Mr Speaker: Order.
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, can I ask you to exercise your power under Standing Order 22(1) to reinstate the Question Time today to one and half hours for the Parliamentary Questions (PQs), so that the PQs on the issue of the Israeli-Hamas content for the Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) lesson can be clarified.
I am sure many Singaporeans would like to know more. But looking at the order of the Oral PQs today, the related PQs are unlikely to be answered today.
So, can I have my request, Sir?
Mr Speaker: Our Question Time has been allocated as 30 minutes. I would like to keep it as it is. If there are questions which have not been addressed adequately, they can always be filed. I recall there was quite a bit of discussion earlier in the previous few days of debate. So, I would like to keep it as it is, so that we do not change the timings that were originally allocated for the rest of the Committee of Supply (COS) debate.
Yes, Mr Leong.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Sir, this is a very important issue which has attracted a lot of concerns from Singaporeans. I think the Minister for Education had mentioned during the COS that the PQs will be addressed today as well.
It is just a simple act of yours to extend the timing. The PQ timing, anyway, was originally one and a half hours. If you do not want to exercise that, then can I have your assurance that the related PQs will be at the top of the queue at the next Sitting?
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong, these questions, as I recall, indeed were addressed during the Ministry of Education (MOE) COS debate and I think there were certainly questions and clarifications that were sought during the COS debate.
I will keep it as that. As I have said, I would like to keep our Question Time to what had been allocated from day one of the COS. If the proceedings today are fast enough, we can cover as many questions as we can – which is how I have always tried to progress all debates. In fact, you yourself, sometimes ask very long clarifications and that takes up time.
My style is to allow as many PQs as possible to be addressed at each Question Time. I have always asked, whether it is during Question Time or during the COS, to keep clarifications short. Likewise, I ask for the responses from the front bench to be also short.
So, let us try to progress as fast as we can. As I have said, I think there was some discussion earlier on this subject. If there are other PQs to be raised in subsequent Sittings, it will be dealt with in accordance with the rules and Standing Orders.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Mental Well-being of National Servicemen","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"1 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Defence (a) what efforts have been taken to address mental health issues affecting national servicemen; and (b) what are the plans to strengthen mental health support in the Singapore Armed Forces.
2 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Defence what are the recent steps taken by the Ministry to improve the mental health and well-being of (i) Full-time National Servicemen and (ii) Operationally Ready National Servicemen.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Defence (Mr Heng Chee How) (for the Minister for Defence): Over the past five years, the proportion of pre-enlistees detected to have mental health issues jumped from 6% in 2019 to 11% in 2023, although the majority have mild to moderate conditions. This is in line with the increasing prevalence of mental health issues at the national level.
To deal with this rising trend, the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) reviewed our overall system and instituted a slew of measures to better support psychological and psychiatric conditions of our Full-Time National Servicemen (NSFs) and Regulars. We have doubled the number of full-time mental health professionals in MINDEF and SAF to 80 today, up from about 40 a decade ago.
The increase in professional expertise is necessary and the SAF will hire more if needed. But other measures are also needed to meet these rising demands.
The prevailing practice to screen for mental health issues among pre-enlistees continues, so that they can receive professional help and treatment. Severe cases that pose harm to themselves and/or to others are deferred from National Service (NS) until the professionals assess that their conditions have improved and no longer pose those risks. For NSFs with mild and even moderate conditions but are assessed by our professionals to be able to serve in selected vocations, they will receive additional monitoring while in service. These assessments and determinations are performed by our in-house professionals, guided by the advice of the SAF Psychiatry Specialist Advisory Board. This is an external panel comprising senior psychiatrists from our national healthcare system.
The SAF recognises that mental health issues can surface later, even when not picked up at pre-enlistment. Therefore, we have increased our mental health support over the years, particularly during Basic Military Training, or BMT. New Care Hubs have been set up in Pulau Tekong in 2022 and Kranji Camp in 2020, where BMT is conducted. These Care Hubs comprise medical doctors, psychologists, counsellors and orientation officers, working closely together with commanders to provide mental health support to servicemen during their transition into NS.
But all of us are also aware that signs of mental distress can be subtle and often it is those who we spend most time around who can pick it up. Therefore, for BMT, all recruits also undergo psychological first aid training to help them to recognise distress signs, cope with challenges, exercise self-care and provide support for their buddies whom they are paired with.
Beyond self-help, our commanders interview BMT recruits regularly to identify potential problems and render assistance. Training is provided to our commanders to recognise mental health issues and distress. However, there may be recruits who are not comfortable to share their problems openly. For that, there is an anonymous 24-hour SAF counselling hotline that they can call.
NSFs detected with mental health conditions are closely monitored by a team of psychiatrists, psychologists, counsellors and medical officers during BMT and beyond. Should their conditions worsen during NS to the extent that they pose a danger to themselves or others, their NS duties may be suspended till they become better or for some, indefinitely.
Our approach to mental health also includes prevention to promote mental well-being. Well-being campaigns target both NSFs and Regulars to promote effective self-care, strengthen coping skills and better recognition of mental health issues. Reactions have been positive and service personnel are more open to discuss mental health issues and seek help.
To coordinate all these efforts, a MINDEF/SAF Mental Health Office was set up in December 2022. It consolidates our mental health professionals under one roof to better synergise and deliver care. This office also works with the other Ministries and their efforts, which my colleagues have touched on at the Parliamentary Motion debate on advancing mental health on 7 February.
We understand that mental health is a national challenge. MINDEF recognises that we need soldiers who are both healthy physically and mentally for a strong defence. To this end, MINDEF and the SAF will work with other agencies to improve mental health and well-being for our NSFs and Regulars.
\tMr Speaker: Senior Minister of State, I take it that you are covering Question Nos 1 and 2?
\tMr Heng Chee How: Yes, Sir. I am sorry. The reply is for Question Nos 1 and 2, Sir.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Capacity Increase at IMH and Alexandra Hospital for Patients Seeking Mental Health Specialist Care","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"3 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the planned capacity increase for patients seeking mental health specialist care by 2030 at (i) IMH and (ii) Alexandra Hospital; and (b) what steps will be taken to support the necessary resources required.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, Sir, Alexandra Hospital will provide outpatient and inpatient mental health specialist services, including 70 acute beds for psychiatric care and rehabilitation. The Institute of Mental Health (IMH) has recently refurbished 11 acute psychiatric wards to enhance inpatient care and will be expanding its capacity to meet future demand.
To support the increase in demand for mental health services, the Government is planning a 30% increase in the number of psychiatrists and 40% increase in the number of healthcare workers training in psychology by 2030. The Government will also expand mental health services in the primary and community settings to support the National Mental Health and Well-being Strategy.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Nadia.
\tMs Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Speaker, just a quick follow-up supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State. Thank you for sharing about the training places and learning opportunities. I think many students are very interested to pursue this route. Could the Senior Minister of State give a little bit more detail about how these training opportunities will trickle down to our learning institutions?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: If I understand Ms Nadia Samdin's question, it is about how the training opportunities will be made available within the learning institutions. There are a number of institutions that already provide training in psychological and psychiatric services. Our approach would generally be to work with them to see how we can expand their capacity.
One of the challenges in this space is that the training of such healthcare workers requires what I call practicums, on-the-job training. You need to have clinical placements rather than only lectures and seminars. So, the rate limiting factor for enhancing our capacity is the number of mentors and training places that we have within the clinical settings, rather than within the education institutions.
We will work with all the partners and stakeholders to be able to realise our plans for an increase in capacity.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Selection of Organisations to Operate Active Ageing Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"4 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Health (a) how many new Active Ageing Centres will be set up in the next five years; and (b) how does the Ministry select which charity or entity to operate these centres.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, we aim to increase the number of Active Ageing Centres (AACs) from the current 157 to around 220 AACs by 2025.
As we expand the AAC network, providers will be appointed via a Request-for-Proposal (RFP) process assessed based on merit, taking into account the proposed operating model, track record and financial viability. To ensure continuity and minimise disruption to seniors, we will also consider directly appointing providers who already have an established local presence and good track record in engaging or serving residents living in the area.
In general, demand for social services, including AACs, is expanding quickly and will likely outstrip the capacity of providers. By taking this dual pronged approach, we hope to evolve a fair, transparent yet flexible appointment system that addresses the concerns of all operators and meet the needs of residents.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. And thank you to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary. I understand the PAP Community Fund has been invited to build and manage AACs in Aljunied Group Representation Constituency (GRC).
Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary confirm that all AACs including those in Opposition wards will be run on a non-partisan and non-political basis, like ACCs that are run by charitable organisations in Opposition wards today?
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: As I have explained, there are two parts to it. One, is that we will issue RFPs and the other part is direct allocation, depending on whether that particular provider has track record within the space.
So, the process remains fair. If there is an RFP in that space and there is no direct allocation, then the terms of what is expected is all set out. It is open to anyone to apply to be an operator in that space. So, I hope that addresses the Member's question.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh: Mr Speaker, it does not address the question. It was an answer to a different question that was not put. My question is, are all AACs going to be run like how they are run today on a non-political, non-partisan basis?
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: Yes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of HDB Flat Size Eligibility Criterion for Silver Support Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"5 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower in view that many seniors live in mature estates whose HDB flats have shorter remaining leases and lower resale values, whether the Ministry will consider reassessing the use of HDB flat type as an eligibility criteria for the Silver Support Scheme, especially with regard to the ownership of 5-room or larger HDB flats which disqualifies a senior from receiving Silver Support.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Minister for Manpower): Sir, the Silver Support Scheme is targeted at seniors who had lower incomes during their working years and now have little or no family support and resources in their retirement. Property ownership is indicative of the senior’s resources and remains relevant in ensuring the Silver Support Scheme is targeted at seniors who need it the most.
\t
In particular, seniors who own a 5-room or larger Housing and Development Board (HDB) flat are likely to have more resources and access to additional retirement funds, and hence, are not eligible for Silver Support.
Nonetheless, seniors who face unique circumstances, including those who own 5-room or larger HDB flats with short remaining leases and low annual values, can write in to the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board to review their eligibility for Silver Support. We will consider the merits of each appeal on a case-by-case basis.
To strengthen support for retirement adequacy, the Government announced enhancements to the Silver Support Scheme at Budget 2024. This includes increasing the qualifying per capita household income threshold to support more seniors. Taken together with the Majulah Package and upcoming enhancements to the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme and Matched Retirement Savings Scheme, these measures will help seniors to meet their basic retirement needs, with greater support given to lower- and middle-income Singaporeans.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Yip.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. I am heartened to hear that the Ministry will consider appeals on a case-by-case basis.
Just a short supplementary question. Instead of complete exclusion, could the Ministry consider a graduated and differentiated eligibility system for the Silver Support Scheme based on flat size and remaining lease lengths? This is because some seniors may be living in larger flats, but they have no savings and no financial support from their family.
\t
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, I thank the Member for his question and the concerns for seniors. Indeed, there are different archetypes of seniors who may sometimes fall through the cracks, even when we have a scheme like this. But let me just explain that the Government has put in place a comprehensive suite of different support measures to meet the various needs of our seniors. The support ranges from universal ones such as MediShield Life for healthcare to more targeted ones. For those who need particular help for healthcare, such as there is the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) blue card, for example.
The Silver Support Scheme is one of those more targeted schemes that is meant to support the bottom 20% to 30% of seniors who have little or no family support currently and earned lower wages during their working years. So, per capita household income is thus quite relevant to assess their overall support structure and the housing type that they live in or own is but one of those other indicators as well. But certainly, we will consider the Member's suggestion to look at each appeal on a case-by-case basis. If there are merits for the senior who needs more support, we will look at how other measures can also come in, apart from just Silver Support.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Study into Ban on Electric Collars for Animal Training","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry will provide an update on the study into a ban on electric collars for animal training; and (b) whether the Ministry will study the enforcement mechanisms for the Guidelines for Rehoming and Adoption of Dogs developed by the Rehoming and Adoption Workgroup.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Tan Kiat How) (for the Minister for National Development): Sir, in 2022, the multi-stakeholder Rehoming and Adoption Workgroup (RAWG), comprising NParks, animal welfare groups, veterinarians and dog trainers, published guidelines to standardise practices in dog rehoming and adoption, as well as dog training and behaviour rehabilitation.
As part of the RAWG’s recommendations, the National Parks Board (NParks) further consulted key stakeholders of the animal community and members of the public on the use of electric collars in Singapore. To complement existing guidelines on dog training and behaviour rehabilitation, NParks is currently developing guidelines to highlight the risks of using aversive animal training devices such as electric collars and will share more details when ready.
Ultimately, these guidelines recommend good practices to be adopted by the community and are not meant to be legally enforceable. Notwithstanding this, in cases where unnecessary pain or suffering is found to be inflicted on animals, we will not hesitate to investigate and take enforcement action under the Animals and Birds Act.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Thank you, Sir. I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. Could I just check what concerns the Ministry has in terms of coming up with a ban on the use of electric collars? I think Senior Minister of State Tan himself tried the use of the electrical collar and it is painful. Obviously, it is painful for the dogs as well and that is why it is being used to train them. So, how could it not be a physical abuse when it causes pain and suffering to the dogs which are being trained?
\tMr Tan Kiat How: Sir, I did not know the Member was keeping track of me! [Laughter.] I did not post about it, but as part of the whole process, I did indeed get my NParks colleagues to bring in a range of electric collars and I tried all of them on myself.
On a range for one to 10 in terms of spectrum, I probably got to about seven and it has been very painful. The marks can show on the skin. It is not just the pain, but also the shock of it because the animal or whoever is wearing the electric collar would not know when the shock is applied.
So, I can empathise with what the Member is saying and I also shared the position the Government is taking on to look at some of these issues in my reply to his question. So, I must commend the Member for his doggedness.
On 4 November 2020 as well as 4 March 2022, I have made some elaborations on our considerations. But more importantly, in the coming months, we will release the guidelines and we will welcome a further conversation among different segments of our community – the dog owners, pet owners, trainers, animal welfare groups and other members of the public. So, we will continue with this conversation; and the guidelines will be out very soon.
But more importantly, the point the Member is making is about unnecessary pain and animal cruelty. On this point, I would like to share with the House that from 2019 to 2023, the Animal and Veterinary Service (AVS) consistently received about 1,250 cases of alleged animal cruelty each year, including feedback from the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA).
Every case undergoes thorough investigation. Between 2019 and 2022, an average of about 60 cases per year, or 5% of the total, were found to be related to animal cruelty. Enforcement actions were taken against offenders, ranging from warnings to prosecution, depending on the severity of the case.
For the remaining cases, our investigations showed that most arose from disputes – disamenities caused by pets or community animals, or involved the deaths of community animals which could be due to non-cruelty-related reasons such as accidental fall from heights, fights among community animals or road traffic accidents.
The community has a crucial role to play because each case is a case too many. Pet owners can refer to the Code of Animal Welfare for pet owners to learn about the minimal standards expected for animal housing, management and care.
We urge anyone with information and/or evidence on suspected animal cruelty cases to promptly share it with AVS via our website or calling our Animal Response Centre at our hotline. The timeliness of information is critical to enable us to establish the cause of death.
As I mentioned in my Committee of Supply speech, we are looking at the possibility of strengthening penalties for animal cruelty as part of our ongoing review of the Animals and Birds Act. AVS will continue to work closely with stakeholders such as animal welfare groups to raise public awareness on responsible interactions with animals.
\tMr Speaker: As you all know, Senior Minister of State Tan loves animals. So, I am sure whatever he says, he will personally look into it. I am going to move on. Next question, Mr Yip Hon Weng.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Incidence of Patients Waiting for Triaging at Hospital Emergency Departments and Public Education Efforts Launched","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"7 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether an update can be provided on the situation where ambulances are delayed as patients cannot be triaged by hospital staff due to peak caseloads at hospitals’ emergency departments; and (b) what are the Ministry’s measures and strategies to inform the public to seek medical assistance away from hospitals’ emergency departments in non-emergency cases.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Health): Sir, our hospital emergency departments, while busy, are able to triage patients promptly to prioritise treatment for urgent cases and preserve valuable medical capacity.
Sometimes, a hospital emergency department may face a spike in urgent cases, for example, when the hospital is handling multiple patients from a major incident. In such a case, protocols for ambulance diversions to other hospitals will be activated. Occasionally, a number of ambulances may arrive at the same emergency department at approximately the same time. In such situations, other than ambulance diversions, the hospital will work with the ambulance crew to triage and activate additional hospital resources to unload the ambulances as expeditiously as possible.
Currently, 40% of emergency department attendances are not life-threatening nor urgent. To encourage these patients to seek care at the general practitioner (GP) clinics for non-urgent conditions, the Ministry of Health (MOH) introduced the GPFirst programme in 2014. Under this programme, if the patient is first seen by a participating GP and is assessed to require further care at the Accident and Emergency (A&E) department, the hospital will reduce A&E fees by $50. Currently, more than 1,000 GP clinics, including all Healthier SG clinics, participate in the GPFirst programme.
MOH has also set up Urgent Care Centres for urgent but non-life-threatening medical conditions, and NurseFirst, a non-emergency helpline where residents can receive useful medical advice.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Yip.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. I also note that the Health Minister had shared at the MOH Committee of Supply that he is working with urgent care clinics as well as GPFirst clinics to deal with non-emergency cases.
My supplementary question is this: since we are a very digitally connected country, is the Ministry exploring partnerships with telehealth providers to create a more accessible and efficient healthcare network for non-emergency cases? And secondly, are there any best practices from other countries that can be adapted to inform Singapore's public awareness campaigns for seeking appropriate medical care?
\t
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, the short answer is yes to the first part. Telehealth is something that we spoke about at some length within the Committee of Supply debate and we will continue to explore partnerships with telehealth providers to see how we can make that available as a channel for health-seeking behaviour.
As for best practices from around the world, certainly, we are studying what is being done in the public health education space. We also have to contextualise such messages and public education campaigns for our local context. Each city and each healthcare system is different, but the way in which people have a relationship with their GP, have a relationship with the hospitals or the way in which they seek help when they are unwell will be culturally contextual, will be appropriate to our social context.
We will look at those best practices, but the most important aspect is that we continue to reinforce locally some key messages – which is that you should reserve going to the emergency department for urgent, certainly, serious and life-threatening cases. We should call the ambulance for urgent, serious and life-threatening cases.
And for things which are not urgent, conditions that have been there for a while, which are clearly not serious or life-threatening, then we should consider accessing some of the other channels that I spoke about in my reply. NurseFirst, which is a helpline for seeking advice from an experienced nurse practitioner; attending an urgent care clinic; seeking help from a GP or a polyclinic; not going by ambulance to a hospital emergency department for conditions which are not urgent, not serious and not life-threatening.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Factors to Determine Number of Lactation Rooms in Institutes of Higher Learning","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"8 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the number of lactation rooms in autonomous universities, polytechnics and the Institutes of Technical Education campuses are based on the size of the campuses; and (b) if so, what is the average area of the campus in square metres that is served by one lactation room.
\tThe Minister of State for Education (Ms Gan Siow Huang) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, autonomous universities, polytechnics and the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) are equipped with multiple lactation rooms across their campuses. Beyond taking into account the size of the campus, the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) also consider other factors when setting up the lactation rooms. These include the general age profile of their workforce and also the relative accessibility of lactation rooms from the staff workspaces.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Thank you, Sir. I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Could I just have two clarifications? One, what is the average number of lactation rooms, in terms of per university, per polytechnic and ITE, respectively? Second, I think that there really is a time concern when it comes to the teachers because unlike other workers, they cannot pump while they are teaching. So, there is a request for more lactation rooms because they really cannot queue for these facilities.
\t
\tMs Gan Siow Huang: Mr Speaker, I thank Mr Louis Ng for showing a lot of interest and support to nursing mothers who are working in our IHLs.
As mentioned in my earlier reply, each IHL provides more than one lactation room to account for the larger campus sizes. But it is also not meaningful to compare the average campus area served by each lactation room, as different campus buildings serve different functions. For example, some of our IHL campuses have very large sporting facilities. The crux of the matter is that the proximity and accessibility of the lactation rooms to the workspaces will be more important than counting the average number of lactation rooms per campus.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Comparative Assessments of Similar Medical Procedures across Countries to Understand Cost Variations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"9 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry has conducted comparative assessments of similar medical procedures across different countries to understand the medical cost variations; (b) whether the Ministry can provide details on the factors contributing to higher medical costs in Singapore, particularly the role played by our healthcare insurance system; and (c) whether the Government will consider conducting bi-annual reviews of all healthcare charges to ensure they are fair and affordable.
\t
\t
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Minister for Health): Generally, it is not advisable to compare individual medical procedure costs across jurisdictions. Quality, labour market conditions, model of care and protocols can be different. While one treatment may be less costly in a foreign country compared to Singapore, there may be other treatments where Singapore is more affordable than the same foreign country.
Ultimately, we have to moderate healthcare costs through a holistic approach, including value-based care, developing fee benchmarks, instil discipline in insurance, rely on cost effective treatment and focusing on preventive care and population health.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Aligning Estimated Procurement Value Amounts for Tenders Called by Town Councils and Government Entities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether there will be an increase in the value of $70,000 under the Town Councils Financial Rules above which tendering procedures will be adopted; (b) if so, whether the value will correspond with the current estimated procurement value of $90,000 under GeBiz; and (c) if not, why not.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for National Development (Ms Sim Ann) (for the Minister for National Development): The Ministry of National Development is currently reviewing the Town Councils Financial Rules to ensure that they remain relevant to the Town Councils' evolving operating context.
The threshold of procurement value which triggers the need for a tender to be called by Town Councils is one of the items under review. The details will be shared with all Town Councils when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of and Actions Taken Following Study on Teachers' Mental Health","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry has conducted a review of the 2021 study by the Singapore Counselling Services on teachers’ mental health; (b) if so, what measures have the Ministry taken in light of the survey results; and (c) if not, why not and whether the Ministry will conduct a review.
\tThe Second Minister for Education (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Education (MOE), regularly monitors our teachers' well-being through internal surveys, dipstick polls and regular engagements. Together, these inputs give us a holistic understanding of their well-being and provide useful information to help us adjust our policies and programmes as necessary. It also allows us to take targeted actions to support schools that require more help.
Teachers who need support can reach out to their supervisors and school leaders. They may also tap on other channels for support, such as their school's Wellness Ambassadors who provide peer support, MOE's in-house professional counselling services and the external counselling hotline provided as part of wider the whole-of-Government efforts to support our officers.
