like property agents. And here, there was also a mix of views.
Ms Joan Pereira and Miss Cheryl Chan wanted to be sure that we can take suitable action against home owners and property agents responsible for offences, but I believe Mr Chong Kee Hiong sought assurance that home owners would not be burdened unnecessarily by the amendments. And again, it is about striking the right balance. Where any property has been misused or unauthorised works done, URA will ensure that culpable parties are all taken to task, whether for committing or abetting the offence. For home owners who do not reside in or are not in Singapore, URA will obtain the owner's home address from ICA and the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS), and they still have to answer the charges if there is a violation of the rules. I think this is in response to Ms Joan Pereira's question. If there is evidence to show that a property agent is complicit in an infringement, they will be referred to the Council of Estate Agents (CEA), who will sanction them accordingly. I think that is something that Miss Cheryl Chan had asked about.
When it comes to enforcement, URA will, if necessary, beef up its enforcement capability and resources but it will also work with other agencies, for example, ICA, the Singapore Police Force (SPF), the Ministry of Manpower (MOM), the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) and the National Environment Agency (NEA), as Mr Gan Thiam Poh had suggested, to share information on any suspected cases of unauthorised use of private property and take the necessary enforcement actions.
Miss Cheryl Chan shared the concerns of elderly home owners who may be taken to task for not assisting enforcement checks. I would like to assure her that URA officers will take a reasonable approach in enforcement. They will, first, identify themselves when there is a need to inspect premises and also explain the intentions of their visit. Officers will not force the occupants to allow them to enter, unless repeated requests to enter have been denied or they assess that critical evidence will be lost if they cannot gain access in a timely manner.
Several Members, including Mr Alex Yam and Mr Chong Kee Hiong, asked about the precautions that building owners or property owners would have to take and what is deemed to be appropriate due diligence. I think it is very difficult and not so practical to draw out all the different scenarios and due diligence steps that have to be taken in legislation itself, but I would just like to assure Members that URA would carefully assess the culpability of persons involved, given all the facts available on each particular case at hand, and ensure that owners who have no part in directing the violation are not unduly penalised. URA will not make egregious demands on owners, and whether or not due diligence has been exercised will be assessed reasonably.
Another section of the provisions in the amendment Bill for which there were some comments was on the role of QPs. Miss Cheryl Chan asked about the professionalism of QPs. The Board of Architects and the Professional Engineers Board oversee the professional development of architects and engineers, respectively. For instance, in order to renew their practising certificates annually, both architects and engineers have to meet \"continuing professional development\" requirements to update their competencies.
All registered architects and engineers are listed on their relevant board's website. So, if there is any question or doubt about whether or not this is a QP, you can look at the website of the relevant board. The professions have their regulatory regimes in place to ensure that those listed are competent to discharge their duties lawfully. The Board of Architects and the Professional Engineers Board will not hesitate to take disciplinary action against registered professionals who fall foul of regulations. Depending on the severity, the QP may be fined, suspended or deregistered. This Bill also gives URA more powers to charge QPs in Court, if necessary, for instance, if they had provided false declarations.
Mr Louis Ng suggested that a time factor be added to QPs' obligation to notify URA of contravention or non-compliance of requirements under the Act. Other than notifying the authorities, the Bill already requires the QP to \"take all reasonable steps to immediately stop or cease the contravention\". This is ultimately what matters, as conditions at a construction site are constantly changing. So, I believe that the provisions in the Bill are sufficient to meet the Member's concern in this regard.
Next, let me talk about occupancy cap. It was, again, one of the topics here that has attracted quite a number of views. Miss Cheryl Chan, Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Mr Gan Thiam Poh suggest that the occupancy cap be calibrated according to the size of the residential unit. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah suggested that the flat cap of six tenants be now imposed on HDB flats, so that it is consistent between private and public housing. I think Mr Gan also suggested that.
In HDB flats, there are predictable typologies of design and layout, and a simple set of rules can be based on the number of rooms. That is what we have today. Unlike HDB flats, private housing comes in wide-ranging varieties and configurations. It would be hard to formulate a rule that could capture all the variations along the scale of private residential housing, from shoebox flats to bungalows. We have considered this, but we think that a complicated tiered cap may be confusing for the public and may result in uncertainty for those who want to rent or sublet legitimately.
In fact, the cap of six persons was the original cap that used to be in place before. But this cap was raised to eight in 2008, and it was due specifically to ease a crunch in the housing supply for workers. Since then, we have built up a good supply of alternative accommodation catering to groups other than families, such as hostels for students and dormitories for company employees and workers. So, we believe it is timely to revert to the cap of six, which was what it used to be before 2008.
As for reviewing the HDB limits, I think that is a separate matter. It is not within the remit of the Planning Act because the HDB controls are regulated separately, but we would be happy to do the review of the occupancy cap for HDB flats on a separate basis.
Finally, on the most interesting issue of this debate and the one which got most contributions from Members – short-term accommodation. Let me address the queries and the points that have been raised by Members with regard to this particular issue.
I must first clarify that the amendments in this Bill do not amount to a change of policy. There is already an existing URA guideline against any short-term accommodation of less than six months in private residences. A breach of these guidelines can be considered a material change of use, which will then be deemed an offence under the Planning Act. This remains the case under the amendments to the Act and the same penalties apply. So, we are not changing policy. We are taking the same approach. In fact, URA had undertaken public consultation on this matter of short-term accommodation in 2015, and in its focus group discussions with stakeholders, such as Neighbourhood Committees and managing agents of private residential developments, there was also strong endorsement of the need to preserve the privacy and sanctity valued by the vast majority of home owners.
Likewise, several Members just now − Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Ms Joan Pereria, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Alex Yam, among others − shared their constituents' experiences and expressed strong support for these rules, and also, in fact, strong support for enforcement. I know Mr Louis Ng felt that this perhaps was done in haste, but I also heard Er Dr Lee Bee Wah who asked why we took so long to put this in place.
On balance, we will have to enforce the current rules, which we have been doing and will continue to do.
Indeed, over the past year, URA has already seen a 60% rise in complaints from home owners about breaches of this short-term rule in their residential properties, and the complaints are related to public nuisance or even safety concerns for their families. These are issues that we take seriously and we should enforce the current rules, as we are already doing, and make sure that the issue does not worsen further. The amendments to the Act will enable URA to do so.
In terms of enforcement, URA will continue with its current enforcement approach on errant home owners, which means that when you look at advertising on home-sharing or rental websites, that, in itself, is not an offence and it is not regulated under the Planning Act, because these listings typically do not indicate the tenure of lease. On the basis of the listing on the site, it is not possible to take action. But as a first step, what URA will do is to work with the MCST of the development which have units with online listings and they will put up notifications to the residents in that development, so that the residents are aware of the rules on short-term accommodation. Then, if the short-term rentals persist and cause disamenities for other home owners, URA will step in to enforce.
I agree with Ms Joan Pereira that MCSTs can also do their part. Under the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act (BMSMA), MCSTs have oversight of common property. For example, they can pass their own by-laws to manage the use and enjoyment of their common property through screening and record-keeping. They can also pass by-laws to register the details of all visitors. These are meaningful and practical things that MSCTs can do, and we will encourage them to do so and assist URA in its enforcement action.
I should also clarify that the minimum period of six months for short-term rental in private residences is set out in the Schedule of the Act, and the Government can adjust this parameter in future by gazette. Indeed, in its earlier consultation, URA had received feedback from a number of respondents, including home owners, that there was scope to reduce the minimum period of rental in a private residence. So, URA is studying this carefully, and will consider a possible reduction in the minimum rental timeframe. This is the six-month time frame. URA will consider whether there can be scope to reduce this timeframe.
But whatever adjustments we may make to this minimum period, it is clear that it will not accommodate residential homes that are being put up for daily rental, which is meaning to say, even if we were to reduce from six months to three months, for example, this would not accommodate residential homes that are converted to daily rental of rooms which are operating very much more like hotels. In fact, such premises which are rented out on a daily basis really ought to be regulated more like hotels rather than residential homes, and they should be subjected to relevant licensing and conditions to ensure proper standards. That was also the feedback that URA had received from various stakeholders, and we also note that many cities in Asia and around the world are likewise regulating short-term home-sharing platforms in a similar way to hotels and serviced apartments. So, in response to the point made by Mr Louis Ng, we had, indeed, studied the models used by other cities. Indeed, for many of them, where it comes to short-term stays that are operating very much more like daily rentals the way a hotel or a service apartment would, the city municipal governments are taking actions and regulating them like hotels or serviced apartments.
In this regard, I am happy to share that URA is studying the option of creating a new use class for private residences that wish to engage in short-term rentals. Such properties would then be approved for that specific purpose, like serviced apartments or hotels today. New residential sites can be sold with such an approved use, allowing flexibility for short-term rentals. For existing residential buildings, they would then require planning permission for change of use, and this would be subject to a set of guidelines which URA is looking into.
What I have described just now, these proposed measures are separate from the amendments that are being tabled today. What I have described just now with this option of creating a new use class for private residences to engage in short-term rentals, can be done without changes to the Act. So, these are separate from the amendments. URA is studying them, and they will provide more details soon for further engagement and consultation with the stakeholders.
I shared what we are thinking about because there is obviously strong interest from Members, and I thought I should clarify our approach and current thinking on this matter, and also explain that we do see a role for home-sharing platforms to continue operating in Singapore so long as they are properly regulated and so long as there is a level playing field between them and similar entities that provide short-term rentals like hotels and service apartments.
I agree that the sharing economy is here to stay; this is a point that several Members had said. We will allow a space in our city for such platforms to exist.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I believe I have addressed the points raised by Members, and I thank them for their contributions and support of the Bill. The amendments in this Bill will strengthen URA's ability to safeguard and enhance the vibrancy and liveability of our urban space. Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah:\tI thank the Minister for his comprehensive explanation. On the part of the access for plastering, if you think that mediation can solve the problem, then we do not have residents coming to us, complaining or sharing with us the problems that they face. So, I thought this is the right time to put in place a requirement. Actually, if the house owners know that, at the end of the day, they have no choice but still have to give them the access, maybe the problem can be resolved much easier. Because today, they know that your URA, your BCA, all have got no teeth. So, you cannot get them. So, this is why I want to urge the Minister to reconsider this.
Mr Lawrence Wong:\tMr Deputy Speaker, we know that this is a difficult issue. We have to balance the need for intervention and action against property owners' rights to their own living spaces and to their own homes. But we are not just leaving this alone. The Planning Act amendments, as I have said, that are in the Bill, do not cover the full extent of what the Member would like to see. We will continue with the mediation route which we have already been doing and will continue to do more of that, but we will continue to study and see if other things can be done to address these difficult issues between neighbours and between two property owners where there are conflicting issues, like the one that the Member has raised.
Mr Deputy Speaker: May I remind Members to only raise clarifications. Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang:\tSir, I thank the Minister for sharing that they are reviewing the regulations for short-term home-sharing. But can I ask if there is a timeframe for this review?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Deputy Speaker, in fact, we have been doing this for some time already. The consultation was done in 2015. Since then, we have obtained further feedback from different parties. We have been examining different models from the various cities, as I have described earlier. We do have some sense of what we would like to see happen. I have described very broad outlines of some of the approaches that we are thinking about. I would expect URA to be able to come up with something quite soon. It will seek further engagement and consultation from different stakeholders before finalising and implementing these plans.
[(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)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Coordinating LED Night Illumination in our National Infrastructure","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\"
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong):Mr Deputy Speaker, as the sun sets outside this House, it seems timely that we consider the night, the colour of the night and how we light up the night.
Over the past 10 years, we have seen improvements in lighting technology. Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) have become more prevalent on the commercial market and have transformed the market for lighting. The lifespan of an LED is longer than that of a traditional incandescent light bulb. LEDs give out less heat, important in a tropical country like Singapore. LEDs, generally, are more energy-efficient than other types of light bulbs or even fluorescent lamps, and their energy efficiency is getting better year-by-year. They are an example of how science and technology are improving people's lives − new solutions to old problems.
Today, there are many different types of LED lights, each with slightly different shades of colour, even different shades of white. To describe the shades of white, the experts use the phrase \"colour temperature\". This is not the temperature of the light bulb, but if I may use the language of scientists, it is the temperature of an ideal black-body radiator giving out light of comparable colour to the light source. What does that mean? You might call it the colour of \"red-hot\", \"yellow-hot\" or \"white-hot\", even if the LED light itself does not give out much heat. So, we have some LEDs which give out a yellowish, warmer, more natural-looking white, or colour temperature of around 3,000 Kelvin. Some have a harsher white colour, with a little bit of blue light as well, or a colour temperature closer to 4,500 Kelvin or more.
Over the years, it has become easier for us to light up the night, but this has also brought to light new challenges as well. For example, Mr Deputy Speaker, exposure to light has been reported to suppress the production of melatonin. Melatonin is a hormone produced by the body that influences the body's own biological rhythms, what we call the circadian rhythms that tell our bodies when we feel sleepy and when we feel awake.
While any kind of visible light can suppress the production of melatonin, we know from research at Harvard University that blue light, in particular, has a stronger effect than other kinds of light. For example, blue light suppresses the production of melatonin for about twice as long as green light of comparable brightness. It shifts the circadian rhythm − the sleeping, waking rhythm − by three hours instead of just one-and-a-half hours. Some researchers have even raised concerns about whether shifting this circadian rhythm can affect eating habits and, in turn, the risk of obesity and diabetes. The research is ongoing but questions like these are being talked about. We also know that modern fluorescent lights and LEDs produce more blue light than traditional light bulbs. So, this is a growing issue.
Mr Deputy Speaker, what have other countries and other jurisdictions tried to do about these questions? If we look at the US and Europe, increasingly, there are policy suggestions proposing that the colour of light is important, especially at night. In Switzerland, the Federal Office of Public Health recommends that LED lamps should have less blue light component. The American Medical Association has also called for a reduction in the amount of blue light component in LED lights. The Harvard Medical School, in their Harvard Health Letter, has pointed out that having too much blue light at night may not be optimal for health. I am grateful to experts, such as Prof Michael Chee from the Duke-NUS Medical School, for highlighting some of these pointers.
Even in the commercial sector, even among the companies that build your portable devices, such as the Apple iPhone, has a \"night mode\", where the colour of the display shifts to a more yellow shade of white, with less blue light emitted.
So, why is this important to Singapore? This is because in our built-up housing estates, the colour of night is shaded by what kind of lighting we choose. Corridor light in our housing estates and in our void decks can shine into living rooms and bedrooms. It is not a short exposure. At the same time, it is also important that our housing estates are energy efficient. And our housing estates must also, at the same time, be brightly lit enough so that all residents, especially our vulnerable and elderly, are able to move about safely at night.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I am told by Housing and Development Board (HDB) colleagues that, for health and safety of lights, HDB relies upon the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard called IEC 62471. Currently, both the pure white light and warmer yellow-white light LEDs would satisfy this IEC criteria. But, at the same time, given the discussions going on in the US and Europe, it is quite possible that the consensus may be shifting in favour of warm yellow-white LED lights, lights which are less pure white but have a warmer yellow-white colour.
