1 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Education in the past three years (a) how many cases of sexual harassment or misconduct have been reported by undergraduate students in each of the Autonomous Universities; and (b) how many of such cases have been referred to the Police for prosecution.
2 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Education (a) how many cases of serious disciplinary cases involving students at our institutes of higher learning (IHLs) have there been over the last three years; (b) how many students have been expelled; and (c) how does the Ministry ensure that the disciplinary frameworks for the IHLs are robust and consistent.
3 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Education (a) for each year from 2008, how many cases of on campus sexual harassment and sexual assault at Autonomous Universities were reported to the campus authorities; (b) how many resulted in administrative penalties from campus authorities and no further action; (c) how many resulted in administrative penalties and Police action; (d) what were the nature of the administrative punishments issued; (e) what were the considerations behind determining administrative penalties; and (f) what support was provided to victims in such cases.
\tThe Minister for Education (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mr Speaker, Sir, can I take the next three questions together, please.
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: Members have raised three areas of concern. First, the number of sexual misconduct cases across the Autonomous Universities, or AUs, over the years. Second, the adequacy of law enforcement and disciplinary actions in deterring potential offenders. Third, the support systems that have been put in place to help victims, in a timely and effective manner that is sensitive to their needs. I will address the first two aspects, while Second Minister Indranee will cover the final aspect.
So, Members may want to pose your supplementary questions after both of us have given our replies.
First, incidence rates of sexual misconduct in the AUs. Over the past three years, the six AUs handled a total of 42 disciplinary cases involving sexual misconduct within campuses. But there were another 14 cases committed by students that happened outside of campuses – making a total of 56 cases. I know that Mr Leon Perera in his question referred to cases within campuses. But since the focus of my reply today is on the penalty framework of the AUs rather than campus security, I will refer to all 56 cases today in my reply.
Let me give a breakdown of the 56 cases.
There were 17 cases in Academic Year 2015, 18 cases in Academic Year 2016, and 21 cases in Academic Year 2017 across all six AUs.
Twenty-five out of the 56 cases were from NUS; two from Yale-NUS which has its own Board of Discipline separate from NUS; 20 were from NTU; and six were from SMU. SUTD, SIT and SUSS had one case each over the last three years. So, the number of cases for each AU is closely related to their student population.
Finally, 37 or about 66% of the cases were related to voyeurism, that is, peeping Toms and filming of people in vulnerable positions.
As the student population changes from year to year, what is more meaningful is to express this as an incidence rate, that is, the number of sexual misconduct cases involving student perpetrators per 1,000 students. That is probably a better measurement. The number was 0.21, 0.21 and 0.20 over the last three academic years, showing no discernible trend.
Let me now talk about penalties for the offenders. Of the 56 cases, the victims in 37 cases made Police reports. Of these 37 cases, four cases are still under investigation and for two, there was insufficient evidence to make out offences. So, there is a remainder of 31 cases. Out of the remaining 31, 10 cases resulted in jail terms of between 10 days and eight months. And these 10 are serious offences, involving outrage of modesty or multiple instances of voyeurism. These are all arising from Police reports and then Police action. Minister Shanmugam will explain later how the Police deal with these cases.
Separately, apart from Police action, the AUs will carry out their own disciplinary processes through their respective disciplinary bodies and mete out a combination of penalties that is within the AUs’ powers and authority. These range from an official reprimand, which will be reflected in the student’s formal educational record, to suspensions, and expulsion, which is the harshest punishment an AU can administer.
To determine the appropriate sanctions, each case is evaluated by the disciplinary body, taking into account the severity of the misconduct and any mitigating factors, such as how remorseful and forthcoming the offender was during investigations, the potential for rehabilitation and the presence of any mental health issues. For offenders with psychiatric conditions, sanctions will include requiring the offender to start, or continue, with mandatory counselling and psychological treatment.
Of the 56 cases I mentioned earlier that happened over the last three years, five cases are pending disciplinary hearings and four students withdrew from the University before sanctions were imposed. So, out of the remaining 47 cases, 34 resulted in an official reprimand, 26 resulted in suspensions of up to two academic terms and 20 were banned from entering students' dorms. These numbers do not add up to 47 because typically, an offender received a combination of penalties.
But if we just look at the 10 Police cases involving serious offences which led to jail sentences, there was only one expulsion, which was subsequently reduced to an 18-month suspension after appeal and the taking into account of the offender's psychiatric condition.
I think there is no need for me to repeat my views on the adequacies of the penalties meted out by the AUs, but I will give two strong reasons why the AUs will need to review their disciplinary frameworks with a view to strengthen the penalties.
First, we need to better balance the objectives of deterrence and redress for the victims against the rehabilitation of the offender. Balancing these objectives is important for an education institution, but it should not end up with penalties that are too soft and too lenient. Our AUs are important national institutions that educate and nurture young Singaporeans to be contributing and responsible members of society.
To achieve this, the AUs' disciplinary frameworks should therefore be stringent but fair. \"Two strikes and you're out\" cannot be the standard application. But neither should expulsions be the default for all forms of misconduct. The penalty must continue to fit the offence, but there has to be a significant adjustment at the most egregious end of the spectrum of misconducts when they are serious criminal offences that undermine the safety and security of University campuses. We must ensure that potential offenders know the severe consequences of their actions, including the impact on their future. There has to be a deterrent.
And if the offender is remorseful, accepted and served punishment, he deserves a chance to make good. This is also the spirit behind the Yellow Ribbon project, and this is how we balance deterrence and rehabilitation.
Second reason, we must recognise that voyeurism is a growing concern in Singapore. A recent \"Big Read\" article by TODAY – published last weekend – gave a good explanation that this may be because the young are exposed to the Internet from an early age, and technological advances make video recording easier and more undetectable. This led to some thinking that voyeurism is not a serious offence, and they cannot be more wrong. Coincidentally, MHA is amending the Penal Code, which will be debated this afternoon, to include new provisions on voyeurism.
As our circumstances change, the AUs must likewise keep up with the times and ensure that their policies and processes remain relevant in establishing a safe and supportive environment for all students. I have therefore asked all our AUs, Polytechnics and the Institute of Technical Education to review their disciplinary frameworks.
In the case of NUS, it has convened a Review Committee led by Mdm Kay Kuok – a member of its Board of Trustees – to review its disciplinary framework. I know many students are not excited by Committees, but this is a necessary process to bring about a considered change to an established disciplinary framework.
The Review Committee has started its work, and will release its recommendations in stages. The Committee members will release some preliminary recommendations in the middle of May for consultations and aim to complete their work in June this year. In the meantime, NUS management is taking immediate actions to improve the support systems and campus security, which Second Minister Indranee will elaborate on later.
Ultimately, the AUs are tackling the concern on campus and student safety holistically, involving tougher penalties for offenders, better physical security on campus, and stronger support and greater sensitivity for the needs of victims.
Mr Speaker, Sir, let me end with just one last comment. This incident provided an opportunity for us to reflect on the character of our society. And I can see that we are a people with a strong sense of justice, who see the importance of differentiating between right from wrong; and this explains the strong reaction to Ms Monica Baey's situation. We also continue to believe in tough but fair systems of punishment to keep the Singapore living environment the way it has been.
These are characteristics of our society that I am proud of as a Singaporean. But we should always refrain from trial by media, doxxing and resorting to mob justice. No matter how wrong an offender is, we need to respect the due process. During this episode, the harshest punishment for Nicholas Lim came from the social media. I hope that as a society, we will give his family and him the time and space they need, to reflect on his actions, to turn over a new leaf and move forward.
Ms Monica Baey herself has said, that as hurt and affected as she is, her objective in publicising her story was not to seek revenge for the present case, but to ensure fairness for both the perpetrator and the victim in future cases. So, the most important priority now is for the AUs to see how they can do better, and take concrete steps to improve campus safety and their victim support frameworks and processes. They are strongly committed to doing so, I am confident there will be swift and meaningful changes, and my Ministry will work closely with them on these aspects.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enhancing Measures to Prevent Sexual Harassment in Schools and Institutes of Higher Learning","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"4 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Education what measures are in place to prevent sexual harassment in all school settings and what will be done to enhance student protection.
5 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Education what safeguards and measures are in place at Institutes of Higher Learning to (i) protect students from sexual harassment or misconduct and (ii) support affected victims and facilitate case reporting.
6 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Education (a) what measures were put in place to reduce sexual harassment and misconduct in Autonomous Universities and polytechnics after reports of sexualised harassment during orientation activities in 2016; (b) what steps were taken to review these measures subsequently; (c) what were the shortcomings; (d) what steps have been taken to improve; and (e) what further steps are planned.
7 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Education (a) what are the forms of training provided at educational institutions to address sexual harassment and assault cases, including support for victims; (b) what are the measures to support victims; (c) what are the policies pertaining to investigating allegations of sexual harassment and assault; and (d) what are the procedures in place to review the effectiveness of such measures and to propose improvements.
\tThe Second Minister for Education (Ms Indranee Rajah) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, with your permission, may I take Question Nos 4 to 7 together?
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMs Indranee Rajah: Minister Ong addressed questions relating to the disciplinary frameworks in the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) and the reviews that the IHLs, including the Autonomous Universities (AUs) are undertaking. I will now address the other questions raised in relation to sexual misconduct in educational institutions.
Ms Tin Pei Ling asked about the prevention of sexual harassment in school settings. Students' safety and well-being are our priority. Schools take a firm stand against sexual harassment and exercise judgement to ensure that disciplinary actions reflect the circumstances of each case. Depending on the facts of the case, a Police report may be made.
Beyond disciplinary measures, students are taught to identify risks to their personal safety and learn to seek help from trusted adults, such as their parents and teachers. Teachers are trained to look out for signs of distress and provide victims first-line help. Both students and teachers are supported by school counsellors and other external agencies, where required. MOE works with the schools regularly to ensure that support measures are relevant and effective.
The other areas of concern raised by Ms Foo Mee Har, Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap and Mr Leon Perera and which I will now address is what support is currently available in IHLs for the victims of sexual offences and whether it is sufficient, as well as what measures are being taken to ensure a safe environment for all students on campus.
In terms of support, the first and most fundamental thing to understand is that sexual misconduct can have a lasting psychological and emotional impact on victims. The sense of violation and fear that victims – male and female – experience is real and can be crippling. For many, the road to recovery can be long and painful. It takes courage for any victim to come forward and report the incident. There must be strong end-to-end support for victims, starting from the time they step forward to report an incident, to post-incident counselling and psychological support.
The recent case reported by NUS student Monica Baey shows that insofar as NUS is concerned, there were shortcomings in victim support and there were clearly areas which were lacking. NUS has acknowledged this and has committed to doing better. NUS is serious about improving its frameworks and processes and has convened a high-level Review Committee to oversee the implementation of various measures by NUS management. One of the immediate steps is the establishment of a Victim Care Unit.
The other IHLs are similarly concerned and are in the process of reviewing their support for victims with a focus on ensuring that the support provided is holistic, timely and accessible. For example, some IHLs have in place 24-hour helplines for incident reporting or counselling services. These ensure that victims or any distressed students receive timely support, even if they come forward outside regular office hours.
As the IHLs do their reviews, there are three broad areas of focus.
First, support for victims. All the IHLs have full-time counsellors on site to support victims, as well as a larger group of staff who are trained as para-counsellors to provide additional support. Counsellors are also trained in managing such difficult situations sensitively.
Our IHLs will look to strengthen these provisions, taking the victim's entire journey in mind. The support must extend beyond counselling and begin at the point that the victim first reaches out for help. We should also ensure victims feel safe to step forward and report cases when they occur and seek help.
A good support system must create psychological safety for victims, guide them through the processes and protocols involved in the management of their case, update them on investigations and ensure that their concerns and questions are addressed along the entire journey. All these must be done sensitively and with empathy.
We also need to recognise that individuals have different resilience and coping levels and that some of the trauma and stress might not manifest immediately. For more severe cases, such as sexual assault, our IHLs will need to be equipped to make judgement calls about the victims’ emotional state and quickly call for external professional help where needed. These are important details that will have to be worked out carefully.
Second, campus security to deter would-be offenders. Currently, CCTVs complement campus security guards to ensure security in common areas and some institutions take the additional precautionary measure of having controlled access to female bathrooms and toilets.
More will be done. Over this past week, NUS started installing full-height doors and partitions in the restrooms of all its hostels and sports facilities, as well as new locks at the entrances of the hostel restrooms. Additional CCTV cameras are being installed at more locations on campus. NUS will deploy more security guards at its hostels and introduce roving security patrols across campus. These changes will further strengthen privacy and security on campus.
NUS expects to complete these enhancements in the coming months. As part of their overall review of campus security, the IHLs will take steps to address new forms of threats, such as the illegal installation of miniature cameras. For example, SUSS is collaborating with SPF to train its security staff to inspect toilet cubicles or ceilings for such cameras.
Third, ensuring a collective stand against sexual misconduct in a modern age.
At its core, the issue is about respect for others. There are some who mistakenly think that voyeurism and verbal harassment are not serious because there is no physical contact with the victims. And this is very simply, just wrong. Voyeurism and other unwanted non-physical harassment exact psychological and emotional harm on victims and, similar to other types of sexual misconduct, have no place in our society. Perpetrators are no less culpable just because they did not come into physical contact with their victims.
We can and, therefore, must do better to educate students not only on the importance of respect, but also what constitutes harm and violation. The IHLs are committed to this and will be taking steps to strengthen such education. For instance, NUS will be introducing a course on respect and consent at the start of the new academic year for all students, faculty and staff.
Technology has also amplified the potential for harm arising from sexual misconduct. Take voyeurism, for example. With image-capturing devices becoming ubiquitous, especially on mobile phones, such crimes are no longer contained between the victim and perpetrator, and the potential for mass dissemination is much higher. We are updating the Penal Code to deal with technology-enabled sex crimes. Institutional processes must likewise keep up with the times.
Institutions and organisations must also recognise that expectations of how they should respond are changing, not just in Singapore but globally. The “me too” movement is an example. As societal norms and expectations change, all organisations need to keep up with the times, send clear signals that sexual misconduct is unacceptable and equip themselves to deal with sexual misconduct complaints appropriately should they arise.
At the end of the day, the best deterrent and protection in such cases is if we respect others, both in the physical and emotional space, and conduct ourselves accordingly.
\tEr Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have two supplementary questions for the Minister. I think it is good to hear about installing more CCTVs, doors and so on. Those are hardware, infrastructure. I would like to ask is there a more deep-rooted culture of sexual harassment in our campuses. If there is, what action is going to be taken to eliminate this deep-rooted culture of sexual harassment?
The second question is, I think what we need is education, or even a campaign on zero tolerance towards sexual harassment. So, in this aspect, is there anything that can be done?
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: The first question is whether there is a deep-rooted trend of sexual harassment. Sexual harassment is a type of sexual misconduct. There are several types: outrage of modesty, sexual assault, sexual harassment. At the AUs, the big bulk, about two-thirds, is still voyeurism. Based on the data I gave just now, there has not been a rising trend in the last three years. However, I do also acknowledge all the explanations that some of the literature has given including the \"Big Read\" article in TODAY that I mentioned earlier, that the young today grow up with Internet, they are exposed to pornographic websites, they know of miniature photography and recording devices, and sometimes, they get these materials through their WhatsApp. Over time, they may have the idea that \"Actually, this is no big deal\". This is what we worry about. It has not manifested in terms of higher incidence rates – at least not over the last three years. But we do worry about this underlying trend.
I do agree with the Members – we need to send a strong signal. It has to be a combination of measures between what I and Second Minister Indranee have talked about, tougher penalties, education, improving the physical security as well as better support for both the victims as well as, sometimes, for the offenders in counselling them and helping them turn over a new leaf.
\tMiss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): I have two questions for Minister Ong. The first is, had this incident not been taken on the social media and gained so much attention, would the Ministry and AUs have taken actions to review the disciplinary framework? The second question is, the Minister mentioned that the AUs are now undergoing this full review. When they are ready, would the Ministry ensure that the revisions are adequate and serve their purpose?
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: Sorry, I did not catch the Member's first question because I thought we just announced that they would review their framework.
\tMiss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: It is true. The thing is if this incident was not taken to social media and had not gained that much attention, would the Ministry and the AUs already have undertaken this review since in the last three years, there was no increase in rates?
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: Okay, I see. Should we not have done this earlier, in other words. The AUs do review their disciplinary framework from time to time. NUS' framework was reviewed about five years ago, and it was probably due for review. But I think what this incident has taught all of us is that there is a stronger concern and some underlying trends. I think we do need to make it tougher at the egregious end of the offence. Should we have done this earlier? I wish we had but I think there are many things that we do, sometimes, ahead of time, and we are also being questioned, \"Why do you do it now?\", \"Aren't you going to open up other problems?\" In this case, unfortunately, that did not happen but I think what is more important is immediate action is being taken now. I am confident that there will be swift and decisive actions.
The second question is how we would know if the measures will be adequate. I think after this furore, the AUs all understand the implications of this. I have given them my written advice and policy guidance that they have to do a thorough review. I am sure all of them will take it very seriously.
\tMr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Mr Speaker, I just wanted to ask the Minister, I thought 37 cases of voyeurism over three years was quite a lot. Frankly, I am quite disappointed that the AUs did not take earlier action to review their processes to better deal with the complaints. I am wondering would the Minister review why the AUs did not take further action, having seen the number of cases that have been reported over the three years. If we do not get to the root of the problem, then whatever we do, the AUs will not do anything to review the process until the matter goes up to social media. That is one point. Two other queries.
Can the reported cases of voyeurism be publicised in campus newsletters to alert students of the extent of the problem?
And also, whether the Minister will consider asking the AUs to publicise the punishment of offenders to students in the AUs, so that there is also a learning message for everyone that there is some deterrent effect. Potential offenders must know that there would be appropriate punishment for them.
\t
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: The first question is again, looking back, why did we not realise that was serious? Of course, we wish that there was a realisation that these are serious offences. Voyeurism is a rising concern. But having said that, today, after this incident, I believe that the AUs are all very aware and I am confident that they will do something swift and decisive. I am confident of that. And we will work closely with them.
As to publicising the punishment, NUS has actually been publicising the cases, the sexual misconduct cases and the punishment that has been meted out to them. It is available on their students' website; which is why after the latest incident, there were several press reports about past cases, because it was publicly available within the NUS website. I think we can publicise but fundamentally, as what I have mentioned, the penalties are just not stiff enough. We just need to toughen them up and send a strong signal that at the most egregious end of the offences, there must be very stiff punishment.
\tMr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): I have one supplementary question for Second Minister Indranee. Minister Indranee alluded to the infrastructural changes that are happening in the NUS now, the retrofitting of the shower cubicles, the locks, additional security cameras and so on. It is a shame that it took this incident of Ms Monica Baey coming forward before these changes are actually made given the number of voyeurism offences that have taken place in the previous years. My supplementary question would be, are these infrastructural changes to enhance security being done across the board for all the IHLs? And is there a time frame for this to be carried out?
\tMs Indranee Rajah: The short answer is that all the IHLs are reviewing their security arrangements. In the case of NUS, they have already embarked on it. They are expected to be completed in the coming months. For the other AUs, they will have to complete their review. But the short answer is that they are all looking at it and their priority is to make sure that the campus is safe for students.
\tMs Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Can I asked the Minister, given that this is happening across all the AUs and maybe other IHLs, are we looking to introduce codes and standards to Universities and IHLs to help them prevent and manage sexual harassment on campus? The second question is, are we considering, given the numbers that you have shared, a kind of cross-campus body that would help to manage such incidents? I am wondering because a student does not stay in a University if he has been found to have committed a misconduct or act. Would he then go to another University? And so, is there this cross-campus sharing of information and therefore, that warrants a body to be set up?
\tMs Indranee Rajah: I think the first thing to remember is that it does not take codes and regulations to understand that taking videos of somebody bathing is wrong. That is not rocket science. It just needs certain fundamental values which is that you must respect other people, respect their privacy, respect their physical space, respect their emotional space. So, we can and the AUs will be embarking, as I had mentioned in my earlier response, on better education for the students. But fundamentally, it boils down to values. That is a function partly of parents, partly schools and teachers and the individual himself or herself. Because if you adhere to that, you do not actually need to have codes and regulations.
The key thing is really making sure that individuals understand that something like this is not a light offence, is not a light thing. It will be taken seriously and it will be dealt with seriously and appropriately as well. There is also the other aspect which is rehabilitation. In some cases, either they have a problem that needs to be dealt with and it may require counselling, it may require additional treatment for those who are mentally not well, so that is another aspect that we will be looking at.
Values, education, rehabilitation.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Mr Speaker, I have a follow-up question for Second Minister Indranee on the security arrangement at the hostels. I understand that the student in the controversy of this NUS Peeping Tom incident said that he was at the hostel after midnight with the intention to stay over at his girlfriend's hostel room, even though he was not a resident of the hostel. I would like to ask what is the security arrangement for the NUS hostel and the hostels at the other Universities. Would they allow people to go into the hostels after midnight and what is the response from the Universities?
\tMs Indranee Rajah: The students can and do visit their friends in other hostels. So, I think that this particular incident will be cause for the Universities to reflect on how that arrangement should be managed. Obviously, you do not want to prevent friends from coming to see each other, but the proper recording and the security arrangements for that should be in place. So, in short, as a result of this, I think the Universities will be reviewing much more closely.
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: I just want to add that we need to take some firm measures, but be careful not to over-react to the extent of not allowing students to visit each other or staying over. This is, after all, university campuses. I think we can have a lively campus without having all the dangers and security lapses, which we will tighten up.
\tMs Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Mr Speaker, I have three supplementary questions for the Minister. I appreciate the discretion that the respective AUs have to review their procedures in the light of Monica Baey's ordeal. I would like to ask the Minister would he think that there is room for some form of minimum standards that MOE could prescribe to the respective boards that are reviewing the different measures, to ensure they have some kind of minimum standards to which disciplinary actions that will be meted out. This is to send that strong signal that the Minister referred to. Secondly, on the safety measures, what would be some minimum standards where people who live in the Halls would have to observe? Last but not least, what would be some of the minimum standards on training and imparting of skills for the counsellors dealing with this sensitive matter of people being subjected to sexual harassment?
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: I think we also need to respect the fact that they are Autonomous Universities having their own boards and governing themselves in a fairly independent way, separate from MOE. So, for us to issue standards or codes or rules to the Universities would not be appropriate. We can do that for Polytechnics because they are Statutory Boards, and we can do that for ITE. But for AUs, they are differently incorporated and structured.
Having said that, when I first issued my public statement that the penalties are manifestly inadequate, I think they all understood the standard that I was looking for. I am sure we will work together, not by MOE issuing rules and regulations but through discussion, moral suasion, I am sure we can come up with something feasible, workable and effective.
\tAssoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, just two questions for the Minister. The first is on the issue of standards. The concern here is that what attracts a suspension in one University might only attract a reprimand or expulsion in another. Then, there would be a sense of injustice that the Universities differ significantly on the standards. And that is why I think it is important that MOE does come in with this suasion and coordinated approach.
The second question is that I think when we look at the disciplinary committees, there is some concern that they may not have the right expertise or skills to discharge all of their functions because, frankly, they are not the Police or the Attorney-General's Chambers. They are not professional adjudicators or finders of facts. So, I wonder what can the Ministry do here to ensure that these committees have the skills necessary to interview the parties concerned, to investigate and to assure the public that justice is being done here.
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: The first question of inconsistencies across AUs, I would not call it inconsistencies. Different AUs may well have slightly differently disciplinary actions, just as different companies would have different disciplinary actions when there are offences. Having said that, researchers and academics stick to the discipline of peer review very closely and I have no doubt in this aspect, there will be some peer review going on.
The second question is expertise. The disciplinary boards of the review committees will need to have certain members, including having student representatives. But of course, if they need enforcement or legal advice, I am sure they can ask for it and they are able to tap on it. After all, it is a university; lots of different talent in different expertise. So, I think we need to give them some time, some space to get their work done.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Police’s Handling of Voyeurism Cases and Issuance of Conditional Warning","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"8 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) for each year from 2008, how many cases of campus sexual harassment and sexual assault at Autonomous Universities were reported to the Police; (b) of these, how many resulted in warnings and how many resulted in criminal prosecution; and (c) what were the considerations behind determining the nature of the action taken in such cases.
9 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Home Affairs in light of the police report made by an NUS student against a person who took a video recording of her in the bathroom (a) how does the police assess whether a person should be given a conditional warning; (b) what percentage of suspects given a conditional warning in similar cases have been rehabilitated; (c) what percentage of suspects went on to re-offend; and (d) whether there is any review of this practice after this case has been discussed widely.
10 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether the Ministry will consider a public education campaign where people are educated not to watch or circulate voyeur videos or photos even if they do not contain nudity but which sexualise young people without their consent.
\tThe Minister for Home Affairs (Mr K Shanmugam): Sir, with your leave, can I take the next three questions, Question Nos 8, 9 and 10, together?
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMr K Shanmugam: At the outset, Sir, let me say this: no woman or man should have to suffer the indignity of her or his modesty being insulted or outraged. That is not acceptable. As a society, we must make sure these values are maintained. People must feel safe, as they go about their life. Our laws must and enforcement must underpin these values.
The questions by Members relate to: (a) the statistics relating to sexual offences in our Universities; (b) the way in which Police/AGC exercise their discretion, in deciding to prosecute, or not prosecute an offender, and the general approach taken by Police and AGC on cases relating to sexual misconduct. Let me deal with the two points.
Mr Perera and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah have asked about the cases of sexual misconduct in the Autonomous Universities or AUs that were reported to Police. Earlier, MOE had informed Parliament that from Academic Year (AY) 2015/2016 to AY 2017/2018, 56 cases of sexual misconduct were reported to the AUs and 37 of these cases were reported to the Police. There was insufficient evidence to make out offences in two cases, and investigations in another four cases are on-going. Of the remaining 31 cases, 16 were prosecuted in court. There were jail sentences in 10 cases. Supervised probation was imposed by the Courts in four cases and a discharge not amounting to an acquittal was given by the Court in one case. And the sentencing for one case where the offender has been convicted is still pending.
So, that leaves a remainder of 15, out of the total of 31 cases. In 13 of these cases, a conditional warning was given. Two others were given a stern warning. Fourteen of the 15 students who were administered warnings, or 93%, did not re-offend. The one NUS student who re-offended had originally been issued with a conditional warning for a voyeurism offence he committed in 2015; he re-offended in 2017 and the Police prosecuted him in court for both his 2015 and 2017 offences. He was sent to jail for eight months and fined S$2,000.
So, beyond these 56 cases, there were an additional eight cases reported directly to the Police. Of these eight, there was insufficient evidence in 6 cases, and investigations in another two cases are on-going.
\tThe Police had earlier also clarified some factual inaccuracies in media reporting of cases for AY2015/2016 and AY2017/2018. There were 25 cases of sexual offences brought before the NUS Board. Of these 25, 17 were reported to the Police. Nine of the 17 were prosecuted in court. The Courts handed down imprisonment terms in five of those cases; they gave supervised probation for three cases, and gave discharge not amounting to an acquittal in one case. In another seven of the 17 reported cases, Police administered conditional warnings. And the last case is pending investigation.
One of the media articles had also erroneously published that there were 13 repeat offenders. Based on Police records, there was only one repeat offender, and I had referred to that case earlier.
These numbers show that some have been prosecuted. Depending on the facts, others have been given a second chance. There are no \"free passes\" to University students or anyone else.
Let me give some background to our approach. I had some time ago asked MHA to review sexual offences, in particular offences against: (a)\tchildren – people will remember the Joshua Robinson case; and (b) women – outraging modesty, insulting modesty and other offences.
And I had also given directions to toughen our laws in these areas.
Following the review by PCRC as well as my Ministry, we decided that some new offences should be specified in law and sentences for some existing offences should be enhanced.
We have proposed new offences to deal with sexual exploitation of minors. We have also proposed new standalone offences for voyeurism, distribution of intimate images, commonly known as \"revenge pornography\"; and sexual exposure over the Internet, commonly known as \"cyber-flashing\". Voyeurism is now dealt with under \"Insulting the Modesty of a Woman\" in the Penal Code. The proposal is to make it a standalone offence and increase the penalties. We have also proposed the updating of some existing offences to deal with technological developments which enable predatory behaviour.
This is all set out in the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill, tabled in Parliament in February. It will be debated later today. If Parliament passes the Bill into law, then voyeurism, usually known as \"Peeping Tom\" behaviour, as well as the making, possessing, accessing and distributing of voyeuristic materials, will all be criminalised as specific offences. It will be presumed that the victims in such recordings did not consent to being recorded; that deals with the evidential challenge sometimes of identifying victims in such recordings, and the penalties will be enhanced.
Because of Parliamentary rules, I should not go into any further detail on the proposed changes. But we will be debating it and, of course, these changes were conceptualised, put through, drafted and tabled in Parliament before the latest discussions on these issues.
The proposals show the Government’s underlying approach and philosophy towards sexual offences where the victims are, of course, predominantly women. We take it very seriously, we want to send a very strong signal that would deter would-be offenders and protect victims, who, as I said, are predominantly women. The Penal Code changes have been thought through for over a year now.
All of this – being tough, taking a no-nonsense approach – does not mean that every offender must be or will be automatically charged in Court. Police and AGC must look at the facts of each case and exercise discretion.
Let me give an example. There was an NUS student, he had taken videos of children in a toilet in a shopping mall; happened over two days in 2015. He was caught, arrested by the Police. He was charged. After he was charged, Police and AGC received a medical report from his doctor at IMH. The assessment was that his risk of re-offending was low and he would benefit from continual mental health treatment. If he was put in jail, that could get affected. The fact that he did not have any prior history was also relevant. In the end, AGC directed Police to withdraw the charges and he was given a 24-month conditional warning. He has since completed the 24-month warning period; no further re-offending, and he has remained crime-free.
The data I have shown indicates in several other cases, prosecutions were carried out for offenders.
We must have tough laws. In fact, we are going to make them even tougher if Parliament agrees. We are creating new laws as well but we must also enforce them appropriately.
When a woman’s privacy has been violated, the follow-up actions must ensure that she is treated with dignity and respect, and her concerns must be addressed and she must be supported. The criminal legal framework must deal with the offender in a way that ensures the specific victim’s safety, deal with the specific offender and deter other would-be offenders.
In this respect, when such violation takes place in, say, NUS, there are actions that NUS has to take and there are actions that the Police have to take. Police will investigate, decide on the best course of action after investigations, whether to prosecute, not prosecute, and what is the right thing to do on all the factors, ensure that their decision will protect the victim and uphold deterrence and safety.
Sir, Singapore is one of the safest places in the world for women and children. Our laws and the way we enforce our laws have ensured that.
Let me give some brief statistics. Based on Police's 2018 Public Perception Survey, the perception of overall safety and security in Singapore among locals was 93%. How do women feel? Specifically, women and their perception of safety in their neighbourhood – 87% – nearly nine in 10 feel safe in their neighhourhood. Seventy-four percent of women feel safe walking alone in their neighbourhood at night. These figures have been consistently high over the years, and we want to make sure that that continues. Women ought to feel safe.
Members can be assured that the Government is committed to continue keeping the environment safe and being tough on such offences. That is why, as I said earlier, we have reviewed the Penal Code provisions, and are proposing new offences and seeking to enhance penalties.
Let me now answer the questions on how Police and AGC exercise discretion in such cases. Broadly, the approach is to consider the specific facts and circumstances of the case; the severity of the offence, including the evidence; and aggravating or mitigating factors.
The Police will also consider how other similar cases had been treated to ensure consistency. In the interest of fairness, like cases should be treated like other like cases. The Attorney-General, as the Public Prosecutor, makes the final decision based on his prosecutorial discretion.
Specific facts, and I say this by way of illustration, could include previous criminal record, if any; level of remorse, whether the offender comes clean, cooperates; and whether any videos of the victim have been posted online or otherwise shared.
Police also assess the likelihood of rehabilitation. Police make such assessments regularly, when making decisions. This is part of their professional craft. They will then recommend the course of action: to prosecute, or give a conditional warning, or a stern warning, or to take no further action. AGC will make the final decision.
I should add that in these cases, the assessment of future conduct and possible rehabilitation is quite important. This is so even when the offender had done similar acts previously, which will, of course, weigh against him. The Police will look at all the factors, including the level of remorse, whether he owned up voluntarily, the likelihood of reform and the likelihood of re-offending. They will also, of course, consider the circumstances of the victim, the impact of the offence on the victim and the need for deterrence.
Generally, there would be no reason for Police to show any leniency, if the following aggravating factors are present: (a)\ta person has previous convictions or was warned for similar offences; (b)\tpremeditation and deception in committing the offence, for example by using hidden pinhole cameras, masking his face, covering CCTV cameras, or other means to evade detection; (c)\tthe video had been shared or circulated; or (d)\tthe perpetrator was not remorseful or had been uncooperative in the investigation.
Let me illustrate by reference to a case in 2015. A 23-year-old man filmed a woman showering at Republic Polytechnic. The accused had committed the offences over a period of four months. He tried to evade detection by covering his face with a towel, covering up CCTVs in the vicinity and did not own up voluntarily. The man was charged and sentenced to 10 weeks’ imprisonment.
Another illustration: five men were jailed between six months and three years for engaging in serial acts of voyeurism and sharing videos of their victims in an online forum.
There had been questions on conditional warning. A conditional warning means that (a) an offender has been put on notice; (b) he would know that the authorities have enough evidence and are prepared to press charges against him if he does not reform; (c) if he commits a fresh offence during this period, he would be liable to be prosecuted for both the current offence and the subsequent fresh or new offence; in other words, he is not let off the hook for the earlier offence; he will pay for both.
Members have not specifically asked about Mr Lim’s case, involving Ms Baey. Let me nevertheless point some of the facts out by reference to the broader position I put out.
Mr Lim is on thin ice with his conditional warning. The factors that were taken into account in his case were set out in the Police statement. If he offends within the period of 12 months, he will be charged for the offence relating to Ms Baey and the new offence.
The case has been dealt with, so it is therefore best that I do not go into it in detail on the factors. But briefly, there were factors which could have justified charging him, the primary one, of course, being that he had done something very wrong. These factors were weighed against other factors, which would justify giving him another chance. The Police weighed both sets of factors, and decided that a conditional warning was appropriate. It was one of those cases, quite usual, normal for Police, where the decision was based on judgement. Police assessed him to be remorseful and likely to reform. He confessed voluntarily within minutes of the offence being committed and well before any Police report was made. He was cooperative with the Police. He had not circulated the video. That had been deleted. Other factors have also been mentioned in the Police statement.
A conditional warning has been an effective deterrent for offenders who have had good propensity to reform. Even after the stipulated crime-free period, the warning remains an internal record for calibrating future prosecutorial decisions. Perpetrators who receive warnings are told in clear terms that if they re-offend, they will face serious consequences. As the cases at the Autonomous Universities show, most who were given conditional warnings did not re-offend. Out of the 15 who received warnings, one student re-offended, and he was dealt with severely; he went to jail.
Sir, we take a very stern view of sexual misconduct. Several perpetrators have been prosecuted and put behind bars. But the rigid meting out of uniform penalties will not serve the wider public interest.
Er Dr Lee also asked about victim care and public education. One area which we continuously review is how to further improve on the support given to victims of sexual crimes who experienced emotional, psychological damage and stress.
\t
Over the years, we have made significant improvements to Police processes and the way Police officers interact with victims. We have trained a group of specialist investigation officers to handle sexual crime cases. We have rolled out the One-Stop Abuse Forensic Examination (OneSafe) Centre, where victims of rape can undergo interviews and forensic medical examinations at a single private location without having to go between the Police station and the hospital. We have a response framework to ensure that victims of sexual crimes are attended to quickly and a victim care programme that provides emotional support.
Er Dr Lee asked if we would consider a public education campaign about the harms of taking and distributing voyeuristic videos. We certainly will, but I think a very good public education campaign will be if Parliament passes the amendments later today. That will be given concerted publicity, to raise awareness about the new sexual offences including voyeurism, when it is classified as a standalone offence and the enhanced penalties.
\tEr Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Sir, I have three supplementary questions. First, who is the qualified person to make the assessment on the accused's suitability for rehabilitation. Is this process applied to all accused persons?
And there is strong public outcry. Many felt that MHA gave more consideration to the offender than the traumatised victim as the future of perpetrator was mentioned. But what about the potential long-term, or even possible permanent damage to the victim? How can MHA ensure that victims are given fair consideration, if not more.
The third supplementary question. It is not just about Monica Baey and Nicholas Lim. We need to send a strong signal to everyone that we have zero tolerance for sexual harassment. I agree with the Minister that we need tougher laws, but I disagree that in sentencing, we compare like-for-like. In fact, the sentencing should be heavier, compared to the previous one. So, I hope, the Minister will consider that.
\tMr K Shanmugam: Let me try and answer that. Who makes the decision on assessment for rehabilitation. I went into the factors in some detail just now. The investigating officers and their superiors make the Police assessment. They do this every day. It is not just for victims of sexual offences, but other offences too. But, of course, within the framework of the law, that is why you take into account the severity of the offence, the impact on the victim, the need to deter others – it is a whole set of framework. Within that, you also look at the offender and you make an assessment based on how cooperative he has been. You are sitting down, you are talking to him, you see whether he confessed or he tried to hide. What does his conduct show about him? It does not mean that the assessments will be perfect, but this are highly trained officers who do this every day; they make an assessment. That is then discussed with the AGC, who make the final decision, taking into account the legal framework and the overall set of factors.
Sir, it is a careful process. I think it is not often that MHA or the Singapore Government is being accused on being soft on these sorts of issues. I think usually the complaints are the reverse; that not enough mercy is shown. We have made that an article of faith that we are tough. We are tough on crime, we are tough on the causes of crime and as a fact that we are putting up amendments to the Penal Code shows, there was never any intention and never any practice of being soft. I think we err on the side of being tough. At the same time, you look at the facts of each case and where it is possible to exercise discretion, you do it. That is done by the Police as well as by AGC.
The second point is that MHA gives consideration to the offenders, when, really, more concern and care should be given to the victims. I absolutely agree. The impact on the victims is very important. Not just for the victim but also to deter similar conduct and it will protect others. The reason why the crime rate in Singapore is so low, is because people generally understand a few things: one, if you commit an offence, it is likely that you will be caught; second, if you are caught, there is a very high likelihood that you will be charged, depending on the offence. If you are charged, there is a very high likelihood that you will be found guilty because the investigation will be thorough, the facts will be presented, there is a professional set of lawyers dealing with it and the Courts are staffed by highly trained lawyers. So, if the evidence is presented, properly assessed, then it is likely to result in a conviction. But, of course, if there is no evidence, or the evidence is weak, it will be thrown out. And in fact, AGC would often not even proceed on the basis that of there being no adequate evidence.
So, this framework, I think, is well understood on the ground. Which is one of the reasons why the crime rate is low as well in Singapore. You cannot do something and get away with it, by and large. How is it balanced, what were the factors that are taken into account, I have said in specific cases in my answer. But I agree as a method of approach and principle, yes, of course, what has happened to the victim is extremely important and nothing I say detracts from that.
Third, we have to send a strong signal, what I meant like-for-like was this: you have a set of facts, a certain decision was taken to prosecute or to give a conditional warning. You then have another case, with a similar set of facts. I think fairness requires that, in both cases, the outcome is similar, so there is consistency. Consistency does not mean leniency, please do not mistake me. Consistency means you have decided to charge, then you will decide in a subsequent case to charge. If you have decided to give conditional warning and the factors are broadly similar, then you will tend towards giving a conditional warning. But, of course, you will look at whether there are any other factors. So, it is more that there has got to be a certain consistency in the way the law is apply and is processed, not just in the Courts. Of course, we can look at the precedence for consistency, but also from the perspective of the Police and AGC. That is what I meant.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effectiveness of Annual Casino Entry Fee Paid by Singaporeans and PRs in Preventing Problem Gambling ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Mr Alex Yam asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) how much casino entry fees have been collected from Singapore citizens and permanent residents since the fees were introduced; (b) how effective have the entry fees been in deterring problem gambling; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider doing away with the annual entry fee to further discourage compulsive gamblers.
\tThe Second Minister for Home Affairs (Mrs Josephine Teo) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Since 2010, the total amount of entry levies collected is around $1.3 billion. The proceeds are channelled to Tote Board which funds social and community programmes that benefit the public.
The daily and annual entry levies serve to deter casual and impulse gambling by locals and are part of a holistic suite of social safeguards. Between 2010 and 2018, the number of local visitors to the casinos declined by 50%. Based on the most recent gambling participation survey conducted by the National Council on Problem Gambling, the probable problem and pathological gambling rate decreased from 2.6% in 2011 to 0.9% in 2017.
On the Member's question, whether we should do away with the annual entry levy, we considered this carefully and think the levy can remain for now. The data is quite clear. Annual entry levy holders tend to have higher incomes. For these affluent individuals who want to visit the casinos more often, such as Premium Players, the annual entry levy provides convenience.
Keep in mind that the levies are not our only measure of deterrence. We have also put in place social safeguards targeting individuals who are at risk of problem gambling. Frequent visitors to the casinos are identified by the National Council on Problem Gambling. If they are assessed to be financially vulnerable, a visit limit or exclusion order will be imposed on them.
\tMr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Speaker, I thank the Second Minister for her response. With regard to the annual entry fee, I know that Second Minister had said that most of those who are on this entry permit tend to be from higher income groups. However, if it is a problem of problem gambling, then the factor of income should not come into play. Problem gambling, regardless of your background or your income level, should still be combated, which is why I continue to make to make the call to do do away with the annual entry fee. Because if we acknowledge that problem gambling plagues people from all backgrounds, then having a higher disposable income should not be a criterion to keep entry permit on an annualised basis.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, I agree with the Member. In fact, some of our social safeguards go beyond that. There are visit limits, for example; and we can even impose an exclusion order. And so, it is not a matter of paying the levy and then being able to enter the casinos. If you are under the exclusion order, then no amount that you offer will get you through. There is also a follow-up question relating to social safeguards and I believe that the Minister for Social and Family Development will be addressing it, so I think we should let him share with us.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Detection and Prevention of Casino-related Crimes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"12 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the Ministry's assessment of the casino-related crime situation in Singapore since the casinos commenced operations in 2010; and (b) what steps are taken to ensure that casino-related crime in Singapore will be kept in check.