Mr Speaker: Mr Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): I thank you, Sir. Could I just ask the Minister, whether MOE has reviewed the report that I cited in my Parliamentary Question (PQ)? And second, whether we are seeing an increasing or decreasing trend in terms of number of teachers that are seeking help from our in-house counselling?
\t
\tDr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: The answer is yes. We have looked at the report, but the report was conducted post-COVID-19; it was in 2021. So, we think that situation may vary, may be different today. I do not have the details or the figures of those who have sought help, but I want to assure Mr Ng that the well-being of our teachers is paramount to MOE. As mentioned, we do dipstick surveys, we visit schools on a very regular basis. The political officeholders – Minister Chan Chun Sing, Minister of State Gan Siow Huang and myself – we are visiting schools almost on a weekly basis. Our senior management visits schools and meet our teachers on a very regular basis, engage them, understand their concerns, respond, should there be immediate needs and create an infrastructure and an ecosystem that is supportive for our teachers.
\tMr Speaker: In case Members are wondering, Question Time started late, so we have just enough time for one last PQ. Short response, please.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Attendance at Appointments with Family Coaches by Recipients of ComLink+ Enhanced Package","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"12 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what percentage of families currently receiving the ComLink+ enhancement package have had at least one session with their appointed family coaches and what is the expected frequency in the number of future check-ins with family coaches; and (b) among households eligible for ComLink+, what is the current average monthly pre-school fees per child above three years old.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Eric Chua) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for the question. I would like to clarify how ComLink+ works.
First, a family who has agreed to come on board ComLink+ is assigned a family coach from a Social Service Office. The family coach will establish contact within one month. For those supported by a case worker from a Family Service Centre (FSC), there is contact from the outset as in-person assessments are done before a case is opened.
The frequency of engagements by family coaches or FSC case workers is based on the family's needs. The Ministry of Social and Family Development's (MSF's) approach is not to focus on the output, that is, to measure the number of visits, but on the outcomes, that is, to measure the actions the family has taken. For newer families that have come onboard ComLink+, we expect our family coach or volunteer befriender to check in with the family at least once every one to two months. If a family is doing well, the frequency of visits may be reduced.
As for the ComLink+ Packages, these have not yet been rolled out. The first ComLink+ Package for preschool, as we mentioned yesterday in the MSF Committee of Supply, will be launched in the second half of 2024. All Singaporean children residing in public rental flats, including those from ComLink+ families, automatically qualify for maximum preschool subsidies. They pay $3 per month for full day childcare at an Anchor Operator preschool, or $1 per month for half-day kindergarten at an Anchor Operator preschool or Ministry of Education (MOE) Kindergarten.
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"Mr Speaker: Minister for Home Affairs?
The Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled \"An Act to amend the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act 1955.\"
Mr Speaker: Sorry, Minister of State. We are moving the other Bill. Based on the Order Paper, it should now be \"Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill\". You referred to the second one. I am referring to the first Bill, the \"Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill\".
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: This one? I shall read it.
Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled \"An Act to amend the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act 1906, the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act 2008, the Police Force Act 2004 and certain other Acts to update and enhance certain procedures relating to law enforcement, insert new offences and update other matters.\"
Mr Speaker: Second Reading what day?
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: At the next available Sitting on or after 1 April 2024.
Mr Speaker: Leader.
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, may I just check whether the Minister of State has the presentation copy available? If he does not, then may I seek Mr Speaker's dispensation to have the presentation copy put shortly after? The presentation copy will be put on the table. It is just that it may be a few minutes later.
Mr Speaker: I give my consent.
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Mr Speaker, we will present it later.
Mr Speaker: Minister of State for Home Affairs, you can move to the second Bill.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment) Bill ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act 1955\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs; 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":"Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Goods and Services Tax Act 1993\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) recommendation of President signified; presented by the Second Minister for Finance (Mr Chee Hong Tat); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, on or after 1 April 2024, 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":"Suspension of Standing Orders","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move a Motion to allow certain Parliamentary Questions (PQs), that were filed by Non-Constituency Member of Parliament, Ms Hazel Poa, in February 2024, but which were inadvertently omitted from the Order Papers for the February and March 2024 Sittings, to be listed on the Order Paper for the next available Sitting, on or after 13 March 2024, over and above her usual quota of five PQs for that Sitting?
Ms Poa had filed three PQs for Oral Answer and three PQs for Written Answer in February 2024. Ordinarily, notice of these PQs would have been given to Members and they would have been listed on the Order Papers for the relevant Sittings during the Committee of Supply period. However, due to an IT system issue that was not picked up, the six PQs were inadvertently omitted from such notice and listing.
The Parliament Secretariat has since issued notices for the omitted PQs on 1 and 5 March, respectively. However, under Standing Order 20(3), each Member has a quota of five PQs, of which up to three, may be for oral answer, for each Sitting day.
The omitted PQs, therefore, cannot be listed on the Order Paper for the next available Sitting, unless Standing Order 20(3) is suspended to allow such listing. The next available Sitting will be on or after 13 March 2024, taking into account the requisite notice period for the PQs.
You have invited me to move a Motion to suspend Standing Order 20(3) to allow the omitted PQs to be listed for the next available Sitting. I am in agreement to do so, to ensure that Ms Poa's allocation of PQs is not affected. I am therefore seeking your consent and the general assent of Members to so move.
Mr Speaker: I give my consent. Does the Leader of the House have the general assent of Hon Members' present to so move?
[(proc text) Hon Members indicated assent. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Leader, please proceed.
Ms Indranee Rajah: Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That, notwithstanding Standing Order 20(3), the three questions for Oral Answer and three questions for Written Answer, which Non-Constituency Member of Parliament, Ms Hazel Poa, had filed for Sittings in February and March 2024, but which were inadvertently omitted from being listed in any Order Paper, be set down in the Order Paper for the next available Sitting, on or after 13 March 2024, over and above her usual quota under the Standing Orders for that Sitting day.\"
The reasons I am moving this Motion were explained to Members earlier. For avoidance of doubt, I should clarify that after the omitted PQs are listed on the Order Paper for the next available Sitting, on or after 13 March 2024, the usual limit of five questions on the Order Paper will apply as per Standing Order 20(3) for any subsequent Sittings.
Ms Poa should take this into account, should she wish to postpone any of her questions on the Order Paper for the next available Sitting to a later Sitting date. I understand that the Parliament Secretariat has taken steps to tighten the IT system and strengthen the processes for the receipt of questions.
[(proc text) With the consent of Mr Speaker and the general assent of Members present, question put and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That, notwithstanding Standing Order 20(3), the three questions for Oral Answer and three questions for Written Answer, which Non-Constituency Member of Parliament Ms Hazel Poa had filed for Sittings in February and March 2024, but which were inadvertently omitted from being listed in any Order Paper, be set down in the Order Paper for the next available Sitting on or after 13 March 2024, over and above her usual quota under the Standing Orders for that Sitting day.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah] (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Order. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the Day.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Estimates of Expenditure for the Financial Year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025","subTitle":"Committee of Supply – Paper Cmd 27 of 2024","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [7th Allotted Day]. (proc text)]
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head X (Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth)","subTitle":"Building a caring and inclusive society together","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Head X (cont) – (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question [7 March 2024]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head X of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\" – [Mr Sitoh Yih Pin]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Minister Edwin Tong.
The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai): Over the last few days we have discussed and debated many serious policy announcements in this House: from tackling immediate cost of living issues and concerns; creating good jobs for Singaporeans; reshaping our economy; to meeting housing demands; reimagining the future of education; and our response to climate change, to name a few. Many of these are policies which strike at the heart of Singapore's long-term interests. And these are very important matters for Singapore and Singaporeans, and some are even existential ones.
Sir, we must get these policies right and we must obtain Singaporeans' support for them. But equally important is for us to achieve them together: as one people, united in our cause with a collective vision and a shared aspiration for Singapore's future. And that is the spirit of Forward Singapore (Forward SG), led by Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence. Which brings to my mind an old African proverb: if you want to go fast, go alone; but if you want to go far, go together.
Indeed, Sir, we have to go together. Our unity has been our strength behind every success in our history. Few societies in the world have succeeded in societal harmony, let alone one that is as richly diverse as ours. According to a post-pandemic survey by the Pew Research Centre, Singapore was amongst a small minority of countries that grew more united after the pandemic.
In today's increasingly divided world, fraught with war, rising inequality, misinformation, populist movements, political disenchantment, this unity is all the more rare and precious. It is ours to cherish and protect if Singapore is to succeed in our next chapter. And that is why it is fitting that the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) brings up the end of the Committee of Supply debates.
Our work is diverse: from developing the arts and sports; stewarding our treasured heritage; empowering our youths; corporates and community; to give back; care for others; and come together to build Singapore. At the heart of everything we do is our goal to foster unity, cohesion and that unique Singaporean identity. This underscores all that we do at MCCY.
And it is the powerful unifying force that helps us transcend our differences. We have seen this come to life when we rallied behind our national heroes in sports and in the arts.
Dr Syed Harun yesterday made a very impassioned speech, noting that when Joseph Schooling won his Olympic gold medal, or when Loh Kean Yew became world champion, or when Shanti took on the very best in Asia and beat them all, we all remember and cherish those moments, we feel proud of their sporting achievements; but even prouder because each of these athletes represents something in each of us and, collectively, as Singaporeans, and it ignites our shared Singapore spirit.
In the same way, our history is brightly lit with the many cultural icons who have inspired and united us. Dr Iskandar Jalil is a master at pottery, but he also creates poetry with his hands. The late Santha Bhaskar, who exemplified a deep appreciation for diversity, embodied multiculturalism throughout her life's work.
Beyond sporting and artistic successes, though, these stories also teach us about strength, resilience, creativity and excellence; inspiring present and future generations to dream big in a pursuit of excellence. And that is why even in difficult times, it is so important that we continue to cultivate and nurture and develop our sportsmen and our artists. So, Sir, in my response, I will set out the broad overarching framework of MCCY's efforts in these areas. My colleagues will develop the details further in their speeches – Minister of State Low Yen Ling on the arts; Minister of State Alvin Tan on the giving space as well as our youths; and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua on sports.
Sir, let me start with sports. Our most basic goal is to drive interest and participation in sports. There are obvious strong social benefits, from keeping active and fit to encouraging intermixing and through that, strengthening our bonds and our social cohesion. It is also the basic building block to finding that next wave of high-performing athletes. A broader base leads to a stronger and more sustained pipeline for talent. Singaporeans are already getting more active in sporting. According to a national survey by Sport Singapore (SportSG), sport participation among Singapore residents risen from 54% in 2015 to an all-time high of 74% in 2022. The sports participation rate for persons with disabilities also nearly doubled from 28% to 54%, in the same period. Sir, it is encouraging, but we want to do more to broaden sporting participation in the community with a number of initiatives.
First, through accessible sport programmes in the community. Our young can, today, join sports co-curricular activities (CCAs). They can also take part in junior sports academy programmes in primary schools, ActiveSG programmes or even take part in private academies and clubs. Members will recall that last year we topped-up the ActiveSG credits, so that these credits can be used to defray the cost of courses run by ActiveSG at any of their programmes. Even if young people do not come from well-to-do backgrounds, SportCares is a programme that is set up to enable children from low-income families to also be included.
For example, the SportCares bursary covers seasonal participation fees for nine ActiveSG academies and clubs the entire season – covered by the bursary. Other programmes, like the Saturday Night Lights football programme, helps to equip youths with holistic life skills using sport, in this case, football as a medium. At the grassroots level, Singaporeans from all walks of life can take part in exciting community-level competitions and games.
Members might remember the inter-constituency games. They were very popular. So, I am very pleased to announce that this year, People's Association (PA), working with SportSG, will bring back the popular inter-constituency as well as inter-GRC community championship as part of Pesta Sukan, which means Festival of Sport. The community championship will focus on five popular sports to begin with – badminton, basketball, football, pickleball and table tennis. Teams will compete under the banner of their constituency, with a final round amongst the GRCs to determine the national champion. This will no doubt add some competitive spirit in community games.
Second, we have been working on having more sporting facilities close to where Singaporeans live. In many Housing and Development Board (HDB) estates, there are now free-to-play facilities like basketball or futsal courts. You see many of them. Some of them are fenced up so that you can protect passersby from a stray ball.
In many of them, there are also badminton or sepak takraw courts, which sometimes also doubles up as pickleball courts. In addition, we are also building up an island-wide network of world-class sporting facilities right in your neighbourhood. One example is the Toa Payoh Integrated Development in the heart of a mature town. This new development will have top-notch sporting facilities to cater to a range of activities.
This will benefit not only the athletes who train there, but also heartlanders, both young and old, who come together, play and bond through sport. There are many more other developments coming soon at the heartlands in Punggol, Clementi, Queenstown, Ang Mo Kio and Hougang.
Third, we recognise that Singaporeans are interested in a broader range of diverse sports, some of which might not yet have mainstream appeal. So, we will do our best to broaden the options for Singaporeans to pursue a wider range of sports. This is why we extended the One Team Singapore Fund (OTSF) to 2027, as the Deputy Prime Minister announced and will be expanding the scope for donations eligible for one-to-one matching. This will catalyse even more support for our national athletes.
Mr Mohd Fahmi Aliman and Mr Darryl David spoke about this and they will be pleased to know that with OTSF, we will do more for emerging sports that are gaining traction in the community and where our athletes also do well on the international stage. These additional resources will also mean that these sports can encourage more grassroots participation and broaden the base, as I noted earlier. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Eric will speak more about the expansion of OTSF to include SportCares.
Next, Sir, sports is for all. And as we talk about growing the base of participation, we also want to ensure that persons with disabilities (PwDs), are included. Over the years, SportSG has retrofitted swimming pools with ramps for wheelchairs at eight ActiveSG sport centres, with two more pools being retrofitted by 2025 and we have built eight inclusive ActiveSG gyms.
We are also on track to make all ActiveSG gyms inclusive by 2026. Having the hardware and the physical set-up to accommodate PwDs is a good step forward, but we cannot just be satisfied that a PwD can navigate the pool and gyms with barrier-free access and then think that, that is enough and stop there. We have to go further and support them with inclusive programming to build a community and to also have appropriately trained coaches to run these programmes.
Today, when you visit our facilities, you can tap into a range of disability sport and inclusive sport programmes and services. For example, more than 3,000 individuals have attended disability awareness training and various coaching and technical courses to better support the PwDs' participation in sport, to allow them to take part actively in the programmes.
They will also Learn-to-Play Programmes, such as Yes! I Can and Play-Ability Festivals, where both persons with disabilities as well as persons without those disabilities can come together and play sports together, and take part in sports, such as swimming, badminton, basketball, archery and shooting.
SportSG is also developing an inclusive Train the Trainer programme, which will be a more structured programme to equip fitness instructors with the relevant skills to guide PwDs and recommend appropriate, suitable exercises for them. We therefore fully agree with Mr Ong Hwa Han that beyond just setting up the hardware, what matters is how empowered PwDs feel when they exercise in the public setting and come to our gyms and come to our pools at ActiveSG.
Senior Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua will elaborate more about our initiatives to make sports even more accessible to all. So, let me turn next to high-performance sports.
Overall, Team SG athletes have done well in 2023. To give you some highlights: in the 2023 Southeast Asian Games (SEA Games), Team Singapore brought home 158 medals and ranked sixth overall. There were also eight Games records, 17 national records and 40 personal bests achieved by Team Singapore.
But what is even more encouraging is that we continue to field a young team. Athletes under the age of 24 made up the majority of the contingent and they delivered outstanding performances. Also, critically, 30% of our gold medals were won by debutant athletes at the SEA Games. That gives us tremendous optimism moving forward.
In the Asian Para Games 2023, our athletes delivered their best away performance of all time. With eight medals, they shattered collectively, nine national records – including two Asian Paralympics records and achieved 12 personal bests. We now have our sights set on the next major Games for the year, which will be the Olympics and Paralympics in Paris.
Many Members have spoken about how we support our elite athletes in high-performance sports. So, let me come back to this point. We are constantly on a mission to find our next sporting champion and to create as many options and pathways as possible for athletes to reach their peak. Champions like Singapore kitefoiler Maximilian Maeder, who is one of the Team Singapore athletes who will be at the Olympics this year. He won a gold at the Formula Kite Youth World Championship in July 2023.
He followed that on with a gold in the Asian Games, winning all 16 of his races on his way to that gold medal. He is the first Singaporean to be nominated World Sailings' Male Sailor of the Year. He is all of 16, going on 17 years old. He is leaving this evening for further training in Europe in preparation for the Olympics. We wish him well.
For athletes competing at the world level like Maximilian and others like Kean Yew and Shanti, we give them the highest level of support. Let me just sketch out for members what that means. They are all on the highest tier of the Sports Excellence (spex) programme, which provides a monthly stipend to the athletes. This is so that they can be full-time athletes and free from distractions. On top of this, we also provide funding for their training and their travel overseas for competitions, or indeed, even if the competition is in Singapore here.
They are further supported by a sports science team in areas, such as sport biomechanics, nutrition, sports psychology, physiotherapy and physiology as well. We work with them on a curated coaching programme: help them with their diet, with sleep, with recovery, with preparation; just about everything that we need to get an athlete in peak performance. We will continue to strongly support their quest for sporting excellence, as Mr Darryl David and Dr Syed Harun mentioned.
But for every athlete who has found success, there will be many more, just below at the next tier, aspiring to find their next peak. We will endeavour to support them on their journey too. Let me just broadly sketch out what we do for them.
I spoke earlier about broadening the base, and I think this is a critical starting point if we want a strong and sustained pipeline of talent coming through for Singapore. We, therefore, work with the national sports associations (NSAs), with schools, as well as with private sporting academies, to identify and track good talent, give them a structured framework for development, with good coaching and mentorship.
Our second key strategy is then to put these talents through a structured development pathway, with a comprehensive support programme either by Sports Science Institute or by the NSA. Take, for example, the Singapore Table Tennis Association (STTA).
Their Junior Development Squad (JDS) is one good example. Over the years, they built up a strong pipeline of local talents. We now have Koen Pang, we have Zhou Jingyi and we have Izaac Quek, all graduating from STTA's JDS.
STTA and the Singapore Sports School also work closely together to set up the School Within a School programme. This programme enables our student table tennis athletes to get extended training twice a day, with a customised academic support programme that is worked around their sporting needs. So, if they need to make up classes, they need to do courses outside of competition period, this programme helps them to catch up, helps them to keep on par with their classmates.
We invest not just in the training of our athletes, but also support their sporting journey throughout their education and, eventually, their employment as well. For athletes still in school, the spexEducation programme helps them manage, both sport and education, by supporting them with school admissions, scholarships and also trying to schedule classes around trainings and competitions.
For athletes who have finished with school and are seeking to enter the workforce, they can apply to our spexBusiness partners, and they include corporates, like Grab, CapitaLand, DBS and Quest Ventures. We have a programme with these employers, so that our athletes can work with them but enjoy flexible work arrangements to accommodate training and competition.
They also provide employment to ex-Team Singapore athletes and, to date, 400 athletes have been hired under the spexBusiness programme.
But of course, we can do more and we can encourage more corporates to come onto the programme, because this programme is really as strong as the number of corporates who enter the programme with us.
In addition, when athletes need to go for training, even if they are not on the spexBusiness programme, there is spexTAG, which stands for spex Training Allowance Grants, to help athletes defray training costs. And for those who miss work while training for or competing or taking part in overseas competitions and major games, spexGLOW offsets lost wages. So, this is the programme that we have to support an athlete on their path, even as they manage work and school together, with training for their sport.
In addition, from August 2024, the spexPotential programme will support more young athletes trying to make the transition to the next level. I spoke earlier about how we had good young athletes at SEA Games, debutants who won a third of our gold medals.[Please refer to \"Clarification by Minister for Culture, Community and Youth\", Official Report, 7 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 132, Correction By Written Statement section.]
Our spexScholarship, the one I just mentioned, has been very successful. But the bar for acquiring that spexScholarship can be high – often benchmarked at Asian Games medal potential. This could mean that an athlete might sometimes be less supported earlier on in their journey. So, the spexPotential programme is a new one that bridges this gap, allows more athletes with potential to be supported at an earlier stage of their sporting career.
spexPotential will provide both financial, as well as programmatic support – such as coaching, overseas training and competition, local training, sports science, sports medicine, as well as equipment – for our junior athletes. This will give them even more support to realise their potential.
Next, let me turn to Mr Xie Yao Quan and Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, who asked about our plans for Sports Hub. I have spoken at some length earlier this week on the Sports Hub and will not repeat the points.
Let me just reiterate that our vision of the Sports Hub is to establish Singapore and the Sports Hub as the leading sports and entertainment destination in the region, inculcate a strong sense of affinity between Singaporeans and the Sports Hub, and also maximise the synergies across the suite of facilities that we have at Kallang Alive. Kallang Alive is a bigger precinct, Sports Hub occupies about a third or so of that space. So, we have got a lot more potential at Kallang Alive.
Against that backdrop, Mr Xie says that we should continue to bring major sporting events to Singapore. We agree. The Government will invest S$165 million in the Major Sports Events Fund over the next four years to do this.
The Sports Hub is already well poised to host many of these events. In addition to the suite of facilities within the Kallang Alive precinct, such as OCBC Arena and the Aquatic Centre, there will be new facilities ready soon, like the Kallang Football Hub and the Kallang Tennis Centre. The latter includes 12 outdoor, seven indoor and two mini tennis courts, that will complement the facilities at the Sports Hub, as we plan for more world-class sporting events at the Sports Hub.
For our TeamSG athletes, hosting such events will also mean more opportunities for them to compete. They get more wild cards when the event is held in Singapore and they test themselves, measure themselves up against some of the world's best, right here, on our home ground.
Sir, there are immense benefits beyond those attributable to our athletes alone. Singaporeans will also get to watch more of the world's best athletes in action, adding to an already vibrant sporting calendar.
It also boosts economic growth and global recognition, possibly unlocking latent potential in hosting entertainment and sporting events, and concurrently strengthening Singapore's reputation as a choice destination for high-signature international events.
This segues nicely into Mr Sitoh's point about the Singapore Indoor Stadium, or the SIS. The hosting of high-quality international events is valuable and also highly sought after. Our competitors are not standing still and we, likewise, must continually innovate and evolve if we want to continue to attract top-tier events.