Mr Deputy Speaker, even if the consensus does not shift for a few more years, it would be prudent of us to consider possible future developments in the industry and future shifts in the consensus because an LED lamp, once installed, is an investment that will be around for many years, long enough to possibly become obsolete if international safety standards shift. And even if we leave aside the discussion about health implications, there is something to be said for having the night-time lighting look just that little bit more natural − a more yellow shade of white, a city at night that looks warmer and more natural.
So, Mr Deputy Speaker, I call upon the Ministry of National Development (MND) and HDB to look at this issue to consider standardising and moving towards LEDs which give out less blue light. We can do this by choosing LED lights with a bit more of a natural yellow colour, or a \"warm white\" colour. To ensure that our living environment is still bright enough for the elderly, HDB could also study the perceived brightness of different types of LEDs. What kind of power output is needed for a pure white LED to look as bright as a warm yellow LED, how to calibrate this, how to have these standards? And once these standards have been studied by HDB, they could be shared with other agencies as well as the private sector. And I wonder if HDB's Building and Research Institute could help look into this.
We should also encourage the Land Transport Authority (LTA) to think about having less blue light when illuminating our roads at night. Safety on the road is important. It is important that road users can see one another, can see pedestrians, and can stay out of danger. But within these limitations, we should look at how to reduce the amount of blue light given out by LED lights. With LTA's plans to replace all streetlamps with LED lights by 2022, we are at an inflection point in our national lighting infrastructure. It is not too early for us to be thinking about these questions. And in our Ministry of Education (MOE) schools as well, there may be a role for looking at warm yellow-white LEDs when replacing the older fluorescent light tubes.
And Deputy Speaker, all these could be part of a shared design language that shapes the aesthetics of our housing estates and our shared spaces throughout our little red dot. Deputy Speaker, as a little red dot on the Equator, we have 12 hours of daylight each day. The rest is night; one half of our existence. So, it matters how we light the night. The colour of night matters, and there is emerging evidence that by choosing a better way to colour the night, we can reduce the risk of casting a shadow on our sleep and our health. May we always choose well and always seek the right kind of illumination.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Senior Minister of State Mr Desmond Lee.
The Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Deputy Speaker, I agree with Dr Tan Wu Meng that night lighting has an impact on the everyday lives of Singaporeans. Our lighting must, first, be functional, for drivers on our expressways to passers-by along our HDB estate corridors, night lighting must be calibrated to suit their different needs. Second, it must be aesthetically pleasing. It should positively shape how we perceive and interact with our estates and public spaces. And third, it has to be safe. This is important, given how pervasive night lighting is in a dense built-up city like Singapore.
To achieve this, one of the specifications we take into account is the light colour. And those of you who have bought fluorescent or LED lights will know that they generally come in three colours, as Dr Tan had described − warm white, pure white and cool white. Warm white has the least amount of blue light, giving it a yellow hue and a colour temperature of about 3,000 Kelvin; pure white has a more balanced mix of blue light, giving it a natural daylight feel and a colour temperature of around 4,000 Kelvin; while cool white has the highest amount of blue light, resulting in a harsh white colour and a colour temperature of around 6,000 Kelvin.
Light colour is important for both functionality and aesthetics. For our street lighting, LTA is moving towards pure white because it offers drivers a high colour contrast, allowing them to see better at night.
In our new HDB developments, light fittings at common areas, such as corridors, also use pure white, but for a different reason. The previous feedback garnered from residents indicated that warm white was too dim for HDB estates. Light colour can affect safety, too, as Dr Tan rightly pointed out. I have explained how LTA uses light colour to improve road safety at night, for drivers and pedestrians.
Dr Tan has cited several reports which advise minimising the amount of blue light for health reasons. Based on these reports, he has suggested we use warm white in our HDB common areas and LTA street lighting. These reports make two broad points. First, they state that long-term or high intensity exposure to blue light can damage the retina of the human eye. Second, they highlight that exposure to any light at night, especially blue light, can affect our sleep cycles by suppressing the production of a hormone called melatonin and affect our circadian rhythm or body clock. This has been linked to impaired daytime functioning and obesity.
I would like to clarify that care has been taken by agencies to ensure that the lighting installed in public places do not cause harm to the human eye. So, the first point about potential damage to the retina of the human eye is not a significant concern in Singapore, given our regulations.
Lighting in our HDB common areas and LTA street lighting follow the globally-recognised IEC standards, which Dr Tan had articulated earlier. These spell out technical and safety requirements for lighting, including the safety limits for exposure to white light. Indeed, the same report by the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health states that \"commercial LED lamps represent no health risk when used correctly, in terms of the risk to human retina.
On the second point on the impact of blue light on melatonin and our sleep cycles, as Dr Tan pointed out, there is no medical consensus on the issue as yet. The reports do not rule out the use of pure white lighting in street lighting or in public spaces like HDB common areas.
And the specific implications of the reports' findings on our HDB common areas and LTA street lighting are as yet unclear. For example, the Harvard Medical School's Harvard Health Letter is based on studies which exposed people to blue light for six-and-a-half hours or longer, while the exposure of most Singaporeans to HDB corridors and street lighting by LTA is much shorter.
Apart from changing the colour of all our lighting, there may be other ways to address this issue. Indeed, one of the possible solutions mentioned by the American Medical Association is dimming LED lighting during off-peak periods. We have, in fact, already installed LED lighting with motion sensors along staircases for all Build-To-Order (BTO) projects launched since 2014, and we are testing out sensor-controlled smart lighting in the common areas of Punggol Northshore estate. Not only will this make our HDB estates more energy-efficient, but it would also minimise ambient blue-light at night.
Ultimately, we must ensure that our lighting remains functional, aesthetically pleasing and safe. The light colours of HDB common areas and LTA streetlamps are carefully selected to meet the functional, safety and aesthetic needs of Singaporeans. We should only decide how best to enhance our lighting after further study on the appropriate length and intensity of blue-light exposure at night has been done.
This, notwithstanding, I agree with Dr Tan that it is not too early for us to be thinking about the long-term implications of these reports on the health and safety of Singaporeans. We will, therefore, continue to keep a close watch on the evolving research in this area.
HDB will also take up Dr Tan's suggestion to study how to vary lighting levels or luminescence based on different colours of LED lights. This will allow us to better decide on the appropriate light colours in different settings − be it for functional or aesthetic reasons.
On its part, LTA will continue to use pure white lighting for expressways and major arterial roads for road safety reasons, because of the greater colour contrast. In the meantime, because streetlamps use high intensity lighting, LTA will study whether it is feasible to use warm white lighting for streetlamps on minor roads, especially those located in residential estates.
Deputy Speaker, the scientific research into lighting is evolving and new lighting solutions will come on the market. We will continue to take steps to find better ways to colour the night, to keep our city vibrant and safe.
[(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":"Offset from Government Rebates for Utility Bills","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"18 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for Finance (a) to what extent has the GST Voucher – Utilities-Save rebate helped to offset utilities bills during periods of increases in electricity tariffs, especially for rental flats; and (b) for those households under the Pay-As-You-Use scheme, whether this rebate can be directly credited into their prepaid utilities account.
Mr Heng Swee Keat: The permanent Goods and Services Tax (GST) Voucher – U-Save scheme has enabled households in 1- and 2-room Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats to receive support which is equivalent to about three to four months of their utilities bills on average. Those living in 3- and 4-room HDB flats receive support equivalent to about one to two months of their utilities bills. The Pay-As-You-Use (PAYU) scheme is a pre-paid metering scheme launched by SP Services in May 2005 to support a small minority of HDB households whose electricity supply has been disconnected due to arrears in utilities payment. PAYU helps these households have their supply reconnected, while allowing them to settle their arrears over time1. For a household on the PAYU scheme, the applicable U-Save rebate is already being credited to their utilities account to help reduce their arrears. If the arrears have been cleared and that household chooses to remain on the PAYU scheme, the U-Save then offsets the water and gas components of the bill.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : 20% of credit payment goes towards settling outstanding arrears."],"footNoteQuestions":["18"],"questionNo":"18"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cost of Reorganising Healthcare Clusters into Three Groups","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"20 Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong asked the Minister for Health (a) how much will the reorganisation of the healthcare clusters cost; (b) what are the considerations for reorganisation into the three clusters instead of two or more than three; (c) what additional concrete benefits of the reorganisation, such as shorter waiting times for appointments, are there for patients.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: We announced in 2012 Healthcare 2020, which outlined our plan to expand capacity, improve quality and enhance the affordability of healthcare services. Even as we implement Healthcare 2020, we need to plan ahead further into the future. Last year, I announced three key shifts to prepare for our healthcare needs beyond 2020: beyond hospital to community, beyond quality to value, and beyond healthcare to health. This transformation is necessary as our healthcare needs will grow in volume and complexity due to our ageing population and increased chronic disease burden, among others. For this reason, we need to organise ourselves better so that we can implement the transformation more swiftly and decisively.
The public healthcare system will be reorganised into three integrated clusters, each having a fuller range of facilities, capabilities, services and networks across different care settings. This will enable them to deliver more comprehensive and person-centred health promotion, disease prevention, curative and rehabilitative care for the population in their respective regions.
Primary care will play an increasingly important role in our care transformation. After reorganisation, each cluster will have a group of polyclinics which, together with general practitioner partners and community partners, can anchor care more firmly in primary and community settings. Collectively, these changes will ultimately benefit Singaporeans by providing more appropriate care and bringing care closer to them.
In addition to greater economies of scale, the reorganisation will also facilitate scaling up of programmes and services by the integrated clusters, and their collaborations with the private sector and community partners, across a wider region to benefit more Singaporeans. The integrated clusters will be able to tap on a larger pool of manpower resources and talents. They will also be able to offer their employees a wider and deeper range of professional development opportunities and a broader platform for cross-learning that will benefit staff and our patients.
We do not expect to incur significant financial cost for the reorganisation. The planned infrastructure and service developments are already included in our Healthcare 2020 Master Plan and the three key shifts I highlighted, and they are separately catered for in our healthcare budget. These will need to be implemented regardless of the reorganisation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Study on Legislating Eldercare Leave","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"21 Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the outcome of the Ministry's study on legislating eldercare leave for employees; (b) what are the barriers that impede legislation of eldercare leave; and (c) from 2012-2017, how many working caregivers do not have eldercare leave and how many working caregivers quit work to care for an elderly family member full-time.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: We recognise that caregiving is an important responsibility and is no easy feat, particularly for those who have to juggle between work and caregiving roles. The Ministry of Health has strengthened efforts to support caregivers by expanding the capacity of aged care services and the number of home and community care options.
We have been studying the issue of legislating eldercare leave in consultation with unions and employers. On balance, we are not ready to legislate eldercare leave at this time, as we need to strike a balance between employers' concerns on business costs and manpower constraints, and the employability of caregivers, versus the need for additional leave provision for eldercare purposes. There are existing leave provisions that can be used for this purpose.
According to the Ministry of Manpower’s (MOM) Comprehensive Labour Force Survey, some 176,200 females aged 25 to 54 were outside of the labour force in 2016, of which 10% were due to caregiving for family members or relatives. In relation to that, we encourage companies to provide more family-related leave benefits which can be used for different purposes, as well as flexible work arrangements. We track this provision, and the trends have been encouraging thus far; 67% of employees work in companies that offer at least one formal flexible work arrangement last year, up from 56% in 2011; and close to eight in 10 employers also provide unplanned time-off or ad hoc teleworking for their employees to attend to personal matters.
Public service agencies currently already provide two days of parent care leave per year. Some private companies have also done so. OCBC offers two days of family care to employees who are not entitled to childcare leave. Cerebos Pacific Limited, a manufacturing company, also offers family care leave on top of statutory leave.
We will continue to review the need for legislating eldercare leave as our socio-economic circumstances evolve over time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Public Education on Responsible Pet Ownership","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"24 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for National Development whether the Government will take stronger action against recalcitrant residents who flout HDB rules on pets as the incessant noise and unpleasant animal smells affect the surrounding environment and residents.
25 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for National Development in light of the high proportion of pet-related complaints that HDB receives, whether more can be done to educate pet owners about responsibility and due care of their pets.
Mr Lawrence Wong: In high-rise, high-density Singapore, and especially in our housing estates, it is important for Singaporeans to be both responsible pet owners and considerate neighbours. Pet owners are wholly responsible for ensuring that their pets are well-cared for, and that they do not adversely affect the wider living environment.
The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) has focused its efforts on raising public awareness about responsible pet ownership. For the younger generation, AVA holds two to three school talks and learning journeys every month. AVA is also developing a preschool kit for kindergarten teachers to educate their students on animal care and welfare. For the broader community, AVA conducts responsible pet ownership roadshows every year. These roadshows include interactive displays, children’s activities, competitions, talks and workshops. The most recent roadshow at Waterway Point in December 2016 attracted 12,000 attendees.
In the event that pets are causing a nuisance, Housing and Development Board (HDB) officers would advise the flat owners to take measures to stop the nuisance. Where necessary, parties concerned are also advised to attend mediation to resolve the issue amicably. In most cases, this improves the situation. For recalcitrant owners whose pets persistently cause disamenity, they may be required to re-home their pets with assistance from animal welfare groups. As a last resort, recalcitrant owners may be brought to Court, where, upon conviction, they can be fined up to $4,000.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Population Trend for Stray Cats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"28 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for National Development (a) how AVA monitors the population of stray cats in housing estates; (b) what is the population trend of stray cats over the past three years; (c) what measures are put in place to manage its population; and (d) what actions are taken against irresponsible cat feeders.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) does not track the population of stray cats. But AVA works with the Cat Welfare Society (CWS) and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) on stray cat sterilisation. Efforts are also made to try to rehome stray cats, although this is not feasible in all cases.
Under the Stray Cat Sterilisation Programme (SCSP), AVA subsidises the cost of sterilising and micro-chipping stray cats in Housing and Development Board (HDB) estates, industrial and commercial areas, as well as in private housing estates. Through these efforts, the annual number of feedback cases on stray cats has dropped from more than 4,000 in 2014 to fewer than 3,000 in 2016.
AVA also works with CWS and SPCA to educate community feeders to feed stray cats responsibly. This includes placing food in receptacles and clearing up after the feeding. If these conditions are not adhered to, irresponsible feeders can be fined up to $2,000, $4,000 and $10,000 for their first, second and subsequent convictions for littering.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Safety of Sigma Lifts Installed for HDB Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"29 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development (a) what steps is the Ministry taking or has taken to ensure that the Sigma lifts currently in operation are safe to use; and (b) whether it will be taking any action against Sigma and its parent company.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The Ministry of National Development (MND) takes a serious view on the safety of lifts in Singapore. The Housing and Development Board (HDB) has in place a comprehensive set of measures spanning lift procurement, installation and maintenance to ensure that lifts in HDB blocks are safe and fit for operation. In particular, lifts are procured through open tenders, and the evaluation process factors in quality and reliability of lift contractors. Audits, stress-tests and inspections in the presence of an independent Authorised Examiner are also conducted as part of a well-established lift commissioning process.