The Second Minister for Home Affairs (Mrs Josephine Teo) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, the casino-related crime situation in Singapore is under control and has continued to improve since the casinos commenced operations. Between 2010 and 2018, the annual number of casino crimes fell by 58%, from 299 to 126 cases.
Police and Casino Regulatory Authority (CRA) actively manage the law-and-order concerns relating to the casinos. To prevent infiltration of criminal elements into the casinos, CRA licenses casino employees and subjects them to stringent checks. Police exchange information with their counterparts in other countries on the latest casino-related crime trends and persons of interest.
MHA has put in place tough penalties for casino-related crimes and Police adopt a zero tolerance approach towards such crimes. Police and CRA also work closely with the casino operators to deter crime through regular surveillance and patrols.
\tMr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mr Speaker, I thank the hon Minister for her comprehensive answer to my question. I have a few supplementary questions. Firstly, in relation to the crime, how much of it are committed by organised crime syndicates? Secondly, given that the casino businesses are doing relatively well, should we not accept that casinos businesses will continue to be targets for organised crimes syndicates? And, what can we do to deter these syndicates, particularly the foreign crime syndicates from coming over to Singapore, and ensnaring Singaporeans as well?
\t
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, I appreciate the Member's concern and he has a particular worry that organised crimes, especially by foreign syndicates, will enter Singapore through casinos. If we look at the pattern of all the offences, the cases that I talked about, the vast majority of crimes committed in the casinos are mostly opportunistic and petty in nature. And actually, the number that relates to organised crime groups – very few.
Among all the offences, theft and cheating account for the most. For the theft-related cases, they mostly involved theft of gambling chips belonging to other patrons at the game tables. So, this is not quite the behaviour of organised crime syndicates. Other common scenarios include theft of cash, valuables, unattended bags and wallets from patrons. So, there is a pattern and these types of theft offences are not representative of organised crimes.
The cheating-related cases usually involve the past posting of bets. In other words, the outcome of the game is revealed and some of the patrons decide to try their luck, in case the croupier was not paying attention. They would place a bet on a location which would suggest that they won but in fact they did not. So, such cases also are one of the more common ones. There have also been cases where counterfeit chips were used by patrons.
So, that gives us a sense. Since 2010, ever since we started the tracking when the operations commenced, there have been fewer than 20 in total that are related to syndicates. If you look at the amounts of money involved, they were between $14,000 to $1.3 million. But the Member's concerns are very well noted. We will continue to keep a close eye.
In this instance, the operators obviously have an interest. They have fiduciary interest and so they are minded to work with the Police to stamp out the possible infiltration of organised crime.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effectiveness of Social Safeguards in Curbing Problem Gambling","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"13 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether he can provide an update on problem gambling in Singapore; (b) what is his assessment on the effectiveness of the social safeguards introduced since the entry of the Integrated Resorts in 2005; and (c) what new safeguards will be considered going forward.
\tThe Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, based on the Gambling Participation Survey (GPS) conducted by the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG), every three years, the probable problem and pathological gambling rate of Singapore residents in 2017 was 0.9%. In 2011, it was 2.6%.
Our casino safeguards are among the most stringent in the world. We take a preventive approach by disallowing the most financially vulnerable people from entering the casinos. For example, undischarged bankrupts, those who are receiving financial aid from the Government such as ComCare Social Assistance or legal aid, and those living in HDB rental flats who have six months or more of rental arrears, are automatically excluded. This means that they are barred from entering the casinos, fruit machine rooms in private clubs and from betting online with Singapore Pools.
The NCPG also has powers under the Casino Control Act to limit the number of visits an individual can make to the casino each month. Under the Third Party Visit Limit regime, NCPG can do so when it notices individuals visiting the casino frequently and gambling beyond their means. In addition, if the individual has incurred debt due to gambling, NCPG may even bar the person from entering the casino by issuing a Third Party Exclusion Order, that is, the person cannot enter the casino at all.
Many locals have also chosen under the Self-Exclusion Scheme to voluntarily exclude themselves from the casinos or fruit machine rooms in private clubs, or from opening an online account with Singapore Pools.
The objective of the existing social safeguards is to try to minimise the negative impact of gambling by targeting the problem gamblers and the financially vulnerable. As a result, problem gambling is estimated to only affect slightly under 1% of the resident population. Having said that, every family that suffers harm because of problem gambling, is one case too many.
Therefore, we will continue our efforts to address problem gambling by putting in place even more upstream and preventive measures. For online gambling offered by Singapore Pools, we have already taken steps by requiring punters to set limits on their expenditure, and we will review how to improve this. For casino gambling, with effect from 4 April this year, the casino entry levies for Singaporeans and PRs have been raised by 50%, from $100 to $150 for the daily levy, and from $2,000 to $3,000 for the annual levy.
We will also be working with the Integrated Resorts (IRs) to implement technology measures to provide patrons with information to allow them to make informed decisions on their bets and better control their gambling expenditure. We will also work with the IRs to strengthen training for casino gaming staff to identify persons at-risk of gambling problem and offer help to such patrons. This is an additional measure.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Move to Allow Casino Operators’ to Increase their Approved Gaming Area ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"14 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what are the reasons for providing Marina Bay Sands and Resorts World Sentosa with the option to increase their Approved Gaming Area by 2,000 square meters and 500 square meters respectively; (b) whether a study has been carried out to examine whether an increase in gaming area would cause a rise in problem gambling; and (c) what further measures will be put in place to help ensure that problem gambling will be deterred.
15 Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry why the expansion of gaming areas for the two casinos by 2,000 square meters for Marina Bay Sands (MBS) and 500 square meters for Resorts World Sentosa (RWS) and the increase in gambling machines from 2,500 to 3,500 for MBS and 3,300 for RWS are necessary for the commercial viability of the proposed expansion of the Integrated Resorts.
16 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) why did the Casino Regulatory Authority allow MBS and RWS to increase their approved gaming area by 13% and 3% respectively, and their slot machines by 40% and 34% respectively; and (b) prior to the approvals, were any stakeholders consulted in respect of the possible social implications on Singaporeans arising from the proposed increases and, if so, who were these stakeholders.
17 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked ask the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how does the Government ensure that the land cost to be paid by the existing Integrated Resort (IR) operators is fair without calling for a public tender; (b) what is the estimated increase in tax revenue that both IRs are expected to generate with the additional investment; (c) whether the increase in tax revenue will be able to support the increased health care needs of Singaporeans; and (d) whether the increase in casino entry fees can be channelled to meet the increased health care needs of Singaporeans.
18 Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how much land has been allocated for the proposed expansion of MBS and RWS; (b) how much will MBS and RWS be paying for the land; and (c) how much additional land cost will each have to pay for the expansion of the gaming areas of the casinos.
The Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Chee Hong Tat) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 14 to 18 together?
Mr Speaker: Please do.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Thank you, Sir. The business model of an Integrated Resort (IR) combines a controlled proportion of gaming activities with a wide range of high quality non-gaming amenities such as theatres, theme parks, museums, hotels, MICE facilities, restaurants and retail shops. Gaming activities are an important source of revenue for the operators, contributing more than two-thirds of their total revenue. The gaming revenue makes it commercially viable for them to offer the non-gaming facilities, as one integrated package.
The two IRs have not decided to activate their additional gaming options. If both IRs exercise their options for additional gaming area in full, gaming area as a proportion of total floor area will drop from 3% today to 2.3%, as the expansion of the non-gaming area is much larger. The IRs have also stated that the additional gaming provisions will be targeted at higher tier, non-mass market players, who are mostly tourists.
Based on the Gambling Participation Survey conducted by the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG), the probable problem and pathological gambling rate of Singapore residents has decreased from 2.6% in 2011 to 0.9% in 2017. This includes all forms of gambling such as casino, horse racing and online gambling.
The Government takes a serious view on tackling problem gambling and will continue to work closely with our community partners to help affected individuals and families. We had discussed with them before making the announcement. The Government will also be strengthening our social safeguards. Minister Desmond Lee has explained how we are doing so in his reply to Mr Seah Kian Peng.
Sir, the S$9 billion investment by the two IRs will introduce additional world class attractions and experiences for both tourists and locals. These are expected to attract an additional 500,000 international visitors each year and contribute S$500 million annually to Singapore’s economy. The investments will also create up to 5,000 new jobs directly and increase business opportunities for Singapore companies.
When there are substantial investments that can benefit our economy and our workers, the Government is open to directly allocate land to these investors. This is a longstanding policy that has been extended to both local and foreign companies across different industries. The IRs will pay fair market value for their land, as determined by the Chief Valuer in accordance with market conditions and established valuation principles.
The expansion site for Marina Bay Sands is 3.3 hectares, at a cost of $1.3 billion. Resorts World Sentosa has set aside a budget of $1 billion to intensify the use of existing land and purchase around one hectare of new land.
If the IRs choose to activate their options for additional gaming area, they will have to pay additional costs for these areas. The amount payable will be determined by the Chief Valuer based on prevailing market conditions when the option is exercised.
Sir, Mr Gan also asked about funding for healthcare needs. As the Minister for Finance had explained at Budget 2018 and Budget 2019, Singapore's healthcare spending will rise with an ageing population and advances in medical treatment, drugs and technologies. We need to be well-prepared for this, by building additional healthcare capacity and ensuring that we have sufficient financial resources to fund the higher healthcare spending in a sustainable manner.
This will require a structural increase in our operating revenue. Our revenue base is diverse and resilient, including taxes on personal and corporate income, consumption and property. The tax revenue from the two IRs are one of the many sources of overall tax revenue. The diverse sources of revenue are supported by a diversified economy. As we continue to grow Singapore's economy, we will adopt a multi-pronged strategy, with many different sectors and trading partners.
\tMr Speaker: Assoc Prof Daniel Goh.
\tAssoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State. My question is regarding the gaming areas. So, am I correct to say that if the gaming area is not expanded then the world class attractions would be projected to be loss-making?
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Sir, I thank the Member for his supplementary question. The IR business model, as I explained in my answer, means it is an integrated package. You need the gaming activities to come together with the non-gaming activities so that it is commercially viable for the operators. Currently, more than two-thirds of their total revenue comes from gaming. So, for the new facilities, the theme parks, the 15,000-seater arena, these are expensive facilities which without the gaming provisions, the additional gaming provisions as options for the operators, they may not find it commercially viable to make these additional investments to create these additional jobs. This was actually explained by the CEO of MBS and I quote him, he said, \"The casino revenue generation is very important because it pays for things that sometimes lose money, sometimes have a very low return, or that are just very expensive.\"
\tMr Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.
\tMr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member): Just to clarify with Senior Minister of State, Mr Speaker. On the second part of my question, prior to the approvals, were any stakeholders consulted in respect of possible social implications on Singaporeans arising from the proposed increases and, if so, who were these stakeholders? May I ask the Senior Minister of State to answer this question?
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Sir, we had engaged the National Council on Problem Gambling and also key stakeholders from religious groups and voluntary welfare organisations before the announcement was made. These are our key partners because they are the people who are on the ground dealing with the issue of problem gambling, helping the families and the affected individuals. And when we discussed with them, they told us that they understood why we had to do this in a package. They welcomed the additional social safeguards that the Government will be introducing and, more importantly, I think there was a commitment that we should continue to work together hand-in-hand to help tackle the problem of gambling, including online gambling, new types of risks facing Singaporeans. We work hand-in-hand and we work together to help the affected individuals and their families.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.
\tMr Dennis Tan Lip Fong: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just one last clarification. Were there any objections or reservations expressed by any of these stakeholders and, if so, who were they?
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Sir, I think I have explained in my answer earlier. They understood why we had to do this as a package. They noted that the rate of problem gambling has been coming down but, as Minister Desmond Lee explained, just because the rate has come down does not mean that we, therefore, become complacent, we continue to take a serious view on how we can tackle this problem together. So, the community partners, the religious groups, the voluntary welfare groups said that they welcome the additional social safeguards – the increase in the levy, the additional safeguards. Importantly, I think we need to continue to work together to tackle this problem hand-in-hand.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Gan Thiam Poh
\tMr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): I do not think my question had been answered. How do you determine the land cost because this is without tender? And the second question is what is the projected revenue for the additional investments? Is there any projection?
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Sir, I have answered the question actually. Land cost will be determined by the Chief Valuer based on the market value. This is again a long-standing practice. The IRs will pay the fair market value as determined by the Chief Valuer. The second part of the question: of course, we made some projections in terms of with the increase in the number of visitors, tourists, what is the additional value-add to Singapore's economy. I mentioned the number $500 million annually. But the exact number depends also on the on the global economy, depends on how well we grow our tourism sector because, mind you, the IRs are not the only thing we are going to develop to grow our tourism sector. We also have Mandai. We also have the Greater Southern Waterfront. We are going to rejuvenate Orchard Road. We are looking at a new tourism site at Jurong Lake District and many others.
Mr Speaker: End of Question Time. Ministerial Statement. Minister for Defence.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos 19, 21-22, 25, 27-28, 33, 35, 41-44, 47-48, 51, 54-55, 57, 59-63 and 65-66 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix. Question Nos 20, 23-24, 26, 29-32, 34, 36-40, 45-46, 49-50, 52-53,56, 58 and 64 have been postponed to the sitting of Parliament on 7 May 2019.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Findings and Follow-up Actions on National Service Training Death","subTitle":"Statement by Minister for Defence","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister for Defence (Dr Ng Eng Hen): Thank you, Mr Speaker. In February this year, I made a Ministerial Statement on the death of CFC(NS) Aloysius Pang which had occurred on 23 January 2019. Therein, I gave as much detail as was known then about the incident without prejudicing the due process as prescribed by the SAF Act for an independent Committee of Inquiry (COI) to investigate thoroughly the factors leading to the death. The COI has completed its investigations and in this Statement, I will present the findings of the COI as submitted to the Armed Forces Council (AFC).
The COI comprised five persons, none of whom are employed by the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) or the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF). They were a judge nominated by the State Courts as Chairman; a consultant medical specialist; a member nominated by the External Review Panel on SAF Safety (ERPSS); a member drawn from the Workplace Safety and Health Council; and a senior-ranked National Serviceman.
I remind Members that the COIs are convened under the SAF Act empowering it to fact find. The COI has no mandate to determine the culpability of individuals. Indeed, section 8C of the SAF Act specifies that no statements made to the COI shall be admissible as evidence in the court martial or for any subsequent disciplinary proceedings that may take place. To keep within this remit, I will not provide specific names of other individuals involved in the incident in my Statement, apart from CFC(NS) Pang. Prosecution of any persons will be conducted separately, which I will elaborate later.
Let me first take Members through the COI’s findings. I intend to quote from their report predominantly and the dates and times stated in the report are in New Zealand local time.
\"On 5 January 2019, CFC(NS) Pang left Singapore for Exercise Thunder Warrior at Waiouru Military Training Area, New Zealand as part of his seventh In-Camp Training (ICT) and the unit's eighth ICT. Exercise Thunder Warrior is a live firing exercise. On 19 January 2019 at about 1900 hrs, CFC(NS) Pang sustained an injury while carrying out maintenance work on a Singapore Self-Propelled Howitzer (SSPH) involved in Exercise Thunder Warrior.
CFC(NS) Pang was assisting in maintenance work in the SSPH when the gun barrel was lowered and he was caught between the flick rammer and the slew ring of the SSPH turret\". I draw Members' attention to the slide which I made in the Ministerial Statement in February. If you look at the picture on the top left-hand corner, the flick rammer is in the middle of the picture, the slew ring above it. And when the gun is lowered and the flick rammer goes up, he was caught between the slick rammer and the slew ring.
\"CFC(NS) Pang was attended to by the Battery Medic on site and evacuated to the Battalion Casualty Station (BCS) at 1910 hours. He was assessed and stabilised at the BCS before being evacuated to the Waiouru Base Medical Centre at 1950 hours. At 2150 hours, CFC(NS) Pang was heli-evacuated to Waikato Hospital where he was operated on at around 0100 hours. CFC(NS) Pang underwent two more surgeries on 21 January and 22 January before his condition deteriorated.
On 24 January 2019, CFC(NS) Pang succumbed to his injuries. CFC(NS) Pang died from severe sepsis arising from his severe chest and abdominal injuries as a result of being trapped between the flick rammer and the slew ring in the SSPH.\"
The COI next established a detailed chronology of events leading to the injury and subsequent death of CFC(NS) Pang. To recap from my Statement in February – the configuration, the safe positions and location of key features within the SSPH gun accompany the summary of events which we will distribute now, with your permission, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker: Yes, please. [A handout was distributed to hon Members. Please refer to Annex 1 and Annex 2.]
Dr Ng Eng Hen: Let me take Members through the events. On 19 January, CFC(NS) Pang had responded to the call from the gun detachment commander, the gun detachment commander was a 3SG NSman, for assistance to conduct corrective maintenance on his SSPH gun. The bearing of the gun was beyond the allowable error and needed to be rectified to resume live firing. CFC(NS) Pang was an Armament Technician from the Forward Maintenance Platoon designated to perform such work. But as CFC(NS) Pang could not resolve the issue, a Regular Military Expert 2 Technician was despatched to join him to perform the maintenance work on the gun. I draw Members' attention that there were only three persons in the gun when the injury occurred – CFC(NS) Pang, the 3SG(NS) Gun Commander (GC) and the Regular ME2 technician (ME-Tech).
The GC explained the fault to the ME-Tech. To rectify the fault, the plan was to change the Central Processing Unit (CPU) card on the Motor Drive Control Unit – Ammo Handling System (AHS) box. The box was located near Safe Position 3. If you remember the previous slide that was shown, the flick rammer is in the bottom left-hand corner and the box is, as indicated, near Safe Position 3.
The ME-Tech briefed the GC to turn off the AHS, to lock the gun barrel, turn off the engine and turn off the master switch. To lock the gun barrel required it to be first lowered to the near-horizontal \"standby\" position.
The ME-Tech then proceeded to stand at the designated Safe Position 3 and started to loosen the screws in the AHS box to carry out maintenance work. The ME-Tech also saw CFC(NS) Pang removing the screws on the right side of the box. CFC(NS) Pang was not in a designated safe position and his back was to the barrel of the gun.
Based on the COI's findings, the ME-Tech informed CFC(NS) Pang in a mix of Mandarin and English that the gun barrel was going to be moved to the standby position and told CFC(NS) Pang to move either closer to him or to a safe position. CFC(NS) Pang replied in Mandarin that it was fine and that the gun barrel would not hit him.
Before he moved the gun barrel to a standby position, the GC said he checked if the path was clear and did see CFC(NS) Pang standing near the gun barrel. As the gun barrel was in the highest elevated position, the GC wrongly assumed that CFC(NS) Pang would have time to move away given that it would take some time for the barrel to move into the standby position. The GC proceeded to shout, \"Standby, clear away\" before activating the control to move the gun. This was heard by the ME-Tech, as well as personnel who were standing outside the gun.
As the flick rammer was moving up, CFC(NS) Pang was still removing the screws on the box and looking back at the barrel at the same time. He initially made no attempt to move away.
The GC noticed that CFC(NS) Pang was making some evasive movements as the barrel was moving closer to him. The ME-Tech was shocked to see CFC(NS) Pang still in the path of the gun and tried to use his hands to push against the barrel to stop the movement.
As the gun barrel made contact with CFC(NS) Pang, the COI opined that instead of activating the Emergency Stop (E-stop) buttons, both the ME-Tech and the GC panicked, and acted irrationally. The ME-Tech tried to push the gun barrel with his hands while the GC went to the main control screen to try to stop the barrel movement. As a result, CFC(NS) Pang was wedged between the flick rammer and the slew ring.
These were the detailed events as determined by the COI that led to the serious injuries and untimely death of CFC Pang. The COI opined that \"the precipitating cause of the incident was due to the lowering of the gun barrel without ensuring that everyone was in their safe positions:
(a) CFC(NS) Pang was standing in the path of the moving barrel and not in a safe position prior to the gun barrel being moved.
(b) CFC(NS) Pang did not move to a safe position, despite receiving warning that the gun barrel was going to be moved to a standby position.
(c) The ME-Tech did not ensure that CFC(NS) Pang moved to a safe position, despite knowing that the gun barrel would be moved.
(d) The GC proceeded to move the gun barrel, despite noticing that CFC(NS) Pang was not in a safe position.
(e) Both the GC and the ME-Tech failed to press the E-stop buttons to halt the movement of the gun barrel.\"
The COI determined that there was non-compliance with the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and safety breaches. \"These breaches have contributed to the cause of the incident and are preventable.
(a) Non-enforcement of the Safe Positions in the SSPH. The Gun Detachment Commander, ME-Tech and CFC(NS) Pang did not follow the strict requirement that everyone must be in the safe positions during the movement of the gun barrel. Safe Positions 1, 2 and 3 in Members' handout. The ME-Tech was standing slightly away from the Ammo Loader's position, which is Safe Position 3, and CFC(NS) Pang was standing in the path of the gun barrel. Although the GC had shouted, \"Standby, clear away\" and the ME-Tech had told CFC(NS) Pang to move closer to him or to move away from the path of the gun barrel, both the GC and the ME-Tech did not ensure that CFC(NS) Pang was at a safe position before the gun barrel was lowered. The GC also did not adhere strictly to the SOP for lowering the gun barrel. Although the GC had shouted, \"Standby, clear away\" before lowering the gun barrel, he should have waited for CFC(NS) Pang to be in a safe position before moving the gun barrel to the standby position but this was not adhered to. This requirement is provided in the SSPH Operator's Manual, \"that no person should be in the travel path of the barrel or the rammer tray\". The GC and the ME-Tech also did not activate the E-stop buttons when the barrel was being lowered.
(b) Non-compliance with the Maintenance Manual for the SSPH Technicians. It is clearly stated in the Maintenance Manual for SSPH Technicians to ensure that before they embark on the maintenance work to replace the interface card in the AHS in this case, that the gun must be in a parked position with the gun barrel locked. On the day of the incident, the ME-Tech did not ensure that the gun barrel was in a locked position before replacing the interface card. Instead, the ME-Tech had started to dismantle the mountings on the gun even though the gun barrel was not in a standby or locked position.\"
The COI opined that a combination of the following factors contributed to the cause of the incident:
\"(a) Lack of coordinated safety control procedure between the gun crew and the maintenance crew during maintenance work on the SSPH. There was a lack of clarity on who should be in the gun, the command and control and whether there was a need for acknowledgement before the gun barrel is moved. It is the COI's opinion that the gun commander should take command and control to supervise and execute all preventive maintenance and corrective maintenance tasks, as well as ensure safety in the gun, as stated in the SSPH Operator's Manual. However, this does not absolve the person activating the gun barrel movement of his responsibility to ensure that everyone is in a safe position before moving the gun barrel.
(b) Commencing maintenance work before the gun barrel was in a locked position. The ME-Tech had commenced removing the mountings on the AHS box even before the gun barrel was in a locked position to get on with the job quickly.
(c) Misjudgement of time and space by personnel in the SSPH. Both the ME-Tech and the GC had miscalculated the time it took for the flick rammer to hit CFC(NS) Pang.
(d) Emergency Stop buttons were not activated to stop the movement of the gun barrel. In their state of panic when the flick rammer hit CFC(NS) Pang, both the ME-Tech and the GC acted irrationally instead of activating the E-stop buttons.\"
The COI found \"no evidence indicating that CFC(NS) Pang’s death involved foul play or was caused by any deliberate acts. However, the COI found that the incident was due to the lapses of all the servicemen who were in the gun at the time of the incident – the GC, the ME-Tech and CFC(NS) Pang\".
Let me repeat this because this is the final conclusion of the COI. The COI found that the incident was due to the lapses of all the servicemen who were in the gun at the time of the incident – the GC, the ME-Tech and CFC(NS) Pang.
The COI also commented on factors related to but non-contributory to the incident or outcome. Before Exercise Thunder Warrior, the SSPH guns were certified Fit for Firing (FFF) in Singapore by the technicians. The guns were certified FFF again in New Zealand before the live firing exercise. It has been established that there was no mechanical fault with the gun that had directly caused the accident. The incident in this case was not due to the serviceability of the SSPH.
On the post-incident medical care, the COI is of the opinion that in view of the extenuating circumstances caused by the distance and the availability of the helicopter, the medical care provided was adequate but can be improved. However, the COI is also of the opinion that this did not cause or contribute to the demise of CFC(NS) Pang.
Members of this House, I have presented the COI's findings. It is sad but undeniable that the direct causes determined by the COI that resulted in the death of CFC(NS) Pang were preventable had there been compliance to safety rules. It was not for lack of knowledge of these rules or inexperience of personnel working on the SSPH gun. The COI determined that prior to the incident, all the three personnel in the gun – CFC(NS) Pang, the GC and the ME-Tech – had received adequate training to be aware that whenever the gun barrel is moved, they must be in a safe position. It was clear to the ME-Tech that CFC(NS) Pang was not in a safe position. Notwithstanding this, the ME-Tech merely told CFC(NS) Pang to move closer to him or move away, instead of stopping the gun movement. When CFC(NS) Pang replied that the gun barrel would not hit him and did not move away from where he was, the ME-Tech could have ensured that CFC(NS) Pang moved away to a safe position or pressed the E-stop button.
The GC shouted, \"Standby, clear away\" before he commenced lowering the gun barrel. At the same time, he saw that CFC(NS) Pang was not standing in a designated safe position. Instead of ensuring that CFC(NS) Pang was in a safe position before lowering the gun barrel, he thought that there was sufficient time for CFC(NS) Pang to move away as the gun barrel was lowered. If the GC had ensured that CFC(NS) Pang was in a safe position before activating the gun barrel to standby position, the incident would not have happened.
From the accounts of CFC(NS) Pang's peers to the COI, CFC(NS) Pang had a positive work attitude and was very helpful to others when it came to work. He was also professional when executing his tasks. CFC(NS) Pang started his Full-time National Service in October 2008. He had attended several courses and training during his Full-Time National Service, graduating with an overall \"A\" grade from the Armament Basic Technician Training (Turret). He had also attended the Maintenance Vocational Training on his sixth ICT in February 2018 in preparation for Exercise Thunder Warrior. He was also professional when executing his tasks and was seen by his superiors as someone who would not cut safety corners when working.\"
Nevertheless, the COI found that the incident was due to lapses of all the servicemen who were in the gun at the time of the incident.
The COI proposed the following recommendations aimed at preventing similar incidents in the future and enhancing the safety system, which I report in full.
\"(a) Enhance safety culture by ensuring that all Servicemen of the SAF and especially NSmen take personal ownership of safety. The Army safety culture should be enhanced and special emphasis should also be placed on the safety culture of the NSmen who must be equally cognisant of all safety regulations and procedures. The SAF could involve NS commanders in the review of the Training Safety Regulations (TSRs) as this will instil greater ownership by NSmen in terms of safety. A more comprehensive risk assessment for high-risk activities should be conducted, and all near misses must be reported and archived.
(b) Review Standard Operating Procedures/Emergency drills. The SAF should review all SOPs and drills to ensure that there are proper procedures in mixed-crew operations. SOP for maintenance work involving gun crew and maintenance crew should be established, including hand-over procedures. Emergency drills or SOPs should be developed to educate operators on the application of E-Stop buttons during gun barrel movements.
(c) Ensure compliance to TSRs, SOPs and Operator Manuals. All systems should be operated in the manner required by their design and a new risk assessment should be conducted if any part of the system is to be used differently. There is also a need to ensure that SOPs relating to the operations of the gun are complied with and operations should be halted whenever the SOPs are not complied with. Similarly, there must be strict enforcement that the equipment conditions as mandated in the maintenance manual is adhered to before the commencement of maintenance work.
(d) Enhance existing training/safety support especially for maintenance-related work. A safety checklist briefing before the start of any maintenance works could be introduced, with emphasis on the number of maintenance crew needed to work inside the gun. There should be continued education on compliance with the TSR and this should be incorporated into the quarterly Army Safety Seminars. There could also be a safety officer appointed during peacetime live firing exercises to oversee safety and further develop the Safety Management Plan with regard to maintenance work and the maintenance crew's interaction with the gun crew.
(e) Enhance training of Medical Officers for aero-medical evacuation and pre-hospital care. Given the extended distances to definitive care – one of the principal considerations in the Medical Support Plan – the use of helicopters for casualty evacuation to a higher echelon care is a given. A familiarisation of the RSAF heli-evacuation protocols should be considered for both NSF and NSmen Medical Officers posted to this specific area of training. NSmen Medical Officers could also re-familiarise themselves with acute trauma care by being given temporary registration as observers either in the emergency and surgery departments during call-ups.
(f) Improve protocols for communications within hospitals caring for injured Servicemen overseas. It may be useful to formalise arrangements between the SAF and receiving hospitals at the appropriate level in the hospital administration so that our Singaporean doctors attached to care for the injured servicemen overseas can be kept abreast of clinical developments and can contribute more effectively.
(g) Lastly, formalise protocols for overseas hospitals following death of SAF personnel. A reference guideline should be drawn up with details on the protocol for the management of the remains of the demised serviceman on overseas exercises.\"
I have concluded presenting the COI's findings and now turn to the External Review Panel on SAF Safety's (ERPSS') written report on the COI's findings. Mr Speaker, I ask your permission to distribute that.
Mr Speaker: Yes, please.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: The ERPSS agrees with the COI's findings on the incident, and supports the proposed recommendations raised by the COI to prevent a similar incident from occurring. The ERPSS also expressed concern about the safety lapses and weaknesses in safety culture that have been surfaced and made several recommendations that would help the SAF to build a stronger safety culture.
First, it is important for commanders to exercise leadership in safety and impress upon their subordinates the need to properly implement safety policies and procedures, build a strong safety culture, and inculcate stronger safety ownership at both team and individual levels, especially among NSmen.
Second, the SAF should do more to improve knowledge retention and safety awareness in its soldiers.
Third, it is vital to accord the same high level of emphasis on maintenance safety, as is accorded to training safety today.
Last, it is crucial to strengthen safety procedures for mixed-crew operations, which can be potentially risky if differences in practices across vocations are not properly addressed.
Mr Speaker, the SAF accepts both the COI and ERPSS' recommendations to improve the safety culture. The SAF Inspector-General's Office (IGO) set up in end February this year after this incident will ensure that the recommendations are followed through.
Specifically, the IGO has identified the need for the SAF to improve in three key areas: command emphasis on safety, safety as a mission outcome and team safety culture. The SAF has to ensure that there is internalisation of safety as a mission outcome across all levels of command. All commanders must adopt a zero accident mind-set and set it in the heart of their unit safety culture. When coupled with a healthy open reporting culture, we can prevent the next accident from happening as our units share with others lessons learnt from safety incidents and near misses.
Another key element of a strong safety culture is team safety. Our commanders need to build a strong culture of team safety, where soldiers take responsibility for their own safety, look out for their buddies and keep each other safe during all training and mixed-crew activities. These behaviours must be ingrained into every soldier, sailor and airman so that safety rules are observed at all times.
Following this incident, the SAF has also taken specific steps to strengthen personal ownership of safety and enhance safety for maintenance-related training or tasks.
(a) Specifically, a Think-Check-Do drill will be implemented as a routine part of pre-maintenance task checks. As part of the drill, technicians will plan and brief all personnel of their expected roles and tasks. A dry run of team-based maintenance tasks will be conducted to ensure tight integration. The positions of E-stop buttons will be re-emphasised together with E-stop procedures and rehearsed as part of pre-ops drills.
(b) Safe areas and hazardous areas will be further emphasised through bold markings on platforms as part of safety enhancements.
(c) The SAF will entrench safety ownership at the team level so that it will become ingrained for soldiers to take care of themselves, their servicemen and their buddies. Safety advocates will be appointed in the units to emphasise safety and conduct checks.
(d) All soldiers will be required to take a safety awareness test annually, which commanders and trainers now take.
(e) NSmen will be actively involved in safety reviews where they can give feedback on safety matters before, during and after each training activity, and this feedback will be incorporated into our TSR reviews.
(f) Medical Officers will be required to undergo refresher training on heli-evacuation processes prior to their deployment for overseas medical support. New initiatives will also be explored to enhance their exposure to acute trauma care.
We need a strong SAF that can defend Singapore but it must and can be built up without compromising the safety and well-being of our National Servicemen. The SAF is committed to continue strengthening its safety systems at all levels, down to our soldiers, aircrew and sailors.
I want to put on record our appreciation to the COI members who have put in much effort and time to thoroughly investigate this tragic incident. And, in that process, they interviewed more than 20 persons involved with the incident, and reviewed voluminous documents related to the event and manuals related to instructions and safety procedures.
Mr Speaker, let me conclude by outlining the subsequent judicial processes to be taken. CFC(NS) Pang's death occurred in New Zealand, which therefore has state jurisdiction and not our Police or State Coroner. However, the New Zealand Attorney-General exercised his discretion not to undertake any inquiry for CFC(NS) Pang's case. Under our military law, it therefore falls on the SAF's Special Investigation Branch (SIB) with the jurisdiction to investigate CFC(NS) Pang's death.
The SIB has nearly completed its investigations and will report directly to the Chief Military Prosecutor, who is a senior legal officer deployed to MINDEF by the Legal Service Commission headed by the Chief Justice. They will decide if any servicemen are to be prosecuted in a military court for offences related to CFC(NS) Pang's death. The military court is presided over by former or serving State Court judges as Presidents of the General Court Martial. The General Court Martial (GCM) will have full access to the witnesses to independently make their own findings and conclusions on the culpability of the individuals who may be charged. The GCM need not take into account anything in my Statement in Parliament today.
In the meantime, servicemen under investigation are reassigned to administrative duties, and if found to have been culpable, will be charged and punished accordingly.
Mr Speaker, let me conclude now by expressing this House's deep condolences to the late CFC(NS) Aloysius Pang and his family. We know that it is difficult time for them. CFC(NS) Pang was by all accounts a motivated and competent soldier. He was well-liked; he was trusted by his peers. He cared deeply for his fellow soldiers. The loss of a good soldier like CFC(NS) Pang is deeply grievous to us. There was an outpouring of grief from many Singaporeans as a result of his untimely and tragic demise. The SAF has updated CFC(NS) Pang's family on the COI's findings and the actions taken to deal with the lapses and prevent recurrences. MINDEF and the SAF will continue to do all we can to help his family through this difficult period.
Mr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): I would like to thank the Minister for Defence for the Statement. I just have one clarification. It pertains to the first handout, the summary of COI's findings on chronology of events, specifically item (6) where the ME-Tech informed CFC(NS) Pang in a mixture of Mandarin and English that the gun barrel was going to be moved to the \"standby\" position. And thereafter, the late CFC(NS) Pang replied in Mandarin that it was fine and so forth.
My first question really pertains to the communication among the servicemen in the turret, whether the COI found a language to be an issue amongst the servicemen, whether the reaction time was slowed because of these issues.
The second question is more general. Looking forward, and I think for servicemen who are born in Singapore, we probably understand a little bit of Mandarin and Malay, if you are an Indian, but for certain servicemen who could be new citizens, language could be an issue. Going forward, how does SAF intend to resolve issues that could crop up where in a situation of extreme panic, language potentially could be a cause for an accident?
Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, I want to be careful for myself to keep to the COI's findings. I will neither impute or raise new items because we want to keep within the remit of the COI. And as I have said, separately, for prosecutorial purposes, the Military Court, the Special Investigation Branch and if they decide to charge, the Military Court will hear other findings and decide all these factors that Members of this House and others in the public might bring up.
But there was no indication that communication, because of language, was an issue within the turret. It was quite clear to all three in the gun of the safety procedures. As I have said, the COI made explicit reference that they knew the safety rules, ex ante, before they went to do maintenance and while they were doing maintenance; and while the gun barrel was moved. All three were clear that no one should stand in the path of the gun barrel. And there was no indication that CFC(NS) Pang did not understand or took a longer time to understand that the gun barrel was moving into him and he was still in the path. There was no such indication.
Mr Speaker: Mr Vikram Nair.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): I thank the Minister for the detailed Statement earlier. And I think it is indeed a very sad incident. One of the things that is clear is that the incident did not arise due to a technical faulty but really due to human error of three different people who were at the site. In any situation where people are trusted to do things, there is a risk of human error.
I notice that the Committee's recommendations are largely all incremental in nature, including the emphasis on personal responsibility for safety, reviewing the SOPs and ensuring compliance in the SOPs. But then again, all these things have to be delegated to people. So, is there anything we can really do as a system to try and deal with this risk of leaving people to do things?
Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, those indeed are the questions that as a system, and as commanders, we are dealing with. That is why we started the Inspector-General's Office. I spent a few years as Minister for Manpower. I set up the Workplace Safety Council during my tenure as Minister and visited a number of safety systems. This was following, if you remember, the two incidents – Fusionpolis and Nicoll Highway. For these two incidents, we undertook a safety review, as Mr Nair has said, of the systems, we went to visit a number of other countries which have better safety records. Professionally, all the safety officers or those who have been involved with these, will tell you it boils down to culture. It is just not the articulation of rules. It is how you internalise every act to the point that you take that extra effort. You can tell people that you have to put on seat belts; you can tell people you should not use your handphone while you are driving. There is no rule that says that you should not look at your handphone while crossing the road. But you see people doing it.
So, for us, we do not have that luxury to just tell people. We are an organisation; we are responsible for NSmen that are sent to us. And you have to do it in a systematic way to tighten, first of all, is it lack of knowledge or is it unclear rules or rules that are difficult to follow. If we find any of these, then you amend them. But ultimately, I think where we have reached is that you have to take care of yourself and your buddy; and you have to internalise this. And we found, in fact, a gap, that while we are paying a lot of attention to live firing exercises, one would think that in maintenance, you do not have high risk. And yet, here, you have an incident where you ignored the safety rules and something very tragic happens.
So, you have to inculcate that, \"Accidents do not take holidays\". You have to be very careful about the rules. The rules there are written for a reason. It is tragic. If anyone of the three in the cabin, anyone of them, have followed the rules, this would not have happened. The COI has stated that clearly. It is a fact that all three ignored the safety rules.
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Walter Theseira.
Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, thank you. Just to follow up on the issue of the safety culture, did the COI interview other personnel not directly involved to establish if compliance with the SOP for the barrel procedure is treated seriously? And second, did any personnel involved ever declare that there might be operational reasons to not follow aspects of the SOP?
Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, we take these incidents and in fact, near misses very seriously because near misses are warning signals to us. No, there were no operational reasons why they did not comply with it. The reason given was that they wanted to get on with it. They could not wait for that few seconds, and for whatever reasons.
Did they interview others to see the situation on the ground? This is what the SAF, the Army, the Artillery and the Inspector-General's Office (IGO)\tasked themselves. Is this indicative of a systemic lapse? Is this prevalent? If you have an isolated incident here and there, you can fix it. And I think the sense is, and this is not widespread because this is a first such incident. When this happened, I asked how many accidents have there occurred before, major injuries. This is the first for 15 years of operation. And I think this my surmising – this is nothing to do with the COI; the COI did not say this. I think NSmen or crew operators can understand when the gun is being fired and at great speeds; and if it hits you, serious injuries, so you better pay attention to the rules. But you underestimate, even at maintenance, that how can this happen. So, that just drives home the point that you have to observe safety rules that rigorously. We must not make safety rules so onerous that you cannot comply. But in this instance, it just meant a few seconds of waiting before the gun was lowered – and we measured it. I think it does not take more than 10 seconds – for the gun to be lowered, to be parked, as the safety manual say, to begin your work.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): I would like to ask the Minister whether we could use some technology to prevent future accidents which means that we can put in some sensors so when the gun barrel detects an obstruction, it would just automatically stop.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: That indeed is the thinking and I thank the Member for that. It is equivalent to house-proofing when a new baby arrives. But the big difference is, remember that our equipment must function in war or in battle. If you build enough automatic stop systems, when we have to push the button and go, we have to push many buttons to start deactivating things that we have put into place. Can you do it for the training equipment? Yes. And you would remember that when we spoke about the Bionix incident, that indeed is what we have done. We have got buttons that somebody can stop. And we have only done it for training equipment.
We know the cost of the SAF, not only in terms of resources and in money, but in persons. We take it seriously and we will design our systems to design away flaws as much as we can, always with the eye that it must not render us operationally incapable or put us at a disadvantage.
Mr Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. I have one clarification for the Minister for Defence. Earlier in his speech, he mentioned that the New Zealand Attorney-General exercised his discretion and declined to investigate the incident. However, we know from other instances, for example, Gavin Chan's death in Australia, that the Queensland authorities did actually investigate and there was a Coroner's Inquiry held there. So, I would like to ask the Minister: did the New Zealand AG indicate any reason why he declined to do so? Going forward, should such an unfortunate incident happen in other countries, would we or would we not expect the foreign government to investigate?
Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, we do not have any information why the AG did not exercise his authority to commence an inquiry into the death. He could have. Be mindful that we are training in some other country and we are subject to their jurisdiction and we have to respect their laws. Different laws apply differently to different countries. In Australia's situation, I am not sure that he had the discretion to not investigate.
So, in this case, the AG decided that they would not and, therefore, we started the COI. That was not to mean that even if they did investigate, we will not have a COI. But it was now, in the Australian case, as you said, Gavin Chan's case, there were two sets of investigations – theirs and our COI.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): May I ask the Minister whether there was any time pressure on the serviceman to carry out the maintenance repair to the equipment because, sometimes, when you are under time pressure, you tend to take short cuts and forget the training safety regulations?
Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Speaker, again, I would not impute any new information. The COI did not give any mention that time pressure was in any way contributory to the injury or death.
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Ministerial Statement. Introduction of Government Bill. Minister for Home Affairs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Road Traffic Act (Chapter 276 of the 2004 Revised Edition)\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Second Minister for Home Affairs (Mrs Josephine Teo) read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Pioneer Generation Fund (Amendment) Bill ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Second Minister for Finance (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.”
Mr Speaker, the Merdeka Generation refers to the group of Singaporeans born in the 1950s, who worked hard and contributed to building our nation through turbulent times. The Merdeka Generation Package is a way for us to show our appreciation for their contributions and to show care for them in their silver years. This Package not only provides the Merdeka Generation with greater peace of mind over their healthcare costs but also supports them in staying active and healthy.
Mr Speaker, over the past week, all eligible Merdeka Generation seniors, close to 500,000 of them, would have received their eligibility notification letters. They will soon start to enjoy benefits that will help them stay active and healthy.