The SIS is part of the Sports Hub, but it was built in 1989 and is now more than 30 years old. Since then, others around the region have refreshed their facilities, with new, modern indoor arenas that are state of the art.
So, we believe that it is now an opportune time to develop a new indoor arena that will be amongst the best-in-class globally. We have gone around to study some of the best arenas in the world, to learn from them. We are considering an arena that can host more sophisticated events, that can also flexibly accommodate different types of events and have a faster turnaround time between the different types of events. It will be different between sports and entertainment and you have to turn it around very quickly. And also, an arena that offers greater value to spectators, such as more varied hospitality suites, better seating and a better overall experience for the spectator.
We are considering for this new arena to be developed adjacent to the current SIS site. This location will continue to give the new arena a synergistic connection to the rest of the Sports Hub and Kallang, and also allow us to plan events and programming as an entire precinct, benefiting from the economies of scale.
It will also allow the current SIS to operate until the new indoor arena is operational and this minimises disruption to the pipeline of events and programming, which can continue throughout the construction period for the new arena.
We will study plans for the SIS and provide more details when it is ready. We are currently studying the capacity of this new indoor arena, taking into account existing and upcoming venues. It should, in our view, have at least the same capacity as the current SIS and also be future-proofed, so that it can continue to serve Singapore's interests in the foreseeable future.
The new indoor arena will operate alongside the rest of the Sports Hub, offering synergies with the other sporting and community facilities at the Kallang Alive precinct, and also seek to inject further vibrancy into the precinct.
Sir, let me now move on to our arts and culture sector. Ms Usha Chandradas made an impassioned speech yesterday evening and asked about our plans to transform and grow the arts ecosystem.
Sir, like sports, which I spent some time on, the arts and culture have the innate power to inspire, challenge and connect people. To quote one of our Cultural Medallion recipients, poet Prof Edwin Thumboo, he says \"Art, whatever its form, helps to define the texture, the rhythm, imagery, symbolism, energy of life in society.\" And that is why the arts is so important in our society. Singapore is a multicultural society, where the tapestry of our nation is so woven by the colourful threads of our unique diversity. And because of this, we have a special heritage to preserve, which in turn, spawns its own unique art forms in Singapore. It is not everywhere in the world that you can enjoy poetry in a range of different languages, all of which we can associate with, including dialects and Singlish, and have both traditional and contemporary forms of dance, music, theatre and visual arts.
I mentioned the late Santha Bhaskar earlier. She epitomises our multicultural spirit so well. Santha formed friendships with other dancers, who were also Cultural Medallion winners, like the ballet-trained Goh Lay Kuan, as well as the Malay dancer, Mdm Som Said. They learnt each other's dance styles, appreciated the beauty of each other's culture, which they then infused into the expression of their own craft. I think that is unique, that is special, that is Singapore.
This story reflects a distinctive feature of our arts and culture sector that we must continue to cherish, the shared multicultural diversity that Mr Sitoh Yih Pin spoke about. So, we will continue to support our arts practitioners.
Let me give Members an update and explain why I am confident of our arts and practitioners, as we seek to make the leap to the next level.
Sir, our arts and culture sector has come a long way over the last 10 years. It has become more vibrant and arts appreciation more widespread. The average number of arts and culture events per day has risen steadily, to more than 120 in 2022, almost double of what it was 10 years ago. More people are enjoying the arts. Arts in-person attendance in Singapore has grown to 59% in 2022, from 48% back in 2011. And if you include digital attendance – which is, post-COVID-19, now the rage, a very common way to access art these days – that figure goes up to 83%.
We have also developed top-class national institutions, like the Esplanade, National Gallery of Singapore, Singapore Art Museum, STPI Creative Workshop and Gallery, complemented by a rich array of private institutions, like the ArtScience Museum and The Private Museum, as well as private spaces, Artspace@Helutrans.
And we have a number of established arts companies today, reflecting the diversity of culture that I mentioned earlier. Companies like Nadi Singapura, Bhaskar's Arts Academy, Ding Yi Music Company, which offer a range of different art forms, genres, representing all of us, a diverse cross section of Singapore's ethnic and cultural make-up.
At the same time, our homegrown artists are rapidly establishing themselves on the world stage and bringing Singapore to the world. Multidisciplinary artist Robert Zhao will be showcasing his work titled \"Seeing Forest\" at the upcoming Venice Biennale 2024. This will happen in Venice next month. The Biennale is amongst the world's most prestigious platforms to showcase contemporary art. Our young singer-songwriter, Shazza, was featured at the iconic New York Times Square billboard just last year, as part of Spotify's EQUAL campaign, which spotlights women in music from around the world.
The Singapore Chinese Orchestra presented \"Legends of Nanyang\" in Shanghai, and later this year, they will be in Suzhou, Tianjin and Beijing. Singapore Ballet will also open the Gala event at Washington's Kennedy Center's \"10,000 Dreams: A Celebration of Asian Choreography\". And this will happen in June 2024 and they will present the late Cultural Medallion recipient Goh Choo San's choreography, \"Momentum\". The Singapore Symphony Orchestra has been invited to perform in Japan, and they will take part in the Kyoto Concert Hall in October 2024, an invitation by the Asia Orchestra Week.
Sir, these examples and many more, show that Singaporeans are already present at the top table at many of these events, and they include our own flagship festivals, such as the Singapore International Festival of Arts, Singapore Writers Festival and Singapore Art Week.
These festivals have drawn a strong international crowd and at the same time, they also allow Singaporeans to access the best in the world, as they come into Singapore and exhibit in Singapore.
Singapore Art Week, or SAW, for example, has grown annually to encompass more areas and districts in Singapore. Arts businesses, like art galleries and ceramic studios, have actively participated in SAW, to grow access to new audiences and new markets. In SAW this year, for example, we had 183 arts events across a 10-day festival, with the majority organised by these companies, enjoying also a very strong international presence.
Next, turning to a young creative. If you are a young creative today, there are many more pathways to pursue an arts education and make something out of it. The School of the Arts, or SOTA, our first specialised pre-tertiary arts school, was set up precisely to do this. The School of the Arts (SOTA) graduates go on to pursue careers in the arts or tap on their arts-enriched educational experience to embark on diverse careers.
At the tertiary level, those interested in the arts can also pursue diploma programmes. Take, for example, Republic Polytechnic's School of Technology for the Arts, or courses at the School of Art, Design and Media at the Nanyang Technological University, Yong Siew Toh Conservatory at the National University of Singapore for those inclined, or the degree programmes offered by Singapore's first arts university, the University of the Arts Singapore (UAS), that was established as an alliance between local arts institutions, LASALLE College of the Arts, as well as the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts. They will welcome their first intake in August this year.
Both these arts institutions have an impressive faculty and alumni who have earned national recognition and also championed Singaporean creativity on the global stage. MCCY and the National Arts Council (NAC) have been working closely with the Ministry of Education (MOE) and UAS to ensure that there will continue to be good opportunities for arts graduates because it is one thing to have these courses and programmes, but it is another to ensure that when they graduate and they finish with their education, that there is a space for them in the creative economy.
And it is the creative economy which I now turn. These education pathways have built up a strong pipeline of talents which can flow into our creative economy where the range of job options have also expanded. I want to give Members one example: Guo Ningru. She is a sound engineer with more than a decade of experience designing sound for both local and regional productions. I met her when she won the Young Artist Award a couple of years ago in 2022. Ningru pursued a degree at the LASALLE College of the Arts, specialising in Sound Design. She received NAC's National Arts Scholarship and furthered her education at the renowned Sound Design programme at the University of California Irvine.
As a creative entrepreneur, Ningru creates 360-degree soundscapes, where audiences are immersed in an aural world. But what struck me about Ningru is a young creative, passionate about a very discrete area of the arts – sound engineering, how we deliver sound from the stage to the audiences. She developed a deep passion and interest in it and she is now highly schooled, well-educated in this area. She is now working in this area, freelancing, working with different companies, both local as well as regional, embarked on a career as a creative entrepreneur. And that is what we want to see.
Sir, we now have a vibrant and spontaneous group of freelancers as well supporting the arts economy. About one in three arts and heritage workers is a self-employed person, or SEP. Working in a wide range of roles, arts SEPs primarily take on gig work and generally do not have structured support from employers to support their training or career development. But they are very critical to the continued success and growth of the arts ecosystem. They play a vital role. They are a little messy sometimes, spontaneous but they add to the overall vibe and vibrancy.
So, NAC will do more to support the development of multiple pathways of training for these SEPs. They can also look forward to a wider range of development opportunities curated to fit their training needs and the nature of their work. Increasing support will help arts SEPs seize better work opportunities across a broader and wider range of job roles and, in turn, boost the long-term growth of the sector. Minister of State Low will speak a bit more about this.
Sir, in order to sustain this growth and push the envelope even more, we will need a concerted plan as well as collective buy-in from all Singaporeans. In 2018, we launched the first Our SG Arts Plan to drive the arts forward and provide a structured roadmap for the next five years, that is five years from 2018. But things changed quickly when COVID-19 intervened and we saw some shifts in the operating environment as well as trends, for example, audience preferences and new modalities of art presentation.
There was also greater intersection of sectors like design, fashion, film, architecture and music. They came together in ways which, perhaps, we did not see earlier. Some of these shifts have also become permanent ones. But in all of them, we saw opportunities.
So, rather than keep with the old plan and let it run its course, we took the opportunity to refresh the plan immediately, with Our SG Arts Plan last year, after substantial consultations with artists, stakeholders and so on in the sector for some time. Drawing an analogy from the arts, we changed the script during the intermission because we saw those shifts and we thought why not move down, move quickly, do not waste time and get the arts ecosystem powered and ready for the next bound.
Under this refreshed plan, we have bold ambitions to further enrich our creative economy, infuse the arts into our everyday lives and harness the power of the arts for their well-being. This programme will be further powered by an injection of $100 million to the arts sector over the next four years which the Government has committed to, to support the ambitions of this Arts Plan. This is in addition to the existing funding to the arts and heritage sector already provided by the Government.
Sir, the arts are essential to the social fabric of Singapore, as I mentioned earlier, and to the confidence and well-being of our people and also are a source of livelihood for many Singaporeans and we want to maintain, if not, push that even further. Minister of State Low will speak a bit more about this in her speech the details. But I want to close this section with an appeal.
Sir, we have seen how valuable our arts practitioners are in preserving our special identity and fostering cohesion and our multiculturalism. We have seen how our arts ecosystem has grown and evolved over the years. Our practitioners and arts companies have also matured, evolving with our society, challenging us with arts which tells our story, manifesting our fears and reflecting our dreams.
We have young creatives being given options to enter the creative workforce and, like Ningru, grabbed them with both hands and made a real fist of it. We also have many artists who are performing on the international stage, knocking on the door of world recognition. We have consciously nurtured arts patronage and support from donors who are playing their part to sustain the arts, supported by Government funding and programmes, such as the Cultural Matching Fund, which we extended a couple of years ago.
Sir, what we now need is a Singaporean audience to strongly support and come out strongly in support of the arts and appreciate our artists: attend the exhibitions, see them perform on stage, attend the festivals, go to their concerts and pay for them, just as we do for many foreign artists. This is what would really help our artists level up and scale even greater heights, a collective appreciation in support by the Singaporean audience. They need this collective support and, together, I believe we can harness its transformative power to then uplift our entire nation and build on the strengths of our diversity and multiculturalism to achieve social cohesion and a stronger sense of national identity.
Sir, let me conclude. We do not live or achieve our dreams alone, but together. This is true of our athletes and artists in the way which I have sketched out. And for all of us, we are our heroes as well, telling stories which inspire us. So, in the spirit of Forward SG, we want a society where no one is left behind; where those who succeed give back and invest in the dreams of others, pay it forward; where everyone brings more to the table and, as a result, we all get more in return, where we are all collectively stronger than the sum of our parts.
We are stepping up our efforts to promote civic engagement and giving back. We will also consciously provide more space for citizens to lead the change they want see in the areas that they care about and the Government will come in to support them. My colleague, Minister of State Alvin Tan, will share more on these efforts.
Mr Chairman, Sir, there is no one Singapore dream, no uniform pathway for success. What matters is that we live in a society that values our diverse passions and aspirations and that there are opportunities for us to achieve our fullest potential. And through ups and downs, we know that our fellow Singaporeans will be there to inspire us, lift us up when we need to, give us the boost we need to cross the finish line.
Sir, on that note, I want to thank the various speeches and cuts that had been made from both sides of the House. All Members, as well as our Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) Members, made many good suggestions, many constructive comments. I also want to thank, in particular, my team from MCCY and our agencies who work very hard to ensure that the policies that we devise meet the needs of Singaporeans and come closer and closer to the endpoints that I mentioned earlier – for cohesion, identity and a transformative strength that is Singapore.
That is why we will continue to work hard to build a vibrant and cohesive home. My Ministry is committed to that – a Singapore where Singaporeans continue to dream and have the courage and ability to chase down those dreams. If we can do this together, Sir, I am confident that Singapore's best days are well ahead of us. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Minister of State Low Yen Ling.
The Minister of State for Culture, Community and Youth (Ms Low Yen Ling): Chairman, the arts and heritage serve as powerful ways to connect Singaporeans of different backgrounds. The Government works closely with our arts and heritage practitioners, stakeholders and the public to create and foster a vibrant arts and heritage ecosystem. In my speech today, I will share how we aim to bring Singapore's arts and heritage to the next bound of growth.
First, we will open up more diverse touchpoints to widen Singaporeans' access to arts and heritage. Second, we will support the development of our practitioners and boost their artistic excellence. Third, we will build a more robust arts and heritage ecosystem to bring the sector to greater heights.
In recent years, we saw sustained and holistic efforts to expand access to the arts, develop a wider audience and enrich our heritage. I think everyone remembers the pandemic years. During the pandemic period from 2019 to 2021, some $490 million was spent each year to boost and uphold the arts and heritage sector.
NAC provided grants and arts housing subsidies to support the creation and production of artistic works, foster organisational growth and cultivate audience engagement. For instance, earlier on, Minister Edwin Tong talked about the Singapore Art Week or SAW. I think it bears repeating. SAW reached over 1.4 million attendees in 130 events last year. And this year, SAW 2024 featured 183 events. Partners from different sectors, like Marina Bay Sands, HDB and Singapore Airlines, worked with us to bring Singapore art to wider audiences.
To promote and preserve our heritage, we opened the revamped Peranakan Museum last year. And in addition, we joined Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand to jointly nominate the kebaya to be on the UNESCO Representative List of Intangible Cultural Heritage.
Last year, we unveiled Our SG Arts and Heritage plans for 2023 to 2027, like what Minister Edwin Tong mentioned, envisioning an inclusive, accessible and vibrant arts and heritage sector for Singapore. We aim to create a connected society, foster a creative economy and establish Singapore as a distinctive city.
At the same time, our SG Heritage Plan 2.0 seeks to empower the community to safeguard and promote our shared heritage and encourage active participation in shaping our heritage landscape. We will build the growth of our heritage sector upon the foundational blocks of identity, industry, innovation and community.
The Government is committed to the success of these plans. Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced in the 2024 Budget that an additional $100 million would be allocated over the four years of Our SG Arts Plan 2023 to 2027.
Ms Usha Chandradas would be glad to know that this $100 million provided is on top of the annual budget for arts and heritage and will go towards: one, expanding arts access for Singaporeans; two, developing our artists and arts workers in Singapore; and three, building a robust arts ecosystem where arts companies and artists thrive.
In addition, we will look at making more significant investments in bringing the arts to the community, catalysing new spaces in our city and leveraging the arts for social impact. We will further support arts groups to achieve excellence, for instance, by catalysing innovation, expanding into new audience segments and building common new capabilities through technology. Let me elaborate.
NAC will expand access to the arts for Singaporeans so that all can participate and benefit. We want to extend the reach and the significance of the arts sector to Singaporeans across diverse walks of life and socioeconomic backgrounds. Besides widening access, we will unpack the power of the arts to promote the health and wellness of Singaporeans.
Yesterday evening, Ms Joan Pereira and Mr Mohd Fahmi have shared, super-ageing Singapore can certainly gain from arts programmes that seek to enhance the quality of life and personal wellness. We, in MCCY and NAC, agree with both Ms Joan Pereira and Mr Mohd Fahmi. We have had good feedback from such programmes and will continue to do more in this area. For example, participants in the series of mindful \"Slow Art\" programmes by the National Gallery Singapore reported lower stress levels and enhanced well-being, compared to non-attendees.
So, I am glad to announce that NAC will collaborate with the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) and SingHealth to develop a framework and resources to guide the design of programmes that promote the arts for health and wellness. The framework, to be developed by 2027, will include best practices, impact measurement tools and case studies that can be used by artists and our community partners. It will initially focus on the well-being of our seniors, with plans to subsequently expand its scope to reach wider groups of people.
The framework and the resources will open up more opportunities for our arts practitioners to use their craft to support and promote well-being. This move is also aligned with our aim to increase access to the arts for citizens through health and community touchpoints, further supporting the Government’s HealthierSG objectives.
The National Heritage Board (NHB) will continue partnering with social service agencies on heritage-based interventions targeted at improving well-being, especially that of our seniors. This is part of the focus on community under Our SG Heritage Plan 2.0.
To give Members a quick example, I think some of you may have visited the National Museum. The National Museum of Singapore recently created an inclusive social space that is called Reunion, for our seniors, including those with mild cognitive impairment and dementia, to engage in meaningful activities and conversations inspired by the museum’s collection.
Chairman, besides engaging our seniors through the arts, we are also actively engaging our youth in the plans for promoting and safeguarding Singapore’s heritage. I agree with Mr Keith Chua and Mr Sitoh Yih Pin on the importance of strengthening our youths' understanding and appreciation of our shared legacy.
To this end, the NHB has involved 35 young people on its panel to develop the inaugural Youth Heritage Blueprint. This gives our youth a platform to share their views and a chance to shape our museums and heritage landscape. Sir, 26-year-old Ms Nur Ashikin Binte Muhamad Ali, a project manager and also a committee lead of the Youth Panel, is excited to see how digital tools like augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) can make Singapore heritage come alive for younger people.
Since January 2023, the Youth Panel has received feedback and suggestions from more than 1,000 youths. The Panel is analysing the findings and developing recommendations for the Blueprint, which will be published in July this year.
Through these initiatives, we hope to make the arts and heritage accessible for all Singaporeans across different age groups, ensuring meaningful engagement with our cultural heritage.
Chairman, as part of our aim to widen access to the arts, NAC will further expand the diversity of arts spaces in Singapore. This is in line with our goal to make Singapore a distinctive city.
Mr Darryl David would be glad to know that NAC will continue to collaborate with public and private sector partners to unlock arts spaces for our artists and also our arts organisations, while also enlivening our public spaces with the arts.
For example, NAC works with the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) on the Community and Sports Facilities Scheme, which co-locates community, arts and sports spaces with commercial developments. Recently, The Artground, which is an inclusive family-oriented arts space for children opened at the One Holland Village mall. This not only offers Singaporean families' easy access to quality arts experiences but also enhances the vibrancy of commercial spaces.
To create more touchpoints for the arts, NAC will continue to collaborate with public sector and private sector partners to unlock and develop arts spaces across Singapore, including the use of both new and also refurbished spaces.
Take 45 Armenian Street for example. NAC has been working with the arts community and stakeholders to co-create the vision for the redevelopment of this space. It is being developed as a hub for artistic experimentation and to support the work of young and emerging practitioners. We thank Ms Usha Chandradas for her feedback when she delivered her cut last evening. When completed in two years' time in year 2026, 45 Armenian Street will provide about 14,000 square feet space for the arts.
Chairman, besides having greater access to the arts in a variety of spaces, Singaporeans are also gaining a deeper appreciation of our heritage assets at different spots across the island.
Mr Mark Lee, Mr Darryl David and Mr Sitoh Yih Pin asked about our plans to foster community bonding, national pride and enliven neighbourhoods through our heritage assets.
As part of Our SG Heritage Plan 2.0, NHB will launch Heritage Activation Nodes, or HANs, in various neighbourhoods island-wide. Together with community partners and heritage interest groups, we will co-create heritage activities and celebrate the unique heritage of our neighbourhoods in each HAN. The first of these nodes will be introduced in Katong – Joo Chiat just next month, April 2024; while the second HAN in Clementi will be rolled out in the later part of this year. I was hoping that Dr Tan Wu Meng will be in the House when I say that about the second HAN in Clementi.
Behind the development of the Katong-Joo Chiat HAN is Katong Culture, a heritage interest group from Joo Chiat Community Club Management Committee and their community partners. Through these nodes, we hope to encourage greater appreciation of our heritage assets among Singaporeans. The HANs will offer fresh heritage touchpoints and provide the platform and opportunities for Singaporeans to co-create heritage experiences.
Chairman, I will now touch on how we will create a vibrant arts and heritage ecosystem with a strong core of arts and heritage businesses and practitioners.
As I mentioned earlier, NAC will be investing an additional $100 million over the next four years. Under the Creative Economy Thrust of our SG Arts Plan 2023 to 2027, the funding will be used to grow our arts ecosystem and help our local arts companies scale impact and speed up their transformation.
First, product development. We will further support our artists and arts companies to develop distinctive and diverse arts offerings for both local and international audiences.
Second, innovation and capability building. NAC will support transformations in art making and artistic productions that leverage on technology to catalyse innovative arts products.
Third, audience development. NAC will help our arts companies to expand their reach or cultivate new audience segments through engaging and innovative works or presentations.
Let me quickly elaborate on how we will broaden and grow our audience through partnerships, technology, data and also insights. NAC will partner with individuals, including independent content creators and writers, as well as organisations, on joint projects and initiatives to expand the overall audience base. We will use technology as an instrument to achieve our goals. It is an important learning point from COVID-19 that we intend to continue to harness.
For example, NAC’s Catch, which is a one-stop online destination for all things arts and culture in Singapore will help our artists and arts organisations to: one, promote their work; two, reach a wider audience; and three, to build relationships with potential supporters. In addition, technology can empower us to better understand consumers’ preferences and tastes through data collection as well as analytics. So, with this knowledge, we will be then more equipped to grow the arts and culture scene strategically.