Sigma has been installing lifts in HDB estates for the past 10 years and has generally met the prescribed performance standards. However, for a recent batch contract awarded to Sigma in 2013, Sigma was unable to meet the timeline for lift installation. Hence, in late-2015, HDB restricted Sigma from tendering for new HDB lift contracts, to ensure that Sigma dedicated its resources to fulfil its contractual obligations. HDB also observed a higher-than-usual breakdown and fault rate in lifts from this batch contract in their first year of operations. The tender restriction has, therefore, not been lifted, and will continue until performance standards improve.
HDB's investigations revealed that while the design and installation of the affected lifts complied with prevailing codes and standards, the doors and sensors were more susceptible to misalignment from knocks. This, coupled with frequent heavy and rough lift usage during the first year period due to renovation and moving activities, resulted in the higher lift faults.
HDB has instructed Sigma to rectify these issues and to carry out improvement works to ensure that the lift doors and sensors operate smoothly. HDB has also issued stern warnings to Sigma and is closely monitoring the performance of its lifts.
Both Sigma and its parent company have channelled more resources towards addressing the issues. In particular, Sigma has undertaken the rectification works progressively, and the performance of the lifts has improved. HDB will continue to hold Sigma accountable for ensuring its lifts meet the required performance standards.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Incidence of Postal Letters Delivered to Wrong Address","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"35 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) how often are postal letters delivered to the wrong address; (b) what action is being taken to improve the service; (c) what are the common reasons for the wrong delivery; and (d) whether any fine-tuning on the sorting process of letters and training of postmen are required.
Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Postal delivery in Singapore is regulated by the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA). Under IMDA's Postal Quality of Service (QoS) framework, SingPost needs to deliver 99% of local basic letters destined for the Central Business District (CBD) by the next working day and 98% of local basic letters destined for non-CBD areas. SingPost is also required to achieve 100% delivery by the second working day. These are one of the most stringent standards for local basic mail in the world.
SingPost delivers more than three million items a day. In 2016, SingPost received about 50 incidents of feedback concerning misdelivered local basic letters. This is a significant improvement from 279 incidents of feedback concerning misdelivered local basic letters in 2013 and 155 in 2015. Letters are misdelivered for several reasons. The postman could have delivered the letter to the wrong letter box, or the address could have been incomplete or incorrectly written.
While the number of mis-deliveries is very small, IMDA takes a serious view of all cases as they inconvenience businesses and individuals. IMDA works closely with SingPost to reduce mis-delivery rates and improve their quality of service. In that regard, SingPost has taken active steps in the last few years to improve its service quality. In 2014, SingPost invested $45 million on sorting machines to improve mail sorting efficiency and accuracy. SingPost has enhanced its staff training programme, which includes the postmen code of conduct, on-the-job training and customer service training. Since 2014, SingPost has hired quality control officers to further ensure that letters are correctly delivered. Finally, as part of its ongoing efforts to engage senders of letters, SingPost provides a 24/7 customer care hotline and has service ambassadors stationed at post offices. SingPost also regularly updates its website with mailing guidelines and tips on addressing letters.
The drop in number of complaints over the last three years show that these efforts have been helpful. Nevertheless, IMDA will continue to monitor SingPost's performance and review the Postal QoS framework, to ensure that SingPost continues to provide reliable and quality postal services for Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Periodic Assessment for Service Personnel who Handle Weapons","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"38 Assoc Prof Randolph Tan asked the Minister for Defence whether service personnel in roles which involve access to weapons and live ammunition are periodically reassessed on the stability of their emotional and psychological state.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: The Ministry of Defence/Singapore Armed Forces (MINDEF/SAF) recognises the importance of ensuring that all Servicemen and women who handle live arms are of sound mind and physical capabilities. SAF has in place various levels of checks to determine the psychological well-being of service personnel. Before enlistment, all pre-enlistees undergo a comprehensive medical screening at the Central Manpower Base for both physical and mental health conditions. Pre-enlistees are asked explicitly if they have a previous record of mental health conditions during the screening. In addition, we require the parent or guardian to endorse this declaration. There is a balance between privacy for the enlistee and potential safety concerns of those with previous mental health conditions.
But since 2016, MINDEF/SAF has also been working with the Ministry of Health to identify pre-enlistees with records of mental health history at public hospitals. If a possible mental health condition is surfaced, the pre-enlistee will be referred to appropriate specialists to certify that that enlistee is mentally capable of performing their National Service duties and to handle firearms.
A Serviceman who is deemed unsuitable to handle firearms because of his emotional or psychological state is excused from such duties and re-deployed to vocations which do not require him to have access to weapons and live ammunition.
SAF Servicemen have avenues to obtain counselling or medical assistance, should they face any emotional or psychological distress, including a 24-hour SAF Counselling Hotline. Those diagnosed with mental health conditions are closely monitored while in service and, where necessary, are provided with regular medical treatment and counselling by psychiatrists, psychologists, counsellors and para-counsellors.
We deploy dedicated psychologists at the formation level to assist commanders in the management of such Servicemen. At the unit level, our commanders interview all Servicemen at regular intervals to find out if they are facing any stresses, including emotional or psychological problems. Commanders also undergo basic training to help them better understand mental health conditions, so that they can try to identify and manage Servicemen with such conditions, including referring them to trained professionals for more assistance, or restricting their access to weapons and ammunition.
MINDEF and SAF will continue to periodically review and strengthen the mental health system, in consultation with the SAF Psychiatry Specialist Advisory Board, which comprises senior psychiatrists drawn from public healthcare institutions, to ensure that all our Servicemen are able to discharge their duties and at the same time, to receive good emotional and mental health care.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Awareness among School Leaders for Importance of Tripartism","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Mr Zainal Sapari asked the Minister for Education (Schools) (a) whether there are efforts made to familiarise senior management and school leaders on the importance of tripartism and its role in creating an environment conducive for Singapore's growth; and (b) whether the Ministry has plans to collaborate with NTUC and its affiliated unions, through its current zonal-level sharing platforms, to understand and strengthen knowledge in tripartism further.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: The Ministry of Education’s (MOE) senior management recognises the importance of tripartism for Singapore. At the Ministry level, there is strong partnership between MOE senior officials and the unions representing our employees. These include four teachers’ unions (Singapore Teachers' Union, Singapore Chinese Teachers' Union, Singapore Malay Teachers' Union and Singapore Tamil Teachers' Union) and the Amalgamated Union of Public Employees. Regular dialogues are conducted, during which the Ministry shares its plans and policies with the unions, and the unions share their ideas, plans and feedback with Ministry officials. Collaboration opportunities are also discussed during these dialogue sessions.
To reinforce the importance of tripartism among our school leaders, we have introduced a labour-management relations module in the leadership programme for senior educators. This newly introduced module helps senior educators to better understand the role of tripartism in Singapore and how strong employee-management relations in MOE help contribute to a strong education system.
The Member has suggested that MOE strengthen knowledge of tripartism through its zonal-sharing platforms. I am glad to share that MOE has been engaging our cluster superintendents to enhance their understanding on the role of tripartism and our collaboration with the unions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Activities to Encourage Secondary School Students to Take Calculated Risks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"40 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Education (Schools) (a) whether there are plans to introduce more activities that will encourage secondary school students to think out of the box; and (b) how can schools help to imbue in the students the spirit to take on calculated risks.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: To better prepare our students to thrive in the future, the Ministry of Education (MOE) has identified a set of 21st Century Competencies to develop in all students. Critical and Inventive Thinking is one of the competencies to be developed. By nurturing our students to be more inventive in their thinking, they will be more ready to think out of the box.
Critical and Inventive Thinking is developed through both the academic curriculum and the co-curricular programmes. Our efforts in this area have been building up steadily over the years.
During lessons, teachers stimulate curiosity and creativity in their students through the use of inquiry-based pedagogies, and novel and open-ended learning tasks. Such approaches encourage students to challenge assumptions, explore new possibilities and embrace uncertainties. Such dispositions are also nurtured through authentic learning experiences in Values-in-Action projects and co-curricular activities, where students have to identify problems that need to be solved and come up with creative solutions.
We have also been providing students with more opportunities for applied learning. This will enable them to apply skills and knowledge gained in the classroom to address real-world problems. Examples of such opportunities include the Applied Learning Programme and Learning for Life Programme in primary and secondary schools, as well as Advanced Elective Modules and Applied Subjects in secondary schools.
To help students grow in their confidence to take calculated risks, our schools seek to provide a learning environment where students can feel safe to make choices, try new ideas and recover from setbacks. We need to help students find more intrinsic motivations in their learning so that they are driven more by a sense of passion. As our schools continue to strengthen their efforts in nurturing such traits in students, we recognise that such cultural shifts will take time and need to be reinforced at home.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Completion of New Bukit Panjang Polyclinic","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"41 Dr Teo Ho Pin asked the Minister for Health whether he can provide an update on the progress of the construction of the Bukit Panjang Polyclinic, its scheduled completion date and details of its range of medical services.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Bukit Panjang Polyclinic is being developed as part of a larger healthcare facility that also includes a nursing home and a senior care centre. Design of the polyclinic is in progress, and physical construction is scheduled to begin by early 2018. The polyclinic is targeted to begin operations by end 2020.
Like other polyclinics, the new Bukit Panjang Polyclinic will provide a suite of services, including medical treatment for acute conditions, chronic disease management, women's and children's health services as well as radiological, laboratory and pharmacy services. We are also planning for dental services to be available at this new polyclinic.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Prohibit Consumption of Alcohol in Areas Close to Residential Blocks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether the Government will prohibit alcohol consumption in all public areas in HDB estates that are close to residential blocks to prevent undesirable acts of indiscriminate urination, rowdy behaviour and acts of public affray that affect the residents of the affected blocks.
Mr K Shanmugam: Under the Liquor Control (Supply and Consumption) Act, consumption of alcohol in all public places, including public areas in Housing and Development Board (HDB) estates, is already prohibited between 10.30 pm and 7.00 am. The restricted hours were intended to minimise disruption to the usual activities of most residents as 10.30 pm is the closing time of most businesses in residential areas, as well as the time when most community activities cease.
Since the Liquor Control Act came into effect on 1 April 2015, we have observed a general islandwide decline in the number of public order incidents related to liquor consumption and feedback on social disamenities, such as noise caused by people drinking in public late at night. There is, therefore, no necessity to extend the restricted hours for public consumption of alcohol at the present time.
The Member's suggestion to extend the restricted hours for certain areas in HDB estates is also challenging to implement. This would result in finely delineated zones within the same HDB estate. Different common areas, depending on whether they were located near residential blocks, would have different restricted hours for alcohol consumption. Members of the public may be confused which zone they are in, making compliance and enforcement difficult.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Child Sex Offenders Registry","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"44 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) in the past five years, how many cases of child sex offences have been reported; (b) what is being done to reduce such crimes; and (c) whether there are plans to create a sex offender registry with limited access given to agencies and communities that can benefit from the information.
Mr K Shanmugam: From 2012 to 2016, the Police investigated an annual average of 325 cases of serious sexual crimes involving victims below the age of 16. Sexual penetration of minor made up the majority of serious sexual crimes, accounting for about 230 cases a year, on average. This is followed by about 75 cases of rape and 20 cases of sexual assault by penetration a year. Over the same period, the Police also investigated about 290 cases of outrage of modesty and 45 cases of sexual exploitation and sexual grooming per year. The trend for sexual crimes involving victims below 16 years of age has been stable over the past five years.
We take a serious view of sexual crimes, in particular, when the victims are minors. To tackle these offences, we adopt a four-pronged approach.
Firstly, the Penal Code imposes stiff penalties for serious sexual offences. For instance, rape is punishable with an imprisonment term of up to 20 years and also liable to caning. If the rape involved a minor under the age of 14 without consent, the enhanced punishment is an imprisonment term of not less than eight years and up to 20 years with minimum 12 strokes of caning. We have also created specific offences targeting those who take advantage of the vulnerable, such as sexual grooming of minors.
Secondly, we enforce these laws firmly. Police take all allegations of sexual offences seriously. Sexual crimes are investigated by specialist units in the Police Divisions and the Criminal Investigation Department. The investigation officers in these units are trained to handle sexual crime investigations, as well as to manage sexual crime victims, including minors, with appropriate sensitivity.
Thirdly, we take a robust approach towards rehabilitation and reintegration of sex offenders, so as to reduce re-offending. For less serious offences, the Court may make mandatory treatment orders requiring the sex offender to undergo psychiatric treatment. Sex offenders who are imprisoned for more serious offences are put through the sex offender treatment programme administered by the Singapore Prison Service, which seeks to reduce reoffending by enhancing self-management of sex offending behaviour.
Fourthly, the Police also work with relevant agencies to put in place proactive safeguards. These include conducting talks in Ministry of Education (MOE) schools to educate students on precautions to protect themselves from sexual assault, and to raise awareness of the legal and social consequences of teenage sex. The Police also train teachers and school counsellors to recognise and report tell-tale signs of sexual assault or abuse in students.
The Member asked about plans to create a sex offender registry with limited access given to agencies. The Registration of Criminal Act allows the Police to maintain a non-public record of persons convicted of serious offences, including sexual offences. Agencies, such as MOE and the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), work closely with the Police to screen prospective employees who are applying for jobs involving children. For example, MOE screens prospective employees for childcare centres, kindergartens and schools with the Police. These processes ensure that persons who have committed serious sexual crimes are not employed in sensitive positions which may put children at risk, but without publicly listing sex offenders which will add to the stigmatisation of these offenders and hinder rehabilitation and reintegration efforts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Care Options for Adults with Intellectual Disabilities Whose Parents or Care-givers Have Passed Away","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"48 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Social and Family Development what options are available for the long-term care of adults with intellectual disabilities when the parents or caregivers of these adults pass away or are unable to care for them anymore.
Mr Tan Chuan-Jin: Parents and caregivers of adults with disabilities are encouraged to plan ahead for the care needs of their loved ones. As a first line of support, parents and caregivers can seek the help of other family members who are willing to continue to provide care. Parents may want to explore with these family members on the possibility of them applying to the Courts to be appointed as a deputy who can make decisions for the adult with disability upon their mental incapacity or demise. This enables the person with disability to continue living in the community.
Caregivers and parents can approach the Special Needs Trust Company (SNTC) whose case managers will work together with the family to develop a care plan that provides for the well-being of the person with disability in various aspects, such as accommodation, daily living and medical needs.
One of the main concerns for parents and caregivers is providing sufficient financial support for their children with disabilities. SNTC assists parents to set up a Trust account to be managed and disbursed to meet the needs of their children with disability when required. SNTC also oversees the Special Needs Savings Scheme, which allows parents to set aside Central Provident Fund (CPF) savings for the long-term care of their children upon their demise.