From July this year, Merdeka Generation seniors can redeem their $100 PAssion Silver card top-ups at selected Community Clubs, MRT stations and bus interchanges. They can use these credits to pay for activities at their Community Clubs, entry to ActiveSG pools and gyms, public transport and more.
They will also receive their first MediSave top-ups in July, as well as additional subsidies for their MediShield Life premiums. From November onwards, they will enjoy subsidies for their bills at CHAS clinics, polyclinics and Specialist Outpatient Clinics. In addition, they can enjoy a $4,000 sign-up incentive if they join CareShield Life between 2021 and 2023. All of these items in the Merdeka Generation Package come on top of substantial healthcare subsidies that the Government already provides to all Singaporeans.
To reach out to our Merdeka Generation seniors, since April this year, the Silver Generation Office (SGO), part of the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC), has started the process of engaging our seniors through home visits and community events. As many of our Merdeka Generation seniors are still working, SGO will supplement their current residential-based outreach approach with engagements in workplaces and community spaces.
The Government is also putting out information on the Merdeka Generation Package to our seniors and their families through a wide range of platforms, such as TV interstitials, radio segments, online channels like YouTube and Facebook, and roadshows.
Let me now turn to the Amendment Bill itself in greater detail. The Bill provides for the establishment and administration of the Merdeka Generation Fund. As mentioned in this year's Budget, the Government will set aside $6.1 billion in this Fund. With accumulated interest over time, we estimate that this amount will be sufficient to cover the projected cost of the Package which is over $8 billion. The Government will continue to monitor healthcare costs and utilisation, as well as life expectancy, to ensure that we are able to fund these key healthcare benefits. This is our commitment to the Merdeka Generation.
As the Amendment Bill rides on the Pioneer Generation Fund Act to establish the Merdeka Generation Fund, we have proposed that the Act be renamed the \"Pioneer Generation and Merdeka Generation Funds Act\".
Amendments to Part 2 of the Act establishes the Merdeka Generation Fund as a separate Fund from the Pioneer Generation Fund and sets out the purposes for which moneys in the Merdeka Generation Fund may be used. The general responsibility for the management and administration of both Funds lies with the Minister for Finance and the amendments provide for the presentation of separate annual financial statements and Auditor’s report for each Fund to Parliament.
Amendments to Part 3 of the Act define the eligibility criteria for an individual to be considered a Merdeka Generation Senior and outline the benefits which Merdeka Generation Seniors receive as part of the Merdeka Generation Package.
Amendments to Part 3 also provide for the powers of the Appeals Panel and the process for appealing to be a Merdeka Generation Senior. The current Act already provides that the Appeals Panel will only consider appeals from Singapore citizens who meet the age criteria. So, they have to meet the age criteria and the Appeals Panel will consider other considerations, namely, the citizenship criterion. The Merdeka Generation Package applies to Singapore citizens born between 1 January 1950 and 31 December 1959. If a person is born before 31 December 1949 and did not receive the Pioneer Generation Package previously, the Appeals Panel may assess and determine that they are eligible for the Merdeka Generation Package.
Amendments to Parts 4 and 5 of the Act relate mainly to the power to make regulations for carrying out the purposes and provisions of the Act as amended by the Amendment Bill and the proper conduct of officers and entities exercising functions in relation to the Merdeka Generation Fund.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, the changes in this Act will enable the Government to implement the Merdeka Generation Package. This is how we can honour our Merdeka Generation for their contributions and give them and their families greater peace of mind with their healthcare costs. Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Lawrence Wong]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criminal Law Reform Bill ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Amrin Amin) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
We inherited the Penal Code from the British. It is nearly 150 years old. It is an important part of Singapore’s criminal law. The last time the Penal Code was reviewed end-to-end was in 2007. Our world and society have changed. The nature and complexity of crime have also changed, and it is timely that we update the Penal Code to ensure continued relevance and effectiveness.
The Penal Code Review Committee (PCRC) comprised lawyers, academics, judges and Ministry officials. The committee took two years to complete this extensive review. It submitted a report of nearly 500 pages and 169 recommendations on 31 August 2018. We considered the proposals by the PCRC and sought feedback from a wide range of stakeholders and also the general public. More than 700 stakeholders from the social, religious, financial, legal and education sectors were engaged in various dialogue sessions. We received written feedback from various individuals and organisations. We have also made the Bill available to Members of this House and to the public for the last three months. We are heartened by the general support for the proposals.
My speech today will cover four key areas: updating current sexual offences; updating the Penal Code's definitions and removing outmoded offences; dealing with emerging crime trends; and updating the sentencing framework.\tMinister Shanmugam will cover the Government's views on two key areas: enhancement of protection for vulnerable victims and reviewing sexual offences, specifically, offences against minors and new sexual offences.
On updating current sexual offences, first, let me talk about the offence of rape. The Bill will expand the definition of rape to include penile penetration of the anus and mouth. Currently, the offence of rape covers only penile penetration of the vagina. We take the view that the label of \"rape\" is appropriate for non-consensual acts involving penile penetration of the anus and mouth. This reflects the high degree of violation and the physical and health risks involved. With this Bill, both men and women can be victims of rape. Clause 110 gives effect to this.
Second, the Bill further clarifies the law on \"consent\" in the context of sexual offences. Clause 121 sets out three misconceptions of fact that would vitiate consent: sexual nature of the act; sexual purpose of the act; and identity of the perpetrator doing the act. We decided not have a positive statutory definition of consent. Section 90 of the Penal Code currently sets out the situations where consent is negated. There is a good body of case law on this matter.
Turning to the second key area in the Penal Code review, the updating of the Code to reflect shifting societal values.
The Bill will criminalise marital rape without exception. Currently, marital immunity for rape is only removed in certain circumstances, where there has been a breakdown in the marriage. Sexual relations in a marriage and indeed in any relationship, should be based on mutual consent.
Sexual assault is violence, and violence in any context is wrong. This is the basis on which we have repealed marital immunity. Clauses 110 and 112 of the Bill deal with this. There have been concerns raised that the complete repeal of marital immunity for rape could lead to an abuse of the legal process, due to an increase in unmeritorious allegations of rape by vindictive spouses.
I want to assure the House that all allegations of rape will be held to the same high standard of evidential rigour. There is a separate proposal which goes some way to deal with this concern. We have doubled the maximum punishment for section 182 of the Penal Code – situations where persons give false information to a public servant – from one to two years' imprisonment. In other words, persons who knowingly make false reports will be dealt with firmly by the law. Clause 54 gives effect to this.
The Bill will decriminalise attempted suicide. This proposal received wide public support, including from organisations which work directly with persons who attempt suicides, such as Samaritans of Singapore. The criminal justice system is not the best way to deal with persons who are so distressed that they choose to end their own lives.
In fact, the threat of prosecution, and the labelling of persons who attempt suicide as \"offenders\" may worsen their emotional state and the stigma they face. This view was shared by the PCRC and many others during the public consultation process. There were some concerns that the decriminalisation of attempted suicide would reduce the deterrent effect, and cause an increased number of suicides. However, bear in mind that persons who attempt suicide typically are so distressed that the deterrent effect of criminalisation is very low. The present situation is that hardly anyone is prosecuted and punished for this offence in the first place.
There were also concerns that the decriminalisation of attempted suicide will send a signal that the Government has shifted its position on the sanctity of life. I assure you that this is not the case. Every effort will still be made to prevent suicides. The Bill amends other laws to ensure that the Police will still be able to intervene in suicide situations. Members of the public will still be able to call for emergency assistance in cases where a person is attempting suicide.
The offence of abetment of attempted suicide will be retained. This will include physician-assisted suicides. Under this Bill, the maximum imprisonment term for abetment of attempted suicide will be enhanced significantly from one year to 10 years. Where the abetment of attempted suicide is of a minor or a person who lacks mental capacity, higher maximum punishments will apply – 15 years' imprisonment. If hurt is caused to the minor or the person who lacks mental capacity in the course of the abetment, the maximum punishment is imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term which may extend to 20 years. Clauses 84, 85, 89, 180 and 183 give effect to this.
The Bill codifies the definitions of fault elements such as intention, knowledge and dishonesty. These definitions crystallise and clarify the existing case law. We wanted to make the law clearer since most of these definitions apply to offences outside the Penal Code as well. Clauses 7 and 8 deal with these.
The Bill clarifies defences. First, the law on mistake. The amendments in clauses 21 and 22 will not change the existing law. There are two types of mistake – mistake of fact and mistake of law. First, it will continue to be the case that ignorance of law and mistake of law will not be a defence. Second, to be clear, we have clarified expressly, in clauses 110 and 111, the current position at law on the defence of mistake as to consent for the offences of rape and sexual assault by penetration.
Where the accused person proves that he made a mistake in good faith such that he believed that the act of penetration was done with consent, he will not be liable for the offence of rape or sexual assault by penetration. In other words, the amendments in clauses 110 and 111 will make clear the burden of proof remains on the accused person to prove on the balance of probabilities that he was mistaken in good faith that there was consent.
The amendments will not affect other presumptions which exist in law today, such as those in the Misuse of Drugs Act.
We will address an anomaly in the defence of intoxication in section 86. This was pointed out by the High Court in Juma'at bin Samad v PP. With the amendment, intoxication must be taken into account in determining the accused person's \"knowledge\" or \"belief\", in addition to \"intention\".
I wish to make clear that all other aspects of the law on intoxication in Juma'at are preserved. The Explanatory Statement is not clear in this regard and this speech clarifies the intent. This includes the requirement for the accused person to prove on the balance of probabilities that he was so intoxicated that he did not form the requisite fault element for the offence. Clause 29 gives effect to this.
We will increase the minimum age of criminal responsibility, known as the MACR, from seven to 10 years old. Children who are below the MACR, and those above the MACR but below 12 years of age, who are unable to understand the nature and consequences of their conduct, cannot be held criminally responsible for any act or omission which would otherwise be an offence. The current MACR is seven years old and this is a colonial inheritance, since 1872.
We need to strike a balance between protection of the public and fairness to young children who may not be able to understand the consequences of their action.
There is no international consensus on the appropriate MACR. The MACR of seven years old is on the lower end of the spectrum.
We studied this very carefully. In Singapore, criminal activity among children below the age of 10 is very low. We see increased criminal activity from the age of 10 onwards, and most juveniles commit property offences. On balance, we think an MACR of 10 years old would be more appropriate in our context. Children below 10 years old, and those between 10 and 12 years old who are not mature enough to understand the nature and consequences of their conduct, will not be convicted.
But this does not mean that we do nothing. We are looking to develop a framework to allow us to intervene in cases of such young children. The raising of the MACR will take effect when the framework for rehabilitation of these young children has been finalised. Clauses 25 and 26 give effect to this.
I will now move on to the third key area on how the Penal Code will be amended to deal with emerging crime trends, especially in the area of white-collar offences.
Offences can be committed across national borders, with the constituent elements of offences committed in different countries. Indeed, many white-collar offences have multiple physical elements which can take place in different countries. It is currently not clear whether Singapore courts will have jurisdiction when some elements take place in Singapore, and others outside of Singapore. A new Schedule will be inserted into the Penal Code. Singapore Courts will have jurisdiction over offences in this Schedule, where any relevant act of the offence occurs in Singapore. Clauses 2 and 168 give effect to this.
The Bill introduces the new offence of fraud. To understand the need for fraud offences, we need to look at the current offence of cheating. The offence relies on there being a victim that relied on the deception by the offender. The deception had to induce the victim to do something.
Take for instance the LIBOR-fixing scandal in the UK. It would be very difficult to show that the victims relied upon the fraudulent representations of the bank employees who manipulated LIBOR. Calculations for LIBOR are complicated, and may not be understood by these victims. Yet, the LIBOR-fixing scandal is egregious, with far-reaching consequences on financial markets and products. We must be able to take action against such dishonest behaviour.
The new offence of Fraud is intended to deal with novel and complex scheme which the current offence of cheating may not cover. It focuses on the deceitful intent of the offender and not the effect on the alleged victim. Trivial lies will not be caught. The cheating offence will continue to be used where the elements of the offence are satisfied.
Two variants of fraud will be introduced. The first, fraud directly in connection with written or oral contracts for goods and services, and the second, other types of fraud. The second category of other types of fraud will come into force first, with the rest of the Penal Code amendments. For fraud in connection with contracts for goods and services, we are working on the development of a mechanism, which allows private persons to obtain recourse for more common cases involving smaller losses.
This mechanism may involve private prosecutions, civil claims or some other avenues. The new fraud offence has been adapted from the UK's Fraud Act. Clauses 138 and 139 give effect to this.
The experience of the UK in the implementation of the fraud offence has been positive. It has enabled the UK government to respond to technologically enabled and complex forms of fraud.
One point on online scams. While these would fall within the definition of fraud, most of these offences are committed by perpetrators overseas. For such cases, prevention is better than cure. While the Police will continue to clamp down on scam activities and work actively with our foreign counterparts, it is a fact that it is challenging to bring these foreign perpetrators to task.
Finally, I will touch on the fourth area, which is updating the sentencing framework. We have made some amendments to the sentencing framework to ensure that the sentences prescribed are proportionate to the seriousness of the offence. Members of this House will be familiar with mandatory minimum sentences (MMS). MMS refers to a sentence where the law mandates that a judge must impose a minimum jail term or another sentence such as caning for a particular offence.
MMS has served us well. It enhances deterrence for serious offences by imposing certain, predictable sentences on offenders. We recognise that society has become safer, less violent, and more mature. It is therefore timely to review all the offences which attract MMS today. We have decided to retain MMS for offences in the Penal Code, Misuse of Drugs Act and illegal moneylending offences. MMS will also be retained for offences which attract a mandatory sentence of caning. These offences are serious, and generally involve elements of physical confrontation and violence.
Presumptive minimum sentences will be introduced for the remaining eight offences as set out in the Bill. Only first-time offenders will qualify for presumptive minimum sentences. For these offenders, the Court may sentence them to a punishment which is less than MMS in exceptional circumstances. We have provided guidance in the law on exceptional circumstances.
Where the accused person is a first-time offender, pleaded guilty and where he was of previous good character – the mere presence of all or any of these factors will not be sufficient to constitute exceptional circumstances. The Court will determine what exceptional circumstances are.
Currently, courts can already exercise judicial mercy in very rare cases where humanitarian considerations arise. This gives us an idea of the degree of exceptionality that is required. The introduction of presumptive minimum sentences is not a softening of the Government's stance against such crimes. Because exceptional circumstances must be shown, we anticipate that the majority of offenders who commit these offences will still face the prescribed minimum sentence.
Almost all the provisions will come into force early next year in 2020. In this major review of the Penal Code, we have clarified existing concepts and amended our laws to reflect prevailing norms and better respond to our changing environment. Minister Shanmugam will provide the Government's views on the changes to two key areas: sexual offences and enhancing protection of the most vulnerable amongst us. Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr K Shanmugam): Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to speak. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary has given the Government's view on some of the key proposed amendments. I intend to set out the Government’s position on two major areas of the law which we are amending. One, better protection of vulnerable victims; and second, dealing with sexual offences. We are setting out new offences and enhancing penalties where minors are involved. Some additional conduct of a sexual nature will be specifically criminalised.
First, protection for vulnerable victims. We want to provide stronger protection for those who cannot protect themselves. First, we will enhance maximum punishment for offences committed against such victims. Second, we will introduce new offences where such victims are abused. The first category of vulnerable victims are children below 14 years old; second, vulnerable persons due to mental or physical disabilities; and third, domestic workers.
Penalties for all offences in the Penal Code committed against these vulnerable victims will be enhanced, up to twice the maximum penalties prescribed for these offences.
Members of this House will remember the case of Annie Ee. Annie had low IQ. She lived with her so-called close friends. They abused her by beating her daily; they made her do all the household chores and they kept her salary. Annie was not capable of protecting herself. She suffered for eight months and then she died.
With the new amendments, if a person like Annie Ee is assessed to be substantially unable to protect herself, then her abusers will be liable to up to twice the maximum punishment. They will be charged for the offence of voluntarily causing grievous hurt; so up to 20 years' imprisonment. This is in clause 17 of the Bill.
All Penal Code offences committed against such vulnerable victims will be made arrestable, regardless of whether the underlying offence is itself arrestable. That will allow Police to intervene quickly.
Penalties will also be enhanced for specific offences committed against persons who are in an intimate or close relationship with the offender, even if they are not married. PAVE is a VWO which works closely with a variety of other agencies, including the Government. They told me about this case, which was one of the reasons why I decided we ought to change the law here. They helped a lady by the name of Cindy. Cindy had suffered horrific abuse from her live-in partner. She was found by the Police in the year 2000, almost completely blind, with slash wounds all over her body and with broken bones. She had suffered horrific abuse over the eight years. Quite unspeakable. The two young children she had with the abuser witnessed all of this abuse, which took place almost daily.
In many serious domestic abuse cases, the abuser exploits the trust of the victim to abuse them. The victims often find it difficult to leave such partners due to the emotional and psychological manipulation which is frequently found in such relationships.
If the offender commits specific offences like rape, wrongful confinement, causing hurt, against intimate partners or those in close relationship, the offender will be subject to twice the maximum penalties that are normally prescribed for such offences. These amendments will mean that such perpetrators who abuse victims, where the victims trust and depend on them, the abusers will face much more severe punishments.
These amendments must be read or looked at together with the proposed amendments to the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA), which will be coming up for Second Reading tomorrow. It means that such intimate partners can get Personal Protection Orders (PPOs) on an expedited basis and that perpetrators will get more severe penalties. Previously, only married partners can apply for PPO under the Woman's Charter.
Now, under proposed amendments to POHA, the timelines for getting a PPO will be comparable to that under the Women's Charter. So intimate partners, usually women, who are in a relationship but not married, who fear violence. This is a significant step to giving them greater protection. Again, based on Parliamentary rules, I cannot go too much into detail on POHA, but my intention is that, it must be fast, it must be quick, and they must be able to get remedies. My colleague, Edwin Tong, will take Parliament through POHA tomorrow.
In the Penal Code, new offences in respect of abuse of vulnerable victims which lead to death or other forms of grievous hurt will also be introduced. But going back to intimate partners, therefore, on the one side, the penalties to be enhanced; and on the other side, easier access to Personal Protection Orders. Of course, there is the underlying psychological problem, that if the woman does not want to leave and continues to suffer the abuse, then our agencies or the VWOs will have to try to find a way of identifying these woman – usually women – and then, encourage them to take the steps.
Now, I am moving on to the abuse leading to death of vulnerable victims. New offences are being introduced, where there is serious abuse of vulnerable victims. I remind Members of another case, Daniel Nasser, two years old. He was abused by his mother and her live-in boyfriend over a period of at least five weeks. They kicked and slapped him almost every day. They stomped on his chest. The autopsy found 31 external injuries on Daniel. The court said the couple had inflicted harm \"in a ruthless and unrelenting manner\".
In such serious cases of abuse which leads to the death of the vulnerable victim, Members will find it odd, but lawyers will know, it is not easy to convict the offenders of murder. The reason is that it is difficult to show that they had the requisite mens rea, that is, the mental elements that were present to meet the requirements for the conviction for murder. I think we have to take a strong stance against such abuse. I refer to clauses 83, 104 and 171.
The first two offences – \"causing death by sustained abuse\" and \"failure to protect\" – will cover persons who owe these victims a duty of care. Who are such persons? Persons who have custody, care, or charge of the victims. They have a responsibility to protect those under their care from harm. Members can refer to clause 83.
The third new offence is \"causing or allowing the death of a vulnerable victim\". Victims, as I described earlier, children, domestic workers and other vulnerable persons.
The offence deals with situations where two or more persons were in a position to cause the death of the victim but both deny they were the ones who caused the ill-treatment. In such cases, it is very difficult to prove in Court, who committed the abuse and who permitted the abuse. Currently, when there is this sort of ambiguity, both could get acquitted, while there is a dead child. This is not right, I think.
Deaths resulting from natural causes or accidents will not be covered. But, otherwise, if you stood by and you allowed a child to be abused in this way, you can be charged.
The United Kingdom and Australia have similar offences. A case from the UK is illustrative of the kind of situation we are thinking about. Let me refer to R v. Ikram from the United Kingdom, where a 16-month-old (or a year and four months) boy died. He was living with his father and his father’s female partner. The boy suffered 21 different injuries within 48 hours before his death, including a fatal fracture to the left femur. It occurred within 12 hours prior to his death. It was established that only the father and his partner were present during the period when the fatal injury was inflicted. The father had been absent for around two hours. Both defendants were charged for murder and both claimed they did not to know how the injuries were sustained. In Singapore, under our proposed amendments, the father and partner both can be charged for causing or allowing a young child's death. So, you can look at clauses 83, 104 and 171.
There have been some feedback and concerns that persons who are themselves victims of abuse could nevertheless be held liable for their inaction by \"failing to protect\" a vulnerable victim or \"causing or allowing the death of a vulnerable victim\". For example, a husband violently abuses his wife and his children. The concern is that the abused wife may herself be found liable under this offence if she did not intervene to prevent her husband from abusing the children. This is even though she may not have really been in a position to intervene. That should not be the case. The clauses in the Bill require the court to consider past or present experiences of those of the accused persons of abuse as well. The Court needs to determine the steps the accused person could have been reasonably expected to have taken to prevent the abuse of the vulnerable victim.
Under the amendments, Daniel Nasser's abusers, the very people who were supposed to protect him, could be liable for the new offence of causing death by sustained abuse, and causing or allowing Daniel’s death.
Now, I will turn to the area of sexual offences. There are amendments to better protect minors and there are amendments creating new categories of sexual offences.
First, minors. Members of this House may remember the case of Joshua Robinson. He was 39 years old, he met two 15-year-old girls on social networking sites. He pressured them to send him nude pictures of themselves and to meet up to have sex with him. Currently – and some Members might find this surprising when they think about it – asking for and receiving nude images by consent, from a 15-year-old, is not an offence today.
He also filmed their sexual encounters. When his house was raided, they found obscene films including more than 300 films of child pornography.
After he was arrested and released on bail, when he was on bail, Joshua Robinson showed a six-year-old girl explicit videos of his girlfriend performing a sexual act on him. At present, that is not a separate category of offence. It will have to come within the rubric of showing an obscene film. But I think Members will agree that we should criminalise it separately and clearly, rather than treating it as just showing an obscene film. I think the action and acts are heinous in themselves, beyond the showing of the film.
Joshua Robinson was eventually sentenced to imprisonment for having sex with minors because both girls were under 16, making and possessing obscene films, and showing an obscene film to a six-year-old girl. I think Members will agree that getting the two 15-year-old girls to send nude photos should itself be criminalised, and showing an obscene film to a six-year-old should be treated with more severity by a separate category of offence.
So, I said at that time that we needed to look at criminalising some parts of his conduct, which were not caught at that time, and increasing the penalties as well, to ensure that people like Joshua Robinson will be dealt with more severely through higher penalties.
So, the new offences, under the rubric of \"exploitative sexual activity with minors\" will deal with sexual predators who exploit young people.
The age of consent for sexual activity is 16 years old, but there are situations where slightly older minors, those between 16 and 18 years old, may be exploited for sexual gratification by persons who are in relationships of trust with the minor.
In such cases, the young person's consent, and we are talking about 16 to 18 years; that young person's consent, is, in my view, compromised.
We are therefore introducing offences involving sexual exploitation of minors of age 16 or above but below 18 where sexual penetration is involved, where sexual grooming is involved, and where sexual communications are involved.
For sexual exploitation offences by persons in relationships of trust with minors who are below 16 years of age – we will enhance the existing penalties, and we will peg them to those for non-consensual sexual penetration.
There are two parts to this definition of \"exploitation\".
First, in considering whether the accused is in a relationship that is exploitative of the victim, the Court will be required to consider the age of the minor – the younger the person (the victim), the more susceptible to influence he or she will be.
Second, the difference in age between the accused and the minor. A large age difference may result in the victim viewing the accused as an authority figure, allowing the accused to exert significant influence over the victim.
Third, the nature of the relationship. If the accused initiates sexual communication or activity, it is likely that the intention of the accused, particularly if it is done very early in the relationship, was to make use of the power imbalance in the relationship to exploit the victim for his sexual gratification.
Fourth, the degree of control or influence exercised by the accused over the minor. The greater the influence by the accused over the minor, the more the minor's will may be considered to be compromised.
The use of violence or coercion by the accused will be considered to be amongst the indicators of control or domination over the victim.
So, in short, a key factor in determining \"exploitation\" is the presence of a power imbalance between the accused person and the minor.
There are other jurisdictions which take a different approach. For example, the United Kingdom and some states in Australia have an exhaustive list of relationships – sexual activity between adults and minors in such relationships is prohibited.
We have adapted this as the second part of the definition of \"exploitation\".
A list of specified relationships has been included in the law. Where these relationships exist between the accused and the minor, there will be a rebuttable presumption that an exploitative relationship exists.
What are these relationships? They involve an adult who is in a position of responsibility, authority or influence over the minor. It will include teacher-student; doctor-patient; and parent-child.
Where the relationship between the accused person and the minor is not in this list, the Court can still find that a relationship was exploitative based on its assessment by reference to the first part of the definition. So, if you look at clauses 113 and 121, those are set out.
I will now turn to predatory conduct against minors. The amendments and new offences take into account developments in technology which have enabled predators to increase their number of victims and the speed at which they can groom minors.
We are seeking to lower the threshold for the current offence of sexual grooming. We are reducing the required instances of prior conduct from two to one, and we will lower the age floor of the offender from 21 to 18 – clauses 116 and 117.
New offences will be introduced: sexual communication with minors – I spoke about this earlier – and showing a minor a sexual image, I spoke about this earlier. Also, sexual activity in the presence of a minor – clause 117.
So, this will allow us to criminalise predatory behaviour like Joshua Robinson's, including asking minors to send him nude images.
There will be, of course, other types of conduct, like sexual experimentation amongst young persons. It is not the intent of these new offences to target these groups of persons. The intent is to prevent predatory conduct.
The AGC will, of course, have to exercise prosecutorial discretion in determining whether it is in the public interest to prosecute. When it is between boyfriend and girlfriend, and they are of a certain age, very young, and it is not exploitative, it should not come within these provisions.
Covering the spectrum of predatory behaviour allows us to intervene early to ensure that our children are protected before the offender has time to meet them and prepare them, and commit additional, more serious sexual offences that could cause, of course, greater physical and psychological harm.
Next, child abuse material. I said in this House last year that we were looking into drafting specific laws against child abuse material.
Apart from sexual abuse, some children are physically abused; they are tortured as well. Terrible harm is caused to these children who are used in the production of such material. We must do what we can to protect them. This does not happen much in Singapore, but we are going to make this extra-territorial in some ways.
We have criminalised the spectrum of offences to deal with every person involved, from consumers to the producers of such material. So, we will also cover realistic depictions of children, meaning depictions which so closely resemble that of actual children, such that if an ordinary person looks at the depiction, they cannot tell whether this is real or a depiction.
Inclusion of these realistic depictions of children will prevent an accused person from arguing that a depiction is computer-generated when in fact it involved an actual child.
The offences of using or procuring a child for child abuse material, and production of child abuse material – these will be made extra-territorial.
The offences will cover Singaporeans and PRs who commit such offences overseas. Of course, it will cover them if they do it here as well. Any person who is in Singapore and commits these offences against a child overseas; and any person who is overseas and commits these offences against a child in Singapore – that is in clause 120.
Next, child abuse material which depicts fictional children. This is dealt with under section 292 of the Penal Code. The offence criminalises sale, distribution, exhibition, production of obscene material. Possession of such material is not criminalised under this provision.
We want to enhance punishments under section 292 when the obscene object depicts minors below 16 years old. The maximum punishments is sought to be increased from three months to two years of imprisonment.
And a new offence criminalising possession, distribution, importation, production of child sex-dolls will also be introduced. These refer to anatomically accurate dolls or robots with features which resemble a minor below a 16-year-old. These dolls are produced and used overseas. We are prohibiting them because of the concern that they may reinforce tendencies which can then develop into actual harmful acts towards children.
Next, technology has facilitated the commission of sexual offences such as voyeurism, \"cyber-flashing\", distribution of intimate images (often referred to as \"revenge pornography\"). And there has been an increase in such cases. These offences are currently criminalised under the Films Act and Penal Code.
We want to create specific offences in the Penal Code to provide proper framing for such offences and adequate punishments.
Voyeurism involves observation or recording of someone doing a private act without the person's consent. Some of the more commonly known forms of voyeurism include \"up-skirting\" and \"down-blousing\". Recently, there has been spotlight on these offences because of the incident in NUS, involving Mr Nicholas Lim. These offences are currently dealt with under \"Insult of Modesty\" in the Penal Code and Films Act.
The current laws, in my view, do not adequately address the range of offences involving voyeuristic recordings and the distribution of such material on the Internet. So, we propose to introduce specific offences involving \"voyeurism\" which will define the offending behaviour and provide for adequate punishments.
The proposals, Members know, as I said earlier this afternoon, well pre-date the incident involving Mr Lim. In fact, the Bill was tabled in Parliament before that incident became public. It was before the incident took place as well, in terms of working on it and drafting.
We have also introduced a presumption. Where the accused person has made a recording of another person doing a private act, or of their private parts, it will be presumed that the person being recorded or observed did not consent to the observation or recording.
Sometimes, there are evidential challenges because you can find the images, but you cannot identify who the person is. This will get over the legal burden and the presumption will be that there was no consent. The accused can then say why there was consent.
The new offences will criminalise \"Peeping Tom\" behaviour, making of voyeuristic recordings, distribution, possession of, or gaining access to such recordings.
Also, modifying any part of a building's structure to make voyeuristic recordings will also be criminalised specifically. This was recently reported in the international media as being a very serious issue in South Korea.
The proposed maximum imprisonment terms for the observance, possession and making of such \"voyeuristic recordings\" is now going to be two years if the Bill gets passed. That is double the current maximum one-year punishment for the offence of insulting modesty under section 509.
There is, I think, a clear need to deter the proliferation of voyeuristic recordings. So, distribution of voyeuristic recordings will attract a higher punishment – a maximum imprisonment term of five years if you go around distributing these. The Court may also impose a fine and caning for these offences. Members may refer to clause 120.
We have also introduced a new offence to criminalise sexual exposure which is commonly known as \"flashing\". There has been prevalence of this – persons intentionally send unsolicited pictures of their genitalia over social media or via messaging platforms. That will be criminalised. Penalties for this offence will be enhanced where the victim is below 14 years old.
Distribution or threat to distribute intimate images – we will introduce a new offence for distribution, threat to distribute, colloquially known as \"revenge porn\". Intimate images could become widely shared on platforms, and it may be impossible to completely remove them, and they have the potential to cause great harm to the victim.
The offence will exclude images such as caricatures or cartoons of a person performing a sexual act. So, a lewd caricature of a person may amount to harassment, but not something that could be mistaken as an \"intimate image\" of the person depicted. The maximum penalty for this offence would be imprisonment of up to five years, with the option of fine and caning. Where the offence is committed against a person below 14 years old, imprisonment will be made mandatory.
The new offence will also cover cases where a person unlawfully accesses databases or recordings that contain intimate images. That is also in clause 120.
We are also introducing a new offence: procurement of sexual activity by deception relating to two types of conduct. First, the use of sexually protective measures; and second, the presence or absence of sexually transmitted diseases. In some countries, cases have emerged of men agreeing to use a condom but secretly removing it before or during sex. It is known as \"stealthing\". In these cases, the quality of the consent provided by the victim would be compromised by the deception. We have identified, and also if men, usually men, mislead their partner on their sexually transmitted diseases, that is also covered. We have identified these two types of deception because they carry serious risks to the victim and represent a greater violation of the victims’ sexual autonomy. You can refer to clause 119. We will continue to assess whether there is a need to expand this offence to cover other circumstances in the future relating to consent.
Mr Speaker, Sir, these enhanced penalties and new offences created will help to better protect vulnerable victims, victims of sexual crimes and reflect our commitment to protect such persons. The amendments we are making today strengthen our laws. They will help ensure that Singapore continues to be a safe home for our people, particularly women, children, and vulnerable persons.
Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah): Sir, this Bill has the monumental task of reforming Singapore’s criminal law. It is the result of an immense effort by the many stakeholders – MinLaw, MHA, the AGC, Law Society, the Criminal Bar and members of public who have provided the valuable feedback. The product is a formidable piece of legislation.
Sir, today, I would like to discuss six broad themes underlying the amendments and the discussions leading up to the presentation of this Bill in Parliament.
The first theme is the protection of victims in vulnerable positions. In particular, vulnerable victims who are unable to defend themselves, victims of abuse within a marriage and minors who have been victimised by abusive or lewd acts.
Clause 83 introduces offences which improve the law's capability to address situations where sustained abuse and neglect results in the unfortunate death of a vulnerable victim. Some of us remember the case of Annie Ee. Annie was a 26-year-old waitress with intellectual disabilities. She was physically and psychologically abused by her flatmates for eight months until she died with severe injuries. This law will ensure the perpetrators in a case like Annie Ee's will be dealt with accurately and effectively – matching culpability with an appropriate sentence.
Another case. In 2015, the case of Joshua Robinson surfaced. He was found to have in his possession 5,902 obscene films, 321 of them containing child pornography, featuring children as young as two years old. Robinson had even shown a six-year-old girl an obscene video while her father was training at a gym. Many Singaporeans raised concerns that the sentence of four years' imprisonment was inadequate. Clause 117 of the Bill addresses that. That clause introduces the offence of sexual activity or image in the presence of a minor below 16 years of age. This is relevant to the proposed section 376ED – it should be supported.
During the debate on the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill in 2007, Ms Ellen Lee raised the point that the exceptions to marital rape immunity are inadequate to address serious abuse in marriage. In particular, Ms Lee cited the case of PP against N where the marital relationship was already highly strained and the husband forcefully dragged her back to their matrimonial home, tied her hands, gagged her and \"raped\" her.
The changes to section 375(4) in clause 110(b) address that and puts into clear focus the victim’s interest. This is a bold move and should be supported. I am also glad that Ms Lee’s conscientious voice in 2007 has made an impact in the changes we are discussing today.
Many countries talk about the rights of the accused. Yes, that is important, but a good justice system is also victim-focused.
Sir, onto another topic within the first theme. Singapore-hosted webpages saw an exponential increase in child pornography content. In 2015, there were 10. But in 2016, there were 211. In the first 10 months of 2017, this number almost doubled to 412. The amendments to this Bill improve our law’s capability to deter such lewd content and punish the purveyors of it. We must protect our children. They are innocent and must be shielded from depraved and corrupt humans who seek offensive pleasure from such lewd acts. Hence, the proposed sections 377BG to 377BK, which punish purveyors of child pornography or child abuse content are important and timely.
Sir, I move on to the second theme, that is, to ensure culpability even where the criminal acts are committed overseas. One key way is to tackle crimes committed through the Internet. The proposed section 4B(1)(c) does so by specifying that certain offences committed outside Singapore but which affect Singapore are punishable as though the act had been carried out in Singapore. This is especially useful for financial crimes which can be committed remotely, with no respect for territorial boundaries. This ensures that the arm of Singapore's law can reach overseas actors who create harm in Singapore. This is key for a highly connected hub such as Singapore. It is an amendment that is needed and welcomed.
Sir, I move on to the third theme. The new presumptive minimum sentence is another important feature of this Bill. The proposed section 303A of the Criminal Procedure Code in clause 169 introduces more flexibility in sentencing by allowing the court to impose a sentence less than the presumptive minimum sentence if exceptional circumstances made it unjust to impose a first-time offender with the presumptive minimum sentence.
At this stage, I should declare that I am a lawyer in private practice and sometimes act as Defence Counsel in criminal cases. From my experience, it is good to give our Judges the discretion to impose accurate sentences. This may involve, at times, lighter sentences where there are strong mitigating factors which put the offenders’ acts in perspective. Allowing a judge to mete out a lower sentence – even lower than the presumptive minimum – could prove very useful where an offender is quite clearly on the lower spectrum of the culpability scale. It makes for more accurate justice. However, I do have a clarification to ask.
In the new subsection 4, it says that \"in any written law, unless the context requires otherwise, a reference to a mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment shall include a reference to a presumptive minimum sentence.\" Could the Minister elaborate on whether such a rationale applies to all existing regulatory and criminal laws or whether it is restricted to only the laws contained in the Penal Code? For example, how would subsection 4 apply to the Misuse of Drugs Act which already has a carefully calibrated deterrent-rehabilitation regime through the availability of the Drug Rehabilitation Centre at one extreme and the Long Term Imprisonments 1 and 2 options at the other extreme?
In short, Sir, presumptive minimum sentences will have the advantage of creating some broad consistency in sentencing across courtrooms and across cases, but allows much needed flexibility where the merits of the case justify a lower sentence. Such flexibility allows for more accurate justice.
Sir, I move to my fourth theme. While it is good and necessary to carry out an extensive review of our criminal laws every 12 years or so, would MHA and MinLaw consider creating a set of legal tools which could deal with morphing criminal threats of the future? In a world where technology progresses so rapidly, the potential criminal activities and their modus operandi may be morphing so quickly that even though we have a robust new criminal law framework now, the law may still not be wide enough to address criminal methodologies of the future.
Therefore, would MHA and MinLaw consider the suggestion to introduce a Schedule or the possibility for subsidiary legislation through which the Minister can respond quickly to the morphing criminal phenomenon without needing to come to Parliament. For example, in the Misuse of Drugs Act, the Minister does not need to come to Parliament to update the list of drugs, especially new psychoactive drugs. In this way, the law addressing the harms of drugs is flexible, versatile and able to respond quickly to the threat.
An example of what could be done for a Penal Code provision is by introducing a Schedule for section 409 of the Penal Code. It was held by the Singapore Court of Appeal in the 2018 case of Public Prosecutor v Lam Leng Hung, Kong Hee & Others that the provision contained in section 409 on criminal breach of trust by an agent does not cover key officers of a charity and officers of a society.
If there was a mechanism for a readily amendable Schedule or subsidiary legislation, and the original offence in the primary legislation was broad enough and consistent with Parliament's intention to encompass such a situation, then rather than having to come to Parliament to amend the provision to plug loopholes, the Minister could expand on the limbs of an existing provision to tighten the law through a Schedule or subsidiary legislation. While this cannot apply retrospectively, it would be a quick and efficient way to plug loopholes for future cases. Could MHA and MinLaw consider this suggestion, please?
My fifth theme covers section 377A. Sir, I support the Government's decision to retain the provision.
Since speaking on the topic in Parliament in 2007, I have followed the debate in other countries and studied the multiple legal challenges in various jurisdictions which seek to redefine marriage, gender, adoption rights, spousal rights and what is taught in schools. This has caused me to believe that retaining a provision such as section 377A, even if it is unenforced, continues to be a good approach for our country. The provision remains relevant and necessary. Sir, I am of the view that the environment the traditional family unit offers to children supports the state in creating the best environment for the upbringing of children. This environment should be protected. We should build it up and not tear it down. Therefore, my views expressed in 2007 have not changed.
Sir, my sixth theme covers section 309. Clause 89 repeals section 309 – the offence of attempted suicide. I have concerns regarding its repeal. Yes, attempted suicide is an issue which must be addressed with great sensitivity and the topic must be respected with all the attendant empathy it so clearly deserves. However, I have looked at the Ministry's arguments for repealing section 309 and I hold a different view. Section 309 should be retained. In a way, retaining it is the more compassionate approach because, in my view, preserving the provision will save more lives. Retention of the provision has a further advantage. It prevents euthanasia from making its way to our shores.
Sir, do I believe we should help members of our society who are contemplating suicide? Absolutely. Do I think we should enforce section 309 against people who attempt suicide? In most cases, no. But keeping the provision is still of immense value. Why? I humbly submit that there are six reasons.
First, because it sends a normative signal that taking one's life is not the answer to life's problems, to the extent that the law prohibits it.
Second, the repeal of section 309 may send the signal that taking one's life is acceptable to broader society when, in my view, that is not society's thinking.
Three, all the attendant treatment, support, care and counselling can be provided while still retaining the provision. Indeed, when this happens, society would benefit from the deterrent effect of the law. This means that the law would help deter some future suicides in society, while, at the same time, the people who need the counselling and care are able to receive it.
I cite the inspiring words of a courageous young lady who wrote a forum page letter in the Straits Times in February 2019. I quote her: \"As someone who overcame suicide and is now a passionate advocate for the sanctity of life, I am sad to see suicide being decriminalised in our nation. Suicide is truly a multi-faceted and complex issue, and the law should not be excluded from having a deterrent effect on people who see death as the only option in their difficult circumstances. I gave up the idea of further suicide attempts after Police officers gently reminded me that attempting suicide was an offence. There was no need for the authorities to restrain or prosecute me, for I was cooperative and clearly in distress. In recent years, I managed to persuade a young foreigner from killing herself just by informing her the offensive nature of suicide in our nation. Human life is sacred and should not be violated, not even by ourselves.\"
She goes on, \"The decriminalisation of suicide perpetuates the erroneous message of 'my body, my choice'. When it is no longer mandatory to report a suicide attempt, people will stop reporting it as it is not a crime.\" – Ms Ho Lay Ping.
Writing that and putting a name to it takes immense courage and I respect that. There is further value in that story, that real-life story shared by Ms Ho displays why the presence of sections 305 and 306 do not cure the concerns over the decriminalisation of attempted suicide.
Fourth reason, I agree with the Ministry that the stigma against those suffering from mental health should be removed. Indeed, I have spoken up in Parliament about removing such a stigma and increasing community support for those suffering from mental illness in 2018 and in 2019. Such a stigma is not fair. We should not hold mental illness against the person who has it. But the removal of section 309 does not need to be part of that destigmatisation exercise. Why? Because there is a risk that the number of suicides will increase if there is no provision to deter the act. Broader society will have no legal deterrent and those attempting suicide may consider the absence of a prohibition as a licence to attempt the act. If that were to happen, society loses and we could see an increase in the number of suicides in future. I feel duty-bound to articulate that concern in this House.
My fifth reason, there should be mandatory reporting of suicide attempts. Yet, this Bill removes the requirement for mandatory reporting. This, in my view, should be seriously reconsidered since removing the requirement for the mandatory reporting of an attempted suicide removes one means, a crucial means, by which the suicidal person can get the professional help he or she needs.