To create a vibrant arts and heritage ecosystem, we need a strong core of practitioners with talent, capabilities and skills. Many of our arts practitioners are self-employed persons, or SEPs. As Minister Edwin Tong announced earlier, NAC will strengthen the support for our Arts SEPs to boost their prospects and their chances of success. We will enhance and increase their training opportunities to enable them to pursue their profession with better career stability.
NAC will develop multiple pathways of training and support for Arts SEPs. This can be in the form of workplace-based, peer-to-peer and also self-directed learning. The Arts Resource Hub will also be enriched with career guidance resources and content tailored for Arts SEPs. For instance, NAC worked with Jeremiah Choy, an SEP and creative director, producer and curator to produce a series of videos with tips and best practices on how to set up a business in the arts and be a successful freelancer.
In addition, NAC will widen the funding access for Arts SEPs to receive training opportunities. These training support enhancements will certainly benefit SEPs, including the arts instructors, as Ms Jean See had pointed out during the delivery of her cut last evening. I would also like to assure Ms Jean See that NAC works with the National Instructors and Coaches Association (NICA) through the NAC-NICA Training Support programme, providing our SEPs with training subsidies and training allowances to support their upskilling journey. NAC also provides affordable physical spaces for arts SEPs and arts instructors’ use via the Arts Resource Hub (ARH).
To maintain a vibrant arts and heritage ecosystem, we will continue to honour and celebrate the peaks of artistic excellence in our midst. The Cultural Medallion (CM), as the nation’s highest arts accolade, provides funds to support its recipients’ continuous artistic pursuits and contributions to the Singapore art scene. We would like to assure Ms Usha Chadradas that NAC has, over the years, broadened the range of projects that the CM Fund can support. I also want to assure her that the process for the recipients to utilise the Fund has also been simplified. Chairman, please allow me to speak in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Chairman, the arts and culture reflect our daily lives, connecting Singaporeans from different social backgrounds and fostering a sense of unity and identity. It is an important part of our social and national development.
Last year, MCCY launched Our SG Arts and Heritage Plans 2.0. Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced in this year's Budget Statement that the Government will allocate $100 million for Our SG Arts Plan from 2023 to 2027. This funding will support three key thrusts: first, building a Connected Society; second, developing Singapore's Creative Economy; and third, establishing Singapore as a Distinctive City. This funding will help us to expand the scope of arts, increase opportunities for Singaporeans to engage with arts, nurture more artists, and establish a more comprehensive arts ecosystem.
MCCY has always been committed to bringing arts and culture to more Singaporeans so that more can participate in and benefit from the activities. This year, we can look forward to even more vibrant and robust arts and heritage offerings. For example, NHB will roll out two new Heritage Activation Nodes consecutively this year – one in Katong-Joo Chiat and the other in Clementi. These two Heritage Activation Nodes will unlock more heritage touchpoints for Singaporeans, promoting greater understanding and appreciation of the unique heritage of their neighbourhoods, and allow all to jointly experience and create unforgettable memories together.
Arts and culture not only bring communities together, it can also cultivate our character, allowing us to experience the beauty of life and bringing us positive energy. Therefore, this year, NAC will collaborate with healthcare partners to promote arts and cultural activities with the aim of improving the well-being of Singaporeans. NAC and healthcare partners will work together to integrate frameworks and resources to guide artists and community partners in the design of arts and cultural programmes that can help to uplift spirits, cultivate Singaporeans’ interest and passion in arts, enrich our lives and making them more meaningful. This programme will be developed first through pilots with seniors and expanded thereafter for more communities to benefit from arts for well-being programmes.
Chairman, MCCY is committed to working with our artists and partners from various fields to build a vibrant and dynamic arts and heritage sector for Singaporeans, as well as a harmonious, inclusive, creative, cohesive and uniquely charming Singapore.
(In English): Chairman, our arts and heritage belong to all Singaporeans. As Minister Edwin Tong mentioned, everyone can support and everyone contribute to the vibrancy of our arts and heritage ecosystem. So, MCCY, NAC, NHB, we invite all our stakeholders to co-create a dynamic and flourishing Singapore arts and heritage scene together.
MCCY, NAC, NHB, we are committed to working closely with our partners in the private sector, public sector and people sectors to deepen our shared identity and grow a distinctive city that is anchored on our shared arts and culture, because our artists and our practitioners form the powerhouse for Singapore’s creative economy. With our arts and heritage plans in place, we have the chance to turn our aspirations into reality – to become a creative city that inspires.
The Chairman: Minister of State Alvin Tan.
The Minister of State for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Alvin Tan): Chairman, our Forward SG exercise brought together over 200,000 Singaporeans to share their hopes and dreams for Singapore and how they can contribute towards our refreshed social compact.
Our community and corporates have answered this call. Today, I will share how MCCY is creating more spaces, more platforms and more tools for them to give back and shape a better Singapore – a city and nation that inspires, as Minister of State Low Yen Ling just said in her speech.
First, our community. Our community's response to the call to shape a better Singapore starts early on – with our youths. As Deputy Chair of the National Youth Council (NYC), I get to spend a lot of time with our youths. They are hungry; they are inquisitive; and they have diverse dreams and passions, ideas and ideals. Dr Syed Harun and I know this in our work with our youths at NYC, and I thank him for serving alongside me as an NYC council member.
Dr Harun and I know that our youths have an unwavering can-do attitude and spirit and want to take action. They care deeply about giving back and making a positive impact on the causes they believe in. That is why we have been listening to them – listening to what they want and providing them with the space, support and the platforms to lead this change.
Ms Hany Soh asked how we are supporting our youths to experiment and execute their ideas. She specifically mentioned the Youth Action Challenge, or YAC. Over the past five seasons of YAC, we have awarded funding to more than 1,000 youths and over 280 youth projects that tackle issues like sustainability, social isolation and mental well-being. These projects have created positive outcomes in our community.
Recently, I spent an evening with Grace, Jun Han and Valencia from Friendzone, a social enterprise that organises events to connect people and to build new friendships. Since receiving funding in YAC Season 2, Friendzone has scaled their outreach, connecting more than 4,000 participants over 200 gatherings. So, if you are a young person with exciting ideas, please watch out for YAC Season 6, coming up.
Sir, our youths also want a greater say in policymaking in areas they care deeply about. That is why we set up the four inaugural Youth Panels, to partner them to shape national policies. Dr Harun asked how we are harnessing our youths' creativity to shape our future and if we are tapping a wider pool of youths. I am happy to share with him that around 140 youths from diverse backgrounds are, indeed, on our Youth Panels. And they comprise a good mix of young working adults and schooling youths, each with their unique lived experiences and perspectives.
I recently caught up with Damien and Salwa from the Institute of Technical College (ITE) College West and Kaplan Higher Education Institute respectively. Despite their busy studies, they spent time at these meetings, and they found them very meaningful and also very valuable. They got to exchange perspectives with other members from different backgrounds and deliberate on complex issues to shape their policy recommendations. They are only 17 years old, and their level of maturity and insightfulness, and indeed, their questions, were really inspiring.
Sir, our Youth Panels mark a shift in how our Government is creating more space for our youths to take ownership in nation-building. Our youths have a direct role in deciding the issues that the Youth Panels would address. These panels also receive support from Government agencies throughout their term, including access to agencies' policy considerations, expertise and data, to inform their policy deliberations.
We will ensure that the views of our youths are incorporated into the policy panels' recommendations, and then either table these recommendations in Parliament for debate, implement them or address them via other channels, such as written responses. So, I look forward to seeing our Youth Panels' recommendations.
If you are keen to share your perspectives, please join us at our inaugural Youth Policy Forum later this year. Our panels will present their policy ideas and debate them before finalising their recommendations.
Sir, another segment of the community that has answered this call, in addition to our youths, are our volunteers at the SG Cares Volunteer Centres. These are individuals giving back and offering peer support in neighbourhoods they grew up in or areas that are close to their heart.
An area that is close to my heart is Jalan Kukoh, where I started my volunteering journey as a youth 20 years ago, serving children, youths, seniors and vulnerable families there. Jalan Kukoh is now home to one of 24 SG Cares Volunteer Centres (VCs) across Singapore, making an impact in their respective communities.
Since 2018, close to 100,000 volunteers have served with these 24 VCs, reaching over 600,000 beneficiaries. I recently met Mrs Chan Swee Fen, a volunteer with SG Cares VC @ Kreta Ayer, which covers Jalan Kukoh. Swee Fen has a Master's degree in counselling and trains volunteer befrienders in practical counselling skills, giving them confidence to conduct home visits and befriend vulnerable seniors in Jalan Kukoh and also the Chin Swee area. She is one of 20,000 volunteers who regularly serve with VCs and is a forerunner of what we call skills-based volunteerism where individuals volunteer their professional skills to meet specific community needs.
And more professional bodies are adopting this model of volunteering. For example, MCCY is partnering Pro Bono SG to grow and develop their pool of volunteer lawyers who provide legal advice to non-profit organisations. Forty volunteer lawyers have served over 800 clients at the Community Law Centre at Tian De Temple in 2023 alone. Last December, I met Ms Cai Chengying and her Pro Bono SG team, and they told me that they will be expanding their reach beyond Tian De Temple. True to their word, Pro Bono SG launched their second Community Law Centre in the Northwest District earlier this year. But this is just the start.
Mr Baey Yam Keng asked about sustaining our VCs' impact and how they are strengthening volunteer management. Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked about reaching senior volunteers. Our VCs equip community partners with skills to attract, engage and retain volunteers of all ages – the young and the young-at-heart. For example, SG Cares VCs @ Geylang and Serangoon train MOE educators to design more meaningful values-in-action (VIA) programmes and projects, encouraging students to continue volunteering even after completing their VIA requirements. Our VCs also work with community partners like RSVP Singapore and Active Ageing Centres to avail more volunteering opportunities that meet the interests of seniors, such as mentoring, befriending and supporting non-profit organisations. MCCY also works with the National Council of Social Services and the Singapore University of Social Sciences to equip our VCs to better do their outreach, training, volunteer management and enable them to learn from one another's best practices.
Mr Baey asked how we manage when SG Cares VCs change operators to keep up with the town's shifting needs. Over the past five years, only three towns have changed operators and, in every case, we ensure a smooth transition. Disruptions are limited and our volunteers have continued to serve on the ground consistently.
So, those keen to volunteer with our SG Cares Volunteer Centres, please visit our SG Cares website to find your nearest VC and to learn about volunteering opportunities that match your interest and your specific skillsets.
Sir, from youths to volunteers at our SG Cares Volunteer Centres to our racial and religious groups, our communities in Singapore are giving back. And there is no more important cause to contribute to than our precious racial and religious harmony, a point that Mr Sitoh Yi Pin, Mr Darryl David and Mr Raj Joshua Thomas made yesterday. As what Minister Edwin Tong said, it is something we must cherish and protect.
I agree with them that we must press on with these efforts, and I am glad to say we are far from starting from scratch. Our community and religious leaders have worked hard over the years to achieve this. Leaders from key ethnic and religious groups contribute to our National Steering Committee on Racial and Religious Harmony. This Committee has helped foster closer ties among these leaders who, in turn, bring their communities together. Committee Members even take turns to organise the annual Harmony Games. Just last Saturday, the Catholic Archdiocese were the lead organisers and they will hand over to the Taoist Federation to organise next year's games.
On the ground in our communities, our Racial and Religious Harmony Circles (HCs) have seen an increase in membership and activities since we refreshed them last year. I have joined a few of these such activities, including last year's Harmony Sports Fiesta at our Sports Hub that reached more than 31,000 people, thanks to the support of over 1,000 HC members, and also Marymount HC's Ultimate Frisbee Tournament with over 200 youths and the young-at-heart. Beneath the roaring energy on the field, I witnessed a shared sense of mutual trust and understanding among participants from different religious organisations and community groups at Marymount. So, well done, Marymount HC.
But our work is only just getting started and we have much more to do. By 2025, we will equip 800 key HC leaders with skills, such as mediation and crisis preparedness, to bolster social harmony in peacetime and in times of crises. And our Harmony Circle Coordinating Council will continue to strengthen efforts to make our HCs more diverse and more digital. So, if you are passionate about preserving and strengthening our precious racial and religious harmony, please join your nearest HC.
Sir, beyond our youths, volunteers in VCs and racial and religious groups, we see another group taking on a new challenge confronting us – our society's mental health and mental well-being, which Deputy Prime Minister Wong has affirmed as a national priority.
This group comprises our SG Mental Well-being Network, which Ms Hany Soh mentioned. We set up this Network in 2022 so that individuals, community stakeholders and private partners can work together to build mental resilience in our communities.
Ms Hany Soh asked about the work done by the network thus far. It has made good progress. We now have 12 well-being circles at various locales. They have trained over 600 individuals in peer support skills and reached more than 3,000 people through their programmes. The three newest well-being circles are located in Queenstown, Marymount and the Singapore Management University. And we welcome the Woodgrove Well-being Circle as well.
And we have made progress beyond these community or locale well-being circles. Our network's members, such as Growth Collective SG and Happiness Initiative, have introduced their own peer support programmes, running more than 900 peer support circles across workplaces, educational and healthcare institutions. Studies done with selected partners found that these peer support circles helped improve mental well-being and sustain it over time.
We will launch a guide later this year on how to set up a Well-Being Circle. So, if you want to set up one, please connect with our network or join our Partners Networking Night on 25 March at 7.00 pm at the Lifelong Learning Institute.
Sir, I have shared how our community, including our youths, VCs, racial and religious groups and mental health advocates, are answering the call and giving back. Alongside our burgeoning community are corporates which have also answered the call.
I recently caught up with Razif Yusoff, who is the co-founder of Push Pull Give, a fitness social enterprise. Push Pull Give allows non-profit organisations to use their fitness studios for free and offers scholarships and employment opportunities for young adults from disadvantaged backgrounds. Push Pull Give is one of the 55 companies that have committed to the National Volunteer and Philanthropic Centre's Company of Good Programme, pledging positive social impact as the core of their business.
Corporates which actively give back to society rarely do so alone. In fact, mutual support and opportunities to network with like-minded businesses are hallmarks of NVPC's Company of Good Programme.
A couple of weeks ago, I visited Unilever's campus to meet 16 local small and medium enterprises (SMEs) which signed up for the Unilever-NVPC Purpose for Growth programme. Unilever mentors helped these SMEs define their business strategy and how to make a positive impact in Singapore.
I am sure many more companies will do the same. I invite them to come because all companies, big and small, can play a part, work together and amplify your social impact on the ground.
I would also like to thank Mr Neil Parekh and the Singapore Business Federation (SBF) for working with us to set up the Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) Coordination Office in SBF. I look forward to working with him and his team through quarterly industry engagements to reach SBF's 28,000 members and encourage more corporates to follow in the footsteps of Companies of Good.
Mr Mohd Fahmi asked how we can support our Co-operatives, which are already contributing to society. I meet with our Cooperatives and Singapore National Co-operative Federation (SNCF) leaders regularly. We are working closely with SNCF to groom emerging leaders and provide targeted funding to ensure our co-operatives remain relevant and also well-governed.
Sir, corporates are also giving back through mentoring by helping our youths navigate key transitions, such as educational and career pathways.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked about the progress of Mentoring SG. I would like to thank her for her own efforts in building our National Mentoring movement. She mentioned School of Day 1, by Matin Mohdari, which is part of Mentoring SG. School of Day 1 recently ran a session for youths who just received their \"A\" level results. I am in contact with Matin and have promised him that we will do more together under the Mentoring SG banner.
Sir, since we launched Mentoring SG in December 2022, it has expanded its outreach, engaging 100 corporates, 2,000 skilled mentors and more than 5,000 youths. And we are training more mentors. Last month, Mentoring SG rolled out a Singapore Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ) accredited course called Mentoring for Youth, which equips mentors with effective facilitation and communication skills through scenario-based practices.
Mentoring SG is embarking on a research study to measure the impact of mentoring programmes and partnerships. The findings will enable it to scale up quality programmes.
This year, Mentoring SG will partner more corporates on industry-led mentoring initiatives. It will also partner more polytechnics and ITEs, to provide more avenues for corporates to give back. For example, the Singapore Semiconductor Industry Association (SSIA) partnered Mentoring SG at the recent Electronics Industry Day in ITE College Central, which I attended, and where employees from semiconductor giant Micron Electronics conducted a “flash mentoring” programme for ITE students. The students I spoke to at the event benefited greatly from the experience, they left with a newfound interest in careers within the semiconductor and precision engineering sectors. Corporates and individuals keen to support our national mentoring movement, please sign up at mentoring.sg.
Sir, I shared how our community and corporates are answering the call to give back using the platforms and tools we have provided. Therefore, Mr Keith Chua’s question about how we plan to grow philanthropy and foster collaboration is timely.
Deputy Prime Minister Wong shared in his Budget speech about an initiative that will help donors better appreciate the needs of our society and also direct their resources to these needs. Today, I am glad to announce the launch of this initiative, called The Collective for a Stronger Society, or The Collective, for short.
Put together by the Community Foundation of Singapore (CFS), in partnership with MSF and the Community Chest, and supported by MCCY, The Collective will connect donors with causes, where donors can navigate causes on the ground that uplift lower-income families; direct their resources to non-profits, social enterprises and other partners that lead impactful initiatives; and identify gaps in the landscape; and come up with fresh solutions that address unmet needs in society. I discussed these details about The Collective with the CFS team at their 15th Anniversary Lunch three weeks ago. CFS will release further details later this year and I encourage companies to find out more and we are looking forward to partner as many companies as possible.
The Collective is one platform for our community and our corporates to give back. The other platform is our Singapore Government Partnerships Office (SGPO), which we launched in January, to partner citizens and stakeholders who are keen to work with the Government to turn their ideas into reality.
We agree with Mr Baey and recognise that some of these ideas do not necessarily fall neatly along agency lines. Therefore, SGPO acts as a \"first-stop\" for citizens or stakeholders with such ideas and it helps to connect them to the right agencies or partners to put their ideas into action. So, please connect with us on our SGPO website with your ideas and your plans for action!
Mr Chairman, our community and our corporates have answered the Forward SG call for a new, refreshed social compact. And we are only just getting started. You have heard me share about the different platforms and the different spaces and the different tools we have made available for our community and our corporates, so I invite all of you to join us to take that step alongside us to shape the Singapore we all want to see, together.
Senior Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua will quicken our steps in his speech about sports next, so I shall hand the baton smoothly for him as he brings us to the home stretch.
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua. For the home stretch.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Eric Chua): Chair, sports is a great way for people from all walks of life, whether you are a senior, a youth, a person with disabilities, sport enthusiast, or weekend warrior, to bond and to stay healthy together.
Singaporeans lead busy lives but we want to make it easier for everyone to make sports a way of life. Our ambition is for Singaporeans to be able to take a 10-minute walk from home to affordable sport facilities by around 2030. This is made possible through the Sport Facilities Master Plan (SFMP).
Today, SportSG has built 10 Sport-in-Precinct (SIP) facilities with another 24 more projects in various development stages. These facilities are located conveniently within HDB estates and are free for use by all.
Dr Syed Harun highlighted the importance of sport in strengthening community ties and social cohesion. SIP facilities serve as organic nodes that brings the community together. From playgrounds for children, to sheltered courts for futsal or basketball, exercise stations with QR codes which you can scan to learn correct techniques and rubberised walking tracks for seniors. There is something for everyone.
More than 370 facilities including indoor sports halls and free-to-play fields are also available under the Dual Use Scheme (DUS). In fact, there are over 40 free-to-play fields where Singaporeans can freely use on weekends.
This year, we look forward to the opening of four new facilities namely: the Kallang Tennis Hub, the Kallang Football Hub, new basketball courts at the former Bedok Swimming Complex and a facility for softball and baseball at Jurong East. In the coming years, Punggol and Clementi residents can also look forward to new sports facilities. At Clementi, there will be a new town playfield which includes a running track and community sport courts. A 5,000-seater stadium, swimming complex, 20-badminton-court-sized indoor sports hall, sheltered tennis and futsal courts, water sports centre and an archery field are features of the new Punggol Regional Sport Centre.
And we have been making our sporting facilities inclusive and accessible to Singaporeans of all abilities. Mr Ong Hua Han emphasised that it is not enough to just make our sports facilities inclusive. We must help persons with disabilities feel empowered to exercise in mainstream settings.
I fully agree. Since the launch of the Disability Sport Master Plan (DSMP) in 2016, SportSG has introduced a range of programmes so more persons with disabilities can take part in sports. These include the learn-to-play programmes such as “Yes! I Can” and “Play-Ability”, as mentioned by Minister Edwin earlier, and an annual Play Inclusive campaign. To date, some 20,000 persons with disabilities have taken part in these programmes.
Our vision is for all persons with disabilities to be engaged, enriched, and empowered through sports.
To refresh the DSMP, we have convened a taskforce comprising stakeholders from SportSG, MSF, SG Enable, MOE and disability sports organisations such as the Singapore Disability Sports Council (SDSC) and Special Olympics Singapore (SOSG).
To date, the task force has engaged more than 600 stakeholders, received good inputs. In essence, the DSMP refresh will look to: one, increase accessibility to disability sport activities and facilities; two, enhance awareness of disability and inclusive sporting opportunities; and three, help fulfil the aspirations of those who aspire to pursue sports at the high performance level. We will share more in detail later this year.
Sport is not only a great way to keep fit, but also builds character, transforms lives and encourage social mixing. In particular, the SportCares programme seeks to harness the power of sport to provide access and opportunities for marginalised communities. Through SportCares initiatives and bursaries, children and youths from low-income families have increased access to quality sports programmes, such as athletics, basketball, water polo and canoeing and many others.
To date, the SportCares bursaries have enabled more than 480 children and youths to learn new sports. In April 2023, SportCares also awarded scholarships to its first batch of students. I would like to share how the scholarship has helped Hassan Shapiee.
Hassan joined SportCares’ Saturday Night Lights (SNL) programme in 2017. SNL is a football programme for youths aged 13 to 21, to train regularly and to compete in the HEARTS Football league throughout the year. Coming from a low-income family with his father as the sole breadwinner, Hassan is the third of five children and juggles part-time jobs to alleviate the financial strain at home. Other than studying, Hassan is also caregiver to his five-year-old younger brother. During his time with SportCares, Hassan served as a responsible captain of his SNL team. As an alumnus, Hassan continues to give back by volunteering with SportCares, planning camps for students with special needs and children from low-income families. He also participates actively in the SportCares Champions programme – a leadership programme for youths willing and able to step into the role of a leader and mentor. With the help of the scholarship, Hassan will complete his Diploma in Sustainable Built Environment at Republic Polytechnic and he has plans to join the Police force.