For parents and caregivers who require assistance in the care of their adult children with intellectual disabilities, there are community-based programmes, such as Day Activity Centres and home-based care services.
The Adult Disability Home (ADH) is a last resort for parents if there is no other family support for their adult children with intellectual disabilities. ADHs provide care for adults with disabilities who require long-term residential care. Today, there are six ADHs providing 690 places for adults with intellectual disability and there are plans to increase the number of places to 870 by the end of this year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Conversion of Government-Paid Adoption Leave to Shared Parental Leave","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"49 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Prime Minister whether the Government-Paid Adoption Leave (GPAL) can (i) be converted into shared leave which parents can allocate between themselves as they choose, instead of being open to mothers only and (ii) be extended to parents (both mothers and fathers) who adopt children above the age of 12 months old.
Mr Teo Chee Hean (for the Prime Minister): With the latest enhancements announced on 13 April 2016 which will take effect on 1 July 2017, adoptive fathers will enjoy the same leave provisions as biological fathers. What Mr Louis Ng has proposed goes beyond what is provided for biological fathers.
The Government is strongly committed to supporting Singaporeans in their aspirations to get married and raise families. Leave has been one of the key measures to help working parents, including adoptive parents, better manage their work and family commitments.
Leave provisions have been progressively enhanced over the years, and several new enhancements will take effect this year, including allowing a portion of Government-Paid Adoption Leave (GPAL) to be converted to shared leave. Specifically, the enhancements are: (i) the second week of paternity leave has been made mandatory from 1 January 2017, which both biological and adoptive fathers are eligible for; (ii) GPAL will be extended from four to 12 weeks from 1 July 2017; and (iii) both adoptive and biological fathers will be able to share up to four weeks from their spouse’s Adoption or Maternity Leave respectively.
With these enhancements, adoptive fathers will enjoy the same leave provisions as biological fathers, and working parents (biological and adoptive) will have more flexibility to decide on the allocation of leave that best suits their caregiving needs.
Adoption Leave – like Maternity and Paternity Leave – is intended to support parents of infants in their first year after delivery, when infants are more vulnerable and need more care. Hence, usage of the leave is limited to the child’s first year of age. Beyond the child’s infancy, all working parents, including adoptive parents, can take six days of paid childcare leave each per year until the child turns seven years old, and two days each per year when their children are between the ages of seven and 12 years. In addition, parents are eligible for six days of unpaid infantcare leave per parent each year, during the child’s first two years.
Employers have provided feedback that even if the overall duration of leave provisions remains unchanged, extending their coverage (for example, beyond the first year of the child’s life), or allowing even more flexibility in sharing the leave between parents, could have an impact on manpower and administrative costs, especially in a time of business uncertainties. We need to balance between providing support for employees with caregiving needs, and employers' concerns on business costs and manpower constraints, as well as the employability of caregivers. Given the significant enhancements made recently, we will not be adjusting the Adoption Leave provisions further, at this point of time.
It will be more important and sustainable for employers to provide a family-friendly work environment, such as by having flexible work arrangements in place, and for our wider community to create a more family-friendly environment in Singapore. Employers can tap on various resources to implement flexible work arrangements, including the WorkPro Work-Life Grant from the Ministry of Manpower and the Tripartite Advisory on Flexible Work Arrangements published by the tripartite partners.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Smokers who Drop Cigarette Butts and Ash from Their Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"50 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources what measures can be taken to prevent smokers who drop cigarette ashes and dispose used cigarette butts from their flats to their neighbours' units resulting in potential fire hazards and health concerns.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The indiscriminate disposal of cigarette butts from one’s residential unit is an anti-social act which also poses a potential fire hazard if the cigarette butt is still lit when it is dropped.
When such feedback is received, the National Environment Agency (NEA) will first work with the respective Town Councils and grassroots organisations to conduct outreach efforts to residents to advise them against carrying out such inconsiderate acts. NEA will deploy surveillance cameras if the situation does not improve, and enforcement action will be taken against any persons caught littering.
My Ministry encourages all smokers to play their part by practising social graciousness and disposing of their cigarette butts and ashes in a responsible manner, so that everyone can enjoy a clean and safe environment.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Tracking of Fogging Operations in Private Condominiums and Landed Estates","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"51 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) whether NEA tracks the number of fogging operations carried out in private condominiums and landed estates annually; and (b) whether NEA will consider revising guidelines to limit the number of fogging operations that can be done in one location every year.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Source reduction, or eliminating potential mosquito breeding habits, remains the most effective method to reduce the mosquito population. Nonetheless, fogging may still be required as a complementary approach when there is urgency to reduce a large mosquito population, such as in areas with active dengue transmissions. In such instances, repeated rounds of fogging may be necessary while concurrent efforts are made to remove the breeding habitats.
The National Environment Agency (NEA) provides guidance on fogging practices to pest control operators (PCOs) to ensure that fogging is carried out properly. PCOs are also required to do a site assessment to ascertain the need to carry out such treatment and have to notify NEA before proceeding with each fogging operation. NEA does not impose any cap on the number of fogging operations that can be carried out in a particular location as such operations need to be calibrated according to the ground conditions, such as the mosquito population, which could be fairly dynamic in nature. If there are excessive fogging operations, NEA would engage the premises managers and PCOs to adjust the fogging operations.
We cannot rely only on fogging to keep the mosquito population low. Everyone has to play his part in keeping the mosquito population in check by practising the \"5-step Mozzie Wipeout\" and removing any potential breeding habitats.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Refund Rate to Customers who Prepaid for Services by Companies which Later Close Down","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"53 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (Industry) (a) what has been the success rate of customers getting back their monies for unused prepaid services when a business closes down prematurely; and (b) whether the Ministry will make it mandatory for businesses offering prepaid service packages to provide prepayment insurance protection.
Mr S Iswaran: Our approach to consumer protection is based on promoting fair trading by retailers and helping consumers make informed purchasing decisions, including those on prepayments.
The Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) has also worked with industry associations to develop industry-specific CaseTrust accreditation schemes, covering areas, such as spa and wellness, school transport, renovation and motor workshops. The majority of these industry-specific schemes offer prepayment protection for consumers. According to CASE, consumers who have prepayments with CaseTrust-accredited businesses that offer prepayment protection to consumers have not suffered monetary losses due to business closures in 2016. We encourage more businesses to be CaseTrust-accredited, and to go further by providing prepayment protection if they collect advance payments from consumers. It is also important for consumers to be aware of the possible risks involved in making prepayments and their capacity to bear with possible losses before taking up a prepaid package.
Genuine business failures which result in the loss of prepayments from consumers are unfortunate. Given the wide range of businesses, it is challenging to impose broad-based measures, such as prepayment insurance, to protect consumers against loss of prepayments from business closures. Such measures raise the cost of doing business which would be passed on to consumers. Overseas jurisdictions, including those in the European Union, Australia and Hong Kong, also recognise the challenges and do not impose broad-based prepayment protection measures. Businesses which engage in unfair practices when selling prepaid packages will be investigated by the Standards, Productivity and Innovation Board (SPRING) Singapore as the administering agency for the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reverse Mortgages for Seniors","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"57 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Prime Minister whether there are plans to assist seniors to monetise their immovable assets by allowing financial institutions to provide reverse mortgages.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): Financial institutions (FIs) used to offer reverse mortgages (RMs) to borrowers, but they have stopped because of low demand. Low demand for reverse mortgages is not unique to Singapore. In the United States, only 2% to 3% of eligible homeowners take up reverse mortgages.2
Notwithstanding, property owners have other options to monetise their properties – rent out a spare room or the entire property, right-sizing possibly with the Silver Housing Bonus, or apply for the Lease Buyback Scheme. Private property owners may also obtain mortgage equity withdrawal loans, subject to FIs’ credit assessment and underwriting standards.
As our population ages, behaviour patterns may change. The Government will continue to review its policies to see if more monetisation options can be facilitated.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["2 : \"Reverse Mortgage Design\", Joao F. Cocco and Paula Lopes, September 2015 http://www.lse.ac.uk/finance/people/Teaching%20Fellows/pdfs%20and%20images/LopesReverseMortgageDesign.pdf"],"footNoteQuestions":["57"],"questionNo":"57"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Nationalise Preschool Education","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"60 Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin asked the Minister for Education (Schools) (a) what the considerations are for keeping preschool education privatised rather than nationalised as an extension of the current nationalised education system; and (b) what are the continual barriers or current issues that impede nationalisation of preschool education.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: Today, we have a diversified preschool sector, comprising commercial operators, non-profit operators, publicly funded operators, as well as a few Government-run kindergartens. A key benefit of this market-based approach is that it provides parents with a diverse range of programmes to choose from, so as to best cater to their preferences and the different needs of their young children.
That said, given the large number of operators participating in this sector, it is not surprising that fees, resources and quality will vary across pre-schools. A nationalised system has the potential to provide more consistent quality and affordability, but this system may not cater to the preferences of every parent.
Internationally, countries have adopted different approaches to early childhood care and education depending on their specific contexts. While some jurisdictions have a state-run preschool system, places, such as Hong Kong and Australia, adopt a similar approach as ours where private operators and the community play a significant role prior to formal primary education.
We recognise that the private sector and the community have built expertise over the years, and we value them as partners in our endeavour to ensure a strong start for every child. Hence, our priority now is to work together to raise the accessibility, affordability and quality of preschool.
One important strategy has been to establish and partner closely with Anchor Operators and Partner Operators in the sector whose preschools are subject to additional conditions, such as fee caps and quality requirements. Today, close to half of Singaporean children are benefiting from quality and affordable programmes in these preschools. We hope that this will continue to grow.
In addition, the Ministry of Education (MOE) plays an active role in supporting and strengthening the quality of preschool education. We are piloting a few MOE Kindergartens as an added quality and affordable option in the landscape. They also serve as incubators for the development of appropriate teaching resources and best practices in kindergarten education, which are shared with other preschool operators. This complements other efforts to raise the quality of preschool education in the sector, such as strengthening teacher training and developing a kindergarten curriculum for the sector.
We have made good progress with our current approach to preschool provision. Today, more than 90% of Singaporean children aged five to six years are enrolled in a preschool. In addition, after subsidies, lower-income families can pay as little as $1 a month for their child to attend pre-school. We will continue to monitor and review our policies for the preschool sector to ensure that every child has access to good quality and affordable preschool.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"ElderShield Premiums Paid Out Since 2002","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"61 Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong asked the Minister for Health since the inception of ElderShield in 2002; (a) what has been the total ElderShield premiums paid; (b) what is the total surplus collected by the ElderShield insurers; (c) what is the total surplus returned to members as premium rebates; and (d) what is the payout ratio and profit margin of each of the ElderShield insurers.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: ElderShield is an insurance scheme that provides basic protection against the costs of long-term care arising from severe disability in old age. Premiums for policyholders are collected annually between age 40 and 65. Coverage starts at age 40 and the policyholder is covered for life. If a policyholder becomes severely disabled before age 65, he will no longer need to pay further premiums and will start to receive monthly ElderShield payouts. From 2002 to end-2015, about $2.6 billion have been collected in premiums and around $100 million have been paid out in claims. About $130 million in premium rebates have been given to policyholders so far, the first tranche in 2007 and another in 2012.
The oldest ElderShield cohort that enrolled at age 40 in 2002 will be turning 55 this year. The current age profile of policyholders is relatively young but will get older over time. As older people are more likely to become severely disabled compared to younger people, ElderShield payouts are expected to increase when the profile of policyholders gets older. Indeed, the proportion of claims over premiums collected has been increasing since ElderShield started in 2002, and this trend will continue in the future.
People who are not familiar with how ElderShield works may ask why the current amount of premiums collected is much higher than the amount of claims paid out so far. Some may even wrongly conclude that policyholders have been paying too much in premiums or that insurers have made excessive profits. Allow me to clarify the facts to address these misperceptions.
There are insurance schemes that provide coverage for the year in which the policyholder pays his premiums and when the policyholder stops paying premiums, the coverage ends. ElderShield works differently. It collects premiums while the policyholder is aged 40 to 65, and provides lifetime coverage from age 40, even after the policyholder reaches 65 and stops paying premiums.
Hence, it is prudent for the total amount of premiums collected to exceed the amount of claims paid while our policyholders are still young, because the premiums collected are meant to provide coverage against future claims throughout the policyholder's lifetime. As explained earlier, the proportion of claims over premiums collected has been increasing since 2002 and we can expect this trend to continue as the profile of our policyholders gets older over time. If the insurers do not collect enough premiums today and set aside some amounts for future claims, there is a risk that ElderShield will not be able to provide adequate coverage for policyholders as our population ages. It is important for insurers to ensure that policyholders will not face this situation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Anti-terrorism and CPR/AED Training for Public Transport Workers under SG Secure Framework","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"62 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Home Affairs that as part of the SG Secure movement, (a) whether there are plans to incorporate compulsory anti-terrorism and CPR/AED training for existing and newly recruited public transport workers; and (b) if so, how often will refresher courses be conducted for these workers so that their knowledge and skills remain current.
Mr K Shanmugam: Since the launch of the SGSecure movement, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has been working closely with the Land Transport Authority (LTA) and the Public Transport Operators (PTOs) to raise public transport workers’ awareness of the terrorism threat and to equip them with knowledge and skills to respond to an attack. PTOs currently train some of their staff in first aid, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and the use of the automated external defibrillator (AED).
MHA has worked with LTA to incorporate the SGSecure messages of vigilance, cohesion and resilience into the training curriculum for bus captains at the new Singapore Bus Academy. These messages have been included in the taxi driver vocational licence and refresher courses at the Singapore Taxi Academy. These knowledge and skills are also reinforced by PTOs during their staff in-service or in-house training. We will continue to work with LTA and PTOs to incorporate emergency response skills into their training programmes.
We are encouraged by the ground-up SGSecure initiatives by the transport industry community. For example, the National Transport Workers' Union organised a counter-terrorism seminar in December 2016 where 200 public transport workers learned how to prepare themselves for a terror attack. The National Taxi Association also organised a number of workshops in November and December last year which trained more than 100 taxi drivers in CPR, AED and first aid skills.
MHA will continue to work with LTA and PTOs to enhance the current training and outreach initiatives, including exercises that hone their preparedness in the event of a terror attack. One such example was Exercise Heartbeat, which involved one of the PTOs, conducted in September 2016 at Bishan Bus Interchange and Junction 8.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Investigations into Jallikattu-related Events in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"63 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many individuals have been investigated and/or charged over Jallikattu-related events in Singapore; and (b) of this number, how many are Singaporeans, PRs and foreigners respectively.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Police are investigating nine incidents of public assembly without a permit relating to the Jallikattu movement. Jallikattu is a bull-taming event practised in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu as part of the Pongal festival. It was initially banned in India, which led to protests in India and other countries.