Sixth, the retention of section 309 consolidates the moral position against euthanasia. For the record, Sir, I support laws that outlaw euthanasia for I believe that an innocent life is as precious through sufferings as it is through joys.
Therefore, for all the six reasons above, I ask the Ministry to seriously reconsider whether it wants to repeal section 309.
If the Ministry wishes to proceed with the repeal, then I ask that a detailed study of the number of suicides following the repeal be undertaken. If the number of suicides in Singapore increases following repeal when compared to pre-repeal numbers, I ask that the Ministry consider re-introducing a provision similar to section 309 back into the Penal Code. For such a detailed study to be meaningful, mandatory reporting should be re-introduced – it should not be abolished. Otherwise, the study may be inaccurate.
In essence, Sir, I urge the Government to closely examine its decision to decriminalise the offence of attempted suicide and closely monitor the impact that it has on our society.
My concerns regarding the abolition of section 309 do not dilute, in any way, my strong support for the other excellent facets of this Bill. After all, the other amendments seek to protect vulnerable victims, ensure our muscular law reaches perpetrators who seek to do Singapore harm from beyond on our shores, retains section 377A and introduces a sentencing framework which allows for the deployment of more accurate justice. Those are strong and commendable initiatives worthy of support.
Ms Yip Pin Xiu (Nominated Member): Thank you, Sir. I would like to thank the Ministry for making changes to the Penal Code. The amendments in Penal Code address various key emerging crime trends and I support these changes.
Under emerging crime trends, I would like to talk about the changes made to tackle voyeurism and the distribution or threat to distribute intimate images.
In this day and age, with the advancements in technology, filming devices are not just getting more sophisticated but also more readily available. It is no longer limited to the conventional bulky devices, or even camera handphones. Instead, a spy camera could be easily ordered online in many shapes and sizes such as in the form of a pen, a clock or even a clothing hook. These cameras are discrete and would practically go undetected in most circumstances.
Further, our society is increasingly connected to the Internet, making it easy to hide behind a screen to circulate the compromising images captured. As of 2018, 84% or 4.83 million of Singaporeans are now Internet users. Hence, the distribution of these images will reach a wider audience, resulting in greater distress to the victim compared to the past.
Although the current law has some penalties for such behaviour, it was passed at the time where voyeurism was less prevalent, as the technology then did not easily allow it. At present times, however, the law does not seem adequate. A CNA report in 2018 stated that there had been an average of 100 Police reports of upskirt crimes that have been filed annually since 2013, and more than 500 cases of insult of modesty since 2015 which include the use of spy cameras. Also, as the devices can be more easily concealed, there could be even more cases that go unreported than before. As such, there is a need to enhance current penalties in order to deter such behaviour.
Next, I would like to talk about the distribution or threat to distribute intimate images. While there has been an effort to educate the public on the dangers of recording images of oneself online in compromising positions, some, especially youths who are more tech savvy, may land themselves in these situations. While filming these images, they were expecting total privacy between the consenting parties. However, if things do go sour, these films could be distributed as part of revenge. While the victims are able to contact platforms to take the videos images down, there could be countless sites hosting these images. And it would require time for such action, during which the images could have been seen by a great number of people. Also, if it falls into the dark web, it could potentially be there forever. Hence, we need a greater deterrence for this too, as the distress and hurt caused to the victim would be much greater than in the past.
With the new amendment, the recording, distribution and possession of such clips will result in harsher punishment. This will commensurate with the hurt and distress caused to these victims, ensuring that Singaporeans are better protected against these emerging crime trends.
To go a step further, the Ministry could consider how to encourage victims of such crimes to come forward and report it to the police, to prevent the perpetrators from causing more harm. We should be mindful not to victim shame, as this is one of the reasons why such crime go unreported. We should also consider providing support to the victims such as counselling where necessary.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, I declare that I am a lawyer attached to a firm that practises criminal law.
The Bill today is the culmination of the work of the Penal Code Review Committee (PCRC), as refined by public feedback. After the Bill was tabled in Parliament for First Reading in February, the Second Reading was deferred to May, which was useful to give the House more time to study the Bill.
The Workers' Party is in general support of the Bill, which makes several broad-based improvements to our primary criminal law, that is the Penal Code, and to related laws. To me, there are four aspects particularly worth mentioning.
First, the Bill updates the law to handle new and emerging crimes such as online crime, for example, the offences of theft and cheating are to be broadened to cover theft by online fund transfers and keying in false information into machines to generate potentially harmful outcomes.
Secondly, there is a new concept of Presumptive Minimum Sentences. This will give sentencing judges some discretion to depart from the mandatory minimum sentences for offences in certain situations. By introducing some flexibility to the Court, there would be less need for plea bargaining, making justice more transparent.
Thirdly, there are changes to strongly deter and punish crimes against victims who are more vulnerable, such as minors under 14, domestic workers and vulnerable adults.
Fourthly, the marital rape immunity will be removed. This has an important signaling effect that society today views marriage as a union between equal partners.
Despite its positives, I have some queries and uncertainty over some aspects of the Bill. For today’s debate, I will focus on just two matters. They are: one, the approach towards offences of causing hurt; and two, vulnerable victims.
First, approach towards causing hurt. For the past decades, the offence of voluntarily causing hurt under section 323 of the Penal Code has been a non-arrestable offence, meaning that the police are ordinarily not able to arrest the suspect without a court warrant. In addition, being a non-arrestable offence, the typical advice given to VCH victims is that the police will not investigate the matter unless the victim goes to court to obtain a Magistrate’s order to direct the police to investigate, or the victim can pursue a private summons against the perpetrator. Pursuing a private summons will require the victim to spend time, effort and costs without police assistance.
VCH is a common offence that occurs daily. When I last filed a Parliamentary Question in 2014 on the incidence of VCH, it was revealed that the cases reported to police amounted to about 10,000 cases a year. This is a large number compared to other reported offences. In fact, the total crimes recorded last year was about 33,000 which, I believe, excludes the 10,000 VCH reports. The figure of 10,000 cases is also likely to be an under-estimate, as many cases go unreported. Of the 10,000 reported cases, only about 600 resulted in criminal charges being filed, a rate of about 6%.
The PCRC is right to note that some past scenarios of VCH can, in fact, be quite serious. In some cases, the injuries may be permanent; there may be elements of bullying or of being outnumbered by a few assailants. Accordingly, I am supportive of the introduction of section 323A to create a new offence of causing grievous hurt even though only hurt was intended. This will now be an arrestable offence attracting higher punishment of up to five years' jail, which the police will be empowered to investigate without a Magistrate’s order.
At the same time, the Committee rightly pointed out that some victims may sustain injuries which are serious and yet do not fall within the definition of grievous hurt, for example, multiple injuries caused in a prolonged attack. The Bill’s response to this is to raise the maximum imprisonment for VCH itself from two years to three years, but to continue to keep it as a non-arrestable offence. It was stated in the PCRC Report that the need for a Magistrate’s complaint would ensure that only meritorious cases were investigated by police. The Report further emphasised that the police did itself take the initiative to investigate and prosecute in the “egregious” cases.
I have some queries about this approach. First, I noted earlier that only 6% of VCH reports resulted in criminal charges being filed. What kinds of scenarios have resulted in the police initiating investigations and prosecutions without a Magistrate’s complaint being filed? How are VCH cases currently triaged for action or non-action? Secondly, of the balance 94% of cases reported where no charges were filed, what is the police assessment of the purpose of the victims when they reported the cases to police? Is there a mismatch of expectations? For example, did most victims expect the police to take some action? From time to time, VCH victims express surprise and disappointment that the police are not taking up their complaints. Thirdly, does the Ministry not acknowledge that relying on victims to file a Magistrate’s complaint requires victims to have the resources and a certain fortitude to navigate the legal system on their own? It is probable that this requirement to see a Magistrate may not necessarily flag out the most meritorious cases, but cases with the most determined victims.
Sir, I am mindful of the workload of the police and I am not asking for all VCH cases to be made arrestable. The changes proposed in the Bill to create the new section 323A and to increase the maximum punishment for section 323 are improvements and will facilitate more robust responses to the more serious VCH cases. Nevertheless, I think the situation needs further clarification and further monitoring to ensure that members of the public get justice for hurt offences.
Next, vulnerable victims. In this Bill, there are particular groups of victims deemed as vulnerable and in need of extra protection. These groups are: children under 14 years of age, domestic workers, vulnerable adults and victims in intimate or close relationships. Such extra protection is found in the amendments to the Penal Code at sections 73 and 74A, and the new sections 74B to E. These sections prescribe that where a victim belongs to one of these vulnerable groups, the offender could be sentenced to twice the maximum punishment applicable to the offence. However, this potential exposure to twice the maximum punishment is subject to a caveat: that if the offender can prove that the victim was capable of protecting herself or himself in the same way as an ordinary person, then the exposure to double punishment would not apply. I am concerned about what this caveat means and how it would potentially undermine the extra protection that was intended. To be more explicit: in what way could it be shown that a domestic worker, a dementia patient or a child under 14 was capable of protecting themselves as any ordinary person? Clarification on this point would be most instructive.
Next, while the Penal Code may be amended to enhance punishments, it would be far better if the provisions were not invoked but, instead, achieve the goal of general deterrence, that is, to prevent incidents from happening in the first place. In this regard, what plans does the Government have to publicise these changes, either to the general public, or in a targeted manner?
Finally, I have a query on minors between 16 but under 18 years old. This Bill introduces new offences to protect those above 16 but below 18 years, if the accused was in a relationship with the victim that is defined as, I quote, an “exploitative relationship” under the new section 377CA. This is an important signal to parents, step-parents, guardians and other persons who are able to exercise some control or influence over the minor not to take advantage of young persons below 18. Protecting minors under 18 is consistent with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which Singapore has signed and ratified.
In this connection, I would like to clarify the amendments being proposed to the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA). Under clause 171 of the Bill, enhancements are being made to protect children and young persons from being ill-treated and from being sexually exploited. Under the current CYPA, the definition of “young person” has a cut-off of 16 years, but the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) has announced that it will raise the cut-off age for protection of young persons from 16 years to 18 years. MSF recently conducted a public consultation and intends to table the change later this year. Can MHA clarify whether the changes it is making to the CYPA under this Bill will be brought into effect at the same time that the definition of “young person” is raised to 18 by MSF?
Sir, before I conclude, I feel compelled to raise a reservation about the suggestion by the hon Member Christopher de Souza in his speech earlier. I do not know whether I heard him correctly and he may correct me if I am wrong. But I understood him to be suggesting that certain tools be given to the Government to react quickly to emerging crime trends and one of the examples he gave was that, for example, CBT, as an agent, the Minister should be enabled to gazette new categories of relationships that would come within section 409. I am not sure whether I heard him correctly, perhaps he could clarify that.
Secondly, I feel that this suggestion, if it is correct, is quite dangerous as I do not think it is proper for the Government to be given the power to enact new criminal sections without coming to Parliament. In fact, in the City Harvest case, the Court of Appeal made quite clear that there is need for reform but that should be left to Parliament. So, I hope he is not suggesting that Parliament relinquish its responsibility and delegate to the Minister such vast powers to create new criminal conduct.
Sir, in conclusion, I believe that the Bill, overall, is positive and the Workers' Party supports it.
Mr Speaker: Mr Christopher de Souza, if you have any clarifications.
Mr Christopher de Souza: Yes. I thank Ms Lim for the clarification. Actually, if Ms Lim had listened to my speech carefully, I had actually used the Misuse of Drugs Act as an example of a situation where, if there are new threats, that is, new drugs in the forms of, for example, new psychoactive substances that have hitherto not been deemed as illicit under the Misuse of Drugs Act, then to include that in the Schedule and to say that thereafter the consumption of those types of drugs would be illicit would make for a much more flexible regime. So, I am suggesting that if there are broad categories of provisions – I used CBT as an example, CBT is actually 406 but it can be read with 409 – if you look at that, the broad context of it, is it sufficiently broad as a primary legislation to encompass different permutations in subsidiary legislation? And I never asked for it to act retrospectively. So, I am looking at possibilities to make the system deter future activities through a more flexible use of legal tools. That was my point.
Mr Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim: Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, I would like clarify that I know that he is not making a suggestion about retrospective laws. That would be against the Constitution in the first place. But what I am expressing concern about is that I do not know whether he is suggesting that the Minister be given powers, even prospectively to gazette new offences, new categories of offences that would come within certain sections. I mean, is he saying that MHA is too cautious to have this Bill to spell out certain categories and the Minister should be allowed to gazette new categories as and when he thinks it is necessary?
Mr Speaker: Mr Christopher de Souza, your final clarification. Make it short.
Mr Christopher de Souza: Actually, that is not what I am suggesting. I am suggesting a situation where, if you look at other threats that we are facing and one threat is drugs, that the threats morph, that the threats can change in future and, if we have a Schedule, as we do in the Misuse of Drugs Act or classification of drugs that makes a certain type of drug which has yet been concocted and has harm as being illicit to consume, then I think that is a valuable example or a valuable way of looking at whether we can develop our own criminal law in the form of the Penal Code to explore such an avenue. I am not advocating a free rein of the Minister to make, willy-nilly, new offences without coming to Parliament. That was not what I said in my speech.
Mr Speaker: Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, abuse cases are gaining more prevalence, not just in Singapore, but also globally. I hope it only means that more are seeking help.
It is a basic human right to live in safety and freedom, free of fear from others. Those who deny others this right must be severely dealt with. This Bill comes shortly after the Vulnerable Adults Bill was passed last year. The stronger penalties proposed will strengthen deterrence measures against criminals who prey on vulnerable individuals. It is a testament to the Government’s resolve to protect victims against perpetrators of abuse.
Aside from criminalising and penalising abusive behaviour, we need to continue working hard on preventive measures. Just recently in February, a couple involved in a high-profile maid abuse case were convicted and jailed. It was three years for the woman for a number of terrible deeds, including forcing the maid to drink water mixed with floor cleaner and making her pour hot water on herself. The man was jailed for six weeks for punching the maid. What drives them to do such things? Why did they treat another fellow human being in such a despicable manner? Has any research been done on this to see how we can correct such behaviour and get them to attend some rehabilitation while under detention? What is being done to ensure that their attitude is corrected? This include not just abusers, but abettors and those who repeatedly witnessed the abuse but did nothing.
We also need to look out for those who fall through the cracks. Such examples would include elderly and mentally-disabled people who are confined at home all day and less-educated foreign domestic workers who do not have a social network here and are confined to working at home most of the time. Also, some victims of domestic abuse refuse to seek help because they do not want the abuser to go to jail which, they feel, will bring shame on the family. Some are financially dependent on the abusers. Others believe they can change. Therefore, we all need to look out for possible abuse cases amongst us and help the victims who might not want to seek help.
Last year, I asked in Parliament how MSF can better assess risks of domestic abuse. I shared that, in the US, data analysis programmes help to identify the risks, complementing case workers' judgement. Is this something we can explore with data analytics technology? Also, when people call helplines asking for help for issues like addictive behaviour or family disputes, should we proactively check if there is domestic abuse? After all, these are often factors related to domestic abuse.
While we are on the subject of domestic abuse, I would like to pledge my full support for the removal of marital immunity for rape. A marriage is a union of two individuals and these individuals' personal rights should continue to be preserved and respected. Non-consensual sex is rape and it must be treated as such. I acknowledge the concerns about difficulty in proving consent, or lack of, between a married couple, and this law may even be abused when parties are negotiating a divorce, for example. Can the authorities elaborate on how they intend to navigate this challenge?
I am also glad to see that the Government is doing more to criminalise any action that could lead to sexual trauma to children, including exposing minors to pornographic material. There are some questions that beg solutions. Why are some minors on dating websites or open to dating adults? What are the underlying issues and can we do something about it?
There were also incidences whereby the minor initially rejected the predator's sexual advances but still gave in to requests to send nude pictures or even met up with the predator, which then leads to rape. What is happening here? I am very worried for our young girls and boys who put themselves in such dangerous situations. Is there a lapse in our sex education programme?
A report in 2017 by the SACC, the only specialised centre in Singapore serving sexual assault survivors, revealed that in 90% of the cases received on sexual abuse suffered during childhood or adolescence, the perpetrators were family members or were known to the survivors. Child sex predators have taken the form of neighbours, family friends, mother's boyfriend, son or relative of someone close.
I think in cases where parents have clearly disregarded their child's safety and also when they ignore their child's claims of sexual abuse or clear signs of it, some action should be taken to haul up the parents or guardian for failing in their duty.
Recently, the issue of peeping toms is being covered in the media. I am glad to see that the Bill specifically outlaws voyeurism and the making, distributing, possessing and distributing of voyeuristic images and videos. This is a long overdue move. When someone has been the victim of a peeping tom, it is bad enough. But if a video taken by the peeping tom goes online, then the victim probably feels hurt all over again every time someone watches the video. As I have said in my PQs, I hope we can have a public campaign telling people it is immoral and illegal to forward or watch such videos.
Whether it is peeping tom or other sexual offences, police should go all out to find the person. And the same principles should apply, no matter where the crime was committed. Offenders should be dealt with strictly and tougher action is to be taken. We should send a strong signal that we have zero tolerance for sex harassment. I support the Bill. In Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The aim of this amendment Bill is to better protect those who are more vulnerable, to ensure that nobody will suffer from fear and is able to enjoy freedom.
I have a few suggestions regarding how we can achieve this aim.
Firstly, those who abuse the vulnerable are indeed perverse and their behaviour is unacceptable. But while we punish them for their actions, can we also look into why they have such a disturbing mentality and how can we help them change that mentality? And those who do nothing despite being aware that abuse is taking place, should also go for counselling and should even be punished.
Secondly, many of these abuse cases take place within the family and it is difficult for the Police to detect them. What can we do to better detect these cases? For example, when somebody calls a counselling hotline and say that a family member is addicted to gambling, or there is a family dispute at home, can the counsellor proactively ask them if there is domestic abuse involved?
Thirdly, with regard to sexual harassment of our youths, how can we educate youths to refrain from discussing sex with strangers so as not to put themselves at risk? Further, we should punish and counsel parents who allow their children to come into contact with sex offenders, as well as parents who are aware that their children have been sexually assaulted but choose not to report to the Police.
Fourthly, voyeurism on campus have been widely reported in the media recently. Under this Bill, punishment for illegally filming others, distributing and watching such videos have been enhanced. I would also like to ask the Police to review the practice of issuing conditional warning and to look into whether such a practice allow offenders to re-offend. I hope that regardless of where these crimes take place, the Police will take a serious view in investigations and punish the perpetrators severely. We should not tolerate sexual harassment at all.
I support this Bill. Thank you.
Ms Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, I welcome the Criminal Law Reform Bill. As Thomas Jefferson said, \"Laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind\".
I will be addressing three areas of the law reform today. First, enhanced punishments; second, the abolishment of marital rape immunity and changes in the definition of rape and consent; and third, the decriminalisation of suicide.
First, enhanced punishments. I wish to commend the Government on its acceptance of the Penal Code Review Committee's recommendations relating to the extension of enhanced penalties for offences committed against the vulnerable amongst us, namely, domestic helpers, vulnerable persons, persons below 14 years of age, victims in intimate relationships and victims in close relationships. The purpose of these sections is clearly to recognise the systemic vulnerability of certain victims and, therefore, the need for commensurate enhanced punishment.
However, Mr Speaker, I am confounded by the incongruence between the policy basis underlying the enhanced penalty regime acknowledging an inherent power asymmetry versus the newly proposed sub-section 73(2) in clause 15. This sub-section renders the section setting out enhanced punishments inapplicable where the accused person is able to prove that his/her relationship with the victim did not adversely affect the victim's ability to protect themselves from harm. Similar wordings appear in the proposed sub-sections 74A(2A), 74B(3), 74C(3) and 74D(3) found in clause 18 of the Bill
In practice, this provision could potentially require the victim to prove that he/she could not have done more to protect himself/herself. There are sadly enough cases of domestic worker abuse. One employer was charged last year for having punched her domestic worker so much over the course of a two-year period such that the latter had become blind in her left eye in addition to suffering from an injured right eye. It is not difficult to imagine a similarly abusive employer, in an attempt to avoid being sentenced with enhanced punishments, citing the exception provided in the proposed sub-section 73(2) and claiming that the mere fact of employment did not adversely affect the domestic helper's ability to raise her arm to stop the punching.
I, therefore, urge the Ministry that the above-mentioned sections be supplemented with illustrations to clarify the scope and limits of the new provision, if the provision is not omitted altogether. I do, however, believe that this should be removed as it inadvertently leads to harsh scrutiny of a victim's actions which encourages a culture of victim-blaming.
My Speaker, equally important to the continued protection of vulnerable persons and groups are that of education and raising awareness. I would like the Minister to clarify on the Ministry's efforts to work with relevant community partners, such as schools, employment agencies and family service centres, to train and raise awareness on the new laws and the additional protection offered to the vulnerable that they support.
Next, on rape. I would like to express my full support for the amendment to abolish marital rape immunity. We are sending a strong signal to where we stand as a society with protecting and advancing women's rights.
Mr Speaker, let me also take this opportunity to commend the expanded legal definition of rape which now uses gender-neutral terms and incorporates many more exploitative scenarios. This is a significant change because it acknowledges that men can be the victims of sexual harassment and assault, too. Not only will male survivors be able to seek legal remedy under this new definition, but this also implicitly acknowledges the unique struggles and social stigmas that male survivors face. As a society, we should move towards de-stigmatising issues related to sexual assault and provide more support to all survivors, regardless of gender.
Mr Speaker, even though the legal barriers for reporting rape are now reduced, there still exists other barriers that discourage rape survivors from actually making a report. For a start, there is an immense informational gap in the definition of \"consent\" in our laws versus the laypersons' understanding of the same.
I strongly urge for a clear and positive definition of consent for the purposes of judicial review and public education. The Penal Code Review Committee decided against making changes to section 90, citing its general ease of application in Court. I understand the Committee's concerns and acknowledge from the briefing notes on CLRB, that is, this Bill, that the Government intends to create a new section to set out types of misconceptions of acts that will vitiate consent. However, I am concerned that these measures might be insufficient in addressing the problem at hand.
For example, I know of such a case cited by AWARE's Sexual Assault Care Centre (SACC). A survivor initially consented to have sex but later withdrew her consent when she realised that the man was too drunk and was being verbally abusive. However, he threatened to hurt her. So, she eventually complied with his demands for her own safety. When she went to the Police, she was told multiple times, and I quote, \"(but) you did consent initially\". This discouraged her from formally making a report as she felt she had no case, which was inconsistent with the precedence set by case law.
Case law presents a different yet more straightforward definition of consent compared to what is currently defined in the Penal Code. It covers a number of situations where consent is negated. However, the definition of consent as developed by case law is not codified nor easily accessible. I recommend that we adapt Ratanlal & Dhirajlal's definition of consent, which was referred to in Pram Nair v PP (2017). For ease of reference, the proposed specific definition of consent for sexual activity should be created under \"Sexual Offences\" of chapter 16 in the Code and should be defined as, I quote: \"Consent is the free, informed and voluntary participation in the sexual activity in question. Lack of resistance and submission to sexual activity, in itself, is not consent as a matter of law.\"
This encompasses the elements of free exercise of choice, voluntary participation and the exercise of choice based on the knowledge of the significance and moral quality of the act. I also propose that the Government includes a section to set out six specific situations where either there is no consent in law, or no consent is obtained.
Situation one, where the consent to participate is expressed under fear of injury or wrongful restraint to the person, or to some other person, including the accused. I would like to bring particular attention to the addition of the words “including the accused” to account for the type of situations that SACC has come across where the accused threatens to harm himself if the complainant does not comply with his demands for sexual intercourse.
Two, where the consent is given by a person who, from unsoundness of mind, mental incapacity, intoxication, or the influence of any drug or other substance, is unable to understand the nature and consequence of that to which he gives his consent.
Three, where the consent is given by a person who is under 16 years of age.
Four, where a person says or does something to show that they are not willing to continue an activity that has started.
Five, where the accused causes or induces the complainant to participate in the activity by abusing a position of trust, power or authority. One could argue that this is already recognised in the proposed section 375(3)(c) on exploitative relationship but that is only for minors. An exploitative relationship can also be a superior coercing his subordinate at the workplace into sexual activity.
Six, where the consent is expressed or implied by the words or conduct of a person other than the complainant. This scenario would be applied to situations that SACC has come across where a wife’s consent is assumed if her husband told another man that he can have sex with her.
Mr Speaker, I urge for more to be done on public education, including comprehensive sex education in schools, to improve the public’s understanding of consent. Sex education programmes need to explicitly discuss the meaning of consent and what it means in practice.
Lastly, I would like comment on the decriminalisation of suicide, an issue very close to my heart, given the people I know around me – far and near – who have contemplated and attempted suicide.
Suicide is a taboo topic in Singapore. This Bill offers us, as a society, an opportunity to break the stigma by having a national conversation about it so that more can come forward to seek help. Because these escalating statistics across all ages of our population are telling us we must: children aged five to nine calling the Samaritans of Singapore hotline increased by more than 500% in less than three years. Suicide is the leading cause of death for those aged 10 to 29. The number of elderly aged 60 and above who took their own lives peaked in 2017, the highest since suicide tracking started in 1991.
First, Mr Speaker, we must de-link the convenient and linear association between suicide and mental illness. Many studies have conclusively absolved mental illness as the only cause of suicide. Research has shown that mental illness is associated with 62% of all suicides in Singapore. There are two other risk factors that make up the other 38%. First, life events – for the young – relationships, academic stress, National Service for the young; for the elderly – bereavement, debt, feeling lonely and fear of being a burden; and for working adults – marital, financial, problems like unemployment or failed business, as well as legal problems. The second risk factor is physical illness, another risk factor which means that suicide associated with physical illness, not unexpectedly, increases with age.
I wish to, therefore, express my concern that the Police referring a person attempting suicide to a medical practitioner may inadvertently categorise all suicide attempters as having mental illness who need a medical “solution” and, as such, not be given the optimal and multi-factorial approach he/she needs at that point of distress and after.
There were 361 suicides in 2017 according to SOS. The latest number for attempted suicides is not available but in response to a Parliamentary Question raised in 2015, MSF reported that there were about 1,000 cases of attempted suicides each year between 2010 to 2014. Because suicide is a crime under section 309, reporting of suicide attempts is mandatory as provided for in the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC). This will not be required with the repeal.
The World Health Organization (WHO) urges society and the individuals themselves not to associate suicide with immorality but to approach it with compassion, which I completely agree. It also said that decriminalisation reduces suicide rates. Yet, there have also been studies of seven nations – Canada, England and Wales, Finland, Hong Kong, Ireland, New Zealand and Sweden – that present a contradicting conclusion where suicide rates were actually higher after decriminalisation.
So, I reluctantly did a dip test with those around me who have contemplated or attempted suicide. None knew that committing suicide was a crime in Singapore at that point of their attempt and most added that it would not have deterred them even if they had known it was. Therefore, I am also not convinced of the deterrent effect of section 309 in preventing suicides. In addition, we know that only 0.6% of reported cases of attempted suicide resulted in prosecution each year between 2013 and 2015 which I surmise, at least in recent years, our Police officers have been taking a compassionate approach in practice anyway, despite suicide being a crime.
Mr Speaker, I think we all agree that a person in distress and attempting suicide should not be treated like a criminal and must be shown care and compassion with the necessary professional and psycho-social support. The repeal of section 309 to decriminalise suicide most definitely helps to de-stigmatise suicide. However, I am concerned that this repeal is not supported with a clear post-decriminalisation strategy, including enhanced psycho-social first-aid training for Police and SCDF officers; coordination between the Police, SCDF, IMH and support agencies, including tracking and monitoring of suicide attempts and support structures, to course-correct should suicides go up after decriminalisation.
With the rising number of suicides with our young and our elderly, decriminalisation of suicide must not be done without reviewing and rebuilding our systemic response towards suicide attempts. We must do more to raise awareness of suicide risk factors, shift perceptions on mental health and deepen community-based efforts in active monitoring, reporting and help-seeking. We must do more to counter the threats of rising suicides amongst our young and elderly. The latter is likely to rise with our ageing population whilst the former is also predicted to escalate with the unrelenting pace of a fast changing digital-dominant future.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, the proposed amendments in this Criminal Law Reform Bill demonstrate to a large extent that our laws are keeping apace with our aspirations of being a more inclusive society, especially in the greater protection given to the vulnerable, such as minors, persons with mental or physical disabilities, domestic workers and sexual assault victims. However, we can and must continue to do more for other minority groups that are still stigmatised by our laws, such as 377A, because, through history, we have never made or changed laws only for the majority within our society, including this Bill. Notwithstanding the above clarifications, Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (West Coast): Mr Speaker, I rise in support of this Bill.
With wider use of technology, changing social norms and an evolving crime and criminal environment, it is timely and imperative to review and amend the Penal Code to ensure our criminal laws serve to deter and prevent crime.
I will focus my speech on the new offences relating to voyeurism, crimes against children and a few other provisions.
Rapid technological advancements have led to the development of sophisticated devices and equipment that a perpetrator could easily manipulate to record private acts and distribute recordings of such acts or images of the victim. The recent cases at our University's halls of residence is a timely reminder and further impetus for our laws to keep pace in tackling the rise of such criminal behaviour.
The current law is inadequate to address the problems brought about by advancements in spy and hidden camera technology. Prosecution had to resort to the Films Act and section 509 of the Penal Code to take action against the perpetrator. An obvious lacuna is the absence of any provision to deal with the possession of voyeuristic still images, that is, not films nor videos. I, therefore, welcome the new provisions to tackle and overcome these pitfalls to better prevent and deter voyeurism.
However, I am concerned that the offence might be too broad as to criminalise private investigators in the course of their work, or witnesses trying to make a recording for the purposes of reporting a crime, or caregivers checking on the safety of their charges. Whilst it is acknowledged that the new provisions to criminalise such offences are progressive and keep pace with the changing modes of commission of such offences, it cannot be denied that there is sometimes little comfort to the victims to have the perpetrators punished.
The pivotal concern of the victim, especially the more vulnerable minor and young person, would be to have those images or recordings deleted immediately and to prevent further distribution.
The laws and processes need to address this. One suggestion could be to empower the Courts to simultaneously make an order for the expunging of offending images or recordings when meting out punishments to the perpetrator. In the same vein, punishment of the perpetrator for the offence of possessing or distributing voyeuristic, intimate images or recordings might not end the distribution chain. It is suggested that the perpetrator be compelled by law to disclose the source from which access to the images or recordings was gained. This would enable the law enforcement agencies to trace the original source of the offending act and take the necessary action against the original perpetrator which would prevent the further distribution of the images or recordings.
On the other side of the equation, the perpetrator should be helped and treated since voyeurism is often associated with a recognised psychiatric disorder. The Courts could be empowered to refer the perpetrator, upon the assessment of a psychiatrist, to psychiatric treatment. The appropriate punishments, coupled with psychiatric treatment, could well minimise recidivism.
The global market for child abuse material is growing at an alarming speed, \"aided\" by advances in technology and the World Wide Web. Children used in the production and distribution of child abuse material suffer horrific immediate physical injuries as well as emotional, mental and psychological disorders with long-lasting repercussions. I, therefore, support the new provisions criminalising activities relating to child abuse material and which define very clearly offences relating to child abuse material.
The new provisions have addressed the lacuna in the law concerning minors of or above 16 but below 18 years of age. It is now an offence when a perpetrator uses or procures minors in this age group for the production, distribution or sale and possession of child abuse material under section 377BL. However, this is an offence only if the minor and the perpetrator are in an exploitative relationship.
It is a defence, by virtue of section 377BM, where the accused person is able to prove that he did not intentionally come into possession of or gain access to intimate image or recording and, on becoming aware that he has in his possession or he has gained access to the intimate image or recording, he has, as soon as practicable, taken all reasonable steps to cease possession of or access to the intimate image or material. The same defence, by virtue of section 377BN, is available to an accused person charged with the offence of having possession of or gaining access to child abuse material under section 377BK.
For the same reasons mentioned earlier, it is suggested that the accused be compelled to disclose the source from which he obtained or gained access to the offending material.
Whilst it is agreed that a tough stance ought to be adopted in the punishment of perpetrators in order that minors below 14 years of age could be protected, it must be noted that punishment alone would not deter or reduce such crimes. Education of minors is essential to enable them to recognise criminal acts against them and just as essential is that the minors must know where they can go to immediately for help and support.
Hence, a robust support system must be established and it is suggested that our schools step up their support system as teachers and school counsellors are usually who the minor will go to for help.
Perpetrators must also be given help and treatment, especially if they are serial offenders. Rehabilitation and therapy including psychiatric treatment or psychological counselling could be made mandatory which should continue after the perpetrator’s release from prison if assessed by a psychiatrist to be necessary for the perpetrator’s complete recovery.
In addition, a support system for perpetrators after their release from prison would help to prevent re-offending. Serial offenders could be monitored either by regulators or their counsellors for a period assessed by their counsellors to be necessary and for a holistic approach towards rehabilitating such perpetrators, mandatory regular reporting to their counsellors could be directed.
I applaud the enhancing of section 509 and making it gender-neutral to balance the protection of not just females but males as well. Even as I support the de-criminalisation of attempted suicide, I hope this move will not be counter-productive and result in more people tempted to this but more support mechanisms from a whole-of-Government and a whole-of-committee approach to help those in need.
With the amendments to the definition of \"public servant\" to include persons who are employed by contractors engaged to perform certain duties on behalf of the Government or a Statutory Board, such as law enforcement functions and escorting persons in remand and prisoners, I wish to ask Minister to clarify whether private security officers who are not auxiliary police officers will be treated as \"public servants\" if they are engaged to carry out law enforcement duties such as crowd control and access control, including issuing of summonses for offences and other law endowment duties.
Sir, in conclusion, the Criminal Law Reform Bill has significantly updated our criminal law regime to keep it current and relevant to our present-day society. Outmoded offences have been removed whilst gaps in the law pertaining to new offences brought about by societal changes as well as the gaps in the law pertaining to minors and vulnerable persons have been addressed.
The amendments and new provisions have also codified the law relating to offences which were previously defined by separate pieces of legislation. This Bill has addressed offences thoroughly and comprehensively at this point of time and will help ensure Singapore remain as one of the safest and most secured countries in the world. However, the changes are sweeping and massive.
Police investigators, law enforcement professionals, prosecutors, lawyers, doctors, psychiatrists, domestic helpers and the layman will be directly or indirectly impacted by these changes.
I hope a thorough, concerted and multi-pronged approach be taken to cascade, inform and educate the categories of people outlined earlier including potential complainants, perpetrators and the young in general to better understand the plethora of changes and new provisions introduced. The Ministry should partner the various agencies and stakeholders to produce suitable reading, reference material, or simple pocket guides, in easy to read and comprehend format, so that the public and potential victims will know the law has better protected them and would-be perpetrators will know that the law has caught up with them. With these submissions and suggestions, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 5.20 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 5.02 pm until 5.20 pm.
Sitting resumed at 5.20 pm
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair]
[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, I welcome the extensive revisions in the Criminal Law Reform Bill. The careful consultation process that led to this Bill started with the formation of the Penal Code Review Committee in July 2016 and culminated in extensive public engagements after publication of the PCRC Report in September 2018. This should be a model that any complex, far-reaching legislation should follow.
I will speak on the relationship between the law and society. Sir, this Bill is necessary because social standards change over time and yet the law evolves only when statutes are changed or when precedent is set. We no longer believe today that marriage implies the automatic consent of a spouse to sexual relations. It is right that this Bill repeals the marital rape immunity. But the law may also shape society. If laws are not properly limited and implemented, the law may have significant unintended and adverse effects on social behaviour. Less recognised is the fact that social standards also give the law effect. Without a shared consensus around the justness of the law, victims will hesitate to seek justice and offenders will be emboldened.
My concern on the unintended adverse effects of the law relates to this Bill's enhanced protection for vulnerable persons. This Bill enhances criminal law around offences against vulnerable persons, in line with recent reforms, such as the Vulnerable Adults Act 2018. This is important because in our ageing society, the number of vulnerable elderly will increase significantly in the coming years. It is right that the Bill expands protection for such vulnerable adults by making it clear, in the new section 304B of the Penal Code, that neglect and abuse leading to the death of a vulnerable adult are serious offences. Section 304C further provides that persons in the same household have a duty of care to stop such neglect or abuse. Sections 335A and 335B make similar provisions for abuse and acts that endanger life or personal safety. In last year’s debate on the Vulnerable Adults Act, many Members spoke on how vulnerable adults need the protection of the law. I will not reiterate those arguments.
What I want to clarify is how these increased protections in criminal law will sit with the rights of the vulnerable elderly to choose how to live out their days in the manner they consider the best. In the book \"Being Mortal\", American surgeon Atul Gawande reflects on the excessive focus that modern medicine places on prolonging life rather than on ensuring a high quality of life.
Medical interventions towards the end of life often cause great harm to the dignity or autonomy of patients. The patient must trade the comforts of home for endless nights and days in the intensive care unit. The patient must endure becoming dependent on others for every little aspect of daily living. The additional days or even weeks of life in this state are not always considered worthwhile. Given these trade-offs, many among the elderly, when faced with a medical emergency or a serious illness, may wish to avoid treatment. They will expect their families to interpret and act on their wishes.
I want to be clear I am not discussing euthanasia. While I agree with this Bill's proposal to decriminalise attempted suicide, I think society is rightfully more cautious on the matter of abetting suicide, which is what euthanasia is in practice. These are still very serious offences under the Penal Code.
But there are a wide range of practices at the end of life which are not euthanasia in the ordinary sense. Some practices are widely accepted, such as choosing to refuse resuscitation or artificial life support. These are codified in the Advance Medical Directive Act. Others are more controversial, such as refusing nutrition, medication, or medical advice and treatment.
Consider some examples of decisions made by persons near the end of life. End-stage renal failure patients may choose to stop dialysis. Patients with cancers and other diseases addressable through medical interventions often refuse treatment. The elderly may wish stay at home, instead of going to the hospital when their health deteriorates significantly. Former US President George H W Bush, at the end of his life, informed his staff he did not want to return to hospital and, as a result, he passed on peacefully at home.
Mr Deputy Speaker, which practices may be caught under the law as neglect by the family leading to death of the vulnerable adult? What makes an otherwise accepted practice neglectful, given that there will be concerns about the mental capacity of vulnerable adults and their physical inability to seek treatment without the support of their family? Which practices do we want to proscribe in the law?
Sir, the law is like Chekov's gun. If the law is written in the first chapter, then we can expect it will be used in the next. Consider some concrete examples. Family members may disagree on the appropriate medical intervention for a gravely ill vulnerable adult and, if they cannot prevail in a discussion, they may consider involving the law. A gravely ill vulnerable adult may lose autonomy in their decision to stop treatment, because the family is both concerned the adult lacks mental competence and the family fears breaking the law. A healthcare or social work professional may refer a case to the police because they believe the vulnerable adult or the family is refusing treatment so as to constitute neglect.
There may be cases where the family does fail in its duty of care. Yet, we do not want cases to be referred unnecessarily to the law. The Terry Schiavo case in the United States created a protracted legal battle over the so-called right to die. Mrs Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state and her husband, who was her legal guardian, argued she would have wanted withdrawal of artificial life support. Her parents disagreed. The case was exploited for political purposes and resulted in a 15-year legal battle.
A landmark case that determined the particular standard of care required, to avoid the charge of neglect at the end of life, could have severe impact on the practice of medicine and the rights of families and the vulnerable elderly.
This House has expressed grave concerns about the growing practice of defensive medicine. Given that aggressive medical intervention in the last stage of life is often futile, costly and harmful to the dignity and autonomy of the patient, we would not want such interventions to become routine simply because of legal precedent, or fears by medical professionals and family members about their potential legal liability.
So, I ask the Government to provide clarity. What is expected of the medical treatment of a vulnerable elderly adult near the end of life in the home environment? To what extent can, or should, the wishes of the vulnerable adult be respected with regards to medical treatment and other acts that affect life? For example, is it neglectful if the family does not convey a gravely ill vulnerable adult to hospital, because of their expressed desire to pass on at home? What if the vulnerable adult wishes to stop routine medical medication and consultation? How can families assure themselves that their actions are lawful and in furtherance of the vulnerable adult’s wishes to live a good life until the end?
I note that the Minister for Social and Family Development touched on these issues in the debate on the Vulnerable Adults Act 2018, which also enhanced penalties for offences against vulnerable adults. This Bill, however, proposes specific sections of the Penal Code which may affect the autonomy of vulnerable adults and their families in making end of life decisions and so, should be addressed separately today.
Next, my concern on the social standards that give the law effect are centered on this Bill’s expanded protection from sexual offences. These revisions, include removal of the limited marital immunity defense for rape in section 375 of the Penal Code and substantive new provisions in sections 376 and 377 on consent, voyeurism, sexual exposure and child abuse. This is progressive and important.
But I fear that enhancing these provisions against sexual offences may be meaningless if we are ultimately hypocrites as a society and we do nothing about the social norms that tolerate such behaviour. The experience of many countries in recent years with the #MeToo movement is instructive. In many countries there are already strict laws against sexual offences and sexual harassment. Yet despite decades of actively enforced law, we had the #MeToo movement – a grassroots movement by women fighting against sexual harassment as a daily fact of life that women felt they had to accept in order to progress in their chosen careers. The law, in short, was not an effective recourse for many women around the world. Nor did the law restrain the behaviour of many men.