In his Budget speech last month, Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced that the Government will match dollar-for-dollar, all donations to SportCares from April this year onwards. We really hope more Singaporeans and corporates will step forward to donate generously to SportCares.
Chair, we know how passionate Singaporeans are when it comes to football, and how much we hope to see our national team succeed both at the regional as well as international levels. Mr Darryl David and Mr Faisal Manap asked for an update on Unleash the Roar and the selection process for Singapore’s National Team's Head Coach.
The Football Association of Singapore (FAS) is responsible for the promotion and development of the sport. This includes developing training programmes and the hiring of coaches. When selecting a National Head coach, FAS considers the following key attributes; one, the candidate needs to demonstrate a track record of developing players and have a robust strategy in preparing and fielding a team to achieve results; two, apart from the National “A” team, the candidate would also supervise the Under-22 team together with the Under-22 Head Coach; three, the candidate is expected to uplift the football ecosystem, impart knowledge and raise the overall profile of football.
FAS has gone through a rigorous process to find a new coach. Let us give our new national coach some time to find his footing and hopefully make his mark with the national team.
To be sure, we are playing the long game to uplift Singapore football. We launched the Unleash the Roar! (UTR!) in March 2021, and since then we have made steady progress to strengthen our football ecosystem locally. A critical part of this is developing a structured football development system so that we can raise the standards of Singapore football at all levels.
I would like to share, at this juncture, a few updates. We now have 15 School Football Academies (SFAs), of which five have dedicated programmes for girls. We have also doubled the number of young footballers from 300 youths in 10 pilot SFAs in 2022 when we started, to over 830 male and female young footballers this year. We have also set up and since sent our National Development Centre (NDC) teams and a combined SFA squad overseas for training camps and competition opportunities to expose them to quality competition they cannot find locally and to further their development in football.
Just last month, we launched the Singapore Youth League (SYL): our inaugural nationwide high performance youth football competition. The SYL provides aspiring youth players a regular and competitive platform to gain match experience and develop their football skills. Through this league, we hope to further strengthen a robust talent pipeline of next-generation national team players.
Last year, we also sent our first batch of eight young footballers on UTR! Scholarships to study and train overseas at world-renowned academies – the IMG Academy in Florida, USA and the ESC LaLiga in Madrid, Spain.
Chloe Koh, one of our scholarship recipients, is now at the IMG Academy in the US. Her near-term goal is to play in the NCAA Division I and, ultimately, she wants to play professionally. As an introvert, Chloe had to step out of her comfort zone when she first arrived in the US. After a few months, however, she has quickly adapted.
At IMG, Chloe gets to travel to different states in the United States, play in tournaments and showcase her skills to college scouts, who are proactively seeking out young talents and potentially bringing them a step closer to their dream of turning professional. We wish Chloe and all our UTR scholars currently overseas all the best.
Chair, our Team Singapore athletes continue to inspire Singaporeans as they shine on the world stage. And this is only possible with a strong support system backing them in taking their sporting goals to the next level. Our high-performance sport (HPS) system is dynamic and athlete-centric. Each athlete is supported in a holistic and personalised manner.
The Singapore Sport and Exercise Medicine Centre (SSMC@SSI) provides personalised sport medicine care for our athletes. Such support includes comprehensive medical screening, focusing on both physical as well as mental health; support for athlete recovery through physiotherapy and exercise rehabilitation; and integration of medical care with sports sciences.
Athletes are covered by a medical insurance policy that allows athletes to claim for in-patient treatment or surgery for accidental sports-related injuries not covered by SSI or SSMC@SSI. To Ms Sylvia Lim's suggestion regarding former national athletes, our consistent approach is to support our athletes' transition into retirement from the competitive sporting careers by helping them find good employment. Active and retired athletes can also tap on various programmes, including spexEducation and spexBusiness, as elaborated by the Minister in his speech earlier. But we will explore how we can support them better.
On the funding of NSAs, there is no change to the policy and requirements that NSAs must meet to qualify for our funding. Besides the mandatory annual submission of audited statement of accounts to SportSG, NSAs are also required to allow SportSG to audit their accounting records.
If an NSA is found non-compliant with the terms of its funding agreement, SportSG will take appropriate action, such as suspending, terminating or even recovering the grant. For more serious cases, such as misappropriation of funds, SportSG would refer these to the police.
We have also previously explained, how we allocate our funding across the NSAs. That has not changed. SportSG's annual grants to NSAs help to support their organisation functions, outreach programmes, training facilities and HPS plans. Annually, the level of funding is assessed holistically, considering a few factors, such as its alignment with SportSG's Vision 2030, whether it has achieved agreed KPIs, its capabilities in governance and execution and the existence of a sound plan for development of the sport overall.
For emerging sports that do not receive support from an NSA, funded directly by SportSG, Mr Darryl David and Mr Mohd Fahmi asked about how we can support aspiring athletes in these fields. We recognise that our athletes in emerging sports, such as powerlifting and pickleball, have performed well internationally. We are all very proud of them.
Therefore, I am pleased to announce that the OTSF will be expanded to support the Athletes Inspire Fund (AIF). The AIF provides funding support for athletes who represent Singapore in emerging sports. Athletes can apply as individuals or as a team. The funding support may cover cost items, such as airfare, accommodation, registration fees, visa fees, travel insurance and equipment. And there will be three application windows each year: in March, July and November. Applications for the March window will be from 1 to 31 March, so please start applying.
Another key component of our athlete support system are our coaches. Ms Jean See will be pleased to know that we are looking to upskill and professionalise exercise, sports and outdoor adventure coaches and instructors, which in turn, could increase their wages that is commensurate with their skillset.
For exercise professionals, SportSG will be instituting an accreditation framework under the National Registry for Exercise Professionals (NREP) in a later phase and we welcome inputs from NICA. Ms Jean See would also understand that the exercise, sports and outdoor adventure sectors are diverse with niche offerings and therefore it is difficult to introduce a cost norm.
However, we will continue to engage coaches to better understand their challenges and explore ways to further support them. For example, in the outdoor adventure sector, the Outdoor Adventure Education (OAE) Council is working on a capability development roadmap that will look into the salary and remuneration challenges for full-time and freelance OAE professionals.
We are open to see how SkillsFuture can further support their professional development and the OAE Council will also be looking at having more sites and facilities with affordable access. Chair, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Sports help us maintain physical and mental health and is also one of the ways to build character, transform lives and encourage social mixing. The Government supports children and youths from different backgrounds to participate in sports through ActiveSG’s Academies and Clubs. In particular, the SportSG’s SportCares programme is committed to providing opportunities for marginalised groups to participate in sports.
Through the SportCares bursaries, children and youths from low-income families have increased access to quality sports, such as basketball, football, track and field, field hockey, water polo, canoeing, table tennis and so on.
So far, the SportCares bursaries have enabled over 480 children and youths to learn new sport activities. We hope that more Singaporeans and corporates can generously donate and actively contribute to SportCares.
(In English): Chair, through sports, we can grow closer as a community. Through sports, we can improve our health and instil a sense of confidence. Through sports, we can inspire a nation to go beyond our limits. In conclusion, sports can clearly enrich and empower our lives. So, I hope to rally all Singaporeans to take action today and let us all live better through sports.
The Chairman: We have time for clarifications. Ms Joan Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Thank you, Chairman. I have a clarification for Minister of State Low. The move to harness the power of arts to improve well-being is laudable. Can the Minister of State share more on this initiative and the benefits that participation in the arts and cultural activities can bring to our seniors?
Ms Low Yen Ling: Chairman, I want to thank the Member Ms Joan Pereira. She spoke very passionately during her cut delivery last evening about this. Actually, she has been consistently giving feedback to MCCY to see how we can synergise our workstream with our MOH counterparts. Indeed, the arts can be harnessed to support greater well-being, empowering individuals to lead healthier and more fulfilling lives. She asked about evidence-based approach.
In preparing for this collaboration with SingHealth and AIC, we checked and overseas studies on the impact of arts on well-being have clearly shown that adults who participate in arts and cultural activities are: one, more likely to have better cognitive reserve in later life; two, less likely to develop dementia; three, have lower levels of frailty and chronic pain in older adulthood; four, less likely to experience loneliness and depression; and five, likely to live longer. So, we really encourage all Singaporeans: please get involved in the arts and cultural activities. It is really evidence-based.
Turning to her clarification, NAC's collaboration with healthcare partners – AIC, starting with SingHealth – to develop a framework for the arts to promote health and well-being, will bring the power of the arts into the lives of our seniors for a start. Then, we will open up for other segments later – Singaporeans and to expand arts access and the range of work of our arts and cultural practitioners. Initially focusing on seniors, the new framework to promote well-being through the arts will be built on an evidence-based approach, interdisciplinary expertise from both the arts and the healthcare sector and also based on existing research.
And the guide will include strategy on how arts programme can be designed to achieve well-being outcomes, best practices, case studies and also impact measuring tools that are in line with and very, very importantly, validated by our healthcare sector.
The Chairman: Mr Darryl David.
Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Chair. One clarification, which I believe could be for Minister of State Alvin. As many societies are being divided by issues and conflicts with ethnic and religious undertones, what are we doing specifically to pull our society together? And how are we in, our own small part, contributing to global efforts to build more cohesive societies?
Mr Alvin Tan: Sir, I thank Mr Darryl David for his clarification. Sir, if you think about the over two weeks of Committee of Supply debate, we talked about our economy, our transport, education, environment, manpower, health. As Minister Edwin mentioned, MCCY really brings up the end of the Committee of Supply debate.
MCCY stewards the heart of our nation. Our heart must be strong, it must be united. It cannot be split, it cannot be divided. But at times it is also moved, moved by issues that confront us, issues that affront us. Over the last couple of months, I have hosted a few of these very spiky dialogues. There was one I hosted with our Harmony Circle leaders on the Gaza crisis.
It was not easy to do, but it allowed for our leaders a safe space to discuss, to air and to also explain their perspectives. Today, this afternoon, I am going to host two young advocates as well. It is going to be a place for space, for platforms. I also mentioned earlier on that we are equipping our Harmony Circle leaders with the tools in which to touch on and engage in these very spiky issues. But we are also doing a lot.
You would have known that many of the Harmony Circles came together to raise funds for the Gaza crisis, the humanitarian crisis there, and we will continue to do so. But I also want to take us a step back and think about, because the Member mentioned cohesive societies.
We have had two iterations of the International Conference on Cohesive Societies. These two editions, we brought together of about a thousand leaders and youth from about 30 countries. They came, they discussed what it meant to be and how do you build Cohesive Societies. We brought them to our heartlands, we brought them to our Harmony Circles.
One feedback that came out of it was, how do you preserve and protect the social and racial and religious cohesion that you have in Singapore? So, it dawned upon me and many of our Members that it is something that, as what Minister Edwin said, we have to cherish and we have to protect.
I still remember hosting some youths from Myanmar and they were fresh off the Rohingya crisis. We brought them to Chinatown and we showed them the Fairfield Methodist Church, Buddha Tooth Relic Temple, Chulia Mosque as well as Sri Mariamman Temple. It is something that we take for granted. They said this could never happen in their country.
So, when we engage in these dialogues, I think it is very important that we also, as we preserve, we want to make sure that in these dialogues, that we remember what we have and we continue to cherish all of that together. So, we will have more of these dialogues, we will create the spaces, the platforms, as well as the tools to preserve this precious racial and religious harmony.
The Chairman: Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Thank you, Chair. I have a clarification for Senior Parliamentary Secretary Chua on supporting retired athletes. Earlier on, he ended off that response with this open-ended statement to say that the Ministry would explore how we could support former athletes better. I would like him to clarify whether this includes possibly looking at how we can support the healthcare needs of our retired athletes, especially for conditions which were associated with their sporting careers, because I think it is a very meaningful gesture that society can make.
Mr Eric Chua: Sir, I thank the Member for her clarification. The short answer is yes, because we are looking at how we can support our retired athletes more holistically.
The Chairman: Ms Usha Chandradas.
Ms Usha Chandradas (Nominated Member): Sir, I thank Minister Edwin Tong and Minister of State Low for their very comprehensive replies to my cuts. I just have one clarification and that is on Gillman Barracks. Will MCCY be working with the Ministry of National Development (MND) to ensure that the artistic character of the space is preserved and what will be the plans for existing tenants of the space?
Ms Low Yen Ling: Chairman, I want to thank Ms Usha Chandradas on the question of Gillman Barracks. MND will be starting heritage and environmental studies in the second quarter this year. But I want to assure her and also the tenants at Gillman Barracks that the tenants at Gillman Barracks can continue to stay on till the end of their leases.
HDB, URA and the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) have shared that any further extension or retention of the current uses in Gillman Barracks will be assessed at a later point when their studies are over and when the development plans are ready.
I want to assure Ms Usha Chandradas and also arts tenants at Gillman Barracks and, in fact, our arts and culture sector that NAC will certainly work with the relevant agency – MND, HDB, SLA and also URA – to support the art tenants where possible and if some of them are planning and thinking of relocation, we will certainly work together with the relevant agencies to facilitate their relocation. For example, supporting them and pointing them to available spaces that they can possibly consider.
I want to assure the Member that we are committed to supporting the development of a vibrant and sustainable arts sector in Singapore and that involves supporting our artists, programme activation and of course, providing spaces. If I can take one minute to share with Ms Usha Chandradas and, in fact, the sector, they would have observed that, in fact, in the last few years we can see that the visual arts sector has really continued to grow and flourish over the years.
It was mentioned a bit earlier but it bears repeating again. The Tanjong Pagar District Park is a very exciting and evolving space with the Singapore Art Museum and also a number of art galleries and art businesses currently sited there. Both Minister Edwin Tong and myself talked about Singapore Art Week 2023 and Singapore Art Week 2024. NAC has also supported the growing creative developments at the Tanjong Pagar District Park through programmes, such as the sonic sessions during the Singapore Art Week 2024 this year featuring the performances by local musicians and artists.
Singapore also plays host to leading showcases and art fair, such as the recently concluded ArtSG which saw a line-up of 114 galleries from 33 countries and territories, attracting a record attendance of more than 45,000 visitors during the 2024 edition, the one that just recently concluded.
I want to assure the Member that the NAC's arts infrastructure and spaces have grown over the years. From 2010 to 2023, the Arts gross floor area (GFA) increased by 42%, from 66,000 square metres to 94,000 square metres. I want to assure the Member that we will be working very closely with our MND counterparts and their agency to give the necessary support to the art tenants. I also want to assure the Member that we will work with the partners in the arts and culture sector to develop a vibrant and sustainable arts sector.
The Chairman: I hear all your assurances. Ms Hany Soh.
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Chairman, I have two clarifications. First is in relation to providing more support to inspire our young to embrace and pursue their passion in sports. I am heartened to hear from the Minister's speech that there will be more sporting opportunities, for example, through inter-school sports tournaments. However, I do hope that the Ministry can continue its efforts to urge other stakeholders, for example, like the Singapore Sports School, to do more in the community, with the community, for the community.
Some examples can be done through events that are jointly organised with the grassroots. For example, like a badminton clinic in which our Woodgrove CSC has organised with partners, such as Singapore Badminton Association and SportsSG, where the Team Singapore athletes, our shuttlers came forward. Apart from imparting their skills, they also take the opportunity to share more about their own personal experience, how they have come through all of the challenges to becoming a professional sportsman.
The second clarification is on the Sports Facilities Master Plan. Apart from constructing and upgrading our current facilities that are operated by the ActiveSG, I wonder if we are also looking into working closely with MOE and its schools to offer more of their sporting facilities to the community. Take, for example, in Woodgrove where Innova Primary, has come forward to share with our Woodgrove CSC on a weekly basis its sports hall every Friday evening to organise badminton sessions for the community.
Mr Eric Chua: I thank the Member for her clarifications. If the Member had listened to my speech, there are a lot of plans coming up as part of the Sports Facilities Master Plan. Other than the Member, Mr Ong Hua Han has also mentioned that it is not just the hardware. It is also about the heart ware, what keeps the heart ware going. It is as much as it is about the hardware as it is about the software or the programmes that are running in the institutions.
We take the Member's point about having more programmes to collaborate with the schools, more programmes to collaborate with the community. In fact, if the Member had listened in to some of what I said for football earlier, the Member would know that a lot of it is vested and intertwined within our school system. The school football academies, for instance, we started with 10 in 2022. And now, in 2024, we have 15 academies that have been set up and includes five that are dedicated to girls as well. Across all the different checkboxes, schools, different genders and different sporting types, we are trying to do more of that, to popularise and propagate more sports, and working in collaboration with the community.
The Chairman: Ms Jean See.
Ms See Jinli Jean (Nominated Member): I thank the Minister for all the very encouraging announcements. I have three clarifications. The first is relating to the Major Sports Events Fund. My appeal is that for the Major Sports Events Fund, it will also provide learning opportunities for freelancers and ancillary services, for example, those doing content production in audio-visual (AV) and whether there can be learning opportunities for them to also shadow the international teams. Of course, the learning opportunities could also extend to Singaporeans who can front opening acts as well as festivals that accompany these major events.
The second clarification is for Minister of State Low Yen Ling. For the SG Arts Plan, this is something very exciting. We really welcome it. I just wanted to put across a point that while professional development is good, the other part is how we enable sustainable businesses. One of the biggest concerns is relating to payments or non-payments, contracts issues, as well as also safe work practices. I just wanted to put forth a proposal to the Ministry that in conceptualising the SG Arts Plan, whether this can be one of the agenda items in terms of looking at the sustainable practices and working with stakeholders like NICA and the Visual, Audio, Creative Content Professionals Association, Singapore (VICPA) to put this as one of the agenda in developing the arts ecosystem in Singapore.
The third clarification to Senior Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua. We certainly welcome the Athletes Inspire Fund for emerging Sports. The ask is that for the coaches who are supporting these athletes in emerging sports, that there could also be more support in terms of their professional development.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Sir, I thank Ms See for her support and also for her comments. Indeed, like many other grants and funds that we have, we will use them strategically. It is focused on bringing major sports events into Singapore, invigorate the system here. And as I mentioned earlier also, using the platform of these major international sporting events and the quality of those events to support the development of our local athletes. So, we will do that strategically.
To the Member's specific point about involving local players for training and so on, the answer is clearly yes, we will do so. I want to cite two examples to the Member to illustrate what I mean. Last year, we hosted the inaugural Olympics e-Sport Week, the first time the event was here, supported many by local contractors. It is not just about learning how to organise such an event and learning the ropes and understanding how it is done and getting the know-how, organisational know-how, but also being a partner with many of the parties. Many Singapore companies, SMEs were involved in part of the running of the programme on a contract basis. So, there is also employment opportunity there.
In the same way, we are now hosting the World Table Tennis Smash in Singapore. In fact, this week, for those Members who are done with Committee of Supply and have nothing else to do, please go and support the Singapore team, Izaac Quek and others will be playing. Also a major event, a grand slam of the table tennis world, hosted in Singapore, but also supported by many other secondees and trainees from Singapore Table Tennis Association, from SportSG, who help to run the event in partnership with the International Table Tennis Federation, so, knowledge transfer, know-how, how we manage an event like this, how we manage the overall flow of the event, plus also some of the Singapore corporates being direct partners.
These two examples, I hope, assure Ms See that whenever we use the Fund, there will always be a strategic goal behind what else we can do to impact Singapore and Singaporeans.
Ms Low Yen Ling: Chairman, I want to thank the Member, Ms See, for the suggestion on the sustainable practices. I want to assure her that in MCCY and also NAC, we are aligned with NICA. In fact, I recall coming into MCCY, it was during the COVID-19 years, so we had many Zoom sessions with NICA and the various agencies. We pulled this whole-of-Government, multi-agency committee together to support our SEPs. Like what Minister Edwin Tong has mentioned, more than a third of our arts and cultural practitioners are freelancers. We are certainly aligned with the Member in supporting them, in terms of strengthening their resilience, in terms of enhancing and ensuring better career stability. That is why we made the announcement today.
The Arts Resource Hub is a very important place for our SEPs, not only as a co-working space for collaboration, but also a place for them to sort of attend some of these important courses, whether it is digital literacy, financial literacy and so on. The Member's proposed sustainable practices is something that NAC will certainly follow up and look into and work in consultation with NICA.
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Chua.
Mr Eric Chua: Sir, I thank the Member for her support for the Athletes Inspire Fund. I give her assurance that so long as a coach is registered with either the National Registry of Coaches or the National Registry of Exercise Professionals, he or she is eligible for support under these two schemes. CoachSG will work with relevant agencies and bodies like NICA to be sure that our coaches are well-supported.
The Chairman: Mr Keith Chua.
Mr Keith Chua (Nominated Member): I thank the Minister of State Alvin Tan for expanding on The Collective. It would be very helpful to know a bit more about this and what it might look like as we move this into fruition. For example, is the focus on strong collaborative philanthropy to help our community? Will it galvanise all our community together in this effort, recognising that the key players in this are the Community Foundation of Singapore, the Ministry of Social and Family Development, Community Chest and supported by MCCY?
The Chairman: Minister of State Alvin Tan, we are approaching our guillotine time. I hope your response will be a short one.
Mr Alvin Tan: Sir, the short answer to Mr Keith Chua is yes. The Collective is another platform for the community to come together and MCCY will continue to support that, to bring different stakeholders to contribute their financial as well as mentoring resources, to better support lower-income families.
But it is also more than just about raising donations. It is about raising awareness of the needs of the community. So, you have these resources and then, you have these needs. If you are part of a corporate or individual and you want to know where to deploy your capital, your time, your expertise, The Collective will be able to do that for you. We will announce more details later.
The Chairman: With that last clarification and response, can I invite Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, if you like, to withdraw your amendment?
Mr Sitoh Yih Pin (Potong Pasir): Mr Chairman, I would like to thank all Members of Parliament for their speeches and the MCCY team for their effort and hard work. With that, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $2,098,737,600 for Head X ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $349,751,400 for Head X ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head F (Parliament)","subTitle":"Building a caring and inclusive society together","sectionType":"OS","content":"Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head F of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\"
In our country's governance, Parliament is where the authority of the Government stems. It is also the body which the Government is ultimately accountable to. However, while Singapore has a strong reputation for strong Government, can we equally say that we have a strong Parliament? In Singapore, we talk a lot a lot about the executive but Parliamentary work is the reason why voters put Members in this House.