There are 114 persons under investigation by the Police for participating in these public assemblies without permits, of whom four are Singaporeans, 23 are Permanent Residents and 87 are foreigners. The incidents took place between 15 and 22 January 2017.
We take a strong stand against the importation of foreign politics by foreigners into Singapore. Foreigners visiting or living in Singapore are to abide by our laws and should not import the politics of their own countries into Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trend of Women Being Asked by Employers Not to Return to Work after Maternity Leave","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"64 Ms Sun Xueling asked the Minister for Manpower in 2016, how many women have notified the Ministry that they have been asked by their employer not to return to work after the end of their maternity leave and whether this number shows an increasing trend in the past two years.
Mr Lim Swee Say: Termination of employment during maternity leave rarely occurs. The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) received one such complaint in 2016. The case involved an employee who was terminated as the employer's business had failed and ceased operations. With MOM's intervention, the employee was able to recover her maternity leave benefits. The employer has also been issued a stern warning. There is no indication that such cases are on the rise.
Female employees are protected under the Employment Act and Child Development Co-savings Act. Those who have been unfairly dismissed during their pregnancy can appeal to MOM. If the dismissal is found to be without sufficient cause, MOM can order the employer to reinstate and/or compensate the employee. In addition, it is an offence to terminate the employment of an employee while she is on maternity leave. Such an offence carries a penalty of up to $5,000 fine and/or imprisonment of up to six months.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures against Hoarders who Cause Disamenities to Neighbours","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"65 Mr Yee Chia Hsing asked the Minister for National Development what measures are available against HDB dwellers, such as hoarders and cat hoarders, who cause great disamenities to their neighbours and do not open their premises for authorised inspection by HDB officers.
Mr Lawrence Wong: When the Housing and Development Board (HDB) receives feedback on hoarding in HDB flats, HDB will carry out an inspection. If excessive hoarding is found, the residents will be advised to remove the unwanted items and reminded to keep their flat tidy. Most residents are generally cooperative.
In hoarding cases where there may be regulatory breaches, HDB will work with the relevant agencies, such as the Singapore Civil Defence Force, for fire hazards, and the National Environment Agency, for vectors. In cases of compulsive hoarding, which could be an indication of an underlying behavioural issue and would require professional help, HDB also works with health and social work professionals to provide counselling and appropriate assistance to the hoarder. HDB also ropes in the grassroots leaders and the hoarder's family in an effort to reduce disamenities.
As for feedback received on the keeping of cats, HDB will work with the flat owners and Animal Welfare Groups, such as the Cat Welfare Society, to rehome the cats. Recalcitrant owners, including owners who refuse to open up their premises for inspection by HDB officers, may be taken to Court where they can be fined up to $4,000 upon conviction.
In cases where there is reasonable cause to believe that the welfare of the cats is compromised, the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) has powers to enter the premises to investigate. The owners, if convicted in Court for the offence of failure in duty of care, may be liable to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or both.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress on Construction Sector's Productivity Roadmap and Capability Fund","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"66 Dr Teo Ho Pin asked the Minister for National Development whether he can provide an update on (i) the progress of the Construction Productivity Roadmap by BCA and (ii) details of the Construction Productivity and Capability Fund, including the total amount of funds disbursed to date, the number of firms that have benefited from the fund, and the productivity improvements that such firms have made to date, respectively.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The first Construction Productivity Roadmap was launched in 2010. We tightened the supply of lower-skilled foreign manpower, required buildings to adopt more productive design, and supported firms as they invested in productive technologies and upgraded their workers. The second Roadmap was launched in 2015. It encourages even higher capital investments, intensifies our efforts to build up a quality workforce, and further facilitates collaboration among stakeholders across the construction value chain. Through the two Roadmaps, we have targeted a 20% to 30% improvement in construction site productivity by 2020.
The results are encouraging. Annual site productivity increases have improved progressively from 0.3% in 2010 to 2% in 2015. A 2.0% increase is also projected for 2016. The cumulative site productivity improvement is about 10% since 2010.
Almost $800 million is available to firms through the Construction Productivity and Capability Fund. As of end 2016, about $450 million has been committed to over 9,000 firms in the built environment sector, and 90% of these companies are small and medium-sized firms.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Efforts to Reintegrate Destitute Persons with Their Families and Society","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"67 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) for each of the past three years, what has been (i) the number of destitute persons admitted into the custody of the Director of Social Welfare (\"Director\"); (ii) the numbers discharged from the Director's custody; (iii) the number of discharged destitute persons re-admitted into the Director's custody; and (b) what steps are taken to encourage destitute persons to reintegrate with their families and society.
Mr Tan Chuan-Jin: The number of destitute persons admitted into Welfare Homes under the custody of the Director of Social Welfare was 250, 251 and 207 for 2014, 2015 and 2016 respectively.
The number of destitute persons discharged from Welfare Homes was 182 in 2014, 172 in 2015 and 163 in 2016. These include persons who went on to independent living and living with family or friends. These also include persons discharged to step-down residential care facilities and nursing homes. In 2014, 39 destitute persons were re-admitted into Welfare Homes. There were 42 re-admissions in 2015 and 27 re-admissions in 2016.
Destitute persons who are admitted into Welfare Homes undergo rehabilitation programmes which impart social, work and life skills to prepare them for independent living in the community, whenever possible. Those who are assessed to have high potential for reintegration are placed on external employment, home leave and pre-discharge programmes to support their transition back to the community. They are also linked up with community resources where necessary to support their reintegration.
In addition, Welfare Homes support family reconciliation to address underlying issues and strengthen family relationships. Volunteers and community agencies also work with Welfare Homes to complement their rehabilitative efforts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Additional Help for People Seeking Social Assistance Given Sluggish Economy","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"68 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for Social and Family Development given the sluggish economy and uncertain outlook ahead, whether the Ministry has seen an increase in the number of people seeking social assistance and, if so, what additional measures will the Ministry be instituting to provide relief to this group of affected people.
Mr Tan Chuan-Jin: The number of applications for ComCare Short-to-Medium Term Assistance was 60,170 in 2015, and 57,694 in 2016. Over the four quarters in 2016, the number of applications has hovered around 14,000 to 15,000 per quarter, with no clear trend. The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) is closely monitoring the situation with regard to the number of households stepping forward for assistance and their profiles. MSF stands ready to provide additional support, just as we did during the 2009 global financial crisis. Let me share on some of these additional support measures
First, we are prepared to exercise greater flexibility in providing ComCare assistance to support households. For example, our Social Service Office (SSO) officers can provide retrenched workers with a longer duration of assistance if they require more time to find a job. This could be a result of external factors beyond the individual’s control, such as limited availability of job openings that fit his or her skillset.
Second, we are prepared to step up our manpower temporarily at our SSOs if there are significant increases in applications for ComCare assistance, so that households in need continue to receive assistance in a timely manner.
Third, our SSOs will also work with the Family Service Centres to assist recently retrenched clients who may require counselling and support.
In addition, through an initiative by the National Council of Social Service, companies can engage social service organisations to deploy social service professionals onsite during restructuring exercises to provide support to those affected and information on community resources available. MSF will continue to monitor developments in the labour market closely and work with Government agencies and community partners to provide support and assistance to individuals and families in need.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Electricity Prices for Singapore Homes and Businesses Compared to OECD Average","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"69 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (Industry) how does the price of electricity for (i) homes and (ii) businesses compare to the OECD average in each year from 2011 to 2015.
Mr S Iswaran: Between 2011 to 2015, Singapore's regulated electricity tariffs were on average 23% higher than the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) average retail electricity costs.
I would point out that such a comparison is of limited value because the OECD average includes a wide range of countries. They vary in terms of energy policy, with some subsidising certain forms of electricity production, for example, in Germany, the US and Spain. We do not subsidise electricity generation or consumption. The fuel mix is also varied among OECD countries, with some having access to coal, nuclear energy, and renewables like hydropower. In contrast, 95% of electricity generation in Singapore uses natural gas imported at global prices. A comparison of average end-use prices for industrial users is even more challenging because, as observed by the International Energy Agency, industrial consumers can purchase electricity through private contracts instead of the regulated market, with variable and often confidential pricing arrangements.
As an energy importer and price taker, Singapore cannot be insulated from movements in the global energy market. Our aim is to foster a competitive energy market for the benefit of all consumers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Conflict-of-interest Issues in Competition Commission of Singapore's Investigations against Government-linked Companies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"70 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade) what safeguards are instituted by the Ministry to ensure that investigations carried out by the Competition Commission of Singapore against Government-linked companies (GLCs) or companies predominantly owned by Statutory Boards and/or GLCs are free from conflicts of interests.
Mr Lim Hng Kiang: Private sector entities, regardless of ownership, are required to comply with the Competition Act. Entities in specified sectors, such as media, telecommunications, gas and electricity, which are regulated by other Government regulatory agencies, are excluded from the Competition Act.
Private sector entities which engage in anti-competitive activities can be investigated by the Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS). The First Schedule of the Competition Act requires any member of the Commission who may have a vested interest in a business being investigated to declare this interest and recuse himself or herself where deliberations or decisions involving that business may take place.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Demerit Points for Some Parking Offences","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"71 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Transport (a) what are the reasons underpinning LTA's decision to impose demerit points for certain vehicle parking and vehicle stopping offences; and (b) whether such demerit points are calibrated to be proportional when compared with other traffic offence penalties.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: Only serious parking and stopping offences, such as parking within a pedestrian crossing, or stopping on the shoulder or verge of an expressway, attract demerit points. These offences not only impede the flow of traffic but also endanger other road users by obstructing their line of sight. Demerit points for parking are calibrated to be proportional to other traffic offences which also attract demerit points.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"AED Kits on Trains and Buses","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"72 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether there are plans to equip all train stations and bus interchanges with AED kits that are easily accessible; and (b) whether LTA will consider working with the public transport operators to equip all public buses, trains and taxis with AED kits for use during emergencies.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: There is at least one automated external defibrillator (AED) at all our bus interchanges and Mass Rapid Train (MRT) stations. These are situated near the Passenger Service Office as the staff there are trained to use them.
We do not have AED kits on all public buses, trains and taxis. We would have to consider the practicality of equipping every bus, train and taxi with one. Instead, the personnel have been trained to respond to emergencies by seeking immediate medical help. For instance, bus captains would immediately request for an ambulance through their Operation Control Centre. When the train pulls into the station, the staff at the station, who would have access to the AED at the station, would attend to the passenger requiring medical assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Disamenities Caused by Public Events at Bay East Garden","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"73 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many private events have been held at Bay East Garden for the last 12 months; (b) what measures are taken to ensure that the events held do not pose any disamenity to the residents living near Bay East Garden; and (c) whether there can be better control of the events held at Bay East Garden to ensure that events are not too noisy and that vehicles parked by participants in the area are not parked illegally.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Eleven private events were held at Bay East Garden over the past year. The events are largely outdoor activities like family days and sporting events.
Each event application is assessed by Gardens by the Bay Company (GB Co) to ensure a minimum amount of disruption and disamenity to Gardens' patrons and nearby residents. For example, events that attract large crowds or tend to be noisy will be directed to locations further away from residential areas.
GB Co will also ask the organisers to keep local residents informed of upcoming events in the spirit of good neighbourliness. This allows for any concerns to be heard and addressed before the event takes place. Moreover, organisers must adhere to GB Co's venue hire terms and conditions. This includes requirements that organisers keep to within specific noise level caps at all times.
Finally, event organisers have to adhere to the requirements of our traffic authorities. For instance, if buses are chartered for certain large-scale events, the organisers may be required to deploy Auxiliary Police for effective traffic management.
GB Co officers carry out checks during events and organisers have been generally cooperative. GB Co will continue to work closely with event organisers to ensure that Bay East Gardens remains an enjoyable, inclusive, and well-utilised community space for all.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Unsold Residential Units","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"74 Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar asked the Minister for National Development (a) to date, how many unsold dwelling units built by property developers are there still available in the market; (b) how many dwelling units are there available in the market put up for sale by home owners; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider slowing down or halting the sale of land parcels for residential development in light of the current sluggish property market.
Mr Lawrence Wong: At the end of 2016, there were about 9,700 unsold private dwelling units, including from executive condominium developments, which have been launched for sale by developers. These include completed and uncompleted units. If we include those that have received planning approvals but have not yet been launched for sale, the figure is about 25,000 dwelling units. This is a historical low since the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) started compiling such data in 2001.
The Member also asked about the number of dwelling units put up for sale by home owners. URA does not compile such data as home owners are not required to report their intention to sell their homes. The demand for private housing remains robust. In 2016, developers sold about 12,000 dwelling units, or 20% more than the approximately 10,000 units sold in 2015. Apart from housing demand, the Government considers other factors such as overall economic and property market conditions, to determine the housing supply to be provided in each Government Land Sales (GLS) programme.
As the current inventory of unsold units is at a historical low, it is important to maintain a healthy level of housing supply to mitigate any shortages in the future. We do not have immediate plans to slow down or halt the supply of private housing through the GLS programme.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Decision on Driverless Taxis in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"75 Ms Sun Xueling asked the Minister for Transport how is the trial operation of nuTonomy driverless taxis progressing and what benchmarks will the Ministry use to determine when driverless taxis can be rolled out in more parts of Singapore and its associated timeline.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: nuTonomy is one of four organisations, besides the Agency for Science, Technology and Research’s (A*STAR) Institute for Infocomm Research, Singapore-Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Alliance for Research and Technology and Delphi Automotive Systems, that is testing self-driving vehicles at one-north. nuTonomy started trialling on a six-kilometre test route in April 2016, and since January this year, they have expanded their testing to a 12-kilometre route. I am told that their trials have generally been smooth except for an incident last year. nuTonomy's aim is to gradually expand their trials into larger and more complex environments.
Significant challenges have to be overcome before self-driving technology is ready for widespread deployment. Self-driving vehicles need to be able to co-exist safely with a high volume of human-driven vehicles, cyclists, people on personal mobility devices, and pedestrians. They will need to be able to deal with unexpected situations, like fallen tree branches or jaywalkers. In Singapore, they also need to function effectively under low visibility conditions, such as during heavy rain or haze. Industry experts expect the technology to reach that state in about 10 to 15 years. In the meantime, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) will continue to work with the participants to expand the area and complexity of their trials progressively.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"More Parking Options for Heavy Vehicle Owners","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"77 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for National Development whether the Government has plans to build more heavy vehicle parks and to improve its public transport connectivity so that these vehicle parks can be more accessible to the drivers.
78 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for National Development whether HDB can consider raising the allowable unladen weight for vans and light goods vehicles at HDB multi-storey car parks beyond the current 1,800 kg to 2,100 kg so that such vehicle owners/drivers can find more convenient parking and ease the season parking demand pressure on those popular heavy vehicle parks.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Currently, there are about 43,190 heavy vehicle parking spaces islandwide, which exceeds the 33,680 heavy vehicles registered with the Land Transport Authority (LTA). About 74% of the heavy vehicle parking spaces are privately operated and located in industrial estates.