These issues are also present in Singapore. Ms Monica Baey has bravely highlighted her own experience as a victim of voyeurism, which has shown inadequacies in how her institution handles sexual misconduct cases. After she came forward, other women reported similar experiences. As Ms Baey posted on Instagram on 1 May 2019 and I quote: \"I hope that Singapore has reflected on what has happened, why this blew up as big as it did and learn not to avoid issues but rather face the hard reality – sexual misconduct and assault is much more prevalent than it appears to be.\"
Sir, these revisions of the law are just a means to the end. The social objective must be to create the conditions for a society where the law is rarely applied because all segments of society accept that these acts are wrongful and there are strong cultural and social norms against such sexual offences. The criminal justice system cannot undo the harms caused by a sexual offence. The trauma of an offence will remain with the victim for life. Serious efforts to correct this must start with attempting to understand the actual incidence of sexual offences and harassment in Singapore, the social conditions around the normalisation and perpetration of such offences amongst some social circles and applying the right educational and policy levers to correct those social conditions. Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, please allow me to declare my interest as a litigation lawyer. I have a practice. Given the Bicentennial Commemoration this year, I think it would be apt to pay tribute to the original framers of the Penal Code, which is one of the oldest pieces of legislation in Singapore, in the administration of criminal justice in Singapore. Prof Ho Peng Kee, then the Senior Minister of State of Home Affairs, colourfully described the Penal Code as \"the mother of all statutes\" when it was last reviewed in this House in 2008. There are masterful commentaries about the history of the Penal Code in two text books. The first book is \"The Criminal Law in Malaysia & Singapore\" by Professors Stanley Yeo, Neil Morgan and Chan Wing Cheong. Incidentally, Prof Stanley Yeo and Prof Chan volunteered as members of the Penal Code Review Committee. The second book is \"The Development of Singapore Law: Historical and Socio Legal Perspectives\" by Prof Andrew Phang as he then was. I relied on these commentaries in the preparation of my speech.
The principle framer of the Penal Code was Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay. In 1837, the Law Commission, which he chaired, produced the draft of the Penal Code. For the draft, Lord Macaulay drew inspiration not just from English common law but two other sources: (a) the French Napoleonic Penal Code of 1791 and (b) Livingstone’s Code for Louisiana which was printed in 1833.
He drew from the best ideas from continental Europe, America and UK. Already then, it was not uncommon to trawl the world for best ideas to be incorporated into draft legislation. Eventually, the Penal Code was introduced in India in 1860. A decade later, substantially the same copy of the Indian Penal Code with its 511 sections was enacted as law in Singapore through Ordinance 4 of 1871 when Singapore was part of the Straits Settlement. Since then, law students, lawyers and our Courts have referred to Indian case law when interpreting our Penal Code provisions.
What were the main objectives of the Penal Code then? The principle objective was to codify common law criminal offences – which is really judge-made law – and in the words of Prof Phang, \"replace the manifold systems of criminal law then existing\" with a single code. The Penal Code allowed lay people to understand what kind of action and behaviour amounts to criminal conduct as well as the precise ingredients that make up the offences. Almost 150 years later, the Penal Code continues to play an important role in the administration of the criminal justice system. It clearly withstood the test of time. The Penal Code is applied every day in the State Courts.
Given the evolving nature of our society and our mores, the Penal Code had to be, and indeed was, revised from time to time ensure its relevance. As mentioned earlier by the hon Senior Parliamentary Secretary Mr Amrin, the last revision of the Penal Code was done by this House a little over a decade ago in 2008.
I have reviewed the work of the Penal Code Review Committee (PCRC) chaired by the hon Minister Ms Indranee Rajah and co-chaired by Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin. The PCRC members are all eminent people drawn from the judiciary, legal service, Ministries, academia and private practice. Together, with their collective knowledge, experience and wisdom, they are uniquely well-placed to undertake the review. As we heard from Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin, they delivered a 500-page tome. I believe that this House owes the PCRC a debt of gratitude for executing the gargantuan task of updating the Penal Code so well. I also commend MHA, just like what Assoc Prof Walter Theseira said, for conducting extensive consultation with the public and VWOs before presenting this Bill.
A simple perusal of the Bill will reveal the extraordinary breadth of the review that was undertaken. We see updates on the following areas: (a) the extra-territorial criminal jurisdiction of the offences; (b) concepts of fault and physical elements that usually make up an offence. These elements are the equivalent of the \"computer source codes\" of the criminal provisions; (c) general defences that may be raised by accused persons; (d) creation of new offences and enhancement of sentences to protect the vulnerable and minors and to deal with modern circumstances and advances in technology; (e) updating of sentences to ensure their deterrent effect; and (f) removing offences which are seen as anachronistic or irrelevant.
The recommendations that the Committee made took into account issues raised by our Courts in many judgments. I am reasonably assured that, with these enhancements, the revised Penal Code, once passed, will continue to play an important role in the administration of criminal justice in Singapore.
I would now like to make several observations and comments on the Bill. First, I am glad that the hon Minister, through a notice of amendment issued on 26 April 2019, accepted my suggestion made outside this House after the First Reading of this Bill to remove the thought crime provisions; namely sections 121A and 121B in the Penal Code.
Presently, it is an offence to imagine the death or hurt or imprisonment or restraint of the President and the accused, if convicted, may be sentenced to death or imprisonment for life. It is also an offence to imagine the deposition of the President from the sovereignty of Singapore. These are clearly anachronistic provisions. It simply does not sit well with the mores and values of present-day society. I am not alone in making this call. The hon Member Mr Charles Chong made this call in 2008 in this House. He said, \"It is of course right that anyone who plots, plans or actually takes action against the person or the Office of the President ought to be punished, but merely 'imagining' any of these – should this really be in our books?\" It did not appear Mr Chong's question was answered then. Nonetheless, it has been answered now.
Second, I note that proposed section 120A dealing with \"criminal conspiracy\" is significantly narrower. The proposed provision would have the effect of decriminalising a conspiracy to commit an illegal act, which was defined as anything that furnishes ground for a civil action. May I please ask what is the rationale for this? How does the narrowing of the definition of \"criminal conspiracy\" reflect on the expected sense of behaviour within our society? How does this square with the retention of the offence of criminal defamation under section 500 of the Penal Code which focuses on vindication of reputation. As Members know, people who have been defamed, also have a right of civil action too. I have also noted that, potentially, aggravated acts of defamation, such as \"threats imputing the unchastity of a woman\" under section 506 of the Penal Code; and \"insulting the modest of a woman\" under section 509 of the Penal Code are proposed to be repealed. What then is the basis to continue to make defaming another a criminal matter in these circumstances?
Third, I have misgivings just like the hon Member Mr Christopher de Souza, on the proposal to abolish section 309 of the Penal Code which currently criminalises an attempt to commit suicide. I appreciate the point made by Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin as well as the PCRC that \"persons who commit such offences should undergo treatment instead\". I wish to point out though that section 309 of the Penal Code, read with the Criminal Procedure Code, now allows the Court to impose on persons convicted for the offence of attempting suicide, mandatory treatment orders aimed at providing psychiatric treatment for such persons in lieu of the jail term provided in the Penal Code. This would therefore take care of the concern expressed by the PCRC.
There is also a practical function. It allows the Police to intervene by arresting and sequestering the person in a safe environment; for example, a padded cell, so as to stabilise his or her condition. I understand from Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin that it is proposed that the Police be given powers to intervene. I seek a clarification, on the basis and extend of these powers, as well as, when is it expected for these Police Officers to be vested with such powers. Finally, there is a signalling effect to would-be offenders, and this is a point that was made by speakers before me too.
Next point, I believe there is a basis to consider amalgamating Penal Code provisions which cover the same ground as provisions in specific pieces of legislation. This will allow for more uniform application of the law dealing with the same area. In addition, reforms of these areas can be done more quickly, instead of waiting for the next review of the Penal Code.
In this regard, I commend the move to transfer the Chapter XX offences dealing with \"offences relating to marriage\" to the Women’s Charter. Similarly, the Penal Code provisions dealing with kidnapping could have been consolidated with the provisions in the Kidnapping Act. This also would be an opportunity to deal with and remove an anomaly in sentencing. Kidnapping under the Kidnapping Act may be punishable by death. It is not the case in Penal Code.
Also, the corruption offences vis-a-vis \"public servants\" in the Penal Code could be merged with the Prevention of Corruption Act. I seldom hear of these provisions in the Penal Code being invoked nowadays. Again, the Penal Code punishment for corruption offences is lighter than the Prevention of Corruption Act equivalent. Notwithstanding my comments, I support the Bill.
Ms Irene Quay Siew Ching (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Criminal Law Reform Bill could not have arrived in a timelier manner, especially in light of the changing crime environment in Singapore by virtue of the proliferation of social media and smart phone use. I would like to commend MinLaw, MHA and PCRC for working unceasingly over the past two years, soliciting feedback from various sectors both private and public; from judges and private practitioners to academics, Police, as well as public consultations from selected groups and social organisations working with vulnerable victims.
The outcome of the Bill is one that is relevant, practical and well calibrated to ensure that the vulnerable are protected, and the resulting punishments accurately reflect moral culpability.
I am very heartened to hear that the latest changes repeal marital immunity for rape and introduce higher penalties for offences knowingly committed against vulnerable victims. These also include charging members of the household guilty of offence for causing or allowing the death of a child under the age of 14.
While we have a comprehensive, robust Bill to protect victims from criminal offenders, it is contingent upon us to constantly look for ways to facilitate the reporting of domestic violence. The reasons for not reporting can be complex as they range from social, psychological and financial considerations to the ease of reporting.
I would like to take this opportunity to laud MSF for their considerable efforts over the years to introduce more rigorous screening tools, training more professionals in operating these tools, and creating more public awareness towards these issues. Their endeavours have led to enhanced detection, reporting and management of child abuse cases, resulting in a very significant increase of 60% in reporting.
However, there is always room for improvement. A quote from social workers from a Straits Times' article in 2017 has indicated a disparity where, \"when a child is abused by a stranger, family members are quick to report, however, this is not so when the abuser is a family member.\"
In recent years, there has been a trend of cases involving children dying or severely traumatised from brutal, chronic physical, psychological and sexual abuse in households. And to hear of this is absolutely heart-breaking.
It is also very distressing that most child abuse cases in Singapore involve care-givers. In 2015, MSF was quoted by The New Paper stating that \"in the 64 cases of alleged sexual abuse reported and investigated from January to September 2015, for every case, the alleged perpetrator was a family member or someone residing in the same household as the victim.\"
These cases often go unreported as the victims are afraid that the family may be devastated. The victims, more often than not, are unable to fend for themselves or are too afraid to come forward to seek help. As such, it is of paramount importance that members of the public such as the neighbours, relatives and friends are encouraged to come forward to identify victims of family violence.
In a similar vein, spouse abuse is the most common form of family violence in Singapore. A study by the organisation PAVE, based on 3,600 cases over the last 10 years, found that victims who are physically or psychologically abused by their spouse made up a disquieting 72% of new cases.
In the interest of reducing prolonged cases of domestic violence and abuse, I request that a central dedicated hotline be set up with trained personnel to handle all domestic violence calls.
Concurrently, a standalone app or feature should be introduced our current municipal app such as OneService or SG Secure to handle all social abuse ranging from child, spouse, elderly or other vulnerable groups and even include animal abuse to allow for a more coordinated response. This way, victims do not have to be routed to call various touchpoints and repeat their accounts.
This dedicated hotline and app can be designed to offer all victims of domestic abuse immediate relief from their plight in three stages: firstly, through crisis intervention and counselling; next, indoctrination and action on the various channels of recourse; and consequently, a successful resolution and rehabilitation.
Our current system requires victims to call various resources at different hotlines, which is confusing and can be a deterrent. The staff working at this central hotline and app can be trained in crisis intervention, and will be assigned to handle individual cases to build rapport with victims through counselling. They can then coordinate with local resources such as the Police, hospitals, or pro bono legal aid for a more integrated, victim-centric care.
The staff can then work out a personalised safety plan, which will include how to receive financial assistance and how to gather evidence of abuse if the case goes to Court. In the event that the victim cannot continue residing in their home for fear of continued abuse, coordinating staff will assist to put them up in a temporary shelter and seek protection order on their behalf with their consent.
Victims can also be directed to websites such as AWARE through the app, where information on domestic violence education can be found. This is if they feel the need to consider their situation before taking further action. It is also vitally important that an algorithm be implemented in the app to separate the more urgent cases and triage victims who require immediate medical attention from abuse.
Through these processes, victims will be able to chart their journey towards restitution and rehabilitation should they choose to lodge a formal report. They will also be educated on frequently asked questions, and fully assured that there will be no backlash from their abusers.
There have been many precedents where victims have successfully sought recourse through lodging a report, and these inspiring stories should be made aware through the app to encourage reporting. This central hotline and app can also be a platform for members of the public or bystanders to report abuse cases with anonymity, and an avenue where they can be taught how to help victims of abuse.
However, while most do not report such cases to the authorities or hotlines, many may want to seek advice or information for family members or friends. Having a standalone app or a secondary municipal app feature will be useful in encouraging reporting or seek information on how to help abuse victims. Members of the public may be more comfortable making a report online compared to calling a hotline.
There are many examples of such apps available overseas and their features which can be used as reference. The Smartsafe app, by the Domestic Violence Resource Centre in Australia or the Bright Sky app by the UK charity body are a few examples.
These free apps help women collect detailed evidence in order to obtain a protection order or prove a breach of one. They collect photographs, videos and recordings and save them off-device to ensure that the evidence is protected and can be used in court later when victims are ready to lodge a report.
The Daisy app in Australia provides information about support services within vicinity and includes safety features to help protect the privacy of people using it.
In the United States, the Sojourner Peace app is available in multiple languages and provides resources for victims of domestic abuse in a quick and discreet way. It also provides links and phone numbers to places where survivors can seek help, and access to the Sojourner's 24-hour domestic violence hotline.
To recap and emphasise, an app mentioned above would greatly benefit victims of domestic abuse and facilitate the ease of reporting for abuse cases. By adding features such as discreet evidence gathering, a one-touch police alert option and the central hotline number, we can ensure that every service is synergised to provide the best protection and survivor-centric help to all victims of domestic violence in Singapore. Notwithstanding my above points, I stand to support the Bill.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill. The comprehensive amendments proposed to the Penal Code are timely and will serve to ensure that our laws remain relevant in the new digital era. However, I would like to seek clarifications on some parts of the Bill.
First, I strongly support the proposed amendment that targets voyeuristic activities. As MHA and MinLaw have noted, there is a bustling online marketplace for upskirt photographs and videos. Unfortunately, the current law we have is inadequate to address the problems brought about by the advancements in micro camera technologies and the prevalence of such cameras to the general public.
There is a need for targeted laws to outlaw the act of observing or recording a person without their consent. But while this will serve to protect victims of voyeurs, some private investigators (PI) have expressed concerns. How would they be impacted by this new offence? Can the PIs continue to conduct surveillance operations to collect evidence for their clients?
Next, I am in full support of the repeal of marital rape. This is a long-awaited change. Married women should have the same access to protection as unmarried women. But there remain practical challenges in implementing this. Some of my residents have also spoken to me to voice concerns over potential false allegations of rape by an estranged spouse. This is not inconceivable for strained relationships. I would therefore like to ask what safeguards are there to ensure such allegations are carefully dealt with.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I also welcome the proposed new section 304C which makes it an offence to cause or allow the death of a child or a vulnerable person. Notable cases in recent years have made this change necessary. In 2016, two-year-old Mohamad Daniel Mohamad Nasser died after five weeks of abuse by his mother and her boyfriend. In 2017, a couple tortured 26-year-old waitress Annie Ee Yu Lian who had intellectual disabilities for eight months. She subsequently died. In both cases, the victims were vulnerable and abused by their care-givers.
The new provision proposed in section 304C would apply to both the person who committed the unlawful act as well as to someone who witnessed the abuse, but stood by and did nothing to stop the abuse. While this deterrent will provide greater protection to vulnerable people by putting the onus on witnesses to report the abuse, but what if the witness was also a victim of abuse – either mentally or physically – by the perpetrator?
For example, take the case of a mother who is a victim of abuse herself and out of fear, she did nothing to stop the abuse to her child. She would have been liable under the new proposed section 304C. I would therefore urge that we consider such circumstances and the mental state of the individuals before we consider prosecution.
Mr Deputy Speaker, another proposed amendment is to raise the minimum age for criminal responsibility to 10 years old, up from the current seven. I note that this was a recommendation by the Penal Code Review Committee, which was of the view that raising the minimum age would not be a significant risk to public safety. While this change might seem reasonable if we compare the minimum age to global benchmarks, I have my concerns and ask that we could perhaps also look at things in a local context. Let me explain.
Locally, we are experiencing an increasing trend of reported cases of children beyond parental control (BPC). The number of cases has risen from 71 in 2016, to 108 in 2018. The ages of these children are also getting younger. Statistics from MSF show that for those between 11 and 12 years old, the number of BPC cases increased almost three-fold from three in 2016 to eight in 2018, while those in the age band of 13-14 years old saw an increase of more than two-fold, from 24 cases in 2016, to 56 cases in 2018. According to recent reports by MSF, we are also seeing BPC cases involving children 10 years old and younger. In my previous life as a Police officer, I was always concerned to see young offenders, especially who were still in Primary schools.
Mr Deputy Speaker, this upward trending of beyond parental control cases goes against the proposed increase of minimum age for criminal responsibility. I worry that it would lead to a phenomenon where unruly, unsupervised young children can possibly commit crimes without liabilities. We must watch this trend carefully. We need to pay close attention to young at-risk children, as well as the number and age of young offenders arrested for crime. More importantly, are there plans to effectively arrest the trending increase of beyond parental control cases?
Lastly, the proposed amendments to the Penal Code have generally resulted in increases to the maximum jail sentences. This would possibly lead to a corresponding increase in jail time meted out to offenders. What would be the impact on our prisons, and does our Prison Service have the resources, both in terms of infrastructure and manpower, to support this?
Mr Deputy Speaker, I will conclude by reiterating my support for the proposed amendments in the Criminal Law Reform Bill. The amendments are essential to ensure that our Penal Code continues to remain relevant in today’s context. I would also like to thank the men and women in the Penal Code Review Committee for the hard work put in over more than two years to put together this Bill. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Bill.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to declare that I am a lawyer in a firm that handles criminal matters. Sir, this is an extensive Bill which covers many areas of amendments of the Penal Code and several other Acts. I would like to focus my speech on the amendments relating to the enhancement of punishments for offences committed against vulnerable persons and the new offences for acts committed against vulnerable persons. Allow me to begin my speech in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] A few years ago, we were jolted by the news about the death of Ms Annie Ee, an intellectually disabled person who was abused, tortured and punished by her housemates. Many people condemned the heinous acts inflicted on Annie, especially in view of her condition which made her more vulnerable to abuse, and those who committed those acts were people who were close to her. After the court case ended, many felt that the sentence imposed was not commensurate with the crime. At that time, many asked why the couple who committed the offences were not charged with murder. The couple had pleaded guilty to various charges of causing grievous hurt. The current legislation requires the prosecutor to prove that the final action committed had led to death. This was difficult to do when the torture took place over a long period of time.
Another case that jolted Singaporeans was the one where there was abuse inflicted on a toddler, Muhamad Daniel Muhamad Nasser, who was only two years old. He was kicked and slapped by his mother and her boyfriend almost every day and forced to eat dried chillies. The toddler eventually died due to head injuries. These cases shake us to the core as human beings. These people who commit atrocities on defenceless victims deserve a heavier punishment. It is a reflection of our principles as a society to strongly condemn inhumane actions towards those who are vulnerable.
Over the past several years, we seem to see several cases involving victims who are unable to defend themselves and the current punishment do not appear to be commensurate with the heinous crimes inflicted on the victims. According to a report by the Straits Times in September 2018, at least five such cases were brought to the courts between 2016 and 2017, compared to seven cases between 2000 and 2011.
Something needs to be done, and I am glad to see proposals within this Bill that increases the punishment on those who abuse and torture defenceless victims, who are unable to defend themselves because of their own condition and also because they have close relations with the perpetrator. There are also suggestions for a new type of offence for abuses that lead to the victim’s death. I think this is a good thing and I support the recommendations.
(In English): When people first heard about what happened to the late Annie Ee, there was condemnation against the heinous acts carried out against her. When people heard about the charges and the punishments imposed on the perpetrators, many voiced out their concerns that the punishments were not commensurate to the severity of the crime and the fact that Annie, was especially vulnerable as she was intellectually disabled. At that time, the Attorney-General's Chambers explained the specific circumstances which led to her unfortunate death and the limitations of the law which requires evidence that the abuser had the intention to cause death or fatal injury.
Therefore in cases, where the abuse consists of a series of acts that eventually leads to death, the abuser is likely to be prosecuted under the crime of causing grievous hurt, which carries a penalty of up to 10 years' jail, with possible fine and caning. In Annie’s case, the perpetrators eventually pleaded guilty to various counts of causing grievous hurt and causing grievous hurt with a weapon.
Cruelty against vulnerable individuals particularly offends our sense of morality as the victims are helpless and their ability to protect themselves is limited. To quote the Penal Code Review Committee, society reserves \"special disapprobation\" for the abuse of vulnerable people by their care-givers or others in a position of trust. There must therefore be appropriate and commensurate penalties against offences of such nature. I am therefore supportive of the proposed enhancements of the penalties for offences against vulnerable persons in this Bill.
I note that in the wake of Annie Ee's case, the public also reflected on how such a prolonged abuse could have taken place with no one reporting the same to the authorities. The Vulnerable Adults Act, which was the outcome of and was in response to various concerns regarding abuse against the vulnerable adults, which had been raised even preceding Annie Ee's case, also took into account recent cases and allowed for more detection of abuse and protection for the vulnerable. The amendments proposed today, addresses the other concerns about penalties and hopefully forms a deterrent against such heinous conduct. I would like though, to seek a clarification about how the proposed clauses in this Bill would sit vis-a-vis the terms in the Vulnerable Adults Act. In particular, I would like to seek clarification on the difference between the definition of \"vulnerable person\" in this Bill and \"vulnerable adult\" in the Vulnerable Adults Act. I believe a clarification may aid in the future applications of both pieces of legislation.
Clause 83 of this Bill seeks to introduce new sections 304B and 304C to the Penal Code. The new section 304B relates to causing death of a child below 14 years of age, domestic worker or vulnerable person by sustained abuse. The new section 304C relates to causing or allowing death of child below 14 years of age or vulnerable person in the same household. I note the distinction made between the two new sections. I would like to seek a clarification on why the offence of \"causing or allowing a vulnerable victim to die\" is applicable to persons in the same household who have frequent contact with the victim, while the offence of \"allowing neglect, physical or sexual abuse\" appears to only be applicable to care-givers and employers of domestic workers. What is the rationale for the difference in the scope of liability in these provisions?
I would also note that in criminalising the offence of causing or allowing the death of child under 14 years of age or vulnerable person in the same household, we need to be cautious not to prosecute those who are in the same household but may not have the power to stop the abuse as they themselves may be suffering from the abuse. The Minister had earlier addressed this concern. I note that the offence will only be made out if there is a failure to take reasonable steps to protect the victims. I appreciate and thank the Minister for the clarification. Mr Deputy Speaker, notwithstanding my queries and comments, I support this Bill.
Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Deputy Speaker, please allow me to first wish all our Muslim colleagues, \"Selamat Berpuasa\", the start of Ramadan.
The Criminal Law Reform Bill seeks to amend the Penal Code and bring it up to date. The Penal Code, as mentioned by many colleagues, is an important piece of legislation in Singapore, as it consolidates laws that relate to criminal offences. First enacted as the Straits Settlements Penal Code in 1871, the Act has been reformed on numerous occasions to bring it up to date. In recent decades, in 1973 – there were enhancement of punishments to curb the use of violence by criminals; in 1984 – introduction of more deterrent punishments for certain offences; in 1998 – enhanced punishments for abuse of domestic helpers; and in 2008, a decade ago – amendments to expand the scope of offences.
Today, we are making important amendments to the Code. This is the result of two years of discussion by the Penal Code Review Committee (PCRC). There are 169 substantive recommendations. After the recommendations, there was engagement with more than 700 stakeholders and with submissions from over 60 individuals and organisations.
I applaud the committee and the Ministry for undertaking this much needed review. There has been robust consultation, and the taking on board of suggestions and feedback. As the Bill involves many changes which many of my hon colleagues have already covered, I will confine my speech to two particular areas which I had previously raised in this House.
First, on gender neutrality. In May 2016, I highlighted that our current penal code is not gender neutral and made a request to the Ministry to consider reforming our Penal Code. This was in relation to the April 2016 case of PP vs Zunika Ahmad. In this case, she was acquitted by the High Court of six charges section 376A(1)(b) of sexually penetrating a 13-year-old in a landmark decision. The case was subsequently heard in appeal before the Court of Three Judges. The apex court overturned the High Court decision. The hon Chief Justice emphasised that section 376A was to be gender-neutral.
While the Court has recognised the gender neutrality of section 376 as it stood at that time, I am heartened that the PCRC has also proposed amendments to sections 375 and 376, so that the definition of \"rape\" would include non-consensual penetration and mean that men can be victims of rape as well. It also expands protection to cover a victim that is an adult male who is forced to engage in penetrative sex against his will by a female perpetrator. This brings the statutes up to date and affords men, especially juveniles protection.
We do not as yet have such confusion in our laws that have led to unbelievable circumstances elsewhere, such as in the 1993 case heard before the court in Kansas in the United States. Hermesmann vs Seyer was a pivotal case in the US, where a woman convicted of statutory rape of a minor and was pregnant as a result of the act, later successfully sued to claim child support from her victim. It is hope that such a situation would never arise in Singapore.
Second, with regard to Child Abuse Material, I raised a question in April 2017 to ask if the Minister of Home Affairs will introduce specific laws on child pornography. I am glad that the public consultations show broad support to criminalise non-fictional child abuse material. The new section criminalises non-fictional child abuse as well as fictional child abuse material where it is indistinguishable if the child portrayed is real or fictional.
The punishments are hefty and rightfully so. A term of imprisonment which may extend to 10 years, and liable to fine and to caning for using or involving a child in production of child abuse or producing child abuse material under 377BG (2) and 377BH (2). The term of imprisonment which may extend to seven years, and liable to fine and to caning for distributing or selling child abuse material as well as a term of imprisonment which may extend to five years, and liable to fine and to caning for advertising or seeking child abuse material.
However, child abuse material should be abhorrent in whatever form it takes, whether it is non-fictional or fictional, and I add whether it involves a real child or a virtual one. The law seeks to recognise the special harm and depravity inherent in child abuse material and child pornography. As such, any material, in any form, should be considered equally abhorrent for its intent.
Therefore, I ask that the Ministry to consider including the criminalising of all fantasy or virtual child abuse material, which is what is usually termed as non-photographic pornographic images of children (NPPIC). Criminalised NPPIC should include but not be exclusive to cartoons, animations and drawings. Even if they are not indistinguishable that the child portrayed is real or fictional.
We will not be alone in this – sections 62-68 of the UK Coroners and Justice Act, sections 1466A(a)(1) and (2) of the US Protect Act, section 1(17) of the Thailand Criminal Code Act. The UNHCR Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child in relation to the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography also refers to child pornography as any representation, by whatever means, of a child engaged in real or simulated explicit sexual activities or any representation of the sexual parts of a child primarily for sexual purposes.
Existing legislation is not as robust. Sections 6(1) and (2) of the Undesirable Publications Act only imposes a conviction for a first offence to a fine of $2,000 to an amount not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or three years. The same is so for the Film Act. The late Dr Victor Cline, who was Professor of Psychology, did in-depth research into sex addiction and pornography. He describes four stages of sexualisation – addiction, escalation, desensitisation and actualisation. His research shows those addicted to pornographic materials will want and will seek more explicit or extreme material and likely end up desiring to act out what they have seen.
Just earlier this afternoon, Minister Ong Ye Kung also alluded to the normalisation of behaviour with the availability of obscene material online. Minister Shanmugam also spoke in his speech for the Second Reading of this Bill that the inclusion of materials which are indistinguishable whether the child portrayed is fictional or non-fictional is to remove the defence by any accused that the material that he or she has been caught with is fictional. Therefore, should it not be the case that all child abuse material in whatever form it takes should be criminalised?
I therefore believe there is fertile ground to include all child abuse material as I have described because technology will make it ever harder to distinguish real and virtual as well as the psychological correlation progressing from virtual to real consumption
Although I believe that the amendments to the Penal Code as proposed under the Criminal Law Reform Bill are much needed and have been robustly discussed, I ask that my proposal to criminalise all forms of child abuse material including NPPIC be considered. Notwithstanding my comments and proposal, I support the Bill.
Mr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the proposed changes to the Criminal Law Reform Bill are timely and relevant. In general, these amendments reflect sentiments on the ground. The amendments have broadly enhanced protection for the vulnerable in the society and tackles emerging crime trends. I am glad our legal justice system is sufficiently nimble to move with the times and I stand in support of the Bill.
However, there are a few sections which I have some concerns with.
According to World Health Organization (WHO), Singapore ranked 62 out 176 countries with suicide rate of with almost 10 suicides per 100,000 people. This also means that Singapore has 2.5 times more deaths from suicide than transport accidents in 2017, when 361 people killed themselves. In terms of trends, men accounted for over 66% of these deaths. The number of elderly aged above 60 who took their own lives also reached an all-time high in 2017, at 129 suicides. This is the highest since suicide tracking started in 1991.
With the current Bill, section 309 of the Penal Code is repealed. This means that attempted suicide is no more a crime. We finally recognise that it is more important to rehabilitate and support those who want to commit suicide, rather than arresting and prosecuting those who have attempted suicide.
As a Police officer in my younger days, I had attended to suicide cases as well as attempted suicide cases. In one very memorable instance, I had to visit a young lady in the hospital after her second failed attempt at suicide. I had to record her statement and warned her that it was an offence to attempt suicide. She was indifferent. She could not care less about what I said. A few days later, she made a third and final attempt, and was successful.
For people who are determined to end their lives, arrest and threat to charge her in court is a poor deterrent to re-offending.
With that in mind, I would like to ask the Minister how many cases of attempted suicide were reported from 2010 to 2018? Of those, how many persons were arrested? How many persons were arrested repeatedly?
Under the current law, abetment of suicide is a crime. I would also like to ask the Minister, how many cases of abetment of attempted suicide were reported from 2010 to 2018?
The above statistics are important for us to understand the underlying trends of suicide rate in Singapore and the effectiveness of our suicide prevention programme.
With the decriminalisation of attempted suicide, I hope that Government agencies will not trivialise the act of attempted suicide especially if the Police are no longer involved or are playing a minor role. I hope more resources, not less, will be channelled to help those who attempted suicide. More resources in terms of counselling to help the victim and victim’s families. More resources in terms of in-depth study on the causes of attempted suicide and suicide. It is through this approach that we can better preserve the sanctity of life.
Perhaps we could look at what the Koreans have done. Korea has one of the highest suicide rates in the world and the highest among the OECD countries. What the South Korean government did was to conduct an extensive study on 70,000 people who committed suicide from 2012 to 2016 to establish a National Surveillance System on Suicide Trend to analyse patterns and statistics on the causes of suicide and who is more likely to attempt suicide.
It built strong local networks by educating medical and social workers on the ground, so they can immediately respond to those thinking of taking their own life. It also strengthened depression tests to identify those who might be at risk .
We can take a leaf from Korea’s experience. At the minimum, I suggest that we should mandate those who attempted suicide to go for counselling or treatment. For this to work, our anti-suicide effort needs to be an inter-Ministry collaboration, involving the Police, MSF and other stakeholders.
Another area we have to be concerned with is teenage suicide. This is particularly problematic because the youths are shockingly vulnerable. Suicide is the leading cause of death for those aged between 10 and 29 in Singapore. These youths and teens are increasingly at risk of self-harm due to bad influences through social media and challenges. Such dark challenges could disguise as Momo Challenge, Blue Whale Challenge or hashtag #kys, that is, \"kill yourself\". When the youths feel stressed, they can also easily go online to search for methods on how to kill themselves.
Thus, I hope that even with the decriminalisation of attempted suicide, the Police should not wash their hands completely. Whenever there is such self-harm reported, the Police should still be alerted to rule out any abetment of suicide. The Police can still be the referral agent to mandate Singaporeans who have attempted suicide to seek help.
Next, section 323: voluntarily causing hurt. The new section 323A fills in the gap between hurt and causing grievous hurt with intention. The Bill also enhance the punishment when hurt is inflicted on domestic workers, vulnerable persons and persons less than 14 years old. This is timely, appropriate and necessary.
However, there is still a gulf between how the Police handle voluntarily causing hurt cases and that of voluntarily causing grievous hurt. Voluntarily causing hurt under section 323 is a non-seizeable offence. There are many injuries which do not fall under \"grievous hurt\". Grievous hurt relates to very serious injuries such as fracture, blindness and other permanent disability. Very often, \"hurt\" can be serious resulting in profuse bleeding, hospitalisation or a few days of medical leave. Yet, it is still not serious enough to be classified as grievous hurt and the offence is not seizable.
The problem of non-seizable offence is that the Police cannot make any arrest without a warrant. The victim of voluntarily causing hurt has to lodge a Magistrate's Complaint with the court. This is an onerous administrative process costing $20 and requires the victim to lodge the complaint personally in court. He also has to buy a medical report from hospital or clinic to state how he has been hurt. This whole process is obviously a deterrent. Only when the victim of voluntarily causing hurt may a Magistrate complaint that the Police will be directed by the Magistrate to investigate. Hence, many perpetrators, many persons who try to hurt other people, get away quite easily.
In UK, you can get arrested for committing such offences. Common Assault, which includes pushing, slapping or merely spitting at people. Such offences carry a maximum penalty of six months in prison. Actual bodily harm, which is a step up, constitutes actual physical harm which does not need to be serious. Actual bodily harm include bruises, scratches and bite marks and the offence carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison.
I would like to ask the Minister, how many cases of section 323 were reported in 2018? How many cases were investigated by the Police due to Magistrate's complaint? How many cases were investigated by the Police without a complaint to the Magistrate? How many cases were eventually prosecuted in court?
One extreme is to follow the UK's example of making \"voluntarily causing hurt\" to be a seizable offence. I do not think the Police are ready for this. I would like to propose somewhere in between.
I would like to propose that the Minister consider requesting the Police to initiate investigation for all cases of \"voluntarily causing hurt\" that fall under the following categories: (a) road bully, that is, assault arising from dispute of a car accident or a near miss car accident; (b) assault by a customer on customer service staff, be it a waiter, a waitress, a sales person in a departmental store, a customer service officer of a telco or cabbies; and (c) assault resulting in victim suffering an injury that needs more than one day of medical leave to recuperate.
In the first place, there is no good reason for a person to assault another without provocation. Worse still, a customer service staff should not be assaulted by the very customer he or she is trying to serve. If the Police can initiate investigation for such assault cases without the need for the victim to lodge a Magistrate's complaint, it will go a long way to deter such violent act and bring justice to the victim in a fast, decisive and appropriate manner.
At this juncture, I will like to declare my interest as the CEO of ComfortDelGro Taxi Business before I continue my speech in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In 2018, there were 40 taxi drivers who were beaten up by their passengers. These were classified as causing hurt and not causing grievous hurt. The Police did not necessarily investigate unless the victim spent money and time to go to the Magistrate Court to raise a complaint. Otherwise, they would not get any help. So, out of these 40 incidents, only four cases were finally prosecuted in Court. The majority of the victims could only look at the passengers going scot-free.
Currently, there is a huge difference between \"voluntary causing hurt\" and \"voluntary causing grievous hurt\". The definition of \"grievous hurt\" includes serious injuries like fractures or blindness. Even if the victim was badly beaten up and was hospitalised for a few days, he may not be considered as suffering from grievous hurt and the incident may not be investigated. If he wants some form of justice, he has to pay for a medical report of his medical examination, take leave and pay another $20 to lodge a complaint at the Magistrate Court. Only then will the Police investigate. All these take time and money, so it does not appear to be fair to the victims.
Therefore, I would like to suggest to the Minister that the Police should proactively investigate incidences of \"voluntary causing hurt\" under certain circumstances, even though the victim was not deemed to have suffered grievous hurt. For example, if the injury is serious enough to warrant more than one day of medical leave to recover, or if a customer beats up service personnel, the Police can investigate immediately and charge the perpetrators in court.
(In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I will like to continue my speech in English. It is good that we are finally repealing the marital immunity for rape, following the practice of other countries such as UK, US and Australia.
We want to protect all women from sexual abuse especially within the confines of their marriage where they are most vulnerable and may find it difficult to say \"no\". The amendment empowers them to step forward because a law has been broken.
However, we do have to be careful to guard against false allegations of rape in instances where a married couple is not yet divorced, but the marriage has already broken down and the woman may want to \"cry wolf\" to fulfil a personal agenda.
Either that, or it could be a difference in interpretation. Using another context, there have been cases of women who claim that they were raped, but the men said that it was consensual sex. Such charges are inherently based on \"he says, she says\", whereby it is quite impossible to obtain good evidence.
It is challenging to prove a lack of consent in marital rape, due to the intimacy associated with marriage and the fluid nature of consent. Some even asked if a husband is supposed to get consent from the wife every time they have sexual relationship. A wife who consented may later retract it, in the heat of subsequent arguments.
While it is morally right to protect women from abusive husbands who force themselves on their wives, I will like to ask the Minister what additional safeguards besides enhancing the punishment of providing false statement, if any, the Police will take to prevent and deter such false allegations? Will no signs of physical injury be sufficient to prove a false allegation of marital rape? I hope the Minister can provide us with more insight.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, the Criminal Law Review Bill is timely. I would like to thank MHA and those who are involved in the Penal Code Review Committee and the public for their valuable contributions in making sweeping changes to update our Penal Code.
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Mr Deputy Speaker, this review of the Penal Code is timely and addresses many of the evolving societal concerns and new crime trends that warrant enforcement. For example, the repeal for the immunity for marital rape restores dignity to women who suffered but were not accorded due justice. Decriminalising attempted suicide while ensuring similar powers to require treatment marks a good balance between legislative powers and rehabilitation. I remember rather vividly, as a young Police officer, I had to serve a warning to a young lady, paralysed from waist down, whose injuries were as a result of a failed suicide attempt. It felt unnecessary and discomforting then.
Similarly, legislation against voyeuristic activities and revenge pornography reflects the tighter legislation needed for the digital age. Very frequently, our aged laws are not able to protect victims as technology progresses much faster than legislation. Our law enforcement officers are often left with a patchwork of legislation across different statutes, stewing in their frustration to restore justice. Left unaddressed, the digital world is no different from a crime-ridden ghetto where self-branded vigilantes prevailed and whose very inhabitants in this ghetto are also intimidated by these self-branded cops. This set of Penal Code amendments will restore order and justice for many victims.
Technological advancements meant that voyeurs are having their field days. Armed with advanced zoom cameras, smartphones and insidious spying instruments, voyeurs make the world a very unsafe place, especially for women. Not only do they not stop at filming or taking photos of very private moments, but they go on to upload and distribute on the Internet. This is deplorable. I support this amendment.
At the same time, can I clarify with the Minister that victims can still have their cases investigated if the videos were distributed prior to the passing of the law but still found on different websites after the passing of this law. Would the Police have the powers to compel the owners of these sites to remove such voyeuristic materials? In addition, would private investigators also be prevented from taking such private videos even though it is presumably required in the course of their work?
As part of the amendments, the Bill also seeks to address the broad adverse impact from computer trading on the financial systems. Because of the speed of trades, malicious and rogue traders can make a lot of money in a short span of time. They can also cause lasting damage and collapse financial systems. Specifically, MHA has introduced section 424A and section 424B to tackle situations, such as the London Whale case involving J P Morgan or the Manipulation of the LIBOR in 2012 involving multiple banks. These amendments are important because of the growing number of financial fraud cases and the sophistication of the rogue traders. While I support the new sections to combat financial fraud, I have a few clarifications for the Minister.
Under the new section 424A, the penalty of imprisonment up to 20 years is twice as heavy as the current section 420 offence of cheating. The latter requires that there must be wrongful loss or that there is a clear victim but not the new section. While I note the need for a strong deterrence, can the Minister clarify why no victim is required as compared to the existing cheating offences?
I would also like to seek the Minister's clarification on the following. First, why is this new section needed instead of strengthening, for example, the Securities and Futures Act (Chapter 289)? Second, the need for strong deterrence for financial manipulation is abundantly clear – the immense financial windfall breeds greed and might destabilise financial systems. Noting that the penalty is heavy compared to existing cheating offences, how is our regime compared with those of foreign legislation? Were there previous cases in Singapore in recent years where we were unable to prosecute the perpetrator because there was no equivalent of a section 424A?
According to section 424A(2), the new section 424A also does not require any of the three sub-sections, namely, section 424A(1)(a), (1)(b) and (1)(c) to be material for the offence to be made out. Because the sub-sections need not have to be material and presumably more situations might be investigated under section 424A, under what circumstances does MHA envisage that such a piece of legislation would be used? Third, what is the likely impact on the compliance requirements of our financial institutions upon the passing of this law?
Notwithstanding the above clarifications, I believe that this enhanced Penal Code will empower our law enforcers to protect us better. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, I stand in support of the sweeping changes introduced by this Bill to ensure that our criminal laws and regime are well-placed to tackle new crime trends and are aligned with societal norms of our times.
I would like to start by commending the Government's decision to provide for a longer three-month period between the First and Second readings of the Bill. This allows both parliamentarians and the public to better understand and seek clarifications on such a crucial and comprehensive Bill. I hope that this practice would be similarly adopted for other Bills which are equally important and extensive. I would also like to commend the progressive reforms this Bill introduces.
Another applaudable aspect of this Bill is the Penal Code Review Committee's extensive efforts to obtain public input in this review. More than 700 stakeholders participated in the engagement sessions and more than 60 individuals and organisations provided written feedback. The Committee included leading practitioners and thought leaders from academia and the private and public sectors.
To further strengthen this commendable effort at engaging the public, would the Government also consider including civil society groups on future review committees for any legislation? Civil society voices could have been especially value-adding and beneficial to the review process, given that many of these groups provide direct services and have expertise in the different issue areas subjected to review. In fact, these groups may have more experience dealing with certain groups of victims that avoid the authorities or are less inclined to report crimes and can provide valuable insights on these blind spots. I hope that it will become a standard practice for civil society to be included in committees spearheading legislative review rather than just at the consultation stage.
Next, the Bill takes the progressive step of abolishing the offence of attempted suicide. This recognises that suicide attempts stem from deep-seated issues and a punitive approach may not be appropriate or sufficient in addressing them.
Beyond legislative reform, we can go further in addressing the needs of those who attempt suicide by ensuring that the authorities have the skills and resources to respond appropriately when these cases arise. Police officers are deployed when an attempted suicide case is reported. Police officers are trained in responding to emergency situations, but may not have sufficient training in handling the complex socio-emotional issues often associated with attempted suicide cases. There is considerable value in having trained professionals who can be at the scene to do any assessment on mental health or provide psychological interventions where necessary. Similar trials have been conducted in the United Kingdom.
I have four recommendations to make here.