I would like to share some thoughts on entrenching the Office of the Speaker and its key principle of impartiality before looking at the importance of ensuring that Parliament is relevant and accessible to the wider citizenry through the principle of openness.
The Inter-Parliamentary Union, of which our Parliament is a member, states that parliaments must be representative, open and transparent, accessible, accountable and effective. It notes that, \"Parliaments are constantly evolving in order to meet new challenges and expectations and crucially that parliaments can always improve, like democracy itself.\"
Thus, the Speaker presides over the Sittings of the House and enforces rules prescribed in the Standing Orders of Parliament and during Sittings, is responsible for regulating and enforcing the rules of debate. In order to do so, it is imperative that the Speaker is and is seen to be impartial at all times. This is the reason why the Speaker does not take part in debates and thus the saying that the Speaker may do anything except speak.
Many jurisdictions have enshrined the principle of the Speaker's impartiality in their rules. Some ways in which jurisdictions have approached this, include having the Speaker not take part in votes in the House, as is the case of Germany's Bundestag retaining party membership, but no longer participating in national party caucuses and also, in the case of the Speaker of the House of Commons in Canada. Or even a system of rotation and the election of a Speaker or amongst their deputies between major parties like we see in countries like Austria.
The Speaker as presiding officer is also responsible for ensuring that Standing Orders are followed to ensure that public business is conducted in a decent and orderly manner, balancing the government of the day's need to get its business through Parliament and the oppositions' responsibility to debate and scrutinise that business. The Speaker may thus be called upon to make rulings and decisions on points of order from time to time and it will be helpful for these to serve as precedents to govern future proceedings. What advisories are helpful, having easy access to past Speaker's rulings can also help Members better understand and thus abide by the Standing Orders.
Next, on why an accessible Parliament is important. In order for Parliament to properly represent and hold the respect of our people, it must not be seen as a cold tower which operates independently and heedlessly of our constituents' everyday lives. Our people must believe that Parliament is a place where the people's concerns are debated and for their voices to be heard.
To build respect for Parliament as a lynchpin of our democracy, we have to ensure that as much as possible, our policy, law-making and accountability processes flow through our Parliament first and foremost; and the chosen means to discuss important matters of public interest in Parliament, also matters.
For example, questions about Ridout Road and the initial announcement of former Transport Minister S Iswaran being investigated by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) were taken by way of Ministerial Statements in July and August 2023 respectively. A Ministerial Statement only allows for Members to ask short clarifications and the Standing Orders expressly prohibit Members from having a debate thereon.
While a full Motion means that any Member wanting to make their views known on the matter have up to 20 minutes to make a speech, not including clarifications, a means through which Parliament obtains regular and better dialogue and input from the public is by the use of Parliamentary Committees, which my colleague Gerald Giam will speak on. In short, having members of the public, experts and different interest groups provide evidence, like was the case during the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods, can ensure more voices are heard and lead to interested parties being able to watch the proceedings and thus understand the complexity of the issues being considered.
We have to keep working to keep Parliament as accessible to our people as possible with increased openness; reduced secrecy – whether perceived or real – to promote the man in the street's understanding of the actual process of legislating and making queries of how their taxpayer dollars are being spent. Where information is shared, it has to be on the basis of full disclosure unless circumstances dictate otherwise.
Maintaining the principle of parliamentary transparency and openness can only encourage and advance more participatory democracy and better governance, and I hope that all of us here will play our part in enabling this to happen in a world that is getting increasingly unpredictable and volatile.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Mr Chairman, Parliament currently has seven standing Select Committees. But none of these is specific to individual Ministries. This is quite unlike many other legislatures around the world.
The United Kingdom's (UK’s) House of Commons, for example, has Select Committees for every government department, like Defence, Home Affairs and Transport, to name a few. Australia's parliament has House Standing Committees on Health, Aged Care and Sport and on Employment, Education and Training, among others.
These Select Committees examine each Ministry's policies, spending and administration. They are empowered to inquire into and report on any matter referred to them by the House or Minister. The committees may call in subject matter experts to give testimony and answer questions from members that can inform their considerations.
Select Committees also provide a platform for members of parliament (MPs) to better understand each other's positions and that of the government. The government may share in confidence with committees information that shapes its policy stances. The committees can discuss legislation or major policy changes before they are officially tabled so that there is more room to work out, compromises before each party takes its position publicly.
After a thorough scrutiny of legislation and policies, the Select Committees can make recommendations to parliament before Bills and Motions are debated and voted on by all MPs. This process will lead to more informed and constructive debate and better decision making in parliament. The committees thus help to contribute to more effective governance, build political consensus and strengthen national unity.
For these reasons, I call on Parliament to set up standing Select Committees for each Ministry or group of related Ministries, consisting of MPs from all political parties represented in Parliament. They should be supported by the Parliament Secretariat and meeting minutes should be made available to all committee members. Ministries should endeavour to engage them on a regular basis.
Mr Raj Joshua Thomas (Nominated Member): \"It will be harder and harder to attract good people\" \"…it is a very serious problem\". These were comments made by the Prime Minister in the book \"The History of the PAP\". The PAP has, for a long time, been very candid about the challenges it faces convincing good people to enter politics. On the other side of the aisle, the Leader of the Opposition has also said that the Workers' Party's (WP's) search for candidates was always an ongoing process.
The quality of the Members in this House is of paramount importance. The Cabinet is drawn from amongst MPs and legislative debate is critical to articulate views on the ground, for transparency and accountability and to shape public opinion.
But over the years, it is not only the demands on MPs that have grown, but also their exposure to toxic social media and encroachments on their private lives. Singapore is a small country with a limited talent pool and as a citizen, I am concerned that many of our good people who should be in Government will be deterred by these changing demands. How do we continue to attract the very best into Parliament? I would like to make three points on this in my speech today.
First, I think that we need to be realistic about what makes a good politician. Do we expect that our politicians will be flawless individuals; who had hardly set a wrong foot; and who had not and will not make mistakes or missteps along the way. This is an impossibly high bar that will deter many good candidates from joining. What Singaporeans expect is influenced by how parties position themselves and their candidates. So, to a certain extent, if Singaporeans develop unrealistic expectations of their MPs, the problem is somewhat self-made by the parties themselves.
This having been said, the bar of course must be set very high – not impossibly high – but very high because these are our national leaders after all. To me, the cardinal criteria are a genuine passion to serve and a high level of competence – not infallibility. I think this is also what is of critical importance to Singaporeans.
MPs, like everyone else, have flaws, fears and doubts and will make mistakes from time to time. I think a candidate who admits and owns these mistakes and who shows he has learnt from them and has become a better person, can still be a good candidate as long as they meet the cardinal criteria.
We can draw wisdom from an ancient Chinese idiom on governance: clear waters do not have any fish. A person who is perfect and devoid of failings will have a sterile mind and hold no interesting or useful ideas or contributions. Flaws, the impurities in the water, are what underpin character and experience. It grants a person empathy that allows him to connect with and to understand others.
Of course, there are some impurities that are in fact, poisons. A corruptible character and a proclivity towards dishonesty are traits that are fatal to a good MP. Such persons should be weeded out as best as possible by each party's vetting processes. But otherwise, persons who have a passion to serve and who are competent, should step up to serve. They should not be deterred by an impossibly high bar set by party and public expectations.
My second point is on the use of social media. The nastiness hurled at MPs on social media, often at a personal level, is something that, sadly, MPs and future MPs must come to accept. This is an inevitable outcome of an open society that is highly connected to the internet and a populace that is opinionated.
There are a lot of complaints about MPs online. There are those that surface real concerns, but a lot of it is griping and sniping. I would like to encourage my fellow Singaporeans to also post positive accounts of their MPs.
Let me give you an example. Someone approached me in July last year on a very urgent family matter. Seeing that this person was a resident in Minister of State Alvin Tan's constituency, I asked him if he could help look into it. On the day that I referred the matter to the Minister of State, he was moving a Bill and the Sitting ended at close to 9.00 pm.
Despite that, the Minister of State rushed down to meet the resident and spent quite a bit of time with them to understand their situation. He helped to coordinate with the relevant agency over the next few days and sorted the matter out. I told the resident later – well, looks like he did a good job. But she said no. He is a rock star. That is what she said. And I have no doubt that there are many examples of the good work and effort our MPs, both ruling party and opposition, put in to serve their constituents.
So, how do we better showcase the good work that our MPs do without an MP being accused of \"ownself praise ownself\"? Residents can consider posting such positive accounts online, akin to a Google review.
But for many such cases, residents may not want to draw attention to their situations. In this regard, grassroots organisations could consider highlighting positive cases with the consent of the resident and properly anonymised, like my anecdote earlier. These would serve to show how MPs can help their constituents, as well as a form of accountability that their MPs are actually working and getting things done for them.
I do not think that our MPs do what they do to get praise. But just like anyone else, it does not harm to give them a pat on the back when they do a good job and I am sure they will appreciate it and be spurred on to do better.
Sir, persons who take up public office must accept that there will be encroachments on their private lives. But this loss of privacy is, in my view, one of the biggest deterrents to persons entering into politics. It is not because they have something to hide, but it is simply because many aspects of private life are just not anyone else's business.
In many other countries, this has been taken to an extreme; with the media and even government agencies probing into politicians' lives on things that have nothing to do with their official duties and often, with political intent or an intent to embarrass. Sir, it is absolutely critical that we do not allow the private lives of MPs to be politicised.
As an absolute minimum, MPs' family members must be out of bounds in the political arena. Many new candidates would be in their 30s and 40s, with families and young children. Subjecting their families to the public glare would be foremost in their minds and could be the deal breaker.
Sadly, it is not possible to prevent anonymous online vigilantes from making claims or spreading rumours about MPs' family members. But it is possible for political parties, whether currently represented in Parliament or otherwise, to have their own code of ethics to not exploit such things for political gain. The media, both mainstream and alternative, should also exercise ethical judgement in how these are covered.
Finally, Sir, I have some views on Member Mr Louis Chua's suggestion that Ministers publicly declare their assets and the impact that such a policy would have. First, Ministers do have to declare their private assets to the President and on a routine basis. Second, I find it curious that the Member's suggestion stops at Ministers. In his own example – the UK – all MPs, including opposition MPs, have to declare their assets, not only Ministers.
The inference I can make from the Member's reference to conflicts of interest in his speech, is that it is because Ministers oversee Ministry budgets and Ministries are involved in procurement tenders. But let us not forget that all our elected MPs, opposition MPs included, have a part to play in the running of Town Councils. Town Councils handle tens of millions of dollars of contracts every year, so the potential for conflicts of interest to arise for backbencher MPs is also quite possible. So, by that rationale, the Member’s suggestion should have extended to all MPs, opposition MPs included.
But in many countries that have such declarations in place, there are problems with evasion, which becomes a political hot point. The content of the declarations themselves also become political issues. For example, the assets of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, which distracts from debate on real national issues like jobs, housing and the economy. The underlying anti-corruption intent is lost.
Last year, we heard two Ministers explain their housing choices in Parliament. To be fair, let us look across the aisle – on my side of the aisle as well – I would not be surprised, given their past careers, that many opposition Members in this House live in private condominiums or landed homes. When made in declarations, these would also become part of the political debate and perhaps even elections issues.
Is it relevant? I do not think so. What is relevant is the actual work and impact of MPs on the ground, as I have mentioned earlier.
But my concern today, is the effect of these suggestions on attracting persons to become MPs – both for the ruling party as well as for the opposition. Many of these people would have already had some success in their careers and understandably, they would have put their hard-earned monies into properties and other investments. Imagine now asking them to put this all up for public scrutiny.
They are new candidates – there is no question of corruption at that stage because they were private citizens. This would be a huge deterrent. So, I think we must be careful when making such suggestions. We should not just pluck and propose without looking at the current system that we have and how effective it already is. That is taking it at its highest. But taking it as it appears to be, I think we should not propose mechanisms that have the effect of politicising the private lives of politicians and in this case, only a particular category.
Sir, I will end my speech. A budget is allocated to Parliament to carry out its functions with competence. Let us ensure that we build an environment where good people are not deterred from entering politics and contributing in this House and in Cabinet. Failing to do so will be to the detriment of Singapore and Singaporeans. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Minister Indranee Rajah.
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Chairman, I thank the Members for their cuts. Indeed, it is important to have a strong Parliamentary system and a strong Parliament. Ms He Ting Ru ran through a number of points.
I would just say broadly, insofar as the Office of the Speaker is concerned, that is provided for in the Constitution and our legislation. The Speakers in this House have endeavoured to uphold those principles. Where there has been any deviation, that certainly has been addressed.
So, the principle of the Speaker's impartiality is not in dispute and certainly, the principle of why the Speaker does not participate in a debate is very similar in many jurisdictions. The system that we have and the way that we organise our Parliamentary business, is actually not very different from many other places. Each country has its own variations and every country has to adapt for its particular circumstances. But if we were to ask our people and if we were to ask around Singapore, is there a high level of trust in our Parliament? I think the answer is yes.
How does Singapore fare compared to Parliaments in other countries? I think you would find Singapore does well. That is testimony and credit to the many Speakers who have sat in this House and upheld their duties with dedication and a lot of hard work.
I think the other point that Ms He Ting Ru raised was that one must have the ability to properly represent and operate in Parliament. I think there is no dispute about that either. The way our system is structured is that the Government carries out the business of the Executive; and the Legislature or Parliament carries out the business of law-making, of scrutinising Bills, of holding the Ministries and the Ministers to account through Parliamentary Questions, Motions and various other procedural devices. All of this is available and have been actively deployed, not just by Government MPs, but also MPs from the opposition.
I think one other point that Ms He raised was that policy-launching must flow through Parliament first and foremost. I think there may be a misunderstanding here about the role of the Government or the Executive, and the role of the Legislature. It is the role and the duty of the Government to develop policies, to implement them, to operationalise them, to carry it out.
When it comes to making laws, the Government has to bring it before Parliament. Parliament must agree. Parliament can ask questions and hold the Ministers to account. But Parliament is not the Government. There is a distinction between the two roles and one should be careful not to conflate the two. Our system of having the Executive separate from the Legislature is a well-known, well-tried and tested one.
On the question of why certain issues were taken by way of Ministerial Statement, those were taken by way of Ministerial Statement because that is the normal way in which information is presented to Parliament, and Members had the opportunity to ask questions, which they did.
We did not do it by way of a Motion, simply because it did not present itself as a matter for resolution, but this does not preclude anybody else from raising a Motion if they wish to.
I think the key point that Ms He was making was that Parliament should be accountable, accessible and people must be able to trust our Parliamentarians. On that point, I agree, which is why it is extremely important that when MPs say something, they should not do so without basis. Importantly, MPs should not lie to Parliament, nor to Select Committees of Parliament.
At the same time, it is also important that MPs do not, then, after something has transpired in Parliament, go outside of Parliament and misrepresent what has occurred in Parliament. Those things are very important too, for accountability of the MPs and for transparency, and also to maintain trust in MPs.
I move on now to the second point about Parliamentary Committees or Select Committees, which Ms He alluded to, and I think that was essentially the main point of what Mr Gerald Giam raised. He is essentially saying that in addition to the standing Select Committees that we have, we should create more Select Committees to oversee various Ministries, if that is how I understood him correctly, and that has been done in other countries.
I think the question that we have to ask ourselves is, in the other countries where they have these multitudes of Select Committees, are they necessarily better governed? Do they necessarily have better outcomes? Are their Parliaments more efficient? Is their government more trusted? I would venture to say no, not necessarily, to all of those questions. In fact, on many international rankings by any measure, you will find that Singapore fares well in governance, transparency, in lack of corruption, or in low corruption. Where it is discovered, it is dealt with promptly, quickly and decisively.
Having more Standing Committees or more Select Committees would not be very productive. For example, it would be unproductive for every Ministry to have to answer to a standing Select Committee. Setting up a Committee for each Ministry requires significant time. Ministries would also have to expend scarce resources reporting to and preparing answers for their respective Committees. These are resources which could be spent on important policy work.
Members will also be keenly aware that our Parliamentary Sittings have grown longer, busier and more frequent. Ministries are spending more time than ever preparing for Parliamentary Sittings. There is a cost to this as it eats into the time that the Ministries have for their policy and other work. For these reasons, creating standing Select Committees for every Ministry would do little to enhance accountability or increase productivity or efficiency.
Instead, we convene ad hoc Select Committees where appropriate, for smaller groups of MPs to study and report to Parliament on specific topics, and sometimes, novel issues of national interest.
One example is the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods, which Ms He also mentioned, that was appointed in 2018 to study what was then, and still is, a new and complex societal problem. To examine this one policy issue – just this one, not even the work of the entire Ministry – the Committee held 16 meetings over eight months, conducted public consultations with many stakeholders, and received written representations and oral evidence from individuals and organisations alike, before reporting its findings to Parliament.
So, you can imagine having many more standing Select Committees, each one to inspect one Ministry that oversees many policy issues would be very costly in terms of opportunity cost as well as the time taken up for the civil servants, the Ministers and the Ministries to do this. Since most of our policy issues are cross-cutting, the value of setting up Ministry-specific committees is also questionable.
What we have is a system that works. When the Ministries have a policy, it is brought to Parliament, either through a Motion or during the Budget debate, which has a broader overview, or when a specific Act is being passed. We must remember, a Select Committee is really a mini version of Parliament as a whole. But here you have everybody that is able to ask questions and participate in debate. So, the public does not lose out by this.
In terms of being accessible to the public, that does not actually have much to do with Parliamentary procedure. That has to do with how MPs conduct themselves in their everyday duties, where they see and speak to their residents, interact with their residents and then bring the issues that are of concern to their residents to this Chamber. We are well-versed with all the concerns of the residents of Clementi. [Laughter.]
This is how you bring residents' issues to the Chamber and how you make Parliament accessible. That is the work that has to be done on the ground.
I will move on to address some of the matters which may have been raised by Mr Raj Joshua Thomas. I would like to thank Mr Raj Joshua Thomas for his speech on attracting talent. I will just make two points. First, I agree with Mr Thomas that politicians obviously cannot be infallible. New candidates, for example, or first-time MPs, will occasionally need some latitude.
But at the end of the day, politicians are human as well. It is very important that our MPs must have high standards of integrity. This applies on both sides of the House. Occasionally, some mistakes will be made and those would have to be dealt with, but where we have to draw a bright white line is where integrity and honesty are concerned, because the people and our citizens must be able to trust us.
Every political party must also have its own code of conduct. The People's Action Party (PAP) has its rules of prudence and its own way of conducting itself and it will be for the opposition parties to look and see how their members conduct themselves as well.
On the second point, I echo Mr Thomas' call for us to treat all our MPs with dignity and respect. I think increasingly, what is happening, not just in Singapore but across the world, is that politicians do become targets. When they become targets, it makes it very difficult for them to carry out their duties. It takes a toll on them.
But it also takes a toll on society, because when it becomes too difficult to do the job as an MP or politician, good people will hesitate to step up. When good people hesitate to step up, some who are not as good may do so. Then, the system and the society will suffer as a whole.
So, it is fine if we want Singapore to be a place where we have robust conversations, robust discourse. But we should try to avoid what we do see sometimes and in other countries – a certain level of nastiness, a certain level of direct personal attacks and more importantly, in some cases, attempting to drag family members in, which really should not be the case, as Mr Thomas touched on.
What does it take to not become a society like that? What it takes is for good people, decent people, to stand up and to say, \"We do not approve of this\". When something is well done, to say that it is well done; to give encouragement and support where a person, a team, a group or the Government has done something well; to let them know that, \"You have done the right thing and you have our support\", because that is actually the biggest and the strongest antidote to sniping and harsh comments.
That is what makes it worthwhile at the end of the day, to know that you have actually made a difference to people's lives and to communities, and made Singapore a better place. So, I thank Mr Thomas for his remarks.
In conclusion, Mr Chairman, I would say that our Parliament has served us well. It remains an effective platform for rigorous debates on important issues and it will continue to evolve in tandem with our changing needs, and this speaks to the resilience of our democratic institution. Together, we can maintain a Parliament that engages in robust but respectful debates, and at the same time, deliver effective outcomes in and out of the Chamber. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: I thank the Minister for answering my cut. Sir, is the Minister saying, and I paraphrase, that Select Committees do not lead to better governance and trust?
I do not think she has established that causality. I am referring to Select Committees in other countries. I do not think she has established that causality, that they lead to poorer governance and trust. Because is she saying that they cause the people to trust the Government less, because of the Select Committees?
Ms Indranee Rajah: I thank the Member for his clarification. No, I am not saying that at all. What I was responding to is the underlying assumption that always goes with the proposal to have Select Committees.
I assume that the reason why the Member suggests having Select Committees is: he feels it would make for better governance and that it would make for better accountability. I am addressing that point.
I am saying that having Select Committees does not necessarily guarantee nor give you better governance or better accountability. I am saying that the processes that we have give a lot of room for the Government and Ministers to be held to account. And I am saying that the system that we have already allows for very good governance. I do not think that having Select Committees essentially overseeing Ministries or having Ministries reporting to them will improve things.
My reference to other countries was then to say that, when you look at those other countries, they do have Select Committees or their equivalents, but are their outcomes better than ours? It does not appear to be so. That was the point I was making.
The Chairman: Mr Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: I thank the Minister. A second clarification on the point she makes about Select Committees being unproductive and a drag on Government's resources. What about the resources used by Government Parliamentary Committees (GPCs)? How is the time and resources that Ministries spend answering questions and briefing GPCs justified? Even more so, given that they are not Parliament organs, but PAP party organs?
Ms Indranee Rajah: I thank the Member for this clarification too. I am afraid the Member may have it back to front. GPCs are a party construct. They are called \"Parliamentary Committees\", but they are not a \"Parliament Committee\". They are PAP Committees, but they are called \"Government Parliamentary Committees\" because they come from the party forming the Government.
They were formed, for those who are familiar with its history, back in 1987. When they were formed, then-Deputy Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong took pains to explain that they were different from Select Committees, which include representation from all parties. GPCs do not.
The purpose of the GPCs was to allow the ruling party, which was the dominant party, to enable or to help the Government's MPs to perform their duties better, by playing a more effective role in the policy-making process, to tap on their expertise and to allow them to give political feedback.