The remaining 26% of heavy vehicle parking spaces are managed by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) and the Housing and Development Board (HDB) in the form of temporary heavy vehicle parks located within or at the fringes of residential areas. Over time, these temporary heavy vehicle parks will be progressively phased out, partly to make way for new developments, and partly because having heavy vehicles enter densely populated heartland precincts poses a safety risk, especially to the elderly and young children. To facilitate this transition, agencies are incorporating new heavy vehicle parks within industrial developments that are near to residential areas, where feasible.
Ultimately, it is the responsibility of business owners to provide or secure parking for the vehicles that they own and to provide their drivers with the appropriate transport options to get to their vehicles for work. This is especially so if they require their drivers to work during odd hours.
Commercial vehicles, such as vans and light goods vehicles, with unladen weight exceeding 1,800 kilogrammes, are generally not allowed to park in HDB residential car parks for safety and environmental reasons.
However, HDB does exercise flexibility by allowing them to use the residential car parks if the vehicles can fit within a standard car lot and do not obstruct or endanger other car park users. Such vehicles should, however, not exceed an unladen weight of 2,000 \tkilogrammes if they intend to park within HDB multistorey car parks (MSCP) as the MSCPs are not designed to withstand vehicular weights beyond this limit. Those that exceed an unladen weight of 2,000 \tkilogrammes can park in HDB surface residential car parks. They can also park at commercial and industrial car parks, as well as heavy vehicle parks.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Availability of HDB Rental Flats and Rental Flats Converted for Sale","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"80 Mr Png Eng Huat asked the Minister for National Development as of 31 December 2016, what is the number of (i) available vacant HDB rental flats, (ii) rental flats converted for sale with a shorter lease, and (iii) such converted flats sold.
Mr Lawrence Wong: As at end 2016, there were about 4,500 vacant rental flats.
To promote home ownership, when existing rental flats are vacated, they can be considered for conversion to sold flats if viable. Over the years, about 9,300 ex-rental flats were converted, most of them before 2011. These flats are sold with the balance of the 99-year leases. Of these, about 9,000 flats have been sold.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Licensed Insurance Companies/Agencies from 2007 to 2016","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Prime Minister for each of the years from 2007 to 2016, what is (i) the number of insurance companies/agencies with a valid licence operating in Singapore, (ii) the number of staff on full-time employment by all these insurance companies/agencies and (iii) the number of insurance agents engaged by all these insurance companies/agencies.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): The statistics are set out in the Table below:3
2 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Prime Minister for each of the years from 2007 to 2016, what is the number of (i) full-time employed dealer's representatives dealing with securities in Singapore and (ii) remisiers in Singapore.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): The statistics are set out in the table below. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) does not collect information on whether a representative (rep) is working on a part-time or full-time basis.
3 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Prime Minister what is the average number of absences for each member of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights over the 31 meetings held from 2012 to 2016.
Mr Lee Hsien Loong: The composition of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights is not fixed and varies according to the terms of the Members. The number of Council meetings also varies from year to year depending on the number of legislations which it scrutinises.
As Council proceedings are conducted in private, it is not appropriate to disclose details of its meetings. All meetings of the Council have been conducted with sufficient quorum and decisions are made by the collective judgement of the Council as a whole. The work of the Council is also reported to the President and its report presented to Parliament annually.
The value and effectiveness of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights are not measured by the duration of its meetings or by the number of Members attending. The Council continues to exercise the duties entrusted to it by the Constitution responsibly and conscientiously.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Accessibility of Public Transport for Persons with Disabilities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Transport what is the Government's assessment of the current physical accessibility of public transport to persons with disabilities.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: Our public transport system is now largely accessible to persons with disabilities. First, all our Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) stations and bus interchanges have at least one barrier-free access route from the entrance to the concourse. Second, all MRT trains and 92% of public buses are wheelchair accessible. By 2020, all public buses will be so.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Hybrid Concession and Off-Peak Passes Issued to Public Transport Commuters","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Png Eng Huat asked the Minister for Transport as of 31 December 2016 what is (i) the number of Hybrid Concession Pass and Off-Peak Pass issued to public transport commuters, (ii) the number of concession cards issued to persons with disabilities, (iii) the average number of trips per day per concession cardholder, and (iv) the average distance travelled per trip.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: About 67,000 Hybrid Concession Passes and 13,000 Off-Peak Passes were issued monthly in 2016. About 12,000 \"Persons with Disabilities\" concession cards have been issued so far. A typical concession cardholder makes about one to two journeys per day. The average distance of each journey is about nine kilometres.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criteria for Application of Vocational Driving Licence","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Mr Zaqy Mohamad asked the Minister for Transport whether there are plans to exclude PRs and foreign private car drivers from taking up vocational licences to ensure that such vocation remains only for Singaporeans, just like that for taxi driving.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: From July this year, all private hire car drivers will be required to obtain a Private Hire Car Driver's Vocational Licence (PDVL). Non-Singapore citizens will be granted PDVLs only if they are employees of chauffeured services companies, which are also constrained by foreign worker quotas. Singaporeans, on the other hand, are eligible for PDVL even if they are self-employed. This is similar to the policy for taxi drivers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Retrenchment Benefits for Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Ms K Thanaletchimi asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how many companies have included retrenchment benefit clauses in their employment contracts; (b) which are the industries that do so and how prevalent is the practice; (c) what kind of assistance does the Ministry render to those retrenched without retrenchment benefits; and (d) whether the Ministry will consider imposing some baseline retrenchment benefits to help workers tide over the period before they get into another employment.
Mr Lim Swee Say: For workers who have served more than two years, payment of retrenchment benefits is mandatory if it is specified in their individual employment contracts or the collective agreements negotiated by their unions.
According to our survey on retrenchment benefits in 2015, it was not a widespread practice for employers to specify the quantum of retrenchment benefits in their employment contracts, except for the unionised sector where a majority of the collective agreements specify the quantum of retrenchment benefits. These establishments were mainly from manufacturing, construction and wholesale and retail trade. The same survey also found that around 90% of establishments which retrenched workers in 2015 paid retrenchment benefits to eligible workers.
The tripartite partners have deliberated extensively on whether to make retrenchment benefits mandatory and to specify the minimum quantum in the Employment Act. We have concluded that it may not necessarily be beneficial for both workers and businesses. A mandated level of minimum retrenchment benefit will likely become the norm and would not benefit the workers in cases where the employers are able to pay higher amounts. If we set the quantum too high, companies may not be able to afford it, especially when they are downsizing under difficult conditions. Further, overburdening companies will also have a negative impact on the remaining workers in the company as they strive to restructure and turn around the business. Instead, the tripartite partners issue guidelines which stipulate the prevailing norms for retrenchment benefits quantum. These norms can be updated from time to time.
The tripartite partners have also stepped up our support for all retrenched workers through the Adapt and Grow initiative, providing job matching and career services for them. In addition, since 1 January 2017, it has become mandatory for employers to notify the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) of retrenchments so that we can reach more retrenched workers and offer them timely assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Insurance Coverage and Compensation for Workplace Injuries","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower for each year of the past three years (a) how many cases of workplace injuries had occurred where the employer had no valid work injury insurance cover on the date of the accident; (b) how many of these cases concluded with a finalised Notice of Assessment awarding compensation for permanent disability; (c) of these, how many employers paid the full amount to the injured employee by the 21st day after the Notice of Assessment was finalised; and (d) how many employers were prosecuted for not having valid work injury insurance in place.
Mr Lim Swee Say: The table below provides the requested data:
The number of employers prosecuted for failing to provide work injury insurance are as follows:
9 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Manpower (a) from 2011 to 2015, in what proportion of cases were CPF Life payments not made by the 4th working day of each month; (b) in such cases, on what day of the month was the payment subsequently made, with the breakdown of percentage by days; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider requiring that earlier payments be made in the event that the 4th working day of the month falls on the 6th or subsequent calendar day of the month so as to alleviate cash flow difficulties that seniors may face in such cases.
Mr Lim Swee Say: Monthly Central Provident Fund (CPF) LIFE payouts are paid directly into members’ bank accounts by Inter-Bank GIRO on the fourth working day of each month, or to the CPF Ordinary Account if they do not have a bank account.
The earliest that CPF LIFE payments can be made is the fourth working day of the month because (a) CPF Board credits interest on the first working day and deducts the monthly payments on the second working day to enable members to earn interest on the full CPF LIFE monies during the preceding month; and (b) the banks require two working days to clear and credit the payments into members' bank accounts.
From 2011 to 2015, 99.98% of CPF LIFE payouts were paid out by the fourth working day. Payouts which could not be disbursed within the four working days were exceptional cases which required further verification. For example, for members who are mentally incapacitated, the CPF Board (CPFB) may need more time to check if there are new Court orders issued to ensure that members' payouts are paid out to a third party who is legally authorised to manage the member's monies.
CPF LIFE payments are only made after the sixth calendar day in months where a public holiday and a weekend occur in the first week of the month. From 2012 to 2015, only 133 out of a total of 1.7 million payments were made after the seventh calendar day.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Singapore Companies with More than 100 and 1,000 Employees in 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005 and 2015","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Ms Sun Xueling asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the number of companies in Singapore which hire more than 100 employees in 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005 and 2015 respectively; and (b) what is the total number of employees hired by these companies in 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005 and 2015 respectively.
11 Ms Sun Xueling asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the number of companies in Singapore which hire more than 1,000 employees in 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005 and 2015 respectively; and (b) what is the total number of employees hired by these companies in 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005 and 2015 respectively.
Mr Lim Swee Say: The number of private sector establishments4 that hire more than 100 employees5 and more than 1,000 employees is provided in Table 1 below.
The corresponding number of employees hired by these private sector establishments is provided in Table 2 below.
Data from 1965 to 1985 is not available.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["4 : Establishment refers to a unit within an enterprise (defined as an incorporated/registered entity such as company, business, association, society, and so on) engaged in one activity and operating in a single location.","5 : Refer to local and foreign employees."],"footNoteQuestions":["10","11"],"questionNo":"10-11"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Minimum Compassionate Leave for Children and Grandchildren","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Ministry will consider mandating a minimum number of days of compassionate leave for children and grandchildren in view of the limited number of days of annual leave, particularly for those working in junior positions or lower paying jobs, smaller families and our rapidly ageing population.
Mr Lim Swee Say: We recognise that employees need our support during the time of bereavement. Already more than nine in 10 companies (92%) provide compassionate leave based on the Ministry of Manpower’s (MOM) survey in 2016. We will continue to work with our tripartite partners to encourage employers to voluntarily adopt such progressive workplace practices.
The Government has introduced several family leave enhancements over the last few years. We should allow time for businesses to adjust and adapt. At this stage, we have no plans to make it mandatory for all firms to provide specifically for compassionate leave for their employees.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Processes Involved in Producing Weekly MUIS Friday Prayer Sermon Text","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Communications and Information and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) what are the processes involved in producing the weekly MUIS Friday prayer sermon text; (b) who determines or approves the final draft of the sermon text; and (c) whether the sermon text has to be vetted and approval obtained from the Ministry of Home Affairs as well as the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs prior to its delivery.
Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: The weekly sermon text is written by the Office of the Mufti in the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) under the guidance of the Mufti. The themes for the sermons are based on an annual framework developed by the Office of the Mufti.
The Office of the Mufti seeks public feedback, including through an annual survey, on the topics for the sermons. Such feedback helps ensure that MUIS continues to provide religious content that is relevant to issues faced by Muslims in Singapore.
The Office of the Mufti is entirely responsible for the sermon texts. They do not seek approval from other Government agencies or Ministries. Although MUIS is a Statutory Board, the Government does not dictate how MUIS should administer matters relating to religious doctrine.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Appointment Considerations for Heads of Overseas Missions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what proportion and number of Singapore's current Heads of Overseas Missions are career diplomats and political appointees respectively; and (b) what are the specific considerations to determine which Missions will be headed by career diplomats as opposed to political appointees.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: No resident Heads of Overseas Missions are political appointees. All our resident Ambassadors are Foreign Service Officers, recruited and appointed strictly based on merit, like the entire Foreign Service and, indeed, Civil Service.
Our diplomats operate in a challenging and uncertain global environment. They are expected to robustly defend and advance Singapore’s interests in the international arena. To build the strongest possible team of diplomats for Singapore, the Foreign Service recruits both fresh graduates and mid-career professionals through rigorous recruitment processes. In particular, mid-career officers are considered based on their past experience, performance and relevant skillsets. Appointments of senior Foreign Service Officers are also subject to approval by the Special Personnel Board in the Civil Service or Public Service Commission. Currently, about 10% of Ambassador-level Heads of Missions joined the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) mid-career.
Our guiding principle is to appoint the best person for the job, whether he or she has joined the Foreign Service as a fresh graduate or mid-career recruit. We will not allow any compromise to the professionalism and excellence of our Foreign Service.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Usage of Family Visiting Privileges by Drug Rehabilitation Centre (DRC) Inmates","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Home Affairs for each year of the past three years (a) what percentage of inmates in the Drug Rehabilitation Centres (DRCs) use their entire quota of family visiting privileges each month; and (b) how many requests have the DRCs received for additional family visiting privileges by the inmates or by their family members respectively.
Mr K Shanmugam: The percentage of inmates in the Drug Rehabilitation Centres (DRCs) who received the maximum allowable two visits per month is as follows:
Requests for additional family visits by DRC inmates or their family members are rare. When requests for additional visits are made, the Singapore Prison Service would assess each request and grant the visit based on the circumstances of the request.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Case of Eight Deported Indonesian ISIS Suspects","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Home Affairs if he can provide an update on the case of eight Indonesians deported to Malaysia due to their suspected link to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and why they were subsequently released by the Indonesian police.
Mr K Shanmugam: On 9 January 2017, a group of eight Indonesians tried to enter Singapore through the Woodlands Checkpoint. The Indonesians were referred for secondary checks by the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) officers when they presented themselves for immigration clearance. One of them said that he was a religious teacher and that his travelling companions were his students. He was found to possess images of security concern, including that of a shoe-bomb and fighters from the terrorist group that calls itself the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The group was denied entry into Singapore and turned back to Malaysia from where they last departed.
The Malaysian authorities repatriated the Indonesians back to their country of origin after they had completed their investigations. It is the prerogative of the Indonesian authorities to decide on the course of action to take with regard to their citizens.
On our part, we have shared our investigation findings on the case with our Malaysian and Indonesian counterparts. We will continue to watch our borders closely and work with our partners to counter the terrorism threat in the region.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Prison Inmates with Identified Intellectual Disabilities and Their Recidivism Rate","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many prison inmates are there currently with identified intellectual disabilities, with a breakdown by type and severity of intellectual disability; (b) what is the overall recidivism rate of this group of offenders; and (c) how does this compare with the recidivism rate of able-bodied, neuro-typical offenders with similar offences.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Singapore Prison Service (SPS) will assess every inmate upon admission to understand whether they have any condition, for example, medical, physical or intellectual disability, which may require special attention. Depending on the individual’s profile and needs, SPS would tailor the management approach and rehabilitation programmes for the inmate, such as housing arrangements, where this is practicable.