First, will the Ministry look into improving the quality of response to attempted suicide by setting up a \"specialist team with psychological first-aid training\" that can be deployed when attempted suicide is reported?
Second, given that it may take time to train a specialist team, will the Minister consider deploying social workers, together with Police officers, when responding to attempted suicide cases? This would help ensure that there are experts on the scene who will be able to handle all aspects of the situation better.
Third, will the Ministry consider making it mandatory for frontline Police officers to undergo psychological first-aid training? This will ensure that the process is not as distressing for people who attempt suicide.
Finally, will the Ministry look into expanding the functions under the existing MyResponder app by SCDF for responding to attempted suicide cases? The MyResponder app works by notifying Community First Responders, who are members of the public trained in CPR or AED procedures, of nearby fire and medical cases. The app could similarly notify trained social workers or counsellors who are available and in close proximity to the scene of attempted suicide cases so that they can assist the Police with negotiation efforts.
Next, the Bill repeals the marital immunity for rape, something which I and many Members of this House have spoken up about and which had been strongly supported by members of the public and representatives from the religious, legal and social sectors during the public consultation process. Rape is wrong in any context.
Can the Minister confirm if marital immunity for rape is completely removed? Currently, section 376A penalises acts of sexual penetration against minors under the age of 16 but does not apply where there is spousal consent. Similarly, section 375(1) provides that penile-vaginal penetration of a girl under the age of 14 is rape but does not apply when there is spousal consent. The position is the same under the new section 375(1A) for oral or anal penetration.
Section 376A(5) states that it is not an offence for a man to penetrate his wife if his wife is 13 years old and above. This means that it is possible for a child between 13 and 16 years old who is in a marriage to give spousal consent to sex even though it would otherwise be considered as rape. Sir, the age of the child should be the only factor here and not whether she is married to the man.
One other positive aspect I would like to highlight is the raising of the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility (MACR) from seven years old to 10 years of age, where children below this threshold are considered incapable of crime. While this is a step in the right direction, would the Government consider further raising this minimum age to 12 years old, in line with the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)? Paragraph 32 of the CRC recommends that states increase the MARC to the age of 12 years old.
Some have argued that logical thinking and problem solving skills only develop between 11 to 15 years old. Some also suggest that intellectual abilities reach adult levels at only 17 years old. Children with underdeveloped logical thinking, problem solving and intellectual abilities are more likely to exhibit risky and potentially criminal behaviour.
While this change puts us on par with the laws in England and Hong Kong, Sir, I believe that Singapore could benefit from setting a positive precedence for other countries by meeting the internationally acceptable standard or level of 12 years old. Sir, notwithstanding my above clarifications, I stand in support of this Bill.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of this Bill. These changes are wide-ranging and welcomed. Singapore’s Penal Code was enacted in 1871, a legacy of the colonial era. It started as a codification of the criminal law for easy administration by Colonial officials in far out territories, many of whom would not be lawyers.
While criminal law in England has not been codified in a single bill, the codification of the criminal law in the Penal Code has always been intended for the criminal law to be easily understood by a wider audience. Even a layperson reading the Penal Code would find the law clearly stated and helpful illustrations provided on how the law was to be applied. This is unlike other pieces of legislation.
Of course, the Penal Code has undergone extensive changes over the last century and a half and this latest set brings the Penal Code up to date with many of the latest developments in crime trends. It also makes important changes to further protect vulnerable victims. In making these changes, the Penal Code has retained the easy-to-understand drafting style that clearly sets out the offences and penalties involved as well as helpful illustrations. While the Penal Code itself is long, each of the offences is clearly set out and organised and a layperson should be able to understand the charges against him when charged for any of these offences.
In relation to vulnerable persons, this Bill makes provision for greater penalties for offences against the following: domestic workers; vulnerable persons; persons below 14 years; people in intimate relationships; people in close relationships; and \"intimate relationships\" refers to partners, sexual or not, and \"close relationships\" include broader family.
These are important changes that recognise special vulnerability in these relationships. All involve situations where one person is likely to be dependent on another or in a position of special trust with that person. And the abuse of that special position by committing a crime, therefore, fully justifies a sterner penalty and sends the right signal.
On a related note, though in a different part of the Bill, the marital immunity to rape has also been abolished. This was a point that I and others in this House had raised on previous occasions. It has always been in my view a quirk of the law when it was argued a man could not rape his wife even if she did not consent to having sex with him.
Some of the reports of husbands abusing wives are particularly heinous, and while they may have involved sex forced through violence, the perpetrator could not be charged for rape but would often be charged with a lesser charge for the related violence. This was usually unsatisfactory for the victims. This amendment addresses this matter.
There is also a series of offences that seem to be aimed at mischief that can have serious consequences. This includes making false reports of dangerous objects, such as declaring there is a bomb on the train when you know there is not one, causing or contributing to serious fire and this seems clearly to capture cigarette butts thrown down rubbish chutes that may cause fires. There is also criminalisation of negligence in respect of things like machineries tearing down buildings and even dangerous animals, which is fair because this makes it clear that people who have responsibility doing these tasks should take additional care.
I also welcome the changes to the Code in relation to crimes that have become particularly damaging in the Internet age. These include specific offences in relation to voyeurism, the taking of intimate photos or videos of a person without their knowledge, possession of the same, or even gaining access to it. These are broad-ranging powers which criminalise not only the obtaining of such information but also those who gain access to it.
Child pornography is another area that receives special legislative attention, with a wide range of offences covering those who exploit children to provide the material, those who profit from it or distribute it and those who access it.
Mr Deputy Speaker, this Is a broad-ranging Bill that thoughtfully covers emerging areas in crime and also provides greater protection of vulnerable people. I wholeheartedly support this reform and thank the Committee members for their hard work in putting these proposals together.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Exempted Business ","subTitle":"Business 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":"Criminal Law Reform Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"Debate resumed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Members who have spoken. Let me address the points that have been raised by Members.
Members spoke positively about the amendments relating to vulnerable victims. Members spoke eloquently and passionately about the need to protect the vulnerable. Victims like Annie Ee and Daniel Nasser were mentioned in many of the Members' speeches. No words can express the sorrow their families went through. We hope that the new laws protecting vulnerable victims will help to deter such cases from occurring.
Ms Rahayu asked about the difference between \"vulnerable person\" in the Bill and \"vulnerable adult\" in the Vulnerable Adults Act (VAA). The VAA provides powers to the State to take intrusive measures, such as removal of the vulnerable adult from their living conditions. Hence, a narrow definition of \"vulnerable adults\" was adopted in the VAA. This is to strike a balance between respecting individual autonomy and protecting those in need of help using intrusive protective measures. Those that do not meet the high threshold in the VAA can and have been helped in other ways.
The PCRC was of the view that the definition in the VAA was too narrow for the purposes of the Penal Code and it recommended for \"vulnerable persons\" in the Penal Code to be wider to cover more persons. This sends a strong deterrent signal and can potentially reduce the need to resort to intrusive remedial measures as envisaged in the VAA. The VAA was only recently passed. We should give it time and MSF will keep a close watch to ensure the interests of the vulnerable in the community are looked after and the balance appropriately struck.
Ms Rahayu and Mr Melvin Yong spoke about the proposed section 304 offence, and whether persons who are also suffering from abuse might be prosecuted for not taking action. The provision provides that a person is not guilty of an offence under section 304C if she could not have been expected in her circumstances to take steps to protect the victim from the significant risk of grievous hurt. We have also provided that such circumstances include her past or present experiences of abuse as a result of an unlawful act by any member of the same household as her.
Ms Rahayu also asked about the differences between the new sections 335A and 304C. The bases for the introduction of these offences are quite different. The offences of \"failure to protect\" has been proposed to cover persons who owe these vulnerable victims a duty of care. It reflects society's view that these people are responsible for the safety and well-being of the vulnerable victims in their care, custody or control. The offence of \"causing or allowing death\" applies to members of the same household as, and who have frequent contact with, the victim. This offence was introduced to overcome an evidential difficulty where two accused persons who have the exclusive opportunity to harm the vulnerable victim deny any ill-treatment of the victim.
Ms Anthea Ong and Ms Sylvia Lim asked about conditions under which the Courts may apply enhanced penalties for the offences against vulnerable victims. The enhanced penalties allow the Courts to punish offenders more severely if they prey on the vulnerabilities of certain persons. If the vulnerability did not make the person more susceptible to the offence, the offender will be subjected to punishment but not enhanced punishment. A person with a physical disability, for instance, may not necessarily be vulnerable, say, in respect of a white collar crime like fraud. There has to be a link between the vulnerability and the offence for enhanced punishments to apply.
Ms Irene Quay and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah made suggestions to improve the reporting and detection of domestic violence. Domestic abuse should, in the first instance, be reported to the Police. Police are trained to deal with such cases and have the legal powers to intervene quickly to stop any imminent or on-going abuse. Police also work with MSF to ensure that the victim receives care and, if required, will physically separate the victim and the assailant. MSF will consider the Members' suggestions. As Ms Quay acknowledged, much has already been done by MSF.
Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked how the amendments relating to abuse and neglect of vulnerable victims interact with decisions associated with palliative care. The Bill does not affect bona fide palliative arrangements. The Bill, for example, at section 304C, introduces obligations on persons in the household who have frequent contact with the victim and who are aware of a significant risk of grievous hurt being caused to the victim to take steps which could reasonably have been expected of such persons to take, to protect the victim from the significant risk. This involves a fact-sensitive exercise.
Mr Patrick Tay and Er Dr Lee spoke about rehabilitation of offenders in Prisons. Psychiatric intervention will be provided to selected offenders where necessary and feasible. Prisons' programmes also include psychology-based correctional programmes, family programmes and work programmes. Mr Tay suggested that psychiatric treatment or psychological counselling be mandatory for sexual predators after the completion of their sentence. We will consider this suggestion. Mr Tay will be aware that offenders who are subject to the Mandatory Aftercare Scheme (MAS) for certain serious sexual offences are required to undergo community supervision and must comply with conditions, such as counselling and case management.
Mr Melvin Yong spoke about the impact of the amendments on Prisons' resources. The Ministry will monitor the impact of the amendments on Prisons and continue to ensure that Prisons will be adequately staffed and resourced.
Members had a discussion earlier about the possibility of certain Penal Code offences being amended by Schedule. In general, Parliament should have oversight of criminal offences of general application, such as those in the Penal Code. There is agreement that we do not retrospectively make acts criminal. On section 409, we acted to reform section 409 as quickly as practicable, considering the need to consult the relevant stakeholders. I believe that the amendment has benefited from parliamentary scrutiny. In the case of the Misuse of Drugs Act, it is a specialised legislation and the Schedule lists classes of substances. If we only list specific molecules, the peddlers will change one of many of the component molecules. So, there is, in that case, a particular operational context.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah spoke about minors dating adults and of dating websites. We share Er Dr Lee's concerns and our response is multi-pronged. The amendments today will deal with sexual exploitation of minors by adults. We want to prevent predatory conduct by adults against minors. We have amended the sexual grooming offences. We have also introduced a sexual communication offence to deal with sexting between an adult and a child. These address grooming behaviour upstream. We will closely monitor and take action against the users of dating websites or social media sites if they exploit young persons.
Mr Alex Yam spoke on criminalising all forms of child abuse material. The distribution and sale of fictional child abuse material are criminalised as \"obscene material\" in the Penal Code and will be subject to enhanced penalties. The current maximum penalty is three months and it will be enhanced to two years. We thank Mr Alex Yam for drawing our attention to the international developments and we will monitor the situation closely.
Er Dr Lee spoke about cases where parents have clearly ignored sexual abuse of their children. She asked about abettors and those who repeatedly witness abuse but do nothing. The amendments criminalise the failure of caregivers to protect children from ill-treatment, which includes the subjecting of the child to sexual abuse. Where death is caused to the child or young person, the maximum imprisonment term has been increased from seven to 14 years. Where death is not caused, the maximum imprisonment term has been increased from four to eight years.
Ms Sylvia Lim asked about the CYPA amendments, whether they will be brought into effect at the same time that MSF raises the proposed definition of \"young person\" to 18. We will try to see whether we can have the changes take effect at the same time or, if that is not possible, as soon as practicable.
Members supported the introduction of the new offence of voyeurism and distribution of intimate images. Mr Patrick Tay, Mr Desmond Choo and Mr Melvin Yong asked about the impact of the new offences of voyeurism and distribution of intimate images on private investigators, persons who report crimes, or caregivers. There are defences where the recordings are for legitimate purposes. Specific requirements apply to qualify for this defence. Among others, the act has to be done without malice, with reasonable cause and the image or recording is used for contemplated or pending Court proceedings and is not kept longer than necessary or required.
Mr Desmond Choo sought a clarification on whether cases which involved the distribution of videos prior to these amendments coming into force would be investigated under the new offences. They would, if the distribution takes place after the provisions take effect. If their offending acts occurred before the new laws are in force, they would be dealt with under prevailing laws.
Mr Tay also suggested that the Courts be allowed to make orders which essentially involve the deletion of the offending images or recordings. The Courts can order the disposal of any property which has been used in the commission of an offence. The CPC was amended last year to specifically allow an order for the deletion of data on a computer or mobile phone where the data was the subject of an offence.
Mr Tay also spoke on dealing with the source of the offending images. The source of the images will be identified through Police investigations and the Police will do its best to track the source. Those in possession of the images have to cooperate in investigations to provide information on the originators of such material.
Mr Desmond Choo and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah spoke about websites that carry prohibited material. We take a strong stand against sites that host prohibited material. IMDA can issue directions to the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block access to such websites.
Internet content providers (ICPs) include web-hosting services, and they are all class-licensed under the Broadcasting Act. So, they are required to comply with the Internet Code of Practice and ensure that prohibited material is not hosted on their websites. If such websites are verified to be hosted in Singapore, the IMDA can direct the ICPs to take down the content and suspend or cancel the class licences of the ICPs.
I thank Members for their support for the repeal of marital immunity for rape. Mr Louis Ng asked about the extent of the repeal of marital immunity. The answer is all non-consensual sex with one’s spouse will be an offence. His question also discusses sex within marriage involving minors. It is not tenable to completely ban minor marriages today. A majority of countries around the world share the same approach. The legal age of marriage is set at 18 years of age. We allow minors in Singapore to enter into marriage with special approval, but these marriages are extremely rare and robust safeguards are in place.
Members raised concerns relating to proof. I make two points in response.
First, all cases of alleged rape – within or outside of marriage – are subject to the same level of evidential rigour during investigation and prosecution. Police officers at the Serious Sexual Crime Branch are trained to deal with complex issues of evidence and proof.
Second, there are existing offences in the Penal Code on false reporting and we are enhancing penalties for false reporting.
I want to thank Members for their support for the amendments to sections 375 on rape, 376 on sexual assault involving penetration, and 509 on insult of modesty.
Ms Anthea Ong supported the expanded legal definition of rape and spoke passionately about the need to protect all victims of sexual assault, regardless of gender. We agree.
Ms Anthea Ong spoke about a positive definition of “consent” in the Penal Code.
Instituting a new positive definition of consent could generate further uncertainty in view of the fairly settled law in this instance. The PCRC studied this issue and found that the experience of England and Wales in having a positive statutory definition does not help in clarifying the scope of consent.
Ms Ong has suggested greater public awareness about the contours of consent. We will work with agencies and organisations to improve on public education in this area.
Members spoke on the repeal of attempted suicide. I was particularly struck by Mr Desmond Choo’s first-hand account from his days as a Police officer where he had to serve a warning to a semi-paralysed lady who had attempted suicide. He said \"it felt unnecessary and discomforting\". With today’s amendments, such warnings will no longer be required.
Mr de Souza set out his concerns regarding the decriminalisation of attempted suicide. Let me be clear. The abetment of attempted suicide is still a crime. The amendments actually enhance the penalties for abetment of attempted suicide significantly. The amendments multiply the maximum punishment by 10 times to 10 years’ imprisonment, and for certain other categories. Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide remain illegal.
Mr Louis Ng spoke about support professionals that could assist police when intervening in attempted suicide cases. The SPF’s Crisis Negotiation Unit (CNU) is trained to handle cases like suicide attempts. Comprising police officers and psychologists, they are trained in negotiation tactics and suicide intervention. Officers are also trained to ensure their own safety. Social workers, for instance, at SOS and SSOs, can be involved later after the Police have ensured the safety of various parties. We will look into Mr Ng’s suggestion on psychological first aid training.
On the use of MyResponder, interventions involving attempted suicide are different from CPR and AED procedures. We want to avoid a situation where a well-meaning member of the public reacting to the notification exacerbates the situation, or puts himself in a position of danger.
Mr Murali spoke about Police intervention and treatment. The safeguards that were previously there – Police intervention, SCDF intervention – will still be there, post-decriminalisation. Where appropriate, Police can still exercise powers under the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act. There will still be mental health treatment for appropriate cases. But, as Ms Anthea Ong highlighted, not all cases involve mental illness. For others, counselling or family support may be needed. The Government will continue to maintain statistics, taking into account inputs from the various agencies which respond to suicide attempts.
Some have raised questions on whether decriminalisation will impact reporting by the public. This should not be the case. Our experience informs us that callers who call emergency lines to report attempts do not call to report a crime. They call for help, out of concern for the safety of the person attempting suicide and others in the vicinity of the person.
Mr de Souza asked for a study to be conducted following the decriminalisation. We will monitor the situation post-amendment but we must remember that suicide attempts happen for various reasons. An increase or decrease in the number of attempts may not be attributable to criminalisation or decriminalisation.
Mr Ang Wei Neng asked for statistics on reports for attempted suicide. The number has been steady in the last five years and the average annual number of reports is 1,210.
The medical literature suggests that there are multiple factors that affect suicide risk, ranging from barriers to seeking help, to economic downturns, to personal risk factors. For example, mental health disorders, substance abuse, financial problems and many others.
Mr Ang Wei Neng suggested that there be mandatory counselling for those who attempt suicide. The Samaritans of Singapore (SOS) operates a 24-hour hotline to counsel persons in distress. The Institute of Mental Health (IMH) operates a 24-hour Mental Health Helpline to assess and triage cases and activate home visit teams if necessary. To make it mandatory means that we will have to enforce the need to go for counselling, and are likely to do so on pain of punishment. Again, we are trying to move away, in this area, from criminalisation to help. So, we should tread carefully in this aspect.
Mr Louis Ng spoke about the MACR and whether it could be raised to the age of 12 years. There is currently no scientific consensus on what the MACR should be. So, we looked at factors such as prevailing criminal activity among the various age groups. We assessed that there would not be a significant threat to public safety to raise the MACR to 10 years of age. Persons of 10 years of age or above and under 12, can still avail themselves of a defence if they can show that they have not attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and consequences of his conduct. We think this strikes the right balance.
Mr Melvin Yong spoke about his concerns regarding the raising of the MACR. I hear the Member’s concerns, and assure him that the raising of the MACR will only come into force when the mechanism to address offending behaviour in children below the MACR is put in place. The framework will ensure that children below the MACR will still have their behaviour addressed.
I thank Ms Sylvia Lim for her support for the introduction of section 323A and the raising of the maximum sentence for section 323.
Both Ms Lim and Mr Ang Wei Neng spoke about voluntarily causing hurt (VCH) and arrestability. We do take hurt offences seriously. All Penal Code offences committed against children under 14, vulnerable persons, and domestic workers, will be made arrestable, regardless of the arrestability of the underlying offence. This includes VCH against these vulnerable victims.
In addition, the expansion of the definition of “public servants” to include persons, such as those who conduct illegal parking enforcement on behalf of the Government, means that acts of hurt committed against a wider range of persons will be arrestable.
So, we are moving incrementally, to ensure that cases get the appropriate response and there is no inadvertent diversion of Police resources away from critical cases.
Ms Lim and Mr Ang asked about the various scenarios in which Police initiate investigations for VCH cases without any of Magistrate's complaint. These include: acts of VCH which cause serious injury which falls short of grievous hurt; acts of VCH involved in road rage; VCH cases involving secret society members; racially or religiously aggravated VCH cases and acts of VCH against public service workers such as taxi drivers, transport workers or nurses. We will continue to monitor the situation with regard to VCH and study the various suggestions. Post-amendment – we can assess if there is a need to create a more expedited framework for the resolution of other types of VCH cases and if this can be done without compromising due process or compromising the delivery of Police response to other more serious offences.
Mr Murali asked about the proposed revision to criminal conspiracy. There are no reported instances of the use of section 120A of the Penal Code against conspiracies to engage in non-criminal conduct. There is no strong policy reason or public imperative to keep it in the Penal Code. There is available recourse for such civil wrongs through the civil courts. The same approach is taken in the UK under the Criminal Law Act 1977, where criminal conspiracy is limited to agreements to commit offences.
The Member also spoke about criminal defamation. The assessment on criminal defamation is different. While there is civil recourse for defamation, the policy assessment is that there may be certain cases of defamation where criminal sanctions are required to reflect the seriousness with which society regards such conduct. It overlaps with a civil wrong, but so do other crimes such as theft and fraud. A policy decision has been made for these acts to be treated both as crimes and as civil wrongs.
Mr Murali has proposed moving the Penal Code offences relating to kidnapping or corruption to other specialised legislation. We will consider Mr Murali’s feedback, and will also ask CPIB to consider it as well. I should address one point though. The Member said there was an anomaly in sentencing; kidnapping in the Kidnapping Act is punishable by death but this was not the case in the Penal Code. The apparent inconsistency can actually be reconciled. The heavier penalties under the Kidnapping Act are due to the fact kidnapping for ransom is involved. Conversely, the kidnapping offence in the Penal Code encompasses a much broader range of conduct, including less serious conduct.
Mr Desmond Choo sought clarification on the need for an identifiable victim for the new fraud offence. The new offence of fraud does not require an identifiable victim. The LIBOR case is a clear example where dishonest gain can be made through the financial system without there being an identifiable victim or loss caused. It is very difficult to find a lay person who understands how LIBOR is calculated, given the arcane nature of the mechanism. Proving loss is also extremely difficult, because LIBOR is an inter-bank lending rate and it only impacts ordinary consumers indirectly, and the impact depends on the practices of each bank. For example, in setting fixed deposit interest rates linked to LIBOR. If it is clear that someone acted dishonestly to gain a benefit, he should be punished.
Mr Choo asked why this new section was required in lieu of strengthening the Securities and Futures Act (SFA). The SFA regulates specific financial transactions and products, whereas the fraud offence will cover any kind of dishonest or fraudulent behaviour for gain. The new fraud offence puts a stop to the game of \"catch-up\" with actors who have a strong financial interest in finding loopholes in regulation. So, this law can be used against such actors.
Mr Choo also asked about how the regime compares with that of foreign jurisdictions. The proposed Fraud offence is adapted from the UK Fraud Act 2006. It has a heavier maximum punishment – 20 years’ imprisonment as opposed to 10 years’ in the UK – to account for the fact that a single count of fraud can encompass a single deceptive scheme which affects multiple victims. The higher maximum punishment is to ensure that complex, large-scale frauds receive the appropriate sentence.
Mr Choo also asked about the lack of a materiality requirement in the new offence. The purpose of the new fraud offence is to focus on the culpability of the offender and not the effect it may have had on the victim. Requiring proof of materiality requires a shift of focus back to the victim and how material they found the falsehood, and this is inconsistent with the purpose of the new fraud offence.
Mr de Souza spoke about presumptive minimum sentences. The amendments set out the provisions which presumptive minimum sentences apply to. They include provisions in laws outside the Penal Code, including certain offences under the Passport Act, the Fisheries Act and the Immigration Act. But the listed offences do not include provisions in the MDA. The list of offences presumptive minimum sentences will be applied to is tightly scoped. We are not introducing a general doctrine that a mandatory minimum sentence should be replaced by a presumptive minimum sentence.
Finally, let me discuss an issue Members have raised – education, awareness raising and social norms. Members have raised important and valid points. We agree that public education and awareness raising is vital; and we know that the amendments today need to be known beyond this House. We will continue to work on this together with Members and community partners. Yes, the law has its limits. The law can shape social norms, but it is only one factor. The legal direction is clear. Families, schools, media and the wider community, including NGOs, also play important roles in shaping norms, and we look forward to working together.
I believe I have responded to major concerns raised by Members. I thank Members for their support on this important Bill. The amendments are timely, comprehensive and necessary. I thank members of the Penal Code Review Committee for its comprehensive report leading to this Bill and all who shared their views on the Bill.
As Mr de Souza had said, this is a monumental Bill and a law that has been with us for close to 150 years. The task of this generation is to update it, strengthen it and make it relevant to today’s circumstances. This is an opportunity for this House to register our strongest condemnation against acts that harm the most vulnerable among us. Persons like Annie Ee, Cindy, Daniel Nasser. It is our duty to protect our society against predators like Joshua Robinson and ensure that they get the justice they deserve. Thank you.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Patrick Tay.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Just a point of clarification. In my speech, I asked the Ministry, there is a provision where the definition of public servant, where the Police engage law enforcement officers on the ground, such as private security officers or auxiliary police officers, they are treated as public servants if they are carrying out law enforcement, crowd control duties and so on. So, would private security officers be treated as public servants in this aspect?
Mr Amrin Amin: Under the provision, it would depend on the functions that they perform. The Act has got specific requirements. So, if they perform a function as set out in the Act, yes, they will be covered and they will be entitled to the protection accorded to public servants.
Assoc Prof Walter Theseira: Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. Just two points of clarification. First, I understand that, palliative care and care of that sort would not be constituted as \"neglect relating to death\". But, what about refusal to accept medical treatment or convey the vulnerable adult to medical treatment, when there might be some issue about the adult actually not wanting medical treatment in the first instance.
The second point is on the question I raised about whether there is a possibility, as part of the social norms of sexual offences, these offences are under-reported in Singapore. This has been the contention that Ms Baey and others have made. Would the Ministry consider studying this issue to determine whether it is a problem?
Mr Amrin Amin: On the issue of palliative arrangement, as I mentioned, it is a fact-sensitive exercise. The elements of the offence have to be made out, but certain indicators like the evidence of abuse and all that would have to be looked into. There will be police investigations and the Courts will have to weigh evidence and the Prosecution as well would have to look at the evidence to see whether there is any merit to the complaint. So, the intent of the Act, is not to go after bona fide palliative arrangements. I think that is as far as I could go but quite a lot of it is fact-sensitive.
On the issue of under-reporting, we are aware this is a global phenomenon. We have made changes to our various processes, including reporting processes and the provisions today as well. These show a clear trajectory that we will like to provide extended support to victims of sexual offences and we will do what we can. There will be various studies to see how we can extend our outreach and support people who are in such situations.
The Chairman: There are no other clarifications.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Amrin Amin]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee. (proc text)]
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair]
[(proc text) Clauses 1 to 7 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 8 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 8. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are seven amendments to clause 8, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together.
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 to 7* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendments 1 to 5 proposed in clause 8 are to clarify the objective formulation of “rashness”. This is in line with the common law as stated by the High Court in PP vv Hue An Li. Amendment 6 is to clarify that some offences may have some physical elements which are strict liability, and have no corresponding fault elements. Amendment 7 is to clarify the defence for a strict liability offence, which arises when the accused person shows that he exercised reasonable care in doing all the acts or omissions which are physical elements of the offence.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 8, lines 30 and 31: to leave out “, and that it is unreasonable to take that real risk,”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 8, line 32: after “circumstance”, to insert “, if it would have been unreasonable to have taken that risk”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3)\tIn page 9, lines 2 and 3: to leave out “and that it is unreasonable to take that real risk”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (4)\tIn page 9, line 3: to leave out “thing”, and insert “act”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (5)\tIn page 9, line 3: after “effect”, to insert “, if it would have been unreasonable to have taken that risk”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (6)\tIn page 11, line 16: to leave out “that”, and insert “any”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (7)\tIn page 11, lines 19 and 20: to leave out “doing anything or omitting to do anything specified in the charge”, and insert “committing all the acts or omissions that are physical elements of the offence”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 8, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 9 to 14 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 15 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 15. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move the amendment* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendment is to make clear the legislative intent that enhanced penalties for offences committed against domestic workers apply only to employers, members of an employer’s household and employment agents who commit offences against their domestic workers.
[(proc text) *The amendment read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) In page 13, line 9: after “offence)”, to insert “that is committed against that domestic worker”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendment agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 15, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 16 to 27 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 28 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Next amendment. Clause 28. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move the amendment* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendment is to make editorial amendments such that for an accused person to rely on a defence of unsoundness of mind, he must not know that what he is doing is wrong by the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest persons, and wrong as contrary to law.
[(proc text) *The amendment read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) In page 25, line 20: to leave out “or” where it first occurs, and insert “and”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendment agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 28, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 29 to 33 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 34 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: I hope Members are following. There are amendments to clause 34. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are four amendments to clause 34, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together.
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 to 4* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendments are to give effect to the legislative intention that inchoate abetments of offences punishable with death or life imprisonment be punishable with discretionary caning.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 33, line 18: to leave out “and”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 33: after line 18, to insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) “(b) by inserting, immediately after the words “to fine” wherever they appear (including in the Illustration), the words “or to caning”;”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3)\tIn page 33, line 21: to leave out “.”, and insert “; and”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (4)\tIn page 33: after line 21, to insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) “(d) by deleting the words “to a fine” in the Illustration and substituting the words “to fine or to caning”.”. (proc text)]
The Chairman: No clarifications.
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 34, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 35 to 37 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 38 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: For Members who are not following, please refer to the Notice of Amendments to Bill in the Order Paper Supplement. Clause 38. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are two amendments to clause 38, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together.
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 and 2* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The intent behind the amendment to section 121A is to remove the limbs of the offence that do not require the offender to commit any physical act or omission. These are colloquially known as “thought crimes”. While this was not proposed by the Penal Code Review Committee, the Government reviewed this, and is of the view that this should be amended to keep the law updated.
There is value in retaining section 121A, but we should limit its scope. In that regard, the Government proposes to remove the words “compasses, imagines, invents, devises or intends”, and replace them with “plans”. This will remove the “thought crime” limbs of the offence. The term “plans” refers to early preparatory acts which may fall short of the “substantial step” requirement for attempts or criminal conspiracy to be made out. This will allow for authorities to intervene at an earlier stage of planning than what is currently allowed under the law of “attempts” and “criminal conspiracy”. The death penalty will also be removed as a punishment option for this offence, and an imprisonment sentence of up to 20 years will be included as a sentencing option.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 35, line 25: to leave out “Amendment”, and insert “Repeal and re-enactment”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 35: to leave out after “is” in line 26 to end of line 28, and insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) “repealed and the following section substituted therefor: (proc text)]
[(proc text) “Offences against the President’s person (proc text)]
[(proc text) 121A. Whoever plans the death of or hurt to or unlawful imprisonment or restraint of the President, shall be punished with imprisonment for life or for a term which may extend to 20 years and shall, if he is not sentenced to imprisonment for life, also be liable to fine.”.”. (proc text)]
The Chairman: This is the part referred to by Mr Murali Pillai earlier on. There are no clarifications.
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 38, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 39 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 39. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are two amendments to clause 39, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together.
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 and 2* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendments to section 121B remove the “thought crime” limbs of the offence, by deleting the words “compasses, imagines, invents, devises or intends”, and replacing them with the modern term of “plans”.
There is value in retaining section 121B as amended. The term “plans” refers to early preparatory acts which may fall short of the “substantial step” requirement for attempts or criminal conspiracy to be made out. This will allow for authorities to intervene at an earlier stage of planning than what is currently allowed under the law of “attempts” and “criminal conspiracy”.
The death penalty will also be removed as a punishment option for this offence, and an imprisonment sentence of up to 20 years will be included as a sentencing option.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 35, line 29: to leave out “Amendment”, and insert “Repeal and re-enactment”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 35: to leave out after “is” in line 30 to end of line 31, and insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) “repealed and the following section substituted therefor: (proc text)]
[(proc text) “Offences against authority (proc text)]
[(proc text) 121B. Whoever plans the unlawful deprivation or deposition of the President from the sovereignty of Singapore, or the overawing by criminal force of the Government, shall be punished with imprisonment for life or for a term which may extend to 20 years and shall, if he is not sentenced to imprisonment for life, also be liable to fine.”.”. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Yes, Mr Low.
Mr Low Thia Khiang (Aljunied): Mr Deputy Speaker, I have a clarification for Senior Parliamentary Secretary. Why are there so many amendments. Is MHA rushing through the Bill?
Mr Amrin Amin: I thank Mr Low for the question. I think this is a very complex Bill, and as a result, there are some of these amendments and we want to be very careful about this. So some of these amendments needed to be made so as not to leave any doubts and cause problems later on. I apologise for the inconvenience and I think we can get through this quite quickly.
The Chairman: Thank you, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 39, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 40 to 79 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 80 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 80. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are four amendments to clause 80, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together?\"
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 to 4* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. Amendments 1 and 3 clarify the meaning of \"premeditation\" to make clear that it refers to the fault elements of the accused person arising before the time of the offence. Amendment 2 makes an editorial amendment to correctly site the proviso that an offender cannot rely on the Exception of sudden fight if he knew or had reason to believe that the victim was acting in obedience to the law or was a public servant lawfully exercising his powers in Exception 4. Amendment 4 is an editorial amendment to clarify that for an accused person to rely on Exception 7 of Diminished Responsibility, he must not know that what he is doing is wrong by the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest persons, and wrong as contrary to law.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 58: to leave out after \"intention\" in line 2 to end of line 5, and insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) \", which was formed prior to the circumstances which gave rise to the act of private defence — (proc text)]
[(proc text) (a)\tto cause death in section 300(a) or to cause such bodily injury as is mentioned in section 300(b) or (c); or (proc text)]
[(proc text) (b) to do an act knowing that the act is so imminently dangerous in the way mentioned in section 300(d).\";\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 58, line 6: to leave out \"3\", and insert \"4\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3)\tIn page 58: to leave out after \"intention\" in line 21 to end of line 24, and insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) \", which was formed prior to the circumstances constituting the sudden fight — (proc text)]
[(proc text) (a)\tto cause death in section 300(a) or to cause such bodily injury as is mentioned in section 300(b) or (c); or (proc text)]
[(proc text) (b)\tto do an act knowing that the act is so imminently dangerous in the way mentioned in section 300(d).\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (4)\tIn page 59, line 28: after \"or\" where it first occurs, to insert \"wrong\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 80, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 81 and 82 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 83 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 83. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are nine amendments to clause 83, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together?\"
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 to 9* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. Amendments 1 to 4 provide that the scope of offenders covered by the new offence of \"causing death by sustained abuse\" should cover persons who have care, custody and control of a child or a vulnerable person, or an employer of the domestic worker, member of the employer's household, or the employment agent of a domestic worker. Amendments 5 to 9 provide that the scope of victims covered by the new offence of \"causing or allowing death\" includes domestic workers. The rationale for these provisions has been dealt with by Minister Shanmugam.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 60, line 12: to leave out \"Whoever\", and insert \"A relevant person who\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 60, line 18: to leave out \"and\", and insert \",\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3)\tIn page 60, line 18: after \" \"employment agent\" \", to insert \"and \"member of the employer's household\" \". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (4)\tIn page 60, line 30: after \"worker\", to insert \", a member of the employer's household\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (5)\tIn page 61, line 12: after \"age\", to insert \", domestic worker\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (6)\tIn page 61, line 15: after \"age\", to insert \", a domestic worker\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (7)\tIn page 62, line 27: to leave out \"10 years of age\", and insert \"the age specified in section 82\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (8)\tIn page 62, lines 28 and 29: to leave out \"or above 10 years of age but below 12 years of age\", and insert \"the age specified in section 83\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (9)\tIn page 63: to leave out lines 5 and 6, and insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"(d) \"domestic worker\" and \"vulnerable person\" have the meanings given by sections 73(4) and 74A(5), respectively; and\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 83, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 84 and 86 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 87 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 87. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move the amendment* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendment clarifies the Illustration to make clear that it is only possible to commit attempted culpable homicide with an intention to kill. This renders it consistent with all other attempt offences.
[(proc text) *The amendment read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) In page 65: to leave out after \"amended\" in line 7 to end of line 9, and insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"— (proc text)]
[(proc text) (a) by deleting the words \"such intention or knowledge\" and substituting the words \"the intention to cause death\"; and (proc text)]
[(proc text) (b) by inserting, immediately after the words \"at Z\" in the Illustration, the words \"intending to kill Z\".\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendment agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 87, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 88 and 103 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 104 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 104. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are two amendments to clause 104, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together?
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 and 2* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendments make editorial amendments to replace references to persons below 10 years of age with references to the section numbers of the provisions in the Penal Code on the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility. This is because the increased Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility will only come into force after the mechanism for the management of young children who exhibit offending behaviour is ready.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 71, line 8: to leave out \"10 years of age\", and insert \"the age specified in section 82\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 71, lines 9 and 10: to leave out \"or above 10 years of age but below 12 years of age\", and insert \"the age specified in section 83\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 104, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 105 and 111 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 112 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 112. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move the amendment* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendment makes editorial amendments to the list of offences relating to non-consensual sexual penetration which are excluded from the scope of section 376A.
[(proc text) *The amendment read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) In page 76: to leave out after \"375(1)(a)\" in line 11 to end of line 16, and insert \", 375(1)(b) read with section 375(3), 375(1A)(a), 375(1A)(b) read with section 375(3), 376(1)(a), 376(1)(b) read with section 376(4), 376(2) (if the victim B is of or above 14 years of age) or 376(2) (if the victim B is below 14 years of age) read with section 376(4).\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendment agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 112, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 113 and 116 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 117 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 117. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are 12 amendments to clause 117, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together?
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 to 12* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendments provide for extra-territorial application of the offences of sexual communication with minors and sexual activity or image in presence of minors.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 81, lines 18 and 19: to leave out \"took place in or outside Singapore\", and insert \"originated in Singapore provided that either A or B was in Singapore at the time of such communication\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 82, lines 17 and 18: to leave out \"took place in or outside Singapore\", and insert \"originated in Singapore provided that either A or B was in Singapore at the time of such communication\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3)\tIn page 83, line 3: to leave out \"and\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (4)\tIn page 83: after line 3, to insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"(ii) when either A or B is or both are in Singapore; and\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (5)\tIn page 83, line 16: to leave out \"and\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (6)\tIn page 83, line 18: to leave out \".\", and insert \"; and\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (7)\tIn page 83: after line 18, to insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"(e) either A or B is or both are in Singapore.'. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (8)\tIn page 84, line 11: to leave out \"and\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (9)\tIn page 84: after line 11, to insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"(ii) when either A or B is or both are in Singapore; and\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (10)\tIn page 84, line 27: to leave out \"and\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (11)\tIn page 84, line 28: to leave out \".\", and insert \"; and\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (12)\tIn page 84: after line 28, to insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"(f) either A or B is or both are in Singapore.\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 117, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 118 and 119 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 120 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 120. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are eight amendments to clause 120, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together?
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 to 8* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. Amendments 1, 7 and 8 insert a new provision to provide for extra-territorial application for the offences of producing child abuse material and procuring or using a child in the production of child abuse material. Amendments 2 and 3 are editorial in nature. Amendments 4 to 6 provide that using or involving a child in the production of child abuse material will include situations where a person who has care or custody of a minor under 16 allows the minor to be used for the production of such material.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 88, line 17: to leave out \"377BN\", and insert \"377BO\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 89, lines 14 and 33: to leave out “with that intention”. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3)\tIn page 89, line 33: to leave out \"A's\", and insert \"A\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (4)\tIn page 95, line 10: after \"used\", to insert \"or allows the person to be so used\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (5)\tIn page 98, line 22: to leave out \", causes or procures\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (6)\tIn page 98, line 24: after \"material\", to insert \"or causes or procures B to be so used\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (7)\tIn page 103, line 32: to leave out \"\".\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (8)\tIn page 103: after line 32, to insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"Child abuse material offences outside or partially outside Singapore (proc text)]
[(proc text) 377BO.—(1) Any person, being a citizen or a permanent resident of Singapore, who does, outside Singapore, any act that would, if done in Singapore, constitute an offence under section 377BG, 377BH or 377BL(2) or (3), shall be guilty of an offence under section 377BG, 377BH or 377BL(2) or (3), as the case may be. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2) To avoid doubt, any person (A) who does in Singapore, any act involving a person below 16 years of age (B) and B is outside Singapore, that would if B were in Singapore constitute an offence under section 377BG or 377BH, shall be guilty of an offence under section 377BG or 377BH, as the case may be. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3) Any person who does outside Singapore, any act involving a person below 16 years of age (B) and B is in Singapore, that would if done in Singapore constitute an offence under section 377BG or 377BH, shall be guilty of an offence under section 377BG or 377BH, as the case may be. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (4) Subsections (5) and (6) apply only where A is in a relationship that is exploitative of B. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (5) To avoid doubt, any person (A) who does in Singapore, any act involving a person who is of or above 16 but below 18 years of age (B) and B is outside Singapore, that would if B were in Singapore constitute an offence under section 377BL(2) or (3), shall be guilty of an offence under section 377BL(2) or (3), as the case may be. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (6) Any person (A) who does outside Singapore, any act involving a person who is of or above 16 but below 18 years of age (B) and B is in Singapore, that would if done in Singapore constitute an offence under section 377BL(2) or (3), shall be guilty of an offence under section 377BL(2) or (3), as the case may be. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (7) To avoid doubt, any person who does in Singapore an act which is a physical element of an offence under section 377BG, 377BH or 377BL(2) or (3) shall be guilty of an offence under section 377BG, 377BH or 377BL(2) or (3), as the case may be, if all the fault elements and physical elements of the offence are proven even though other physical elements of the same offence occurred outside Singapore. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Illustrations (proc text)]
[(proc text) (a) A, a citizen or a permanent resident of Singapore, films in a foreign country a video recording of child abuse material involving a person below 16 years of age (B). B is in that foreign country during the filming. A is guilty of an offence under section 377BG or 377BH read with section 377BO(1).(proc text)]
[(proc text) (b) A, who is in Singapore, uses remote video facilities to film a video recording of child abuse material involving a person below 16 years of age (B). B is in a foreign country during the filming. A is guilty of an offence under section 377BG or 377BH read with section 377BO(2). (proc text)]
[(proc text) (c) A, who is in a foreign country and is not a citizen or a permanent resident of Singapore, uses remote video facilities to film a video recording of child abuse material involving a person below 16 years of age (B). B is in Singapore during the filming. A is guilty of an offence under section 377BG or 377BH read with section 377BO(3). (proc text)]
[(proc text) (d) A, who is in Singapore, uses computer software to alter and reproduce child abuse material which was not filmed in Singapore. The child abuse material is not stored in Singapore but in a computer server in a foreign country which A accesses through A’s computer in Singapore. A is guilty of an offence under section 377BH read with section 377BO(7).\".\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 120, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 121 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 121. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are three amendments to clause 121, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together?