In other words, the role of the GPCs within the party construct is to give feedback to the Ministers and to the Ministries, to enable the Government to do better policy-making. It is not the reverse, where the Ministries brief the GPCs or report to the GPCs.
Ministries can brief GPCs where there is a matter that they need to seek the GPCs' input or views on, but the inputs are given through the Minister, because the GPCs essentially are a party construct. Essentially, the GPCs' role is to scrutinise legislation, to make suggestions to the Minister, and to help the Ministries to do better.
For example, the Pioneer Generation Package is not means-tested. This was something that the GPC for Finance Chair Mr Liang Eng Hwa strongly advocated for and it was something that was fed back to us. We took that into account.
I know that others also give feedback and we take feedback from everyone, but essentially, the GPC framework is the party's way of organising their MPs to give feedback to the Minister. I think just this year, for example, members of the GPC for Communications and Information tabled a Motion on building an inclusive and safe digital society, and members for the GPC for Health filed a Motion on improving mental health and well-being.
So, the role of the GPCs is really for MPs from the governing party to help the Government to do better.
The Chairman: Mr Giam. One short clarification, please.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Thank you for your indulgence, Chairman. Just one last set of questions. Do GPCs get confidential briefings by Government Ministries that are not made available to opposition Members? The Minister said that GPCs get information through the Minister. Does that mean that civil servants do not brief the GPCs?
Ms Indranee Rajah: Ministries may brief a GPC for the Ministry's purposes, if the Ministry wishes to seek feedback or to find out about something which the Ministry is doing. But if there is anything which is political, that is really not for the civil servants. That is really for the Minister and the GPCs, because the GPCs come from the same party as the Minister.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Chua, I am afraid we are reaching the end of the guillotine time. Unless you have a super, super short clarification. Okay, to the point.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Thank you, Chairman. I figured I should, since Member, Mr Thomas, mentioned my speech. So, I just wanted to clarify with him, if he is suggesting that all Members should make asset declarations and not just Ministers? And does he think that anyone in this Chamber will try to hide their assets?
Mr Raj Joshua Thomas: Sir, no, that is not what I was saying. I was, essentially, asking why is it that the Member stopped at a certain point, because in the example that he used, the UK, it was not only Ministers who declared their assets, but all members of parliament had to declare their assets. So, that was the point that I was making. I was not suggesting that this is something that we should do. In fact, if you look at the gravamen of my speech, it was really to say that it is not something that we need to do, within our system.
The Chairman: With that, can I invite Ms He, if you like, to withdraw the amendment?
Ms He Ting Ru: Thank you, Chairman. To close, I would like to thank Parliament staff for their work in ensuring the running of the various different functions of Parliament, which range from the official Parliamentary business, like ensuring that Sittings go smoothly, coordinating visiting dignitaries and overseas visits, and also, the often unseen work in ensuring the functioning of areas, such as security, research, communications and facilities management.
Our current Speaker reminded us, upon his election last year, of our own fragility and mortality. He said that we are all too human, and as individuals we may fail, while rules and institutions, which apply without exception, do not. This brings to mind something that Thomas Paine said a few centuries ago, in which he reminded us that there can never exist a Parliament which will last forever, nor capable of commanding forever how to govern.
So, given that our time on earth and this Chamber, is temporal, I hope that all of us can look deep within ourselves to think about the part that we can do in the here and now, to maintain an institution that can be rightfully called a strong Parliament that future generations can look up to. Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $48,684,900 for Head F ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $6,676,000 for Head F ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Heads B, C, D, E, G and Z","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: I shall now deal with the remaining Heads of Expenditure in respect of which no amendment stands on the Order Paper Supplement. In respect of the Main Estimates, they are Heads B, C, D, E, G and Z. I propose to take those Heads of Expenditure en bloc. You will see these figures flash on the digital screens.
[(proc text) Question, \"That the sums stated for Heads B, C, D, E, G and Z which appear in the last column of the schedule of estimated expenditure under the Main Estimates on page 6 of Paper Cmd 27 of 2024 stand part of the Main Estimates,\" put and agreed to. (proc text)]
The Chairman: In respect of the Development Estimates, they are Heads B, C, D and E.
[(proc text) Question, \"That the sums stated for Heads B, C, D and E which appear in the last column of the schedule of estimated expenditure under the Development Estimates on page 7 of Paper Cmd 27 of 2024 stand part of the Development Estimates,\" put and agreed to. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Total Sums for Main Estimates, Development Estimates and Resolutions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Question, \"That the sum of $128,890,856,700 shall be supplied to the Government under the Heads of Expenditure for the Public Services shown in the Main Estimates for the financial year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, contained in Paper Cmd 27 of 2024,\" put and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question, \"That the sum of $37,548,577,800 shall be supplied to the Government under the Heads of Expenditure for the Public Services shown in the Development Estimates for the financial year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, contained in Paper Cmd 27 of 2024,\" put and agreed to. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Resolutions to be reported.
[(proc text) Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Second Minister for Finance.
The Second Minister for Finance (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has come to certain resolutions.
[(proc text) First Resolution reported – (proc text)]
[(proc text) That the sum of $128,890,856,700 shall be supplied to the Government under the Heads of Expenditure for the Public Services shown in the Main Estimates for the financial year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, contained in Paper Cmd 27 of 2024 (proc text)]
[(proc text) Second Resolution reported – (proc text)]
[(proc text) That the sum of $37,548,577,800 shall be supplied to the Government under the Heads of Expenditure for the Public Services shown in the Development Estimates for the financial year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, contained in Paper Cmd 27 of 2024. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Minister.
Ms Indranee Rajah: Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolutions.\"
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolutions accordingly agreed to. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Supply Bill ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Second Minister for Finance (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
In accordance with Article 148(1) of the Constitution, Heads of Expenditure to be met from the Consolidated Fund and Development Fund, other than statutory expenditure have to be included in the Bill to be known as the Supply Bill. The purpose of the Supply Bill before Members, is to give legislative approval for the appropriations from the Consolidated Fund and Development Fund to meet the expenditure for the Financial Year, 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025.
The Heads of Expenditure and the sums that may be incurred in respect of each Head, are shown in the Schedule to the Bill. These have been approved by the House in the Main and Development Estimates of Expenditure for the Financial Year, 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, as contained in Paper Cmd No 27 of 2024.
The Supply Bill, when approved, will empower the Minister to issue warrants, authorising expenditure up to the amount for each Head as shown in the Bill to be paid out from the Consolidated Fund and Development Fund. Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time. (proc text)]
Ms Indranee Rajah: Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Third time.\"
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly 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":"Supplementary Supply (FY2023) Bill ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
The purpose of this Bill is to make additional provision in accordance with Articles 148(2) of the Constitution for expenditure in excess of the sums authorised by the Supply Act 2023. The additional sums have been approved by the House in the Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the Financial Year, 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024, as contained in Paper Cmd No 28 of 2024. Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time. (proc text)]
Ms Indranee Rajah: Mr Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Third time.\"
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Prime Minister. Sorry, I should instead invite Leader of the House to make her Closing remarks before we start with the next Bill.
The Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Prime Minister): Certainly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Acknowledgement to the Chair ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): My apologies to Minister of State Alvin Tan. He looked so keen to move the Second Reading of his Bill. I wish to let him know it might be some time before he gets that pleasure.
Mr Speaker, as is customary, the end of the annual Budget process is marked by the delivery of a speech by the Leader in acknowledgement to the Chair of the House. This is not the first time you have presided over the Budget process, having done so in previous years as a Deputy Speaker. But this is the first time that you have done so as Speaker of the House.
You ran a tight ship, keeping close control over the process, yet allowing flexibility when needed. Under your efficient management, we covered much ground in nine days – close to 70 hours of debate. Sixty-one Members spoke for two and a half days in the debate on the Budget Statement and we covered 598 cuts over seven days of Committee of Supply.
Every year, one Ministry will emerge as the \"favourite\" with the most number of cuts, even though this is one prize Ministries prefer not to win as it means even more work for the relevant Ministers and their team. But anyway, for the record, this year, the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) was \"the 1\" to win the prize and as we know \"All Too Well\" now, they rose to the occasion with \"Style\". Members may not quite get the references I just made, but it is alright, if you ask your children or Ms Usha, they will know.
Budget 2023 was delivered on 14 February and is remembered as a Valentine's Day Budget, especially with its family-oriented measures. This year's Budget was delivered on 16 February, which coincidentally fell on the seventh day of the first month in the traditional Chinese calendar, also known as “Ren Ri” or Everyman's Birthday. This is fortuitous since Budget 2024 is a Budget with something for everyone – so, everyone got a birthday present under Budget 2024!
More importantly, Budget 2024 gives life and breath to the plans in the Forward Singapore report that we, as Singaporeans, collectively developed to build our shared future together.
Budgets 2020-2023 helped us to get through the COVID-19 pandemic. Those Budgets, including five Budgets in 2020 alone, helped save lives, save jobs and enabled us to emerge stronger. But the post-pandemic world into which we emerged is very different from the one from which we entered. The world in which Budget 2024 takes place is messier, more dangerous and more unpredictable.
Conflicts are raging around the world. In Gaza and Ukraine, there has been the tragic loss of life. Even though these are far away, in an interconnected world, we are not unaffected. As a small nation-state, we have to navigate an increasingly fragmented world order fraught with geopolitical contestation. Climate change poses an existential threat for us given our small size, low-lying land and energy constraints.
At a more personal and individual level, Singaporeans remain concerned with costs of living and inflationary pressures and other immediate concerns. Against this backdrop, Budget 2024 provides a clear action plan to take Singapore forward into the future with optimism and hope, these challenges notwithstanding. Budget 2024 also sets aside resources for policies that will allow us to turn challenges into opportunities, reinvigorate our workforce by helping workers find new paths and second careers and build a Singapore that is vibrant and inclusive, fair and thriving, resilient and united.
So, let me recap what we have set in motion by approving this Budget.
First, assurance. The enhanced Assurance Package – which includes additional Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers for all Singaporean households, a Cost-of-Living Special Payment in cash for eligible adult Singaporeans and additional U-Save and service and conservancy charges (S&CC) rebates for eligible HDB households – provides assurance to Singaporeans for cost-of-living concerns. We also took decisive measures to ensure a strong, innovative and vibrant economy.
To maintain our competitive edge and ride the winds of change, we amped up support for our National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Strategy 2.0. In this connection, I should mention that Dr Tan Wu Meng's speech on this topic, which took us on a masterful tour of the rapid AI advancements and how we prepare our citizens for this change, has attracted global attention. The clip of his post has garnered several million views across various platforms. This is a good example showing how, although we are a small Parliament, what we say and do in this House can be noticed far beyond our shores. So, I encourage Members to keep up the quality of our debates and thereby the credibility of this House. [Applause.]
Beyond this, we have strengthened support for our companies with the $1.3 billion Enterprise Support Package, which includes a generous Corporate Income Tax Rebate, as well as enhanced schemes that support collaborations and partnerships between local and multinational enterprises, scaling up of our firms and sustainability.
We introduced the Refundable Investment Credit to enhance our investment promotion toolkit, as global competition for investments intensifies with BEPS 2.0.
With the SkillsFuture measures in Budget 2024, we have expressed our belief and confidence in our workers, as well as our confidence in their ability not only to upskill but to chart new directions even at a later age. The new SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme – which includes the top-up in SkillsFuture Credits for Singaporeans aged 40 and above to pursue selected training programmes, the new SkillsFuture Mid-Career Training Allowance and the opportunity to pursue another full-time diploma – are all intended to empower Singaporeans throughout their journey of lifelong learning so that they can continue to access opportunities at every stage of life, for every stage of life.
Many of these moves were informed by ground-up feedback from citizens through the Forward Singapore exercise. These measures give effect to Singaporeans' wishes to upgrade their skills and seize new opportunities and help them embrace a culture of lifelong learning. Likewise, the new Institute of Technical Education (ITE) Progression Award is an expression of our commitment to social mobility as well as our confidence and belief in our ITE graduates.
We have continued to uplift our lower-wage workers and improve wages across different professions, through the enhancements to the Workfare Income Supplement scheme and the Progressive Wage Credit scheme. By respecting and rewarding every job, we hope that these initiatives will enhance opportunities across diverse pathways and enable all Singaporeans to progress throughout their careers.
We further strengthened our social compact by providing more support to those who need it the most. The ComLink+ Progress Packages will uphold social mobility and ensure that families from all backgrounds will have access to full and fair opportunities. We also strengthened access to justice, especially for the most vulnerable, through the civil and criminal law systems.
Families are the bedrock of our society and we have committed to supporting them through every stage of life – from providing strong foundations for the young, to enhancing the golden years of the elderly. In this Budget, we have increased support for parents. We are improving preschool affordability by reducing monthly childcare fee caps in Government-supported preschools and enhancing preschool subsidies for lower-income families. The pilot to provide affordable and reliable childminding services will give parents another caregiving option and hopefully pave the way for such services to be delivered at greater scale.
To support married couples and young families, we have ramped up the Build-To-Oder supply, given them greater priority, increased the number of Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS) flats and will provide the PPHS (Open Market) Voucher.
For our seniors, we have made adjustments to the Central Provident Fund system and strengthened the Silver Support Scheme to support their retirement needs. Young seniors will get an additional boost for their retirement through the Majulah Package.
We also set aside funds for Age Well SG, a new national programme to support seniors to age actively, stay socially connected and be cared for in their own communities. These initiatives position us well to holistically take care of the needs of our ageing society.
As the threat of climate change looms ever larger for the world and for Singapore, we have taken concrete steps towards achieving our ambitious climate target of net-zero emissions by 2050, including setting up the Future Energy Fund this year with an initial injection of $5 billion to help decarbonise our energy system and enhance our security in clean energy.
Inclusivity is the glue on which unity is built. By building on the previous Budgets and having something for everyone, Budget 2024 ensures that no one is left behind. At the same time, by creating opportunities and providing catalytic assistance to encourage and amplify individual effort, we are fostering a resilient and united Singapore.
Mr Speaker, we were able to cover all this and more in a relatively short period of time due in no small part to your able Chairmanship. I thank you for your patience, professionalism and fairness, and also commend you on your ability to remain in the Chair for extended periods without a break!
On behalf of the House, I would also like to convey our appreciation to the Clerk of Parliament, Deputy Clerk and the other Assistant Clerks, as well as the Parliament Secretariat and staff, interpreters and translators, whose dedicated efforts and support behind the scenes over the past two weeks ensured that the proceedings went smoothly. Unlike Members of Parliament (MPs) who are seen and heard on camera, their work is unseen and often unsung. But it is only because of what they do that we as MPs can do what we need to do. We are grateful for their hard work. [Applause.]
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, and congratulations on your successful maiden Budget and Committee of Supply. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Finally, I get an opportunity to speak. Hon Members, it has been a long but intense debate – nine days for Budget 2024, a Budget that moves our country upwards and forward. Sitting in this Chair and also down there, in that chair, I listened intently and quietly to all of you and, in some cases, we went for a six-hour session before going for a break. For me, spending over $130 billion is a serious business, and I thank hon Members for your time, your energy and your ideas.
For me, this debate scored a few firsts. Personally, this is the first Budget and Committee of Supply in which I am Speaker. Accordingly, it is the first time in 18 years that I did not have to make a Budget speech nor file any cuts. And for the record, I averaged about 10 cuts per Budget.
In all, some 61 Members from both front and back bench spoke this year in the Budget debate, compared to 58 Members last year. Some more statistics: there were 598 cuts filed this year for the Committee of Supply, compared to 661 cuts last year. In fact, this is the first time in the last six years that there was a decline in the number for cuts over the previous year. I think, in part, due to the fact that we have fewer Members in the House this year.
There is one other first which we all do not want. For the very first time, our total fertility rate (TFR) unfortunately, has gone below 1.00. Singaporeans are very special to all of us and our Budget reflects that from birth to old age. We are spending more than ever on each one. Being a father myself to two adult children now, I can only hope that more young Singaporeans will have the privilege of experiencing the joy of being parents themselves.
But the next first is something which is a good first. It is the first time in three years when Members from both sides of the aisle have explicitly expressed their support for the Budget. And this support came from no less than the leaders of both opposition parties. We all want to build a Singapore for all and we want to build it for all Singaporeans.
Whether speeches are long or short, whether it is 15 cuts that you filed or five cuts, all I can say is that more is not necessarily better. In fact, I also heard Members from both sides of the House echoing the same in that more handouts are not necessarily good. Likewise, more Parliamentary Questions, more Committees are not necessarily better.
Indeed, from my perspective, crispier and sharper speeches are much preferred and the order for the day. When speeches go on too long, some of us may start to wonder whether they were written by ChatGPT.
I am glad that there was no need for me to cut anyone off, although there were quite a few Members who breached your time allocations but, in the spirit of give and take, I cut them some slack. But please do not take this as a given. For those Members who attempted to slip in a mini speech during clarification time, please refrain from doing so, as I will be more strict from now on.
It leaves me now to thank all Members for your cooperation and support in helping me ensure we had a smooth Budget debate. My appreciation also goes to the Leader of the House, Minister Indranee Rajah, and also her Deputy, Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad.
My final round of thanks goes to my two Deputy Speakers, Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Christopher de Souza, my Clerks and all, all the support staff for ensuring that proceedings went well each day throughout the entire two-week period. It does take meticulous care, experience and a whole team to ensure Budget and Committee of Supply 2024 went smoothly. And the Parliament of Singapore has, over the years, received the support from an invaluable and experienced team.
Let me conclude. I said more is not necessarily better. So, my speech is also short.
Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong has described the world we are in now as, I quote, “messier, more dangerous and more unpredictable.” As a small country, we cannot do much to remake the world into a neater, more predictable one. Nor should we want to, because complexity and multilinearity is a part of the human condition. To thrive in this new world, Singapore cannot aim to be a mere “safe space”.
We must, as our forefathers have always done, take risks, accept failure and rise again and say “Majulah!” And in this, Singapore is a beautiful home and a safe harbour, where we will help one another along when we are down. And we provide over $130 billion and more a year, to those among us who need it most. Only in this way, can we move Forward Singapore. Thank you. [Applause.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Financial Institutions (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: And now I call on Minister of State Alvin Tan.
The Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, on behalf of Mr Lawrence Wong, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance, and Minister-in-charge of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time\".
Sir, MAS plays a central role in upholding Singapore's status as a safe and trusted international financial centre. As our financial industry grows in size and complexity, MAS must continually review and enhance its regulatory powers to ensure that it can effectively supervise financial institutions (FIs), as well as investigate and punish serious misconduct in our financial sector.
The Financial Institutions (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill (FIMA Bill), will harmonise and enhance MAS' investigative powers across six Acts, namely the Financial Advisors Act 2001, the Financial Services and Markets Act 2022, the Insurance Act 1966, the Payment Services Act 2019, the Securities and Futures Act 2001 and the Trust Companies Act 2005, collectively, the MAS-administered Acts.
Other key amendments in the FIMA Bill pertain to the regulation of capital markets in Singapore. These amendments empower MAS to issue directions to capital markets services licence (CMSL) holders to manage potential risks from the conduct of unregulated businesses and also to enhance MAS' supervisory powers.
Let me first start with the amendments to enhance MAS' investigative powers. MAS investigates and enforces a wide range of violations using its powers under the laws and regulations it administers. Such violations range from breaches of business conduct requirements by regulated FIs, to insider trading, fraud or deception when dealing in securities. Let me give two examples of recent cases.
First, MAS reprimanded several FIs and individuals, including AIA Financial Advisers Private Limited and two Aviva entities, for breaching requirements under the FAA in relation to remuneration of supervisors as well as adequacy of risk management.
Second, following contraventions of the SFA and its business conduct requirements by Three Arrows Capital, MAS issued nine-year prohibition orders against Three Arrows Capital's Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chairman. Such enforcement actions are not possible without MAS conducting rigorous investigations of suspected violations.
However, some of the investigation powers available to MAS under the Securities and Futures Act (SFA) and the Financial Advisers Act (FAA) are not available in the other MAS-administered Acts, specifically the Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA), Insurance Act (IA), Payment Services Act (PS Act) and Trust Companies Act (TCA). For convenience, I shall refer to this latter group of legislation as the other MAS-administered Acts. We also need to strengthen or widen some existing powers under the SFA and FAA to ensure their effectiveness.
The FIMA Bill will close these gaps by enhancing and making consistent the investigation powers across all of the MAS-administered Acts. The FIMA Bill will also facilitate the transfer of evidence between MAS and other agencies for enforcement to be more efficient and more effective. I shall now explain the main categories of amendments in detail.
First, MAS is proposing to introduce in the other MAS-administered Acts the power to require persons to appear before an MAS officer for examination and statement recording for the purpose of investigations under the relevant Acts. Such powers already exist under SFA and FAA and are effective in enabling investigators to obtain information about suspected misconduct.
Second, the FIMA Bill will remove the requirement in SFA and FAA for MAS to first issue orders to a suspect to produce information and show that the suspect has failed to comply with such orders before MAS can enter, without a warrant, premises believed to be occupied by the suspect. This will enable MAS to enter premises without tipping off the suspect and, therefore, reduce the risk of the suspect destroying evidence related to the investigation. A similar power to enter premises without a warrant will be extended to the other MAS-administered Acts.
Sir, MAS officers will not have the powers to search the premises and seize evidence on the premises when they exercise the power of entry without warrant. They can, however, require any person on the premises to produce information or state where such information can be found. MAS officers can also require any person on the premises to preserve evidence.
The FIMA Bill will also introduce provisions in the other MAS-administered Acts to empower MAS to obtain a Court warrant to search premises and seize evidence. This power already exists in SFA, FAA and TCA and it allows MAS to obtain evidence that is in the possession of uncooperative subjects before it is concealed, removed, tampered with or destroyed.
The FIMA Bill will also amend the current transfer of evidence provisions in SFA and FAA to facilitate the exchange of information between MAS and the Police, Public Prosecutor or other law enforcement agencies. In cases where MAS investigations reveal serious misconduct that warrants a criminal prosecution, the ability for MAS to transfer evidence to the Police would be helpful. It reduces the need to duplicate investigations and enhances the efficiency of our law enforcement agencies. Conversely, there may be cases investigated by the Police or other law enforcement agencies that may be more effective or appropriately dealt with by MAS through regulatory actions.