SPS does not currently collate detailed data on the overall number, profile and recidivism rate of inmates with intellectual disabilities. It plans to do so going forward.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Application Fee for Enforcement of Money Order Issued by Small Claims Tribunal","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Law (a) whether a claimant has to pay a fee to apply for the enforcement of a money order issued by the Small Claims Tribunal and, if so, how much; and (b) whether there are measures in place to help a low-income claimant defray this cost.
Mr K Shanmugam: Legal costs for proceedings at the Small Claims Tribunals are kept low as the process is straightforward and parties appear in person. A Money Order issued by the Tribunals is deemed to be a Magistrates' Court Order and can be enforced through a Writ of Seizure and Sale.
The filing fee for a Writ of Seizure and Sale to enforce the Tribunals' order is to be paid by the claimant unless the Court orders otherwise. Currently, the filing fee is $80, which is about half the fee for a case filed under the Magistrates' Court. In addition, there are other associated and ancillary fees, which may bring the total cost of enforcing the Tribunals' Money Order to about $400 to $600. The claimant can recover these enforcement costs from the judgment debtor if the judgment debtor's personal property is successfully seized and sold, and the proceeds of sale are sufficient to cover the costs incurred.
The claimant may also apply to the Registrar of the State Courts to waive or defer the payment of such costs. The Registrar will consider all the relevant facts in the specific case, including the claimant's financial circumstances, in deciding whether to waive or defer such fees. The claimant will not be charged a fee for making a waiver or deferment application.
The Legal Aid Bureau may also provide legal aid for the execution of a Writ of Seizure and Sale, provided that the applicant satisfies the requisite means and merits tests.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Total Subsidised and Private Nursing Home Capacity","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"19 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the current total subsidised and private nursing home capacity; (b) in the past five years, how many applications for these nursing homes have been received and what has been the queue time in each of those years; and (c) within the same period, how many of the patients in these nursing homes are ambulant and how many can be cared for at home or within the community.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: We have about 12,800 nursing home beds as at end-December 2016. Of these, about 11,000 beds are subsidised.
Between 2012 and 2016, the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) received an average of 3,400 applications for subsidised nursing home beds per year. The waiting time depends on several factors, such as care needs of patients, family preferences and available capacity. On average, successful applicants wait about four months for a subsidised nursing home bed.
Very few nursing home residents are ambulant. This is because in assessing the needs of applicants, AIC generally prioritises nursing home placements for patients who require help and supervision in three or more activities of daily living, such as feeding and toileting and have weak family support. For seniors who are ambulant and can be supported in the community, AIC refers them for home-based and community services instead. We are strengthening these services to enable more seniors to age in place, rather than be cared for in a nursing home. In 2016, more than 6,000 seniors were placed in home care and/or day care.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Additional Nursing Home Beds from 2021 to 2030","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Health (a) how many nursing home beds will be added from January 2021 to December 2030; and (b) how much of the expected demand will be fulfilled by 2020 and 2030 respectively given our ageing population.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Ministry of Health (MOH) plans for nursing home capacity to meet projected demand based on a combination of factors, such as demographics and incidence of disability. We have increased our capacity from 9,400 beds in 2011 to 12,800 beds today and will develop more nursing homes to reach a total of 17,000 beds by 2020. This is expected to meet the demand for nursing homes in 2020.
Beyond 2020, we will continue to add more nursing home capacity. However, the number of beds added will have to be constantly reviewed and calibrated as demand patterns change. We are also meeting seniors' care needs holistically in different ways.
Even as we continue to build more nursing homes, we are also focusing on upstream efforts to keep Singaporeans healthy and growing our suite of home and community care services to help seniors age in place.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extent of Codeine Substance Abuse in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Health (a) how widespread is the abuse of codeine in Singapore; (b) which are the most vulnerable groups; and (c) what are the measures taken to address such codeine abuse in Singapore.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Codeine is used as a medicine for the relief of cough and pain. As codeine can be addictive, the supply of medicines containing codeine is monitored and controlled in a few ways.
First, the manufacture, import and supply of medicines, including codeine cough preparations, is regulated by the Health Sciences Authority (HSA). Under HSA's Health Products Act, doctors and pharmacists can only supply to an individual patient not more than 240 millilitres of codeine cough preparation on any one occasion. They cannot supply to the same patient within a period of four days.
Any person who violates the law can be fined up to $50,000 and/or jailed for up to two years under the Health Products Act.
Second, as the professional body which regulates the conduct of doctors, the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) acts on complaints of errant prescribing or dispensation of codeine cough preparations. The SMC Ethical Code and Ethical Guidelines also provide guidance for doctors to prescribe or dispense drugs with potential for dependence or addiction. Doctors who breach the Ministry of Health's (MOH) guidelines or the SMC Ethical Code and Ethical Guidelines may face disciplinary action and be liable for suspension of between three months and a year, fine and censure.
Third, HSA regulates the wholesale distribution of codeine cough preparations, and works closely with various enforcement agencies, such as the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) and the Singapore Police Force (SPF) to curb the illegal diversion of such preparations into the illegal market.
Finally, to help reduce the demand for such preparations by codeine abusers and addicts, HSA has stepped up public education on the harm caused by codeine abuse through public advisories and press releases.
From 2012 to 2016, HSA convicted 37 offenders and SMC disciplined five doctors for inappropriate prescribing of codeine cough preparations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Changes to Smoking and Cigarette Sales Laws on Smoking and Smokers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"22 Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef asked the Minister for Health with recent changes to the smoking and cigarette sales laws, whether there have been changes to the statistics on smoking and smokers, especially amongst women and teenagers.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Based on the Student Health Surveys which are conducted every three years, the prevalence of smoking among Secondary 1 to 4 students decreased from 8.6% in 2006 to 6.2% in 2009 but has remained at the same level in 2012. Although the rate fell to 2% based on the 2015 survey, there was a change in survey methodology, and we are studying the data to better understand if this had an impact.
Based on national health surveys which are also conducted once every three years, smoking amongst women increased from 3.7% in 2007 to 4.2% in 2010 and decreased slightly to 3.8% in 2013.
Smoking prevalence is determined by complex socio-demographic factors as well as the various tobacco control measures introduced in recent years. My Ministry will continue to monitor smoking prevalence in Singapore and further strengthen our tobacco control programme as part of a multipronged approach.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Benefits of Integrated Healthcare Clustering","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"23 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the average size that each integrated healthcare cluster will serve; (b) how does it compare to Hong Kong; (c) how will this new clustering benefit the public in expediting the waiting time at A&E departments; and (d) how will this improve the average waiting period for a patient who needs to be scanned for suspected serious illnesses like cancer.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Each cluster will serve a population of 1 million to 1.5 million Singapore residents. This is comparable to Hong Kong, which also has healthcare clusters serving populations of 0.5 million to 1.8 million each.
Healthcare 2020 outlined our plan to expand capacity, improve quality and enhance the affordability of healthcare services. Even as we implement Healthcare 2020, we need to plan ahead further into the future. Last year, three key shifts to prepare for our healthcare needs beyond 2020 were announced beyond hospital to community, beyond quality to value and beyond healthcare to health. This transformation is necessary as our healthcare needs will grow in volume and complexity due to our ageing population and increased chronic disease burden. For this reason, we need to organise ourselves better so that we can implement the transformation more swiftly and decisively.
The reorganisation will enable the integrated clusters to deliver more comprehensive and person-centreed healthcare services that are appropriate and closer to the patients. This will help to reduce the need to access specialist care and the accident and emergency department at the hospitals.
The reorganisation will also facilitate scaling up of programmes and services to benefit more Singaporeans. In addition, the integrated clusters will be able to offer their employees a wider and deeper range of professional development opportunities, and a broader platform for cross-learning that will benefit staff and, ultimately, our patients.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criteria for Auto-renewal of Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) Card","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) cards have been automatically renewed for households that do not respond to the invitation letter for renewal; (b) whether these households receive the same subsidy tier upon automatic renewal; and (c) whether the Ministry allows for auto-renewal to the same subsidy tier for retired senior citizens with no change in their household situation.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: A household’s eligibility for and level of subsidy under the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) depends on their latest household income or property annual value, as well as household composition. To ensure that households receive the correct level of subsidies, households are requested to submit a renewal application form every two years so that we can verify and update their latest household information.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) seeks to make the renewal process convenient for CHAS cardholders. Households would receive a reminder letter about three months before their CHAS cards are due to expire. For those who do not respond, another renewal reminder letter is sent about one month before their CHAS cards expire. The renewal application form is included with the reminder letters. The application form is prefilled based on our existing records, to make it simpler for households to update their household information.
MOH also works with partners, such as the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC), to publicise information about the renewal process, as well as to reach out and provide any necessary assistance to individuals and households who may not be familiar with the renewal process. The CHAS application form is also available online, and at various locations, such as polyclinics, public hospitals and community centres.
We will continue to review the CHAS renewal process from time to time to ensure that it is convenient to the public and enables them to receive appropriate levels of subsidy based on their latest circumstances.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Blue and Orange CHAS Cards Issued in 2015 and 2016","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"25 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Health how many blue CHAS cards and orange CHAS cards were issued by the Government in 2015 and 2016 respectively.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: There were 290,000 Blue and 170,000 Orange Community Health Assistance Scheme (CHAS) cards issued in 2015, while 400,000 Blue and 240,000 Orange cards were issued in 2016.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on SME Working Capital Loan Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (Industry) (a) what is the number of applications and utilisation rate of the SME Working Capital Loan Scheme since its introduction in 2016; (b) whether SMEs face cash flow concerns or inability to obtain funding for their business growth; and (c) whether there are plans to enhance the attractiveness and availability of the scheme.
Mr S Iswaran: The Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) Working Capital Loan was announced at Budget 2016 to help viable SMEs access working capital and continue growing their businesses. The scheme complements existing Government loan schemes and commercial loans offered by financial institutions. Since its launch in June 2016 to December 2016, the SME Working Capital Loan has catalysed more than $700 million in loans, benefiting approximately 4,300 SMEs.
Based on the 2016 DP Information Group SME Development Survey, 96% of SMEs which applied for Government and commercial working capital term loans of five years and below were successful in their applications. This comprised 79% which received the full amount requested, and 17% who received partial approved amounts.6
Of the approved loans under the SME Working Capital Loan, 82% are less than the maximum quantum of $300,000. The current scheme is therefore sufficient to meet the needs of most applicants. The Government has regular meetings with the financial institutions and chambers and associations to understand and monitor the financing needs of SMEs and is prepared to provide greater assistance if necessary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["6 : DP Information Group surveyed SMEs on the outcome of their financing applications, which included applications for both Government and commercial working capital loans. The high percentage of approvals for full and partial amounts implies that SMEs were able to access financing to address cash flow concerns or for business growth."],"footNoteQuestions":["26"],"questionNo":"26"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Tax-free Withdrawals from Supplementary Retirement Scheme (SRS) Accounts","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"27 Mr Yee Chia Hsing asked the Minister for Finance whether the Ministry can allow tax-free withdrawals from the Supplementary Retirement Scheme (SRS) accounts to the extent where the SRS contributions do not benefit from any tax deduction due to the personal income tax relief cap of $80,000 that will be effective from the Year of Assessment 2018.
Mr Heng Swee Keat: All personal income tax reliefs, including Supplementary Retirement Scheme (SRS) contributions made on or after 1 January 2017, are subject to an annual cap on personal income tax relief of $80,000 from Year of Assessment 2018. This cap on personal income tax relief preserves the progressivity and fairness of our tax structure.
SRS members are advised to evaluate whether they would benefit from tax relief on their SRS contributions and make an informed decision on whether to make the contribution in the first place. Generally, those who have reached their personal income tax relief cap can place their monies in the same investments outside of SRS and can enjoy the same tax treatment on the gains from these investments. This achieves the same outcome as the Member's suggestion to allow tax-free withdrawals from SRS when the contributions do not benefit from tax relief.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Allocation and Utilisation of ActiveSG Funds","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"28 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth as at 31 December 2016 (a) what has been the total amount of funds allocated for ActiveSG; (b) what is the size of the ActiveSG membership; (c) what is the total amount of ActiveSG dollars that have been (i) utilised, (ii) extended, (iii) forfeited; and (d) what happens to the forfeited and unconsumed portion of the allocated funds respectively.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: As at 31 December 2016, there were almost 1.2 million ActiveSG members. The budget for ActiveSG, including the operating budget for facilities, such as sports stadia and swimming pools, was about $60 million.
The complimentary $100 ActiveSG credits given to new members are intended to encourage members to kickstart an active lifestyle and for them to experience the various sports facilities and programmes. Thus far, almost three quarters of members have utilised their credits. The ActiveSG credits amounted to about $10 million in revenue forgone per year.
Sport Singapore (SportSG) announced in November 2015 that the validity of the credits will be extended for another year, so long as the member uses them at least once in the last 12 months. More than 630,000 members benefited from the extension. About 150,000 members had their credits lapsed on 31 December 2016 despite email reminders.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Expenditure Incurred by Grassroots Organisation Committees for FY2015/16","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Mr Png Eng Huat asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth for FY2015/2016 what is (i) the amount of expenditure incurred by grassroots organisations and (ii) the percentage share of this expense incurred by Citizens' Consultative Committees, Community Club Management Committees, Residents' Committees, Neighbourhood Committees and others respectively.
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth): For the Financial Year (FY) 2015/2016, the total expenditure for Grassroots Organisations (GROs) was $206 million.
The percentage breakdown of this expenditure is:
30 Mr Kok Heng Leun asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Ministry will consider having a specialist team who provides psychological support and mental health expertise to go with the Police when the Police responds to cases of attempted suicide.
Mr Tan Chuan-Jin: Singapore adopts an inter-agency, multi-pronged approach to address suicides through promoting upstream prevention, encouraging help-seeking behaviour, providing support to at-risk groups, and offering crisis intervention and support.
For cases of attempted suicide, the priority is to ensure the immediate safety of the person attempting suicide. The Police are thus activated as the first responder to attend to the crisis situation immediately.
Police officers will, when they notice signs of suicidal tendencies, recommend the appropriate follow-up, including engaging the next-of-kin to assist in caring for the person, or referring the case to the Samaritans of Singapore for counselling. If there are signs indicating possible mental instability, the Police may refer the person to the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) for an assessment of the person’s mental state, and treatment if necessary.
The current staged approach works well, and it rightfully prioritises the immediate safety of the person attempting suicide. Time taken to mobilise a larger team, including psychological and mental health experts, may delay our response.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Nationwide Study on Employment for Persons with Disabilities and Special Needs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"31 Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Ministry will conduct a comprehensive nationwide study on the employment rate and employment conditions of persons with disabilities and special needs, with a focus on finding out the employment difficulties they face and how their salaries compare to other workers with similar qualifications.