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 to 3* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. These amendments are editorial, and consequential to the insertion of a new provision relating to the extra-territorial application of the offences of producing child abuse material and using or involving a child in the production of child abuse material.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 104, line 5: to leave out \"377BN\", and insert \"377BO\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 104, line 6: to leave out \"377BN\", and insert \"377BO\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3)\tIn page 106, line 5: to leave out \"377BN\", and insert \"377BO\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 121, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 122 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 122. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move the amendment* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendment makes editorial amendments to the list of minor-specific offences in section 377D. If the accused person had previously been charged for these minor-specific offences, he cannot avail himself of the defence in section 377D.
[(proc text) *The amendment read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) In page 110, line 7: to leave out \"375(1)(a), 375(1A)(b), 376(1), 376(2)\", and insert '375(1)(b), 375(1A)(b), 376(1) (if the victim B is below 14 years of age), 376(2) (if the victim B is below 14 years of age)\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendment agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 122, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 123 to 137 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 138 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 138. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move the amendment* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendment makes editorial amendments to ensure that similar definitions of “representation” apply for the offences of fraud introduced in sections 424A and 424B.
[(proc text) *The amendment read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) In page 121, line 18: after \"section\", to insert \"and section 424B\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendment agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 138, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 139 to 166 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 167 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 167. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are four amendments to clause 167, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together?
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 to 4* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendments are editorial amendments to provide clear examples of situations where a person has committed an offence of attempt, and to provide that for offences of attempts, mandatory minimum sentences for the underlying offence do not apply.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 134, line 11: to leave out \"act or\", and insert \"person in such possession\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 134, line 16: to leave out \"act or\", and insert \"person mentioned in subsection (1)\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3)\tIn page 135, line 30: to leave out \"subsection (1)\", and insert “that subsection\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (4)\tIn page 136, line 7: to leave out \"(1)\", and insert \"(2)\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 167, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 168 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 169 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 169. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are five amendments to clause 169, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together?
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 to 5* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendments provide for consequential amendments to the First Schedule of the Criminal Procedure Code arising from the amendments made during the Committee Stage.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 142, lines 41 and 44: after \"years\", to insert \" and fine'. (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 142, lines 43 and 46: after \"years”, to insert \", and fine, or caning\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3)\tIn page 143, line 18: to leave out \"items relating to sections 121 and 121B\", and insert “item relating to section 121\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (4)\tIn page 143: after line 18, to insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"(g) by deleting the word “Ditto” under the sixth column in the item relating to section 121A and substituting the words \"Imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for 20 years, and fine\"; (proc text)]
[(proc text) (h) by inserting, immediately after the word \"life,\" under the sixth column in the item relating to section 121B, the words \"or imprisonment for 20 years,\";\".(proc text)]
[(proc text) (5)\tIn page 148, line 35: after 'age', to insert \", domestic worker\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 169, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 170 to 173 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 174 – (proc text)]
The Chairman: Clause 174. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Amrin.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, there are three amendments to clause 174, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. As the amendments are related, may I seek your permission to move them together?
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Amrin Amin: Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move amendments 1 to 3* standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs, as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement. The amendments provide that the lifting of marital privilege under section 124 of the Evidence Act will apply to the following situations:
(a)\tChild abuse offences committed against a person below 16 years old;
(b)\tAll hurt offences committed against children. This is consistent with the coverage of domestic workers and vulnerable persons; and
(c)\tAll attempts, abetments, and conspiracies to commit such specified offences.
This will ensure that spouses of an accused person can be required to give evidence in a trial of that accused person for sexual or violent offences committed against children.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 166, line 1: after \"offence\", to insert \"committed against a person below 16 years of age\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 166, line 2: after \"offence\", to insert \"or an offence under Chapter XVI of the Penal Code (other than a sexual offence)\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3)\tIn page 166: after line 17, to insert — (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"(e) an abetment of, a conspiracy to commit or an attempt to commit any of the offences mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (d);\". (proc text)]
[(proc text) Amendments agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clause 174, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Clauses 175 to 191 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Consequential amendments* to be made will be made.
[(proc text) *The amendments read as follows: (proc text)]
[(proc text) (1)\tIn page 33, line 19: to re-letter paragraph (b) as paragraph (c). (proc text)]
[(proc text) (2)\tIn page 83, line 4: to renumber sub-paragraph (ii) as sub-paragraph (iii). (proc text)]
[(proc text) (3)\tIn page 84, line 12: to renumber sub-paragraph (ii) as sub-paragraph (iii). (proc text)]
[(proc text) (4)\tIn pages 143 to 161: to re-letter paragraphs (g) to (zzzn) as paragraphs (i) to (zzzp), respectively. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Before we read the Bill for the Third time, I just want to thank all Members for their patience.
[(proc text) Bill reported with amendments; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn to 10.30 am tomorrow.\" – [Mr Desmond Lee]. (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 7.45 pm.
19 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) what is the impact to Singapore in the event of a prolonged stoppage of water treatment operations at the Johor River Waterworks; and (b) what are Singapore's obligations to provide treated water to Johor under such a scenario.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: PUB will shut down its Johor River Waterworks when the Johor River is affected by pollution upstream of our waterworks. Johor also has water treatment plants along the Johor River, upstream of the Johor River Waterworks, and will shut down the plants when pollution occurs upstream of them.
Since 2017, there have been seven pollution incidents along the Johor River which caused PUB's Johor River Waterworks to be temporarily shut down. These incidents have been traced to illegal discharges from premises such as palm oil mills and chicken farms within the catchment area. These pollution incidents typically cause disruptions ranging from several hours to several days. So far this year, there have been two pollution incidents, with the most recent one on 4 April 2019, where there were high ammonia levels in the Johor River.
Given the importance of the Johor River to the water supply of both Singapore and Johor, we have expressed our concern over the frequent recurrence of pollution incidents to Malaysia, both at the federal and state levels. Most recently at the Singapore-Malaysia Leaders' Retreat in April, Prime Minister Lee raised concerns over pollution in the Johor River and the severe impact of pollution incidents on both countries.
Under the 1962 Water Agreement, Singapore is entitled to draw 250 million gallons per day (mgd) of water from the Johor River, while Johor is entitled to buy treated water up to 2% of the total quantity of water we import to Singapore on any given day, or about 5 mgd when Singapore draws its full entitlement. In practice, we have been selling Johor 16 mgd of treated water, which is in excess of their entitlement, at Johor's request. We do so on a goodwill basis without prejudice to our rights under the 1962 Water Agreement. When we are unable to import any water from Johor due to pollution, Singapore has no obligation to supply treated water to Malaysia.
During these pollution incidents, PUB works closely with the Johor authorities to flush the polluted water column from the Johor River. Such collaboration between PUB and its Johor counterparts has helped us to manage the pollution incidents. PUB conducts stringent water quality tests to ensure that the raw water from the Johor River is suitable for treatment before resuming abstractions and operations. During such temporary disruptions, PUB steps up production at desalination plants and local waterworks to meet Singapore's demand.
Nevertheless, pollution incidents along the Johor River impacts the water supply of both countries, and remain a serious concern. We will continue to engage our Malaysian counterparts on the need for them to take measures to prevent future pollution incidents along the Johor River.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Preventive Measures at Hospitals in light of Emergence of Drug-resistant Superbugs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"21 Dr Chia Shi-Lu asked the Minister for Health in light of the emergence of drug-resistant bacteria and fungus including Candida auris (a) whether the Ministry will be revising its strategy on measures to deal with superbugs; and (b) how will preventive measures be strengthened in our hospitals and clinics.
22 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Health in light of the dangers of multidrug-resistant pathogens such as candida auris, what measures are being planned to ensure that public confidence in our hospitals remains high.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The emergence of microorganisms such as viruses, bacteria and fungi which are resistant to standard drugs and treatments, a phenomenon also known as Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR), is a global public health issue. While AMR can occur naturally in some microorganisms, the misuse and overuse of antimicrobials such as antibiotics globally in healthcare, as well as the animal and agricultural sectors, have led to accelerated development of AMR. Due to increased global connectivity, there is a growing risk of AMR being spread internationally. Singapore, being a global travel hub, is exposed to the importation of AMR organisms.
Candida auris is one example of an antimicrobial resistant fungus. It was first identified in 2009 in Japan and subsequently reported from other parts of the world, including Singapore. The first case of Candida auris here was reported in 2012. To date, a total of 16 cases have been detected in the public and private hospitals. Investigations showed that the cases are unlinked, and there is no report of local spread.
We have put in place a number of measures to address the development and spread of AMR in Singapore. These include regulation on the prescription and retail of antibiotics to minimise the risk of misuse and overuse, and public education campaigns on the proper use of antibiotics, such as HPB's \"Use Antibiotics Right\" campaign in 2018.
Within our public hospitals, there are Antimicrobial Stewardship Programmes to guide doctors in making appropriate antimicrobial drug use, and Infection and Prevention Control measures to reduce the risk of spread of antimicrobial-resistant organisms. Notwithstanding these measures, we can expect infections with antimicrobial-resistant organisms to occur from time to time as microbes can naturally acquire AMR and antimicrobials still need to be used for treating infections. Healthcare institutions must therefore remain vigilant in surveillance and maintain high levels of infection prevention and control to prevent spread of AMR. MOH also works with healthcare institutions to monitor antimicrobial resistance and healthcare-associated infections.
As AMR is a cross-border issue, MOH also participates in regional and global collaborations to tackle the AMR challenge.
We launched the National Strategic Action Plan on AMR in end 2017 to outline our long term approach towards AMR. This was the result of a joint review by MOH, National Parks Board, Singapore Food Agency, National Environment Agency and PUB, Singapore's national water agency. The plan is aligned to the global action plan on AMR. Under the plan, we are progressively implementing enhanced measures in the priority areas of Education, Surveillance, Research, Prevention & Control of Infection and Optimization of antimicrobial use. The AMR Coordination Office was also established as the national coordinating body to facilitate the implementation of the National Strategic Action plan on AMR.
Beyond actions taken by agencies and professionals, individuals too play a part in the prudent use of antibiotics or antimicrobials. We encourage patients and consumers to consult doctors on the best course of medical treatments, take antimicrobials according to doctor’s advice and only when indicated. Everyone of us must also practise good personal hygiene to protect ourselves from infection.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Average CPF Balance of Persons in Different Income Groups and Proposal to Offer Differentiated CPF Interest Rates","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"25 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the average CPF balance for individual CPF members at varying percentiles from the 5th to the 95th percentile; and (b) whether the CPF Board will consider offering differentiated interest rates so those with lower CPF balances can receive more interest to build up their balances and a lower interest rate for those who have high balances.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The CPF system is already designed to be progressive through limits on CPF contributions and differentiated interest rates.
There are monthly and annual limits on the amount of CPF contributions a member can make. Mandatory CPF contributions from ordinary wages are capped at the salary ceiling of $6,000 per month. The maximum amount of mandatory and voluntary contributions that a person can make in a calendar year is subject to the CPF annual limit, currently at $37,740.
CPF members with lower balances earn a higher effective interest rate than those with higher balances. This is because CPF interest rates are differentiated based on a member's CPF balance. Balances in the Ordinary Account earn 2.5% per annum, while those in the Special Account, Retirement Account, and MediSave Account earn 4% per annum. On top of this, since 2008, an Extra Interest of 1% is paid on the first $60,000 of combined CPF balances. Since 2016, CPF members aged 55 and above also receive an Additional Extra Interest of 1% on the first $30,000 of their combined CPF balances. Hence, members aged 55 and above enjoy interest rates of up to 6% for the first $30,000, up to 5% for the next $30,000 and up to 4% for balances above $60,000.
Members' balances can vary widely due to their unique circumstances, such as differences in age, employment, income, and withdrawals for retirement payouts and housing payments. In 2018, for active CPF members turning 55, more than six in 10 had at least the Basic Retirement Sum (BRS) of $85,500 in their Ordinary and Special Accounts. Over time, we expect members' CPF balances to increase with rising income and labour force participation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Appeals by Persons who have Obtained BTO Flats more than Twice in Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"27 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many appeals have been received from applicants or joint applicants for BTO flats who have obtained BTO flats more than twice in the last five years; (b) how many of such appeals have been approved; and (c) whether the Ministry will review and revise the existing schemes to accommodate such applicants and allow a conditional third chance to be given to such applicants.
Mr Lawrence Wong: All eligible Singaporeans can purchase two subsidised BTO flats from HDB, and they have to pay a resale levy for the second purchase. We have also allowed seniors aged 55 and above to buy a flat from HDB for a third time, but this is limited to a 2-room Flexi flat on a short lease. We are unable to extend housing subsidies for non-elderly households to buy a third new flat, as this would not be fiscally sustainable.
However, HDB does receive such appeals and will consider each one on a case-by-case basis. Over the last five years, HDB received about 790 appeals to buy a third subsidised flat. About 150 were approved, based on exceptional circumstances. In particular, if an appellant and his/her spouse are buying a subsidised flat together, and the spouse is a first-timer, HDB may consider making an exception on account of the fact that the spouse has not yet taken up any housing subsidy.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Government's Stand on Developers Offering Two-year Deferment Schemes to Home Buyers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"28 Mr Zainal Sapari asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the Ministry's position on developers who offer two-year deferments to prospective buyers; (b) whether the buyer and seller stamp duty will be based on the date of signing the Option-to-Purchase obtained earlier under the two-year deferment plan or on the date of signing the Sale and Purchase Agreement; and (c) whether developers are required to pay stamp duty for unsold units after five years even after an Option-To-Purchase has been obtained but a Sale and Purchase Agreement has not been executed yet.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Since October 2007, the Government has disallowed deferred payment schemes for uncompleted private residential properties. So deferred payment schemes are only applicable for completed private residential developments. As with any property transaction, buyers should exercise due diligence and prudence before committing to a purchase under such a scheme.
For the purpose of stamp duties, a unit is only considered sold when the Sale and Purchase (S&P) Agreement has been executed. The buyer's and seller's stamp duties are based on the date of execution of the S&P Agreement. Likewise to qualify for ABSD remission, developers will have to ensure that all units within the development are sold, with the S&P Agreements executed, within the prescribed period of five years.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Processing Time for Make-up Pay for In-camp Training","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"33 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Defence (a) why does SAF still require 10 working days to process NSmen make up pay for in-camp training; and (b) whether SAF can reduce the current processing time of 10 working days.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: NSmen who have submitted their claims are paid their Make-Up Pay within 10 working days from the start of their ORNS activity. The primary reason for this timeline is to verify the NSmen's training attendance before payment is made, to ensure accountability in the use of public funds. In practice, NSmen are typically paid within five working days for Low Key In-Camp Trainings (ICTs) and seven working days for High Key ICTs. In some cases, a longer time may be needed to verify claim details with NSmen and their employers.
We regularly review our systems and processes to make the process of claiming Make-Up Pay more efficient and convenient for our NSmen and their employers. Employers are encouraged to register with the Direct Reimbursement to Employers of Claims for NS Training, or DIRECT, scheme. Under this scheme, the employer will continue to pay the serviceman his usual pay and claim reimbursement from MINDEF.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Workplace Accidents in Schools Involving Cleaners","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"35 Mr Zainal Sapari asked the Minister for Education (a) in the last three years, what has been the trend and number of workplace accidents in schools involving school cleaners engaged by the Ministry; (b) what is the percentage of such school cleaners who have undergone training related to workplace safety and health (WSH); and (c) whether the Ministry can consider mandating all cleaning team leaders and supervisors in schools to attend the WSH Hazard Identification and Risk Management Course to reduce potential workplace injuries sustained by school cleaners.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Since the current school cleaning contract commenced on 1 October 2017, 35 cases of workplace accidents involving school cleaners were reported to MOM, out of about 3,300 school cleaners engaged. About half of these cases reported involved slips and falls.
MOE has been, and will continue to work with our cleaning contractors to pay attention to workplace safety and health issues for school cleaners. To reduce potential workplace injuries, MOE requires all our appointed cleaning contractors to provide a Workplace Safety and Health Officer to carry out risk assessment and monthly cleaning safety checks in schools. In addition, MOE holds regular meetings with our cleaning contractors to look at safety concerns and work together to improve workplace safety for our school cleaners.
Currently, about 50% of the school cleaners have undergone training related to workplace safety and health. We will take the Member's suggestion to require all cleaners to undergo the training, when we review subsequent school cleaning contracts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Police Reports Filed against PMD Users","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"41 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) in the past three years, how many police reports have been filed against users of personal mobility devices (PMD) who are involved in accidents where their victims were injured; (b) on average, how long does the investigation take to conclude a case; and (c) what is the average amount of compensation that has been ordered by the courts to be paid out to the victims.
Mr K Shanmugam: Between 2016 and 2018, there were about 200 reported accidents involving personal mobility devices (PMD) that resulted in injuries to another person.
Each case is different. The amount of time taken to investigate hence varies, and depends on a number of factors, including the availability of evidence.
We do not have information on the average amount of compensation ordered by the courts to be paid to victims.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singaporeans or PRs Involved in Easter Sunday Bombings in Sri Lanka","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"42 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether any Singaporeans, Singapore Permanent Residents or families with a Singapore-nexus have been casualties in the bombings in Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday 2019; and (b) what can our security agencies learn from the bombing incidents to help deter similar acts of violence from happening in places of worship in Singapore.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Easter Sunday bombings in Sri Lanka was one of the most horrific terrorist attacks since 11 September, leaving more than 250 dead and 500 wounded.
There were no Singaporeans among the casualties, and we do not know of any Singapore Permanent Residents who were injured either. However, a Singapore-based British lawyer, Anita Nicholson and her two children Alexander and Annabel, were killed. We are deeply saddened. MFA has been working with our Honorary Consul-General in Colombo to monitor the situation closely and to help Singaporeans there.
There are several lessons.
First, international cooperation is crucial to combating terrorism. In the lead-up to the attacks, it was reported that the Sri Lanka authorities had received information from foreign counterparts. Unfortunately, it appears that not enough was done to follow up on the information. In our region, security agencies regularly share intelligence for our common fight against terrorism. Such collaboration has helped to thwart many plots and attacks.
Second, the importance of security forces being able to respond swiftly when attacks occur. In periods of heightened threat, Police will step up deployment at places with high human traffic and at sensitive locations such as places of worship. We are ramping up the number of Police In-Situ Reaction Teams deployed on the ground at areas with high footfall, such as Orchard Road and Marina Bay, to provide quick response. They are highly trained to deal with terror incidents, and complement the existing Emergency Response Teams and Rapid Deployment Troops.
Third, it is important to have strong support from building owners to adopt enhanced security measures. The Police will work closely with them to enhance the security of their premises. These include installing hostile vehicle mitigation measures, CCTVs, deployment of security officers for checks on persons and belongings, and even structural hardening against bomb blasts.
As for places of worship, MCCY has distributed a security advisory to them. Later this year, MCCY will also be introducing the SGSecure Community Network Crisis Preparedness Accreditation Scheme for religious organisations. Under the scheme, MCCY will produce and disseminate checklists and resource guides that will help them improve their crisis preparedness.
It is also important that the general population be prepared against the terror threat. If they react appropriately, they will stand a better chance of survival, and perhaps even prevent the attacks in the first place. As part of SGSecure, we sensitise Singaporeans to identify and report suspicious items and behavior, to \"Run, Hide, Tell\" when the attacks are in progress, and to help fellow Singaporeans who are injured with \"Press, Tie, Tell\".
The Sri Lanka attacks are another clear example of the need to act decisively and firmly against radicalisation, whether online or on the ground. The leader of the attacks, Zahran Hashim, had been preaching messages of hate against non-Muslims for a period of time. The group he led was not large, but he was able to use social media to spread his message to a wider audience. Despite his active propagation of messages of hate, neither Zahran nor his group were picked up. And his messages of hate were not stopped. This allowed him time and space to brainwash many Sri Lankan Muslims into carrying out the attacks, including some prominent and well-off members of the community.
Singapore has zero tolerance. We will continue to be strict about hate speech and radical ideology, and will deal with their purveyors.
Finally, the criticality of racial and religious harmony in society. Sri Lanka has gone through years of turmoil because of racial and religious tension. Up till 2009, Sri Lanka was embroiled in a decades-long civil war between the majority Sinhalese and the minority Tamils that killed more than 100,000 people. More recently, there had been riots between the Sinhalese Buddhists and the Muslims. Now, the Catholics and Christians have been targeted. This is very sad.
If any attack were to succeed here, we must not allow it to seriously affect the racial and religious harmony which we have painstakingly built up over 50 years, and which has been a cornerstone of our peace and progress. Our racial and religious harmony did not come about by chance, and it should never be taken for granted. It is fragile, and can all too easily be shattered, not just by distrust in the aftermath of a terror attack, but by careless and irresponsible words and expressions during times of peace. Nor should we believe that no one will be offended, and allow offensive speech or hate speech in public discourse.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Road Accidents Involving Pedestrians Using Mobile Phones","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether the Ministry tracks the number of road accidents involving pedestrians who use their mobile phones; (b) if so, what are the numbers of such accidents over the past three years; and (c) whether there needs to be legislation or measures put in place to deter people from using their mobile phones while walking.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Police do not track the number of accidents involving pedestrians who were using their mobile phones when the accident occurred.
The use of mobile phones is but one of many activities that can cause pedestrians to be distracted while crossing roads. Other examples include reading a book, listening to music through headphones and earphones, or talking to another person. It is not practical to try to legislatively prohibit pedestrians from engaging in such activities. A better approach is to foster good road safety habits and personal responsibility.
In this regard, Traffic Police (TP) conducts regular outreach to educate the public on the dangers of distracted crossing. An example is the \"Use Your RoadSense\" initiative. As part of this initiative, TP uses traditional and social media to disseminate advisories on safe road-use, such as staying alert to one's surroundings when crossing the road.
Since 2014, LTA has installed \"LOOK\" road markings at zebra crossings, to alert pedestrians to road crossings ahead and to remind them to look out for oncoming vehicles.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Payment for A&E Services in Public Hospitals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"44 Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar asked the Minister for Health (a) whether payment for accident and emergency (A&E) services in the public hospitals is needed to be made in full in cash upfront or after medical treatment has been rendered; and (b) whether low-income or needy patients seeking A&E services are eligible for subsidised fees.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: All patients who visit the A&E department in a public hospital are charged at a single flat subsidised rate for basic investigations and services, regardless of income.
The payment process of A&E departments varies across public hospitals depending on their operational considerations. In emergency cases, such as when patients arrive via ambulance, they are always attended to first and payment is collected after treatment. In some non-emergency cases, the flat fee may be collected upfront, whereas in other cases it would be collected after the service is rendered.
No one will be denied essential healthcare services, including A&E, due to the inability to pay. Patients who face difficulties in paying for their A&E fees can approach the medical social workers to seek financial assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Uber's Employment Practices are In Line with Singapore's Tripartite Standards","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"47 Mr Ang Hin Kee asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry plans to engage the new management team of Uber's new Asia Pacific Regional Hub to ensure that the company's manpower management will be better this time round and complies with tripartite standards so as to avoid a repeat of employees and contract staff who were left in a lurch during the company's sudden exit in 2018; and (b) whether there remains unresolved disputes among ex-staff and contract workers with regard to their sudden termination.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Following news of Uber's sudden exit last year, MOM intervened to work closely with Uber's management team to ensure that the Grab-Uber merger was managed sensitively and responsibly. We have been in touch with Uber and will continue to engage them on relevant employment issues. They also pro-actively sought MOM's advice on a subsequent transaction, and appropriately handled the HR issues in that case.
All employees who were affected by the merger have been provided their contractual entitlements, including retrenchment benefits in accordance with the Tripartite Advisory on Managing Excess Manpower and Responsible Retrenchment. There are no unresolved disputes to our knowledge.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Complaints from Owners of DBSS Flats about Recurrent Defects or Discoloured Floorings","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"48 Dr Lily Neo asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether there are ongoing complaints from owners of apartments in DBSS projects about fixture defects such as recurrent discoloured flooring; and (b) what help will the Ministry give to such apartment owners in resolving the issues with the DBSS developer after the defects liability period.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS) was introduced in 2005 to give flat buyers more choice by allowing private developers to design, build and sell flats directly to buyers. While HDB sets the eligibility requirements for purchase and provides broad planning parameters, the DBSS developer is responsible for the design, pricing and construction of the flat.
Under the Sale and Purchase (S&P) Agreement signed between home buyers and the DBSS developer, the developer is contractually required to build the unit in accordance with the materials, finishes, and other specifications set out in the Agreement. The Agreement also stipulates that the developer must rectify any defects within the one-year Defects Liability Period (DLP). Flat owners are responsible for the maintenance of their flats after the DLP.
From time to time, HDB is made aware of concerns from some DBSS flat owners about the quality of the fixtures in their flats. In such cases, although HDB is not a party to the S&P Agreement between the developer and the buyer, HDB actively seeks to facilitate a fair and satisfactory outcome. For instance, if HDB receives feedback from DBSS flat owners on new or recurrent defects, whether during or after the DLP, HDB will surface the issues raised to the developer and urge the developer to address the issues with the owners. These issues may be complicated due to differences in views on what constitutes a defect. Should disagreements persist, HDB will advise flat owners to seek independent legal advice on their possible options for recourse under the S&P Agreement.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proportion of Children in Cohort Whose Parents Maximise Co-matching Amount for CDA","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"51 Mr Zainal Sapari asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the average and median amount in the Child Development Account (CDA) for children born in 2006 when they reached 12 years of age by 31 December 2018; (b) what is the percentage of children in this cohort where the parents are able to fully maximise the co-matching amount for their child's CDA; and (c) whether the Ministry can extend the closure of a CDA to when the child is 16 years old before the balance is transferred to the child's Post-Secondary Education Account which will then allow the child's parents more years to co-match up to the allowable cap.
Mr Desmond Lee: Children born in 2006 were eligible for up to $6,000 in Government co-matching in the Child Development Account, or CDA, if they are the second child, and up to $12,000 if they are the third or fourth child. In addition, the 2006 birth cohort was a transitional cohort where parents could choose to either close the CDA at the end of the year their child turned six, or extend the CDA till the end of the year their child turned 12. Parents who chose the latter also had the flexibility to close the CDA at any time when the child was between seven and 12 years old.
For those whose CDAs were closed at the end of 2018, the year in which the 2006 birth cohort turned 12, the average and median amounts remaining in the CDA were about $3,300 and $500 respectively. Sixty-four percent of these accounts maximised the Government co-matching in the CDA.
When the CDA is closed, the balance is transferred to the child's Post-Secondary Education Account, or PSEA. Today, parents can already continue saving in the PSEA to enjoy Government co-matching if they have not saved up to the co-savings caps in the CDA.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of and Time Taken to Clear Vehicles that Break Down on the Roads","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"54 Mr Ang Hin Kee asked the Minister for Transport (a) what is the current monthly number of vehicle breakdowns on roads; (b) whether that pattern has changed over the years; (c) what is the most frequent type of vehicles that break down on the roads; (d) what is the current recovery time taken to clear vehicle breakdowns and whether it has improved over time; and (e) what more can be done to reduce the time needed to clear the roads due to vehicle breakdowns.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: LTA provides vehicle recovery services on expressways and tunnels. Vehicle breakdowns along other roads are attended to by private vehicle recovery services; they are not tracked by LTA.
Between 2013 and 2018, the number of vehicle breakdowns per month on tunnels and expressways ranged between 2000 and 2500. Cars have consistently accounted for the largest proportion of these breakdowns – about 45% last year. LTA's vehicle recovery services are placed on stand-by near expressways and tunnels, to ensure timely responses. Upon activation, LTA will generally arrive within 8 minutes and 15 minutes for tunnels and expressways respectively, and clear the vehicles within 10 minutes after arrival.
Motorists can play their part, by moving their broken down vehicles to the road shoulder where possible. They should also regularly service their vehicles to minimise such occurrences.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"LCD Displays at MRT Platforms to Indicate Time Remaining before Train Doors Close","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"55 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry will consider installing LCD display boards with a timer countdown feature on our MRT platforms to indicate the time remaining before the train doors close, for the safety and convenience of MRT commuters.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: LTA and the public transport operators had previously studied having countdown timers for MRT platforms. They concluded that such a feature could create unnecessary anxiety amongst commuters and compromise safety, especially if one's attention is fixated on the timer and not the surroundings.
Instead, our MRT platforms are equipped with audio and visual cues to alert commuters of closing doors. Commuters are familiar with the train chimes and flashing lights. These are features consistently applied to all our MRT lines, and most systems in other cities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of People Using Medisave to Pay for Parents' Healthcare Bills","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"57 Mr Png Eng Huat asked the Minister for Health in each year of the past five years, what is the number of people using MediSave to pay for their parents' healthcare cost and what is the median withdrawal value.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Over the past five years, the number of Medisave withdrawals for parents' healthcare expenses has varied between 161,000 in 2014 and 193,000 in 2018, or 9.7% and 3.8% respectively of the total number of Medisave withdrawals. The average withdrawal amount ranged between $760 in 2014 to about $440 in 2018.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cases of Suspected Unauthorised Subletting of HDB Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"59 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for National Development in the three years prior to 2017 where there were about 70 cases in which enforcement action was taken against errant flat owners whose flats were overcrowded (a) how often are checks and investigations conducted on HDB flats suspected of unauthorised subletting or overcrowding based on public feedback; (b) whether the current penalties are sufficient; and (c) how is the Ministry working with the community to enhance surveillance and awareness.
Mr Lawrence Wong: HDB flats are meant for owner-occupation. Notwithstanding this, HDB flat owners are allowed to rent out their flats with HDB's approval after they have met the minimum occupation period.
Flat owners are responsible for ensuring that there are no dis-amenities or overcrowding in the flats during the period of rental. To ensure that the rules are complied with, HDB carries out proactive inspections on an ongoing basis. In addition, HDB investigates every case of public feedback received on suspected unauthorised rental or overcrowding.
HDB takes a serious view of such infringements and will take action against errant flat owners. Depending on the severity and circumstances of the infringement, HDB may issue a written warning, impose a financial penalty of up to $50,000, or acquire the flats compulsorily from the owners. In cases where the tenant is found to have sublet the flat to occupants without the knowledge of the flat owners, HDB will debar these errant tenants from renting a whole flat for five years. These measures are adequate deterrents.
As part of HDB's community outreach efforts, HDB organises community programmes such as Heartland Talks, and publicises cases of action taken against flat owners who have breached the rental rules. HDB residents and members of the public can also play an important role by reporting any suspected infringements to HDB.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Disallowing Cyclists on Bus Lanes during Bus Lane Operating Hours","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"60 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Transport whether LTA will consider disallowing cyclists on bus lanes during the bus lane operating hours taking into consideration that the bus lane is not wide enough to provide a safety distance between the bus and the cyclist.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: Given our land constraints, cyclists have to share our public road lanes with other road users. We have therefore put in place rules to ensure that cyclists interact safely with other road users. This includes requiring them to keep to the left side of the roads where traffic tends to travel at lower speeds and could include bus lanes. To reduce obstruction to bus passage, cyclists are required to cycle in a single file during bus lane operating hours. We have also been equipping public buses with blind-spot mirrors and new buses with collision warning systems, which help bus captains be more aware of the cyclists around them.
Ultimately, road safety is a shared responsibility. Everyone has a part to play by being responsible and keeping a look out for each other.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Instrument Landing System Withdrawal at Seletar Airport","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"61 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport following Singapore's withdrawal of the use of the Instrument Landing System (ILS) for Seletar Airport (a) what are the technical and commercial consequences to Seletar Airport; and (b) whether the ILS is regarded as necessary for the operation of Firefly flights at Seletar Airport when Singapore first decided to implement the ILS.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: Seletar Airport has been operating as a visual airport for decades. This means that pilots flying to and from Seletar Airport need to be able to clearly sight the runway and their operating environment when landing and taking off. This also means that during bad weather, flights may have to be delayed or diverted to other airports. This arrangement has worked well for Seletar Airport as it is a rather small airport.
In 2017, when arrangements were being planned to shift Firefly's flights to Seletar, Firefly asked the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) to install at Seletar Airport an Instrument Landing System (ILS) and its associated flight procedures. Firefly had informed CAAS that an ILS was a requirement by its regulator, the Civil Aviation Authority of Malaysia (CAAM). CAAS agreed to the request as the ILS would also have enabled all other pilots to operate at Seletar in all weather conditions.
While ILS is a commonly used instrument approach, it is not the only one. CAAS and CAAM are working on an alternative, using GPS-based instrument approach procedures.
Meanwhile, flights to and from Seletar Airport are using visual procedures as in the past.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"ACRA’s Oversight of Auditors whose Audit Opinions of Listed Companies Found Wanting","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"62 Mr Png Eng Huat asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) what oversight does ACRA have over auditors whose audit opinions of listed companies are later found to be wanting; and (b) what action is taken against such audit firms or their partners when they are found to be negligent.
Mr Heng Swee Keat: Under the Accountants Act, the Public Accountants Oversight Committee or PAOC is empowered to inspect public accountants' audits of companies' financial statements. The PAOC is a Board committee under the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority or ACRA. The inspections assess public accountants' compliance with the Singapore Standards on Auditing, which are consistent with international auditing standards.
The PAOC's inspections aim to deter audit deficiencies and raise audit quality. Public accountants with audit deficiencies will be sanctioned. Depending on the severity of the deficiencies, the PAOC can inspect the public accountant again, require the public accountant’s work to be reviewed by another public accountant, restrict the type of services that the public accountant can provide, or suspend or cancel the public accountant's license. The names of public accountants whose licenses have been suspended or cancelled will also be published on the ACRA website.
The current audit inspections cover public accountants. Later this year, we plan to amend the Accountants Act to expand audit inspections to audit firms and to apply sanctions for audit firms' lapses. The proposed amendments will hold audit firms to higher accountability.
Our regulatory measures are aimed at providing greater assurance to the public that audits by public accountants meet prevailing standards. However, all parties involved in companies, including directors, audit committees, management, and the accounting profession, have a responsibility and a role to play in ensuring the quality of financial reporting. Investors too need to take appropriate steps to understand the health of the companies and apprise themselves of risks versus returns, when deciding whether to make an investment.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Quality of Training at Overseas Medical Schools Dropped from Approved List","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"63 Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong asked the Minister for Health (a) what are the concerns with the quality of training at the 57 overseas medical schools that are to be dropped from the current list of 160 approved schools; (b) how are these concerns measured and determined; and (c) whether Singaporean students currently studying at these schools or doctors who have graduated from these schools should be concerned with the quality of their training.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: With the addition of Duke-NUS Medical School1 in 2005 and the Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine in 2013, the annual intake of medical students across the three medical schools in Singapore grew from about 300 in 2010 to 502 in 2018. With more doctors being trained locally, we can moderate the number of approved overseas medical schools.
The Singapore Medical Council's (SMC) Schools Review Committee took into consideration various factors including the academic standing and reputation of the schools, reflected by international and national rankings, as well as the performance of our doctors from these universities and how well they adapt to our system when they return to work in our healthcare institutions.
Overall, the SMC chose to retain schools with higher international and national rankings and where SMC's data indicates that doctors who graduated from the schools had performed satisfactorily and had fewer challenges adapting to the local practising environment.
Singaporean students currently studying at, or who will be commencing their medical study before 1 January 2020, and doctors who have graduated from the affected schools will not be affected by this change. All doctors who graduate from overseas schools will be orientated to the local working environment, and they will be assigned a supervisor to ensure that they are able to adapt well.
MOH and SMC reviews the list regularly based on the evolving needs of Singapore's healthcare system. For example, SMC had reduced the number of approved medical schools in 1993 and had increased the number of approved medical schools between 2003 and 2007, to cater to the changing needs of our healthcare system.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Formerly known as Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School."],"footNoteQuestions":["63"],"questionNo":"63"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Complaints to Council of Estate Agencies about Property Agents","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"65 Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked the Minister for National Development over the past three years (a) how many complaints have been made to the Council of Estate Agencies (CEA) about property agents; (b) what is the nature of the complaints made; and (c) how many property agents have been sanctioned by CEA for misconduct.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Between 2016 and 2018, the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) received a total of 2,489 complaints against estate agents and salespersons, or an average of about 830 each year.
Most of the complaints related to service quality and unprofessionalism, such as no-show at appointments. CEA also received complaints on potentially misleading or inaccurate advertisements, and complaints on alleged misconduct, such as failure to declare conflict of interest.
There are three courses of action that CEA can take to punish errant estate agents and salespersons – Court prosecution, action by CEA's Disciplinary Committee, or the issuance of warning letters. Over the past three years,
a. 23 salespersons were convicted in court for offences such as the illegal handling of transaction monies, and were fined.
b. CEA's Disciplinary Committee took action against six estate agents and 42 salespersons for misconduct such as failure to conduct their work with due diligence. The Disciplinary Committee meted out financial penalties, and suspended the salespersons' registration status.
c. Finally, about 700 warning letters were issued to deal with minor infractions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Anti-scalping Legislation in Singapore to Keep in Check Black Market for Concert Tickets","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"66 Mr Ong Teng Koon asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Ministry will consider the anti-scalping laws of other jurisdictions, for example the Major Sports Facilities Act (Queensland, Australia), the Digital Economy Act (UK), the Places of Public Entertainment Ordinance Act (Hong Kong), the Securing Paper Distribution of Entertainment Tickets Act (Japan), and similar legislation in more than 10 states in the United States; and (b) whether the Ministry will study the implementation of such legislation in Singapore to protect the interests of consumers from market manipulation by scalpers.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Generally, there is no prohibition against the resale of goods and services in Singapore, including concerts and sports events tickets, subject to the terms and conditions of the event organiser. The margin which resellers can command is freely determined between willing buyers and sellers.
Event organisers can prohibit resale. Some have put in place measures to curb the unauthorised sales of their tickets. These include printing the names of event goers on tickets and stating clearly that the tickets are not transferrable. Event organisers may also conduct identification checks and void tickets which have been sold by unauthorised sellers.
The Government's approach on consumer protection is based on promoting fair trading by businesses and helping consumers make informed purchasing decisions. We encourage consumers to take steps to protect themselves before making their purchases. Consumers who are purchasing tickets of concerts and sports events can, for example, check the terms and conditions of such tickets carefully before making their purchases, and compare the resale price with the original price of the tickets. If consumers are unsure about the legitimacy of the tickets they are about to buy, they should approach the official event organisers for verification to avoid paying for a ticket which may be subsequently voided by event organisers.
If consumers have reason to believe that suppliers have engaged in unfair trading practices in the sale of tickets, for example, false and misleading claims, they can approach the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) with details of these practices for CASE to assist them in seeking redress from the suppliers. The Competition and Consumer Commission is also empowered with investigation and enforcement powers under the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act to take action against errant suppliers who persist in unfair trading practices. The Police can also investigate if there is fraudulent activity involved in the sale of tickets.
We assess that our current position strikes an appropriate balance between protecting consumers and allowing market forces to operate. We will continue to monitor international developments and the experience of countries with anti-scalping laws and adjust our position if necessary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Public Agencies’ Exemption from Personal Data Protection Act","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Ms Irene Quay Siew Ching asked the Prime Minister with regard to public agencies' exemption from the Personal Data Protection Act (a) whether he can list out the specific clauses in the current laws and instruction manuals that provide for public agencies' accountability on data breaches (not misuse of data) in public IT systems; and (b) whether he can explain how these clauses in the laws collectively impose a high standard of responsibility on all public agencies.
Mr Teo Chee Hean (for the Prime Minister): \tPublic agencies and their officers are subject to data protection provisions set out in the Public Sector (Governance) Act (PSGA) and the Instruction Manual 8 (IM8), as well as in other related legislation. The PSGA criminalises the acts of unauthorised disclosure of data, misuse of data and the re-identification of individuals from anonymised data. Public officers found guilty of these offences can be fined up to $5,000 and/or face a jail term of up to two years. Besides the PSGA, other legislation also criminalise the act of unauthorised disclosure of data, such as the Official Secrets Act, the Banking Act, the Income Tax Act, and the Statistics Act. These provisions serve to deter public service officers from and punish them for the irresponsible use and handling of data. Please refer to Annex A for a list of the relevant clauses in the aforementioned Acts.
Apart from criminal proceedings, public officers found to be negligent in protecting data under their control can face internal disciplinary actions, as provided for in the Public Service (Disciplinary Proceedings) Regulations 1999.
Apart from such legislative sanctions, the government has a number of measures to prevent or minimize the chances of a data security breach and to minimise the consequences of a data breach. All public agencies are required to comply with the provisions of the IM8. The IM8 complements the broad data provisions in the PSGA by setting out the rules and requirements that agencies have to adhere to in order to manage and protect government data under their control. The IM8 prescribes specific measures to protect government data. For example, the IM8 mandates Internet surfing separation, the disabling of USB ports from being accessed by unauthorised devices, and the use of passwords to protect files that contain personal data. The IM8 also prescribes certain data protection processes, such as the prompt removal of access rights, the detection of inactive users and the regular review of system access rights.
Agencies are regularly audited for their compliance with the IM8 requirements, as well as the effectiveness of the measures implemented. The objective of audits is to enable agencies to uncover process and system gaps that should be addressed before a data incident occurs. Where such gaps are identified, agencies are required to draw up plans to close these gaps within a specific timeframe, and the progress of these plans are monitored until the gaps are fully closed. Besides regular IM8 audits, agencies' data management practices may also be audited by the Auditor-General. The outcomes of these audits are reported in Parliament and publicly available; agencies' actions to close the gaps are tracked until completion. Serious irregularities can be brought to the attention of the Ministry of Finance for internal action, as part of the audit process.