Mr Tan Chuan-Jin: Employment is integral to enabling persons with disabilities to live independently and integrate with society. In 2013, SG Enable (SGE) was set up to enhance employability and employment options for persons with disability. SGE works with voluntary welfare organisations to seek out employment opportunities for persons with disabilities and to place and support them in these jobs.
Over the past two years, SGE and its partners have collectively placed more than 1,000 persons with disabilities into employment. SGE has also supported internships for about 75 tertiary students with disabilities in our Institutes of Higher Learning. Employment support for persons with disabilities range from training for employability, to job placement and support, to working with employers to put in place arrangements for better integration.
Through these employment support efforts, SGE has gained a better understanding of the needs and challenges of persons with disabilities seeking employment. With this knowledge, SGE will continue to render timely and customised support to persons with disabilities in seeking and sustaining employment.
Persons with disabilities comprise about 0.55% of the resident labour force, and 60% of them tap on the various employment support schemes ranging from transportation subsidy, income supplement and training support. These persons with disabilities are mainly employed in the hospitality, food and beverage, wholesale and retail and administrative support sectors. Their median monthly gross wage ranged from $1,000 to $2,800.
The Ministry of Social and Family Development will continue to explore means of capturing information on the employment status and conditions of persons with disabilities, so that we have a more complete picture of the situation and can better support them as part of our diverse workforce.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Persons with Disabilities and/or Special Needs in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"32 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) how many persons with disabilities and/or special needs are there in Singapore; (b) what is the breakdown of this number based on the type of disability and/or special needs; (c) within these categories, what is the further breakdown based on functioning levels; and (d) if any of such data is not available, whether the Ministry will carry out a study for the purposes of more targeted policymaking.
Mr Tan Chuan-Jin: The prevalence rate of persons with disabilities in Singapore is as follows:
Persons with sensory (blind and deaf) and physical disabilities would constitute half of the disability group. The remainder comprises those with intellectual disabilities and Autistic Spectrum Disorder.
An enhanced standardised in-take assessment was introduced in 2016 to enable professional staff to assess the level of functioning of persons with disability in our funded services. This enables staff to provide appropriate levels of intervention and support as required.
The Ministry of Social and Family Development refines its system of data collection regularly. The Ministry has started on a project to leverage on the Social Service Net, a national IT system for the social service sector, to collect more comprehensive data across our disability services. We will also work with partner Government agencies to put together a more complete disability dataset to better guide disability policy and programme development.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Property/Estate Agencies and Agents Registered in Singapore from 2007 to 2016","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"33 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for National Development for each of the years from 2007 to 2016, what is the number of (i) property/estate agencies in Singapore and (ii) housing/estate agents registered in Singapore.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The Council of Estate Agencies (CEA) was set up in October 2010 to administer the new regulatory framework for the real estate agency industry. The annual number of estate agents (EAs) and real estate salespersons (RES) since CEA's formation is as follows:
34 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many cases of fake food imported from overseas have been detected by AVA over the past three years; (b) what is the breakdown of the country of origin in these cases; and (c) what action has been taken against the suppliers.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) has not detected any cases of fake food products in Singapore to date. Fake food is defined as food that is made from ingredients that are not edible and can be hazardous when consumed.
The Government places great importance in ensuring that our food is safe. In addition to sampling food imports for safety tests, AVA also conducts checks to ensure that food is accurately labelled. From 2014 to 2016, AVA took enforcement action against 26 cases of mislabelling of food products, including honey, black moss and chia seeds. The traders involved were warned or fined and required to correct the labels.
The maximum penalty for importing fake food or mislabelling food products is a fine not exceeding $10,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, or both.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Complaints against Managing Agents of Management Corporations of Strata Titles","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"35 Mr Zainal Sapari asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether there is an increasing trend over the last five years on the number of complaints received by BCA on managing agents of Management Corporations of Strata Title (MCSTs) over their non-delivery of service or compliance; and (b) whether there are processes in place to ensure only managing agents of MCSTs with the necessary credentials are allowed to operate their business.
Mr Lawrence Wong: We have not seen an increase in the number of complaints received about service standards of managing agents (MAs). The Building and Construction Authority (BCA) receives about 30 cases of such feedback annually. This number has been consistent over the last five years.
Management Corporation Strata Titles (MCSTs) have the flexibility to appoint MA firms that best serve their needs. To aid them in their choice, MCSTs can select from a list of MA firms accredited under the voluntary Accredited Managing Agent (AMA) scheme. This scheme is jointly administered by two industry associations: the Singapore Institute of Surveyors and Valuers, and the Association of Property and Facility Managers. Accredited firms are required to have staff who are trained in recognised estate or building management courses, and who also possess sufficient experience and knowledge in property and strata management.
To help raise the overall competency of MAs, the BCA Academy also offers courses covering the strata management framework and relevant rules and regulations. We encourage MAs to make use of these training opportunities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Applicants above Income Cap for Rental Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"36 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development for each year of the past three years (a) how many applicants above the income cap for rental flats have applied for rental flats; and (b) how many of such applications have been approved.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) exercises flexibility for deserving households who do not meet the eligibility criteria, such as the income ceiling, to rent a flat from HDB on a case-by-case basis.
Between 2014 and 2016, about 1,900 households requested for a waiver of the income ceiling criterion, of which 273 applications were approved. The other applicants were assessed to be able to afford other housing options or had family support.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Considerations for Replacement of Bathroom Doors in New HDB Residential Developments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"37 Ms Sun Xueling asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether there has been an assessment on the practicality of providing wooden laminated doors for HDB bathrooms given usage patterns; and (b) whether HDB will consider replacing the wooden laminated doors with aluminium bi-fold doors for the bathrooms of new HDB residential developments.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) has provided laminated timber bathroom doors for standard Build-To-Order (BTO) flats since 2001. These doors have undergone performance tests, including repeated wetting and drying cycle tests, and meet the requisite industry standards for use.
However, depending on their usage habits, some residents could find such timber doors unsuitable. For example, in bathrooms where the door could be frequently splashed with water due to floor washing, bathing patterns or lack of shower screen. In such cases, deterioration would appear over time.
It is thus the flat owners' responsibility to use and maintain the doors properly. Nonetheless, if issues with the laminated timber doors occur within the one-year defects liability period (DLP), HDB will perform rectification, which may include one-for-one replacement.
Separately, HDB has been carrying out studies on new bathroom door options as part of its regular effort to keep flat fitting designs up to date. One new option is laminated unplasticised polyvinyl chloride (UPVC) folding doors. These doors are durable, easy to maintain, and offer a modern timber look and feel that complements the bedroom doors. They are also more resistant to fungus growth. Since November 2015, HDB has introduced laminated UPVC folding doors for bathrooms in new public housing development launches.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Selective En Bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS) on Community Social Capital","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"38 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for National Development whether there has been a study done or planned on (i) the degree of preference of Singaporeans to sink deep roots in a local community as opposed to having to move out under the Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS) with no guarantee of relocation in the vicinity and (ii) the erosion of social capital when people who have lived in the area for a long time and contributed to the community move out under SERS.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Under the Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS), residents move en bloc to a new precinct nearby, preserving the existing community ties built over the years. The Housing and Development Board (HDB) has also put in place the Joint Selection Scheme, where up to six households affected by SERS can book their new replacement flats together, to continue living near their old neighbours.
HDB conducts a biennial survey to gauge residents’ level of support and satisfaction for SERS, including the extent to which SERS has impacted their family and community ties. Over the years, our surveys have consistently shown a strong support level for SERS, at 85% or more, with residents affirming benefits, such as having a brand-new living environment, being able to move nearby and with their old neighbours.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Management of Food Wastage through Schools and Neighbourhood Communities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"39 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) whether the Ministry will be working with schools to raise awareness about food wastage and ways to manage the issue; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider setting up a network of food banks within communities so that households with excess food items can donate them via these neighbourhood food banks.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: My Ministry works closely with schools to raise awareness on the importance of reducing food wastage. The National Environment Agency (NEA) supports schools by providing educational resources, such as posters, videos and presentation materials, on food waste reduction.
Later this year, the National Environment Agency (NEA) will implement a two-year food waste reduction and recycling project for schools. Under this project which will involve 10 schools, emphasis will first be placed on reducing the amount of food waste produced and then on recycling the remaining food waste using onsite food waste recycling machines. There will be assembly talks on managing food waste in participating schools and training will also be provided on the proper segregation of food waste for recycling to the schools' staff, students and canteen stallholders. In addition, they will host learning journeys for neighbouring schools and their community partners to share about their food waste reduction and recycling efforts. Apart from raising awareness about food wastage, the project will demonstrate the benefits of proper food waste management to other schools and encourage them to set up similar systems.
Currently, food redistribution organisations, such as The Food Bank Singapore, Food from the Heart and Fei Yue Community Services, accept donations of excess food items from households. For example, The Food Bank Singapore currently has 15 collection points for households to drop off their food items. As these organisations are located within the communities, they are able to channel food efficiently to those in need. My Ministry will continue to support these organisations' efforts on food redistribution and encourage companies and households to donate their excess food to them.
While food redistribution is one step towards reducing food waste, we should move upstream to avoid generating food waste in the first place. NEA has developed a food wastage reduction guide for households with a wide range of useful tips on how to reduce food wastage, such as planning food purchases to avoid having to throw out expired food items that are not consumed.
To raise awareness and minimise food wastage in the community, my Ministry works with the Community Development Councils (CDCs) and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). For example, NEA has partnered the South East District on the \"Eco-Kepalas @ South East Organisations\" programme and North East District on the \"I Love My Food\" initiative to encourage households to reduce food wastage.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures Taken to Manage E-waste","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"40 Mr Chen Show Mao asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) what measures are being taken to encourage consumers and waste management companies to adhere to environmentally sound practices in managing e-waste; (b) how effective have these measures been; and (c) whether the Government will consider establishing strict guidelines on e-waste collection, disposal and recycling for consumers, businesses and waste management companies.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Electrical and electronic waste (e-waste) is a key waste stream in Singapore. Approximately 60,000 tonnes of e-waste is generated in Singapore each year. E-waste contains valuable and scarce materials, but also small amounts of hazardous substances, such as mercury and cadmium. The release of such substances into the environment may pose pollution and health problems.
To encourage environmentally sound management of e-waste, my Ministry supports voluntary recycling programmes, such as REcycling Nation's Electronic Waste (RENEW), which is led by Starhub, DHL and recycler TES-AMM. Under this programme, consumers can place their e-waste in bright green e-waste recycling bins which are conveniently located in shopping malls and commercial buildings. The e-waste will then be collected by DHL and delivered to TES-AMM. RENEW, which is an expansion and replacement of its predecessor StarHub E-waste Recycling Programme, now covers almost 280 locations around Singapore. Since 2012, these programmes have collected and recycled about 110 tonnes of e-waste. Businesses that want to recycle their e-waste, can participate in the HP Planet Partners Programme or Dell Recycling Programme. The e-waste collected is sent to e-waste recycling facilities, which are subjected to pollution control requirements.
As the amount of e-waste generated in Singapore is likely to increase as technological advancement leads to faster product replacement, my Ministry has been exploring options for a comprehensive nationwide system for the collection, disposal and recycling of e-waste.
The National Environment Agency (NEA) commissioned a study in March 2016 to develop possible options for an e-waste management system. The ongoing study includes a survey of the entire e-waste collection and recycling value chain, including treatment and disposal. In addition, consultations were conducted in October and November 2016 to seek industry's views on elements of an e-waste management framework. The results from the study and industry consultations are expected to be released this year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Guidelines for Schools on Retention of Prizes Won during Competitions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"41 Mr Zainal Sapari asked the Minister for Education (Schools) whether there is a policy to guide schools in deciding on the retention of prizes, especially cash prizes or those with cash value, won by students representing the schools during competitions.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: Schools set their own internal guidelines in managing prizes won by student representatives in competitions. This is done based on factors, such as the school's education philosophy, type of prizes and competition rules.
Some schools have a practice that book vouchers are shared equally amongst team members. When cash prizes are given, winners may be encouraged to donate a portion of the cash to support needy students or for their own Co-curricular Activity (CCA). This inculcates in our students a sense of gratitude to the larger community supporting them in the competition, and to pay it forward to benefit fellow students through the school programmes.
The preparation for, and experience of the competition are the most valuable aspects. This is the educational value the students gain, irrespective of prizes won. We will remind schools to explain the purpose of their management of cash prizes to students and parents clearly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Time Taken by Institutes of Higher Learning Graduates to Secure Full-time Employment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"42 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills) (a) what is the average and median time taken for graduates of institutions of higher learning to secure full-time employment; (b) whether the time taken is lengthened with the economic slowdown; and (c) what are the steps taken to help these graduates find employment.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Ministry of Education (MOE) does not measure the statistics as requested by the Member. Instead, the Graduate Employment Survey (GES), conducted by the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) annually, provides an indication of the employment outcomes of graduates six months after the completion of their final examinations.
For 2016 fresh and post-National Service (NS) polytechnic graduates, the overall employment rates were 90.6% and 95.4% respectively, slightly higher than 88.9% and 91.5% in 2015. Full-time permanent employment rates for the fresh and post-NS polytechnic graduates in 2016 were 55.8% and 70.1% respectively, also comparable to 2015 figures. Many polytechnic graduates chose to work in part-time or temporary jobs as they prepared to commence further studies.
The results of the 2016 GES for autonomous universities (AUs) are being tabulated. Based on the 2015 GES results, the overall employment rate six months after graduation was 89.5%, and the full-time permanent employment rate was 83.1%.
IHLs have in place various programmes and initiatives to help fresh graduates find employment after graduation. For example, education and career guidance are provided to students to broaden their awareness of the jobs and careers available. IHLs also organise annual career fairs for graduating students and provide resources to help graduating students as well as fresh graduates in their job search. Workforce Singapore (WSG) programmes and initiatives are also extended to fresh graduates to help those who require more support in their job search.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":2089,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Chan Chun Sing","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170206/vernacular-Chan Chun Sing(1).pdf","fileName":"Chan Chun Sing(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2090,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Chan Chun Sing","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170206/vernacular-Chan Chun Sing(2).pdf","fileName":"Chan Chun Sing(2).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2091,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Vikram Nair","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170206/vernacular-Vikram Nair(1).pdf","fileName":"Vikram Nair(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2092,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Thomas Chua Kee Seng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170206/vernacular-Thomas Chua(1).pdf","fileName":"Thomas Chua(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2093,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Rahayu Mahzam","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170206/vernacular-Rahayu Mahzam(1).pdf","fileName":"Rahayu Mahzam(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2094,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Ang Wei Neng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170206/vernacular-Ang Wei Neng(1).pdf","fileName":"Ang Wei Neng(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":588,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20170206/vernacular-Lee Bee Wah(1).pdf","fileName":"Lee Bee Wah(1).pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}