The deterrent measures in the PSGA and other legislation, the prescriptive measures in the IM8, as well as the regular IM8 compliance audits, collectively impose upon public agencies and public officers a high level of responsibility for data protection. Data security is essential to upholding public confidence in the Government's ability to deliver a high quality of public service to our citizens through the use of data. The Public Sector Data Security Review Committee, commissioned by the Prime Minister and chaired by Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean, will recommend ways to enhance the policies and practices the public sector already has, to keep pace with advances in technology. This includes keeping accountability measures up-to-date to ensure that data security remains a priority among public service leaders, and to ensure that policies and practices are continually improved to maintain a robust data security regime. The Committee will present its findings and recommendations to the Prime Minister in November 2019.
2 Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked the Minister for Transport what are the steps that LTA has taken to ensure that the Thales signalling system used on Singapore's MRT system is safe for operation in light of the train collisions at Joo Koon station in 2017 and on the Tseun Wan line in Hong Kong recently.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: Ensuring the safety of rail operations is our top priority. The recent train collision on the Tsuen Wan line in Hong Kong is a reminder that we must always be vigilant every step of the way, from robust system design, to rigorous testing and commissioning, and responsible operations and maintenance.
The Thales SelTrac Communications-Based Train Control (CBTC) signalling system is an established product and has been adapted for use on 86 metros across 40 different countries. Hong Kong's Tsuen Wan line and Singapore's North-South and East-West Lines (NSEWL) also use the system. Each system is however custom-built to the metro's unique architecture and specifications, with software logic tailored for the local needs and conditions.
The Hong Kong authorities are investigating the 18 March 2019 train collision. This may take a few months. We will study the investigation report when it is available. There were media articles linking the incident to a dual backup system which was uniquely designed for the Tsuen Wan line's signalling system. None of our MRT or LRT lines use such a system. Regardless, we should avoid unnecessary speculation into the root causes of the incident until the formal investigation report is available.
The Joo Koon incident in late 2017 was due to complications from concurrently operating the NSEWL's legacy and new CBTC signalling systems on the same line. We understand that this was not the case for the collision on the Tsuen Wan line in Hong Kong. The NSEWL now operates entirely on the CBTC signalling system, so a similar incident to Joo Koon will not recur.
Arising from the Joo Koon incident, LTA invited Thales to set up a CBTC simulation laboratory in Singapore – the first of its kind in Asia, and the largest by Thales in the world. This has allowed LTA and SMRT to perform additional tests to fine-tune the CBTC signalling system's software and hardware before it is implemented on our rail lines. It has also contributed to the NSEWL's vast improvement in rail reliability.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of Speed Limit on Non-Expressway Roads","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether LTA has considered reducing the speed limit for non-expressway roads to improve road safety in light of LTA's push for the use of bicycles, e-bicycles and personal mobility devices on our streets and roads; and (b) if not, what are the considerations that LTA takes into account for not doing so.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: Road speed limits are set to ensure that motorists can travel safely and efficiently. When setting the speed limit of roads, LTA generally considers factors such as road geometry and the level of pedestrian activities. Locations with higher pedestrian activities (e.g. School Zones and Silver Zones) have reduced speed limits of 40 km/hour.
Rather than road speed limits, we seek to develop off-road infrastructure to create a conducive environment for all active mobility users. To enhance active mobility infrastructure, LTA will roll out more dedicated cycling paths and build a cycling network in every HDB town by 2030. This means a total of 700 km of cycling paths across the island.
Apart from infrastructure, user behaviour is critical for ensuring safety. We urge all users to play their part by exercising caution and consideration when using our roads and paths.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Taxi Drivers and Private Hire Drivers by Age Group","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Mr Ang Hin Kee asked the Minister for Transport whether he can provide a breakdown of the current number of taxi drivers and private hire drivers by their respective age groups.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: As of February 2019, there are about 41,000 and 99,900 Private Hire Car Driver's Vocational Licence (PDVL) holders and Taxi Driver's Vocational Licence (TDVL) holders respectively. The age breakdown is shown in the table below.
5 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Transport (a) what are the current procedures in traffic recovery following traffic and road failures caused by accidents, road cracks and fallen trees; (b) how much time do current responses take to recover traffic to normal conditions; (c) whether there are plans to improve current responses to such sudden traffic failures; and (d) whether there are sufficient channels to notify motorists to avoid the affected area to prevent further congestion.
Mr Khaw Boon Wan: Traffic disruptions can be caused by accidents, road defects, or fallen trees. For accidents, the Traffic Police will respond as quickly as possible to the accident scene. The Singapore Civil Defence Force may also be activated if there are injuries. For road defects that affect traffic safety, LTA will carry out rectification works on an urgent basis. For fallen trees, NParks will deploy its Rapid Response Team as soon as possible. Traffic recovery procedures and response times differ depending on the nature of the incidents.
Where there is significant traffic impact, officers will be deployed on the ground to manage the situation. LTA also notifies the public on the incident location and traffic situation via radio and online channels so that they avoid the affected areas.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Role of Government in Export Sales of Weapons and Ammunition by Singapore Technologies Land Systems","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Defence (a) what strategic role does the Government play in approving, restricting or advising Singapore Technologies Land Systems (formerly ST Kinetics) regarding export sales of weapons and ammunition to potential buyers; and (b) whether and how such decisions take into account risk factors such as the likelihood of such arms being used to commit war crimes or in violation of international law.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: Under the Strategic Goods (Control) Act and Regulations, export of all weapons and ammunition from Singapore require an exit permit from the Singapore Customs. Exit permits will only be issued if such exports satisfy international obligations and commitments under the relevant UN Security Council Resolutions and other agreements which Singapore has ratified. This includes preventing illicit trade in conventional arms, Weapons of Mass Destruction and related materials as well as prohibition of exports to named countries.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Human Trafficking Syndicate within ASEAN Targeting Rohingya People","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) whether there is any indication of human trafficking syndicates operating within ASEAN targeting the Rohingya people; and (b) if so, what coordinated steps can ASEAN Member states take to stop, prevent, and deter such human trafficking.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: We have no specific information on any human trafficking syndicates operating within ASEAN that are targeting displaced people from Rakhine State. However, we are aware of reports by the international media and UN agencies on cases of trafficking of the refugees in the settlements at Cox's Bazar, including those trying to make their way from Bangladesh to third countries.
Bangladesh and the UN have made conscientious efforts to host the refugees. But this is not a sustainable situation. The problems faced by these refugees will continue to fester, including the risk of human trafficking.
The situation in northern Rakhine State is further complicated due to the ongoing armed conflict involving the Arakan Army. ASEAN will continue to support the efforts to create conducive ground conditions for repatriation to begin. The ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on disaster management (AHA Centre) has sent a needs assessment team to Rakhine State. It is ultimately the responsibility of the Myanmar government and the respective stakeholders to formulate a viable and durable political solution that addresses this longstanding and complex problem.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update and Review on Liquor Control Act","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Home Affairs since the introduction of regulatory measures to restrict alcohol consumption in public places (a) what has been the number and trend of breaches since then; (b) what has been the number of public complaints relating to alcohol consumption in public places; and (c) whether there is a need to further restrict alcohol sale and consumption in HDB neighbourhood estates.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Liquor Control (Supply and Consumption) Act, introduced in 2015, prohibits alcohol consumption in all public places between 10.30 pm and 7.00 am. Stricter hours are imposed in designated liquor control zones, that is, Little India and Geylang.
As of 31 March 2019, around 4,500 breaches have been detected since the coming into force of the Act in 2015. The trend has been improving, from around 1,200 per year in 2015 and 2016, to under 800 in 2018.
Police do not track the number of complaints relating to alcohol consumption in public places. However, the decrease in the number of breaches over the years suggests the number of such complaints has similarly reduced.
Our assessment is that liquor-related law and order issues are under control. There is no need to further restrict alcohol sale and consumption at this juncture, including at HDB neighbourhood estates. MHA and Police will regularly review these policies, taking into consideration public feedback as well.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Kitchen Exhaust Duct Fires from 2014 to 2018 and Measures to Minimise Risk of Such Incidents","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many cases of kitchen exhaust duct fires there have there been each year from 2014 to 2018; and (b) what measures are being taken to minimise the risk of such incidents.
Mr K Shanmugam: From 2014 to 2018, there were a total of 42 fires involving kitchen exhaust ducts (KEDs). The fires mainly occurred at food establishments within residential areas such as coffee shops and hawker centres. The main cause was poor maintenance of the ducts, causing grease to accumulate and which ignited during cooking.
The Fire Code, which is administered by SCDF under the Fire Safety Act, as well as the Singapore Food Agency's (SFA) Environmental Public Health (Food Hygiene) Regulations, requires KEDs to be maintained regularly. SFA and SCDF take a stern view against non-compliance. Over the last five years, a total of 270 enforcement actions were taken against premises owners or occupiers who did not comply with regulations related to KEDs.
To educate the public, SFA and SCDF have produced advisories, posters and brochures on the fire safety aspects of KEDs, and distributed them to stallholders.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Average Waiting Time for Seniors to Access Care Services","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked the Minister for Health for each year from 2016 to 2018, what is the average waiting time for seniors to access (i) home-based care services (ii) daycare services and (iii) respite care services, including emergency respite care.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: MOH has been increasing home and centre-based care capacity to meet the needs of seniors who require these services. From 2015 to 2018, we added 2,300 home care places and 2,700 day care places, and vacancies have exceeded waitlists at the national level for both services. Waiting times for home care services, day care services and respite care services vary depending on factors such as administrative processing time, care needs of the seniors, family preferences and available capacity of specific providers.
Between 2016 and 2018, the median waiting time for home care services was around 7 days and the median waiting time for day care services was around 20 days. We do not have detailed waiting times for respite care services. Typically, the time taken to access planned centre-based respite care services is within two weeks. Caregivers who face emergency situations that require more immediate access to respite services can call the Singapore Silver Line (1800-650-6060) or approach the Agency for Integrated Care (AICare) Links for assistance. For seniors who require interim post-discharge support at home while awaiting long-term care arrangements, the Interim Caregiver Service is also available for patients discharged from hospitals.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Seniors Benefiting from Home-based Care Services from 2016 to 2018","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked the Minister for Health for each year from 2016 to 2018 (a) how many seniors have benefited from home-based care services; (b) how many referrals for home-based care have been received by the Agency for Integrated Care; (c) what is the total number of public and private home-based care providers; and (d) how many persons are employed in the home-based care sector, excluding foreign domestic workers.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Over the years, MOH has grown the supply of home-based care services to enable more seniors to age in place. Today, we estimate that there are more than 70 home-based care providers providing a range of home-based care services, such as home medical, home nursing and home personal care services.
Based on data reported by Government funded home-based care providers, the number of workers (excluding foreign domestic workers) providing home care services was 890 in 2016, 1,050 in 2017 and 1,120 in 2018.
The number of seniors who have benefited from subsidised home care services was 5,200 in 2016, 6,000 in 2017 and 6,700 in 2018. The number of referrals to home care services received by the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) was 15,800 in 2016, 16,300 in 2017 and 14,400 in 2018. The number of referrals is non-unique as some seniors may be referred to more than one service at different points in time. Not all referrals result in the take-up of services as clients may opt for alternative care options.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Singaporeans Utilising Nursing Homes, Home Care, Day Care and Respite Care Services","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked the Minister for Health by household income or housing type and by age group, what is the current number of Singaporeans utilising nursing homes, home care, day care (including dementia day care) and respite care services respectively.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Based on records submitted by care providers to MOH, in the fourth quarter of 2018, there were around 16,000 unique Singapore residents benefiting from subsidised home and community care services, and around 12,000 on subsidised nursing home services. These figures include those using subsidised respite care services in each setting.
Among the subsidised home and community care residents, around half were aged 80 and above, around three in 10 were aged 70 to 79, and the remainder aged 69 and below. Around three in five received the maximum subsidy.
Among the subsidised nursing home residents, around four in 10 were aged 80 and above, around three in 10 were aged 70 to 79, and the remainder aged 69 and below. More than four in five of these residents received the maximum subsidy.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Profile of Healthcare Workers Providing Long-term Care Services and Their Skill and Manpower Gaps","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the current number of workers providing long-term care services, broken down by nationality, educational qualification or skill level, professional rank, and type of care service; (b) what are the skill and manpower gaps given rising demand; and (c) what are the plans to address such gaps.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Based on data reported by service providers, in 2018, there were 12,020 workers in Long-Term Care (LTC) providers who received subvention from MOH. Table 1 provides the breakdown by job groups and service types. We do not have details on the educational qualifications and skill level of LTC workers. About 40% of the LTC workforce are locals.
To meet the growing demand for manpower, we have increased local training places, in particular for nursing. Nursing intakes in ITE, the polytechnics, and the autonomous universities have collectively increased by 30% from around 1,600 in 2013 to over 2,100 in 2018, the highest intake to date. The Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) has also partnered LTC providers to hold recruitment events, with more than 1,000 locals joining the community care sector in 2018. We are also working with LTC partners to improve healthcare productivity by adopting technology and assistive equipment, streamlining existing work processes, and facilitating bulk procurement of shared products and services to achieve manpower savings.
As our population ages, there will be increased demand for healthcare professionals who are trained in areas such as geriatric care, management of complex chronic conditions and end-of-life care. To develop and upskill the LTC workforce, AIC-appointed learning institutes offer subsidised training in areas ranging from clinical skills to leadership and people management. In addition, the Community Care Manpower Development Award (CCMDA) offers scholarships for those working or wishing to work in the LTC sector to pursue the relevant advanced skills training. Lastly, the newly launched Skills Framework for Healthcare and Social Service maps out the job roles and needed competencies in healthcare, and helps employers to identify skills gaps and develop workplace-based skills training to meet changing industry needs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Percentage of Spending on Mental Health, Diabetes and Ageing versus Total Healthcare Spending in 2018 against Amount Budgeted for 2019","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for Health for 2018 (actual) and 2019 (budgeted), what is the percentage of spend on (i) mental health versus total healthcare spend (ii) diabetes versus total healthcare spend and (iii) ageing versus total healthcare spend.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Based on the latest available expenditure data, MOH's operating expenditure for financial year 2017 was $8.7 billion, of which about 3%, 11% and 6% were spent on mental health, diabetes mellitus and aged care respectively.
MOH's expenditure on mental health comprises operating subvention to Institute of Mental Health, psychiatry units in other Public Healthcare Institutions and intermediate & long-term care facilities to provide subsidised patient care, as well as funding for various programmes under the National Mental Health Blueprint and Community Mental Health Masterplan. The figures do not include Government’s funding for other mental health initiatives such as school allied educators to provide students with counselling and related support.
MOH's expenditure on diabetes mellitus comprises operating subvention to public healthcare institutions and participating CHAS clinics to provide subsidised care to patients with diabetes as well as health promotion activities under the War on Diabetes.
MOH's expenditure on ageing comprises operating subvention to long-term care and social aged care facilities to provide patient subsidies for residential, day care and home care services. It does not include government funding on other ageing initiatives or subsidies provided to the Pioneer Generation and Merdeka Generation which are separately catered for under the Pioneer Generation Fund and Merdeka Generation Fund respectively.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The FY17 actual expenditure have been rounded to the nearest ten million."],"footNoteQuestions":["14"],"questionNo":"14"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Remedial Actions Following High Blood Pressure Drug Recall","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Health regarding the three brands of a high blood pressure drug which are being recalled, what is being done to ensure that all medication is tested and cleared before being released into the market.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: On 28 March 2019, the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) recalled three brands of medicines which belong to the angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) class of blood pressure medication and contain the ingredient losartan. All three medicines were manufactured by Hetero Labs Limited. Following the recall of several losartan medicines in US due to the presence of a nitrosamine impurity, N-nitroso-N-methyl-4-aminobutyric acid (NMBA), HSA tested the suspected losartan medicines and they were found to contain trace amounts of NMBA which are above the acceptable limit1.
Under HSA's drug regulatory regime, stringent standards are set on the quality and safety of medicines sold in Singapore. Before being approved for sale, the medicines are evaluated to ensure that they meet the required international standards of quality, safety and efficacy. After approval, HSA conducts post-market surveillance, which includes monitoring of global developments and risk-based product sampling and testing for compliance to quality and safety specifications. Products found to be deficient in quality will be withdrawn from the market. Manufacturers are also required to test all batches of medicines, including the levels of specific impurities, to ensure that they comply with stipulated standards.
The routine tests required of the manufacturers are based on known impurities that may be generated during the manufacturing process, as it is not practical to exhaustively test for all types of impurities. In the case of the recalled losartan medicines, testing for nitrosamines like NMBA was not previously part of the testing parameters of ARB medicines as NMBA was not expected to be generated in the manufacturing process. This approach is similar to that adopted in other countries including the US, Canada and the European Union.
HSA now requires companies supplying ARBs to ensure that future batches of their medicines are tested and do not have unacceptable levels of nitrosamine impurities before supply to Singapore. HSA has also been working with suppliers and international regulatory agencies to verify the cause of contamination and to formulate measures to eliminate the nitrosamines in the medium to longer term. HSA will continue to monitor the quality and safety of these medicines to safeguard public health.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The acceptable limit is derived based on international guidelines on what is considered reasonably safe if a patient continues to take the affected medicine every day for a lifetime of 70 years."],"footNoteQuestions":["15"],"questionNo":"15"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Government Support for Diagnosis, Treatment and Subsidy for Persons with Rare Diseases in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Health how is the Government supporting the diagnosis, treatment and subsidising of persons with rare diseases in Singapore.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Most of the rare diseases are diagnosed in childhood. While most of these diseases do not yet have an effective cure, early diagnosis and treatment for some of the diseases can substantially extend a patient's lifespan and improve his quality of life.
To enable early diagnosis, our public healthcare institutions have implemented the National Expanded Newborn Screening Programme which covers more than 30 rare diseases.
At our public healthcare institutions, patients with rare diseases can have access to subsidised inpatient and outpatient services. MediShield Life and MediSave can be utilised to pay for their hospital bills. Patients who need help with their bills may also apply for financial assistance such as MediFund and Medication Assistance Fund.
A small number of individuals with very rare conditions require medications that are very costly. Our hospitals do their best to assist these patients, for example by negotiating price discounts with manufacturers for the medications where possible, waiving parts of their medical fees or drawing from hospital charity funds.
MOH recognises that more support is needed for these patients, and is looking into providing greater support for them. More details will be made known later this year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Poor Customer and Helpdesk Service by Singapore Telcos","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) whether the Ministry is aware of the complaints of poor customer service by the Singapore telcos; and (b) what can the Ministry do to get the telcos to improve their phone helpdesk especially for the many elderly customers who have to be put on hold for long periods to speak to an officer.
Mr S Iswaran: The number of complaints received by the Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) and the telecommunication companies (telcos) concerning poor customer service by telecos has shown a decreasing trend over the past five years. IMDA requires telcos to look into every complaint and see how they can serve their customers better.
IMDA also tracks consumer satisfaction of telecommunication services through the Consumer Awareness and Satisfaction Survey (CASS). The 2018 CASS showed that consumers were generally satisfied with their telcos, and consumer satisfaction has improved in several areas, including hotline waiting times, the time taken to resolve complaints, and the competence of customer service officers. An April 2019 poll of non-English speaking individuals conducted by IMDA also found that respondents were generally satisfied with the customer service by telcos.
To address the needs of elderly customers, several telcos now allow customers to make appointments for telcos to call them back, so they do not have to wait on the line for too long. In addition, when receiving calls on their hotlines, the telcos will arrange for elderly customers to be served by officers who can speak the same language or dialect.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Recall of Fisher-Price Baby Rocker in US","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in light of the recent recall of the Fisher-Price baby rocker in the US (a) whether these rockers have been imported into Singapore; (b) whether there is a process of tracking and assessing the safety of infant or baby products that are imported into Singapore; and (c) what are the measures in place to ensure imported products meant for infant or children are safe for use.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Enterprise Singapore (ESG) oversees the safety of general consumer products sold in Singapore. General consumer products, including products for use by children, that are not regulated under any other legislations, are required to meet applicable international safety standards under the Consumer Protection (Consumer Goods Safety Requirements) Regulations administered by ESG. While these general consumer goods are not required to be pre-approved before they are sold in the market, ESG monitors safety issues in such goods via consumer feedback and overseas consumer product notices and will work with suppliers to address any safety concerns quickly. Based on the information it gathers, ESG conducts tests on selected consumer products in the market to ensure that they are safe. Suppliers found with non compliant products will be asked to rectify or stop sale. This risk-based approach towards product safety regulation allows general consumer products, which have lower safety risks, to enter the market quickly without the need for comprehensive but resource intensive testing. This approach balances safeguarding consumers safety and ensuring market efficiency.
ESG is aware that Fisher-Price has issued a voluntary recall globally, including in Singapore, of its Rock 'N Play Sleepers and has issued an alert warning consumers to discontinue the use of the product. ESG has also published the alert on its website in April 2019.
Consumers are strongly encouraged to respond to the product recall by Fisher-Price. Parents should exercise vigilance when buying and using products for their children, including observing the safety labels on products. Where a child's entire weight is to be placed on a product, parents should check the product's recommended maximum weight capacity to ensure it is suitable for their children. Baby rockers should only be used on the floor and not on elevated or soft surfaces as they may tipover and cause injury or suffocation. Parents should also supervise their children and secure them with restraints when they are in baby rockers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Competition from China's Plan for Greater Bay Area Project","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"19 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the Ministry's assessment of the risk posed to the competitiveness of key industries in Singapore such as financial services and ICT by China's plan for a Greater Bay Area; and (b) what plans are being developed to draw economic benefits and mitigate competitive risk from the Greater Bay Area project.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Singapore welcomes the development of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA)1, which is part of China's strategy to promote the integrated development of its various regions2. The GBA aims to become a vibrant world-class city cluster and global innovation hub that will lead China's further reforms and opening up. This will create new opportunities that are beneficial to regional economies. Given our strong ties with GBA cities and businesses, Singapore is well-placed to tap on potential business opportunities in the GBA.
Singapore agencies and counterparts at the Guangdong Provincial People's Government know one another well. Singapore holds regular ministerial meetings with Guangdong through the Singapore-Guangdong Collaboration Council (SGCC). In November 2018, the China-Singapore Guangzhou Knowledge City (CSGKC) was also elevated as a State-Level Bilateral Cooperation project to promote cooperation in areas such as technology innovation, intellectual property rights, and advanced manufacturing. The GBA outline development plan highlights the CSGKC as a key technology innovation platform. As part of our engagement with the GBA, Singapore will also twin with Shenzhen under the ASEAN Smart Cities Network.
Hong Kong is another GBA city which Singapore is well-connected to. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) meet regularly to discuss financial regulatory issues. MAS and HKMA have signed agreements to cooperate including a FinTech Cooperation Agreement and a Memorandum of Understanding to facilitate digital trade and trade financing between our two markets.
There is strong mutual desire between Singapore and GBA authorities to nurture and grow a vibrant digital economy. The various platforms that have been established allow for active exchange of ideas and collaboration between government, companies, universities and research institutes. This will lead to opportunities for Singapore’s ICT, financial and other companies in the GBA in the areas of technology innovation, infrastructure development, data management, and digitalisation.
We will also continue to build on our competitiveness as a financial hub. Singapore has deep strengths across a range of financial activities, including asset management, foreign exchange and derivatives, insurance and reinsurance. We are a major US dollar funding market and our capital markets serve not just Southeast Asia, but the pan-Asian region. Singapore is also a leading centre for FinTech.
At the same time, the Singapore Government continues to invest heavily to help our businesses and people remain competitive and translate opportunities into tangible gains. We do so by continually strengthening our value propositions by acquiring deep skills, improving our productivity, and encouraging innovation. For example, the Digital Economy Framework for Action introduced last year covers programmes such as the SMEs Go Digital Programme, which supports SMEs in their digitalisation efforts to improve their productivity. The TechSkills Accelerator (TeSA) programme, on the other hand, equips ICT professionals to take on deeper tech roles, and for non-ICT workers to switch to a tech career. These moves will ensure that Singapore has a good chance of sustaining our competitiveness and remaining relevant in the global economy. The Government is also committed to work in tandem with leading global and local ICT and tech companies, to encourage industry investments that complement government efforts in building a thriving ecosystem of digital opportunities for all.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The GBA comprises nine Guangdong cities as well as Hong Kong and Macao. ","2 : For instance, the Jing-Jin-Ji and Yangtze River Delta regional clusters."],"footNoteQuestions":["19"],"questionNo":"19"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trees Uprooted and Fallen in Public Spaces Last Year","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many trees have been uprooted and fallen in public spaces last year; (b) what are the reasons for these incidents; and (c) whether the Ministry has plans to further reduce the number of such incidents.
Mr Lawrence Wong: In 2018, 217 trees were uprooted and fell in public spaces. These incidents were due to strong winds and heavy rainfall.
For the two million trees in urban areas under its care, NParks has a rigorous tree inspection regime in place which consists of regular inspections every 12 to 24 months, and additional annual in-depth inspections for larger trees. NParks also carries out measures such as replacing storm-vulnerable species with hardier trees, pruning trees regularly and prior to periods of more severe weather conditions, and using technology to analyse risk and improve inspection processes. NParks will continue to ensure that its tree management programme remains robust and comprehensive.
There are another one million trees in public housing estates that are managed by the Town Councils (TCs). NParks is working with the TCs and HDB to set up a nation-wide tree registry system to better manage these trees. This system will comprehensively map out trees in public housing estates, and allow TCs to develop suitable tree care regimes and tree replacement programmes. NParks also provides technical training on tree health and maintenance for stakeholders who manage trees in Singapore, including TCs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"HDB BTO Applicants Who Obtained Housing Grants","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development for each type of flat in the past five years (a) what are the percentages and numbers of HDB BTO applicants who have obtained HDB housing grants; (b) what are the numbers and percentages for each type of grant; and (c) what is the lowest price for that type of flat for the successful grant applicant.
Mr Lawrence Wong: First-timer households buying a flat from the HDB enjoy a subsidised flat price, and may receive up to $80,000 in housing grants, comprising the Additional CPF Housing Grant (AHG) and Special CPF Housing Grant (SHG). Among the first-timer households that had booked a flat between January 2014 and December 2018, about 48,600 or 61% have obtained the AHG and/or SHG (as detailed in Table 1).
The lowest flat prices (after grants) paid by the successful grant applicants are set out in Table 2.
22 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for National Development with regard to flats under the 2-room flexi scheme for seniors (a) whether HDB has approved or will consider approving the transfer of such flats to a family member or estate beneficiary of the lessee should the lessee pass away before lease expiry; and (b) if so, under what conditions or circumstances such approval has been or will be granted.
Mr Lawrence Wong: If the sole owner of a short-lease 2-room Flexi Flat passes away before lease expiry, the flat can be transferred to a named beneficiary if that individual fulfills the eligibility criteria to own the short-lease 2-room Flexi Flat.
If the beneficiary is not eligible to retain the flat, HDB will reimburse him/her the value of the residual lease.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Illegal Wildlife Trade Consignments Detected at Singapore’s Land, Air and Sea Checkpoints","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"23 Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked the Minister for National Development (a) in the past three years, how many illegal wildlife trade consignments have been detected at Singapore's land, air and sea checkpoints; (b) how is technology used to better detect and deter illegal wildlife trade through Singapore's checkpoints; and (c) how is Singapore working with international authorities to stamp out organised crime that deal with illegal wildlife trade.
Mr Lawrence Wong: A total of 67 illegal wildlife trade consignments were detected at our border checkpoints from 2016 to 2018.
Our enforcement agencies use technology to screen and check travellers and goods at our checkpoints. For example, ICA uses radiographic scanners and hand-held screening devices to ensure that goods that enter Singapore are lawful and legitimate. We also cooperate closely with our regional and international counterparts to combat illegal wildlife trade. For instance, our agencies assess intelligence reports from our partners and work with them to act upon credible and actionable information.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increase in Mass Food Poisoning Cases","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources in light of the increasing number of mass food poisoning cases (a) whether the Ministry has detected systemic issues in our food hygiene framework; (b) whether the current training and enforcement regime is adequate; and (c) what are the Ministry's plans to prevent future cases.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Singapore Food Agency (SFA) takes a serious view of food safety. SFA will take enforcement action against operators who fail to adhere to food hygiene and safety regulations, and for any food hygiene lapses found.
SFA conducts regular inspections on a risk-based approach. From January 2018 to March 2019, more than 95,000 inspections of food operators were conducted to ensure compliance with food hygiene and safety. In particular, more than 3,700 checks were conducted on food caterers – a category of food business that poses higher food safety risks.
The Government is paying close attention to the mass gastroenteritis incidents reported between November 2018 and March 2019. Joint investigations by the Ministry of Health and SFA thus far found that poor food handling practices, the lack of environmental cleanliness both in the food preparation and common areas, and poor personal hygiene practices were the main causes of these outbreaks. Gastroenteritis can be caused by eating contaminated food, or coming in contact with an infected person or an environment contaminated by viral gastroenteritis.
On poor food handling practices, SFA has taken enforcement actions for the lapses found and required operators to rectify the lapses. SFA has stepped up surveillance and engagement of all food operators, particularly for food caterers supplying food to pre-schools, and during festive seasons. Advisories are issued periodically to remind food operators to ensure that their food handlers observe good food hygiene and safety practices, and that their Food Hygiene Officers (FHOs) fulfil their duties to ensure good food hygiene and safety practices, and adherence to time-stamping requirements.
Food handlers and FHOs working at premises that have been suspended due to food hygiene and safety lapses are required to undergo re-training and be re-certified for Basic Food Hygiene Course (BFHC) and WSQ \"Conduct Food & Beverage Hygiene Audit\" programme respectively. SFA will continue to work with the industry to build a strong food safety culture among food business operators through strengthening their food safety management systems as well as competencies of food handlers and FHOs.
At the same time, SFA is taking steps to strengthen the regulatory regime for food hygiene and safety. For a start, heavier penalties will be imposed on food operators involved in significant food poisoning incidents. Total composition amounts will be increased and food operators who commit serious food hygiene and safety offences will be prosecuted in Court. In appropriate cases, SFA will also press for deterrent sentences to be imposed by the Court.
A multi-pronged approach to incorporate good food hygiene and safety practices as well as good environmental and personal hygiene to prevent and control infection is important to mitigate gastroenteritis. In the recent spate of outbreaks in pre-schools, SFA and the Early Childhood Development Agency issued an advisory to emphasise the need to maintain environmental cleanliness and put in place infection control measures. This includes reinforcing good personal hygiene practices in every individual to prevent the spread of diseases and to protect oneself from acquiring infections. For instance, areas with vomitus must be properly cleaned with bleach to disinfect, and children and pre-school staff who are sick should stay at home so as not to spread infection.
Fundamentally, food safety is a joint responsibility across the industry, consumers and the Government as food can be contaminated at any point along the food supply chain. While SFA continues to be vigilant and ensures that regulatory measures are in place and properly enforced, the industry and consumers must also play their part to upkeep high standards of food, environmental and personal hygiene at all times.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"More Support for Environmentally Sustainable Projects","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"25 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources how can the Ministry work with our financial institutions and funding bodies to divert more support for environmentally sustainable projects while reducing exposure to those with adverse impact on the environment.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: MEWR recognises that our financial sector plays a key role in advancing our environmental objectives. We work closely with the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) to promote green financing in Singapore and to increase the financial sector's awareness of environmental risks and opportunities.
The Government has taken a pragmatic approach through the adoption of international standards, market-led best practices and capability-building in the development of green financing in Singapore. There has been progress on various fronts.
(i) In 2015, the Association of Banks in Singapore (ABS) issued the Guidelines on Responsible Financing. Our local banks have all adopted these guidelines to evaluate their borrowers’ Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) risks and help borrowers improve their sustainability profiles. Most recently, in April 2019, the local banks announced their decision to cease the financing of new coal-fired power plants.
(ii) The Singapore Exchange (SGX) introduced the \"Comply or Explain\" Sustainability Reporting Guide for listed companies, beginning from the financial year ending on or after 31 December 2017. The inaugural sustainability reports by first-time reporting companies have progressively been published.
(iii) To encourage the issuance of green bonds, MAS introduced a Green Bond Grant Scheme in 2017, which helps to defray the cost of certifying sustainability oriented bonds as green bonds. This Scheme leverages international green bond standards to promote convergence and harmonisation with regional and international markets. Over $4 billion of green bonds have been issued to date.
The Government also supports capability-building initiatives as they are key to companies understanding and incorporating ESG risks and opportunities across their core businesses. For example, MAS is working with insurers to anchor ESG research, modelling capabilities and underwriting teams in Singapore to catalyse the development of innovative ESG products.
These are encouraging developments. MEWR will continue to work with MAS to support our green financing efforts and steer the broader conversation on sustainable development. This will guide efforts in priority areas such as climate mitigation and adaptation and resource efficiency, as we transition to a resource-efficient and low-carbon future.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Public Education Programmes on Vaccines","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry will implement public education programmes to inform parents and students about the facts regarding vaccines so that they can make informed choices regarding voluntary vaccines.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Parents have been supportive of the school-based vaccination programmes, and there is high take-up of vaccines offered in schools. For example, the take-up rate of vaccination against second booster doses of diphtheria as well as the vaccination against polio, both offered in schools at Primary 5, are above 90% each. For the recently rolled out Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccination, the opt-in rate has been slightly over 90% for the first 25 schools covered so far. In addition, measles vaccination coverage among resident children is at 93% for the second dose at 7 years of age.
We want to encourage high vaccination take-up rates to achieve herd immunity, so as to protect against the outbreak of potentially serious diseases such as measles, diphtheria and polio. The Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Health Promotion Board (HPB) conduct public education programmes to the general public as well as to parents and students to ensure continued support for the vaccination programmes. For example, through HealthHub, HPB's online health information portal, members of the public can access information on immunisation as well as details on age-appropriate immunisation for children.
For school-based vaccination programmes like the HPV vaccination, the Ministry of Education (MOE) supports HPB in the distribution of an information package prior to the school visit for HPV vaccination, to enable parents to make informed choices. The information package includes a factsheet on HPV vaccination, a brochure on the risk and prevention of HPV, and a letter providing information on the HPV school-based programme. MOE will continue to work with MOH to sustain support for vaccinations offered in schools.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Current Demand for Higher Chinese at Primary 1","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"27 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the current demand for Higher Chinese at Primary One level; (b) which are the schools that offer Higher Chinese at Primary One level; and (c) whether the Ministry will increase the number of schools which are currently offering Higher Chinese or Higher Mother Tongue.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: All primary schools already offer Higher Chinese to students who have the interest and ability to do so. Demand for Higher Chinese is healthy. Over the past five years, over a quarter of Chinese students offer Higher Chinese at PSLE.
Many Primary schools start offering Higher Chinese from Primary Three, and all will offer it from Primary Five. This is in line with our priorities in lower primary education – to ensure students settle well in school, and build a strong foundation in literacy, numeracy and social skills – rather than to specialise them too early.
\tThis will also allow schools to make use of the two years of Chinese Language instruction at Primary One and Two to assess if the child has the interest and ability to offer Higher Chinese from Primary Three. Even without offering Higher Chinese, however, the Chinese Language curriculum at Primary One and Two is designed with enrichment modules to stretch students with stronger ability and interest.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Unpaid Salaries Owed to Foreign Employees","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"28 Ms Anthea Ong asked the Minister for Manpower of the unpaid salaries ordered by the Employment Claims Tribunal in 2017 and 2018 (a) how much was owed to foreign employees; and (b) how much has been recovered by these foreign employees to whom these salary debts were owed.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The amount of unpaid salaries ordered to foreign claimants by the Employment Claims Tribunals (ECT) since its establishment on 1 April 2017 is shown in the table below. Taking into account that the 2017 figure is not based on the full year, the value of unpaid salaries ordered to foreign claimants by the ECT has not increased in 2018.
Overall, the amount of money recovered to foreign claimants is about half of the total ordered amount.
In terms of individual outcomes, about 40% of the claimants reported that they received full payment from employers. About 40% reported partial payment, which includes all payments made by employers, insurers or the Migrant Workers Assistance Fund.
The average amount owed to foreign claimants who fully recovered salaries from their employers is about $3,500, significantly lower compared to that of claimants who received partial or no payment, about $7,100. The vast majority of cases of partial or no payment involve employers who are in financial difficulty.
The evidence is thus very clear, that early reporting of arrears is critical to the prospects of full recovery. This is why MOM consistently educates workers to approach the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management early when they encounter arrears, and urges Non-Governmental Organisations that assist foreign workers to do the same.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Study on Gender Pay Gap","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Government has conducted a study on the gender pay gap in Singapore using fixed parameters of occupation and years of service; and (b) if so, what are the results of the study and, if not, whether it intends to conduct such a study.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Differences in pay can be a result of many factors. As women are more likely to exit the workforce, or have intermittent patterns of work due to childcare or elder care-giving responsibilities, these factors could affect their pay rather than gender per se.
MOM is carrying out further analysis on pay differences between men and women to control for other factors such as educational qualifications and years in service. More findings will be shared when ready.
30 Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong asked the Minister for Manpower in 2018, how many Singapore citizens earned less than $1,300 per month from full-time work and how many earned less than $2,000 per month from full-time work.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Wages have grown at all levels in recent years. In the past 5 years, real wages at the 20th percentile grew 4.2% per annum, more than at the median. As a result, the proportion of full-time employed Singapore Residents earning less than $1,300 in gross monthly income from work1 (including employer CPF contributions) has fallen to about 5%; the number of such residents has also declined by about 40% to 97,000. About 15% earned less than $2,000; the numbers declined by about 30% over five years to 282,000.
To support lower-wage workers, the Government will continue to top up their salaries and CPF savings through the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme. WIS benefits more than 400,000 workers each year, boosting their annual incomes by up to 30%. Total payouts in 2017 amounted to $650 million. Most Workfare recipients also receive other forms of Government support such as GST Vouchers, U-Save rebates and Community Health Assistance Scheme (CHAS).
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Gross Monthly Income From Work refers to income earned from employment. For employees, it refers to the gross monthly wages or salaries before deduction of employee CPF contributions and personal income tax. It comprises basic wages, overtime pay, commissions, tips, other allowances and one-twelfth of annual bonuses. For self-employed persons, gross monthly income refers to the average monthly profits from their business, trade or profession (i.e. total receipts less business expenses incurred) before deduction of income tax. (Source: Comprehensive Labour Force Survey, Manpower Research and Statistics Department, MOM)"],"footNoteQuestions":["30"],"questionNo":"30"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Medical Insurance Coverage for Foreign Domestic Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"31 Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how many foreign domestic workers are currently covered by additional medical insurance beyond the compulsory coverage of $15,000 for inpatient care and day surgery per annum; and (b) whether the Ministry will require the compulsory medical insurance to also cover outpatient care.
Mrs Josephine Teo: We do not track the number of employers who purchase medical insurance above the required $15,000 coverage for their Foreign Domestic Workers (FDWs). In the past three years, 96% of FDW medical bills were below $15,000. Employers who had not opted for additional insurance coverage and have difficulty paying medical bills for their FDWs can approach the hospitals for assistance.
Outpatient bills, which are typically lower, are often managed by FDW employers without the need for insurance. Requiring FDW insurance to cover outpatient care will increase insurance premiums for employers across the board and may not be welcome by all.
32 Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) in each of the last three years, how many applications has the Ministry received for the ComCare Child Care subsidy; (b) how many of these applications have been approved; (c) what is the demographic profile of the successful and rejected applicants respectively; and (d) what are the common reasons for rejection.
Mr Desmond Lee: Low-income families can apply for ComCare child care subsidies if they are unable to afford child care fees after receiving the Basic and Additional Subsidies provided by the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA). From 2016 to 2018, there were applications for an average of 4,440 children yearly for ComCare child care subsidies, of which 86% were approved on average.
MSF does not track the demographic profile of these applicants or the reasons for all rejected applications. Some applicants did not qualify for the assistance because their household income exceeded the income criteria, or because they had not yet applied for Basic and Additional subsidies before applying for ComCare child care subsidies.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Regulation of Student Care Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"33 Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether all student care centres in Singapore are regulated by the Ministry; and (b) whether there are requirements for background checks or screening of candidates to be teachers, staff or volunteers at student care centres and, if not, whether the Ministry has any plans to do so in the future.
Mr Desmond Lee: Student Care Centres (SCCs)1 that administer the Student Care Fee Assistance (SCFA) scheme are registered with the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF). These SCCs are prohibited from employing individuals who have been convicted, warned, or are being investigated, for offences involving dishonesty or moral turpitude. SCC staff are required to declare whether they have criminal records, have been charged in a court or are being investigated by the police, in Singapore and/or other countries.
Registered SCCs are also required to meet stipulated standards in areas of supervision, physical environment, operating hours, safety, health and hygiene, and provide a structured daily programme.
MSF conducts audits on registered SCCs to ensure compliance with the above requirements.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : SCCs include the Special Student Care Centres (SSCCs) which provide before- and after-school care for children with disabilities."],"footNoteQuestions":["33"],"questionNo":"33"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Paternity Leave Taken in Each of Past Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"34 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development for each year in the past five years (a) what is the median number of days of paternity leave taken by fathers; and (b) what is the median number of days of shared parental leave taken by fathers.
Mr Desmond Lee: The median number of days of Government Paid Paternity Leave (GPPL) and Shared Parental Leave (SPL) taken by fathers who took at least one day of GPPL or SPL in the last five years is shown in Table 1 below.
In 2013, we introduced one week of GPPL and one week of SPL. To better support families, in 2015 the Government encouraged companies to offer eligible fathers a second week of GPPL. In 2017, it was made mandatory for companies to offer the second week of GPPL. SPL was also increased from one to four weeks.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[{"annexureID":2228,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex 1","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20190506/annex-Annex 1.pdf","fileName":"Annex 1.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null},{"annexureID":2229,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex 2","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20190506/annex-Annex 2.pdf","fileName":"Annex 2.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null}],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":2901,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20190506/vernacular-Lee Bee Wah Criminal Law 6May 2019-Chinese (002).pdf","fileName":"Lee Bee Wah Criminal Law 6May 2019-Chinese (002).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2902,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Rahayu Mahzam","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20190506/vernacular-6 May 2019 - Ms Rahayu Mahzam - CRLB.pdf","fileName":"6 May 2019 - Ms Rahayu Mahzam - CRLB.pdf"},{"vernacularID":2903,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Ang Wei Neng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20190506/vernacular-Ang Wei Neng Criminal Law 6May 2019-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Ang Wei Neng Criminal Law 6May 2019-Chinese.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}