However, under the current SFA and FAA, MAS may only transfer evidence to the Police or Public Prosecutor for the purpose of criminal investigations or proceedings for marked misconduct offences under the SFA and offences under the FAA. The FIMA Bill will expand the existing provisions to allow evidence gathered by MAS to be transferred to the Police or the Public Prosecutor for the purpose of criminal investigations or proceedings for any offence under the MAS-administered Acts.
Presently, the Police or other law enforcement agencies may only transfer evidence to MAS for the purpose of civil penalty investigations or actions for market misconduct offences under the SFA. The FIMA Bill will replace these provisions with the power for the Police or other law enforcement agencies to transfer evidence to MAS, for the purpose of taking regulatory actions in respect of any misconduct under the MAS-administered Acts if such transfer is in the public interest.
In this regard, the specific provisions for the transfer of evidence between MAS, the Police and other law enforcement agencies are consistent with the existing general common law principle permitting enforcement agencies to share with other enforcement agencies – evidence that would ordinarily be kept confidential where it is in the public interest to do so. Expressly legislating for the transfer of evidence between MAS, the Police and other law enforcement agencies, notwithstanding the common law principle, will make clear when evidence may be transferred and facilitate operational arrangements in respect of the transfer.
Sir, let me now explain in more detail how the Bill will enable MAS to regulate FIs in the capital markets sector more effectively. This pertains to amendments specific to three Acts, namely, the SFA, the FAA and the TCA.
The first set of amendments relates to expanding MAS' powers to issue directions to CMSL holders and their representatives for their unregulated businesses. Currently, CMSL holders may conduct unregulated businesses, such as dealing in products that are not regulated by MAS. Examples of such products include digital payment token derivatives that are traded on overseas exchanges.
These unregulated businesses may pose contagion risks to CMSL holders' regulated businesses. For instance, losses from a CMSL holder's unregulated business could adversely impact its ability to meet its obligations to customers in its regulated businesses. Customers may also not be fully aware that regulatory protections do not apply to the CMSL holder's unregulated businesses.
While MAS has issued guidance to CMSL holders on risk-mitigating measures and safeguards that they should adopt when they conduct unregulated businesses, we should put these on a clear legal footing. The FIMA Bill will empower MAS to issue legally binding directions to CMSL holders and their representatives in relation to their conduct of unregulated businesses, to mitigate risks posed to its regulated businesses.
Sir, the second set of amendments enhances MAS' supervisory powers under the SFA, FAA and the TCA. They will harmonise requirements across the Acts and where relevant, also align MAS' powers under these Acts with the Banking Act 1970. I will highlight a few key amendments.
The first relates to the appointment and removal of key persons. Regulated FIs are generally required to obtain MAS' approval before appointing their chief executive officers and directors. However, this requirement currently does not apply to locally incorporated recognised market operators and recognised clearing houses, and approved trustees. The FIMA Bill will therefore introduce approval requirements for such entities.
In addition, while MAS already has powers across the SFA, FAA and TCA to remove a director or key management officer, there are some minor differences in the grounds for removal. The FIMA Bill will consolidate the grounds for removal into a single ground of not being \"fit and proper\". Certain factors that MAS may consider, in its assessment, are also set out in the Bill.
The second area relates to persons obtaining control of a capital markets FI. In general, a person acquiring control in capital markets FIs, must obtain MAS' approval before doing so. However, this requirement does not currently apply to locally incorporated recognised market operators and recognised clearing houses and approved trustees. The FIMA Bill will extend the approval requirement to such entities.
For other capital markets FIs, the FIMA Bill will also clarify when MAS' approval must be sought. Currently, a person must seek MAS' approval prior to entering into an arrangement by which the person would obtain control of a CMSL holder or a licensed financial adviser. Such an arrangement may include early stages of negotiations for the acquisition. This is not MAS' intent. The FIMA Bill will make clear that MAS' approval need only be sought before a person obtains control of the regulated entity.
The last aspect relates to the appointment of external auditors. Presently, MAS' powers in relation to external auditors of Approved Exchanges, Approved Clearing Houses, Approved Holding Companies and Licensed Trade Repositories are limited to matters that the auditor must immediately report to the MAS, such as when the auditor becomes aware of any matter that constitutes a breach of the SFA or an offence involving fraud or dishonesty. It is important that the auditors appointed by such entities can satisfactorily discharge their duties, given the central role that these entities play in the capital markets.
The FIMA Bill will introduce the requirement for such entities to obtain MAS' approval for the appointment of their external auditors on an annual basis. MAS will also have powers to direct these entities to remove or replace their appointed auditors, where the appointed auditors are unable to discharge their duties satisfactorily. With these amendments, MAS will align the approach for capital markets FIs with the approach that MAS has taken for other systemically important FIs under its purview, such as banks and insurance companies.
Lastly, the FIMA Bill will also introduce various miscellaneous amendments, such as (a) the amendments to clarify MAS' reprimand powers; (b) amendments consequential from the introduction of new processes, such as updating some of the Acts to remove references to physical licences; and (c) amendments to provide for definitions necessitated by amendments made by this Bill.
Mr Speaker, in conclusion, the FIMA Bill will enhance MAS' ability to enforce its regulatory regime and supervise capital markets FIs more effectively. This will further strengthen Singapore's position as a safe and trusted international financial centre. Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Mr Edward Chia.
Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Financial Institutions (Miscellaneous Amendments), or FIMA, Bill extends MAS' capabilities to safeguard our financial system's integrity. While it is far-reaching, it aligns with our commitment to uphold the highest standards of financial supervision.
However, I would like to highlight five key areas that require clarification based on feedback received by the industry. This includes: first, clarifying the scope of MAS' powers; second, the appointment of agents by foreign regulators; third, managing risk profiles of CMSL holders; fourth, the extension of MAS' authority over the appointment and removal of key personnel; and fifth, the definition of \"reasonable care on accuracy\".
Firstly, Sir, the Bill impacts a wide range of existing financial regulations – from the FAA to the SFA and the TCA – essentially impacting the entire spectrum of our financial regulations. Specifically, the Bill grants the MAS powers including the power to enter without a warrant.
The feedback has been a palpable sense of concern. We must acknowledge and address these concerns proactively and explain the need for these powers and explain why MAS cannot simply apply for a warrant to enter. It is essential to emphasise how these measures will protect legitimate institutions from undue anxiety, while simultaneously guaranteeing stricter and more expeditious enforcement actions that ultimately serve the interests of bona fide institutions.
Such a measure is not commonplace in other financial hubs, such as Hong Kong, which has not enacted similar legislation even in its recent tightening of financial regulations. How do we justify these measures and are they similar in other jurisdictions, such as Australia and the United Kingdom (UK)? Additionally, what safeguards will be put in place to prevent misuse?
Moreover, it is important to note that a Court warrant is still necessary for seizing evidence. In light of this, how can we ensure that entering premises and conducting interviews without a warrant will indeed enhance effectiveness in combating illicit activities?
Secondly, the Bill also enables MAS to approve the appointment of agents by foreign regulators to conduct an inspection of specified financial institutions under the SFA. Will this mean that agents appointed by foreign regulars can conduct inspections without a warrant as well? Is there a reciprocal arrangement with these foreign regulators? How would this impact our jurisdiction's autonomy and would MAS be obliged to approve all such appointments?
Thirdly, the Bill allows MAS to issue directions on risk mitigation for unregulated business activities for CMSL holders. Given the varied nature and scope of activities these institutions undertake, a one-size-fits-all approach could potentially overlook individual complexities. How will this approach ensure that unique risk profiles of these institutions are adequately managed? Is there a plan to engage with the industry for transparent and fair standards implementation?
Moving on to my fourth point. The extension of MAS' authority over the appointment and removal of key personnel, such as CEOs and directors, needs to be carefully managed. The industry seeks clarity on the criteria and processes that will guide these decisions. What are the policies in place to prevent potential overreach? Furthermore, what is the usual timeframe for approval and how does the timeframe compare to other jurisdictions?
Understanding the criteria that will guide these significant decisions will be crucial for maintaining industry confidence.
Finally, Sir, the Bill introduces a nuanced stance on reasonable care on accuracy, which could lead to reprimands for insufficient disclosure or lack of duty of care. I would like to seek concrete definitions to prevent ambiguity in enforcement. How will MAS assess and enforce these standards to ensure fair treatment across the board? Furthermore, what avenues will be available for individuals to demonstrate compliance?
In conclusion, this Bill represents a step towards reinforcing the robustness of our financial system. However, the measures within it must be implemented with precision and in consultation with the stakeholders they affect. Certainly, financial institutions will compare the new measures with those implemented in other global financial hubs.
Hence, to ensure our competitiveness as a financial centre remains robust, it is critical that we thoroughly explain the rationale behind this amendment Bill and work to convince the industry that these changes will ultimately prove advantageous for legitimate institutions operating within Singapore's jurisdiction.
Mr Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding my questions and clarifications, I support the amendment Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Neil Parekh.
Mr Neil Parekh Nimil Rajnikant (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me this opportunity to speak on this Bill. I would like to declare my interest as a board director of Elevandi, established by the MAS to advance fintech in the digital economy as well as to organise the annual Fintech Festival. I would also like to declare my interest as a member of the Advisory Council of the Singapore FinTech Association.
The FIMA Bill aims to amend various acts to enhance MAS' investigative powers, regulate additional business activities, clarify MAS' authority to reprimand formerly regulated persons for past misconduct and improve the governance and control of financial institutions.
For businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the financial sector, the Bill introduces stricter licensing and compliance requirements; which, while increasing administrative work, enhances trust within the business community. Also, the move towards digitisation and electronic service adoption can reduce paperwork and make compliance processes more efficient. This will encourage businesses to uphold the highest standards of compliance, enhancing our reputation for integrity and reliability in the market. However, this Bill will introduce several challenges that businesses may face.
One key challenge is the increased compliance costs due to stricter licensing and regulatory requirements, which could strain the financial and operational resources of SMEs in the sector. Additionally, the enhanced investigative powers granted to regulatory authorities may lead to a more rigorous scrutiny of business practices, requiring companies to invest more in compliance and risk management systems. The shift towards digitisation, while beneficial in the long run, may pose short-term challenges for businesses lacking the infrastructure or expertise to adapt quickly.
Lastly, the broader regulatory scope of these amendments means that more businesses, including those involved in emerging financial products and services, will come under greater regulatory oversight, perhaps necessitating adjustments to their business models to ensure compliance.
Sir, may I now take this opportunity to seek clarifications from the Minister of State on three issues?
What would be the guidelines for the MAS to manage regulated institutions in the development of unregulated financial products? Could the Minister of State also please outline how SMEs will be supported in understanding and complying with new regulations, including potential briefings, training and financial assistance, while fostering confidence in the regulatory landscape? Lastly, given the unique challenges posed by cloud services, may I clarify how MAS intends to handle investigations involving digital data stored in cloud environments, including the practicality of seizing physical evidence and ensuring the security and confidentiality of unrelated data?
Given that the financial sector is one of the pillars of our economy, this stronger regulatory oversight is paramount as the governance of financial institutions becomes increasingly important. In my view, these legislative amendments reflect MAS' recognition of the rapid evolution within the fintech sector and the need for a more comprehensive regulatory framework. These amendments will allow MAS to further develop a secure and vibrant ecosystem for fintech innovation, while ensuring the new regulatory measures are proportionate to the risks posed.
Mr Speaker, Sir, despite the short-term pain, there will be long-term gain for our financial system. This Bill will enhance Singapore's stature as a well-regulated, leading global financial hub. Notwithstanding my clarifications, I support this Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Don Wee.
Mr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I declare that I am working with a Singaporean bank. This legislative effort suggests a comprehensive approach to strengthen MAS' regulatory framework and adapt it to the evolving landscape of financial services. It aims to provide MAS with enhanced tools and flexibility to effectively regulate and supervise financial institutions operating under its jurisdiction. I therefore support the Bill, but I have few points to clarify with the Minister：
With the enhanced power, how does MAS intend to synergise the information that it collects and harmonise, with the Suspicious Transaction Reports filed with the Suspicious Transaction Reporting Office? Can the enhanced intelligence be shared with other Government agencies, such as the Singapore Police Force and the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) seamlessly, so as to investigate and prosecute money laundering and terrorism financing cases swiftly? How can the enhanced power allow MAS to expedite investigations into licensed payment services providers for suspected failure to comply with its obligations? Mr Speaker, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In order to investigate and prosecute money laundering and terrorism financing cases, can the enhanced intelligence be shared with other Government agencies, such as the Singapore Police Force and the Attorney-General's Chambers? How can the enhanced power allow MAS to expedite investigations into licensed payment services providers for suspected failure to comply with its obligations?
(In English): This FIMA amendment Bill will allow MAS to issue written directions on the minimum standards and safeguards that should be in place when CMSL holders and their representatives conduct unregulated businesses. However, I believe MAS deserves more authority to issue stiffer measures in this aspect as an errant service provider may use consumers' investments for its unregulated activities.
What are the grounds for removal of key personnels? What are the attributes and factors that the single fit and proper test is looking out for? Under what circumstances will MAS approve the appointment of external auditors or agents by foreign regulators to conduct inspection of financial institutions? What type of information will be shared with these foreign regulators?
The FIMA Bill allows for the service of notices, orders or documents by registered post and electronic services. Has MAS considered the relevant risk factors and what measures will be imposed? Notwithstanding the above-mentioned clarifications, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, this Bill will enhance MAS' investigative, supervisory and inspection powers to more effectively ensure compliance by financial institutions. This is a positive move that strengthens the integrity of our financial institutions. I thank MAS for conducting a public consultation and incorporating its findings into this Bill. I have three points of clarification.
My first clarification is on enhancement and expansion of MAS' investigative powers. The amendments will expand MAS' investigative powers under five pieces of legislation and provide MAS new investigative powers under one additional piece of legislation.
Can the Minister of State share how much additional workload will this entail for MAS' Enforcement Department? Can the Minister of State share how the expanded investigative powers will impact the current MAS-Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) Joint Investigation Arrangement? Can the Minister of State also share what steps will be taken to ensure that MAS' enforcement officers are prepared for the expanded scope of powers?
Police are guided by the Police General Orders (PGOs) in carrying out their investigative powers. Given the expanding scope of MAS' enforcement officers' powers, can the Minister of State share what equivalent guidance there is for MAS' enforcement officers?
My second point is on the right against self-incrimination. The new section 89(1) provides that a person is not excused from disclosing information on the ground that the disclosure of information might tend to incriminate the person. However, under section 89(2) when a person claims before making a statement disclosing information that the statement might tend to incriminate the person, that statement is not admissible against the person in criminal proceedings.
Can the Minister of State confirm that what this means is that such a person must still provide information that might incriminate them but may preface it with a claim that the statement might incriminate them? Will the individual be informed that they can preface their statement with a claim that the statement might incriminate them?
This is because if there is no such notice, individuals who know to preface their statement might tend to be those who are aware or legally advised of their right against self-incrimination. In contrast, those who may not know of this right may tend to be those who are less privileged, socio-economically.
Can the Minister of State also clarify whether this claim must strictly be made before the individual provides their statement? What are the implications if the individual only states in the middle of the statement that it may be incriminating? Is such a statement still admissible in criminal proceedings? Additionally, is there a strict format or wording that such a claim must take? If the individual will be informed about their option to make such a claim, will they be informed about how they should make such a claim? Those with limited or no legal advice on their rights against self-incrimination should not be penalised if their statement fails to meet some strict, undisclosed standard.
My third and final point is on the treatment of privileged communications. Under the new section 89(3), a legal counsel who refuses to disclose privileged communications must still give the name and address of the person to whom the privileged communication was made. Can the Minister of State clarify the rationale of this requirement? Can the Minister of State also confirm that the authorities will not approach an individual to seek production of the privileged communication?
Sir, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Minister of State Tan.
Mr Alvin Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Mr Don Wee, Mr Edward Chia, Mr Louis Ng and Mr Neil Parekh for their questions and comments on the Bill. I will first deal with some general questions and comments relating to the proposed enhancements of MAS' investigative powers.
Mr Edward Chia highlighted the importance of explaining the rationale for and consulting the industry on these amendments. I assure Mr Edward Chia and Members of this House that MAS did issue public consultations on the proposed amendments, in which we explained how they would enhance the effectiveness of MAS' supervision and enforcement.
MAS carefully considered the feedback received from industry and the public and has incorporated the feedback as appropriate in the amendments. For instance, in response to feedback that it was unclear whether MAS' investigative powers would override legal professional privilege, MAS inserted a new provision to state that MAS' exercise of its investigative powers does not require a person to disclose any information subject to legal privilege.
Mr Louis Ng asked how amendments to MAS' investigative powers will affect the workload of MAS' Enforcement Department and the current MAS-CAD Joint Investigation Arrangement. He also asked how MAS will ensure that its officers are equipped to exercise the expanded investigative powers and what guidance will be given to them in this regard.
Sir, the proposed amendments will enable MAS to conduct investigations using its powers under the respective MAS-administered Acts more effectively. This does not necessarily lead to an increase in the volume of investigations and a higher load on MAS officers. If there is a serious cause for investigation, MAS will take it up and commit the needed resources.
The amendments will also not affect the MAS-CAD Joint Investigation Arrangement. This Arrangement enables MAS and CAD to jointly investigate offences under the SFA as well as the FAA. MAS officers taking part in the joint investigations are gazetted as Commercial Affairs Officers and exercise criminal powers of investigation, not the investigative powers under the MAS-administered Acts.
On Mr Louis Ng's question on training and guidance to the MAS officers, I would first highlight that the expanded powers are not new to MAS. They already exist to a large extent, in the SFA and the FAA. MAS officers are experienced in conducting investigations under these Acts and I have given a few examples of such cases in my speech. MAS has internal processes and guidance, which takes into account Police procedures and practices to ensure that MAS officers exercise investigative powers lawfully and judiciously.
I now turn to the Members' questions about specific proposed provisions and powers.
Mr Louis Ng asked several questions about the proposed provisions on self-incriminating statements. These provisions state that when being examined by an MAS officer, a person is not excused from disclosing information on the ground that the information might tend to incriminate them. However, if that person claims before making a statement that the information might tend to incriminate them, then that statement is not admissible against the person in criminal proceedings. I will refer to this as the \"pre-statement claim\".
Before an MAS officer starts examining a person under the MAS-administered Acts, the officer will indeed inform that person that where they claim that a statement may incriminate them, that statement would not be admissible as evidence in criminal proceedings against them. There is no strict format or wording for the person to make a pre-statement claim. Thus, those who are not legally represented will not be disadvantaged in terms of their ability to make such a claim.
The pre-statement claim may be made at any point during MAS' examination of the person and the information which the person claims is self-incriminating, would then be inadmissible in criminal proceedings. MAS would, however, still be able to use such information to take non-criminal actions, such as civil penalties and prohibition orders.
Mr Louis Ng also asked: one, for the rationale for requiring a legal counsel who refuses to disclose privileged communications to MAS, to provide MAS with the name and address of the person to whom the privileged communications were made; and two, if MAS will approach the person identified by legal counsel and compel the person to produce the privileged communication to MAS.
These provisions relate to situations where legally privileged communications, made by or to a lawyer, may be relevant to MAS' investigations. The lawyer would not be required to disclose the privileged communications itself. However, the name and address of the person who received or made the privileged communication is not legally privileged information. Requiring the lawyer to disclose these details would enable MAS to contact that person, to determine if the person is willing to waive privilege and disclose the privileged communication to MAS. MAS will not compel or force the person identified to produce the privileged communication to MAS, as MAS' investigation powers do not override legal professional privilege.
Sir, let me now turn to questions about the proposed evidence transfer provisions. Mr Don Wee asked how MAS will synergise and harmonise the information it receives with the Suspicious Transactions Reporting Office (STRO). He also asked if MAS will be able to share the evidence obtained using its enhanced investigative powers with other law enforcement agencies, such as the Singapore Police Force and the AGC, for their investigations into and prosecution of money laundering and terrorism financing offences.
Sir, under the enhanced powers, MAS may transfer evidence to police officers, Commercial Affairs Officers or the Public Prosecutor for the purpose of criminal investigations or proceedings for any offence under the MAS-administered Acts. Since STRO is part of Singapore Police Force's Commercial Affairs Department, MAS will be able to share information with STRO as needed to pursue such criminal investigations or proceedings.
As for money laundering and terrorism financing offences, these may be found in laws that are not administered under MAS’ purview, such as the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act. Nevertheless, as I mentioned in my speech, MAS will still be able to share evidence with the Police and AGC for the purposes of investigating and prosecuting such offences based on the general common law principle permitting enforcement agencies to share confidential information with other enforcement agencies, where it is in the public interest to do so.
Mr Don Wee also asked if the FIMA Bill would expedite MAS’ investigations into licensed payment service providers which fail to comply with their obligations.
The FIMA Bill will enable MAS to be more effective in obtaining information regarding a suspected failure of a licensed payment service provider to comply with its obligations under the PS Act. For instance, the amendments to MAS’ investigative powers under the PS Act will empower MAS to interview and record the statement of any person, such as employees of licensed payment service providers, for the purposes of investigations under the PS Act. The other enhancements to MAS’ evidence gathering capabilities also increase the likelihood of MAS being able to obtain relevant evidence before it is tampered with or destroyed.
MAS is committed to the timely enforcement of the laws and regulations under its purview. Sir, I wish to highlight, however, that while MAS may be able to investigate licensees more effectively with its enhanced powers, the time taken to complete an investigation depends on a variety of factors, including the nature and complexity of the suspected offences and the volume of the evidence. MAS must investigate matters thoroughly to ensure we are able to take robust enforcement action against non-compliant persons.
Mr Edward Chia also raised questions concerning MAS’ proposed power to enter premises without a warrant. He asked why MAS cannot simply apply for a court warrant to enter, if the proposed power can be found in other jurisdictions, and what safeguards will be put in place to prevent misuse.
MAS recognises that the ability to enter premises is a significant power. However, this power is necessary to enable MAS to effectively investigate potential breaches under the MAS-administered Acts. Evidence crucial to our investigations is often found in premises occupied by a suspect. While legitimate financial institutions may cooperate and produce that evidence to MAS, there will be instances where the suspect is not forthcoming and there is a risk that evidence will be destroyed or concealed. In such instances, we will require a more robust approach.
It is not necessary for the Court to act as a gatekeeper in every case where MAS wishes to exercise such powers. There are safeguards built into the provisions themselves. MAS will have to give two days’ notice before entering premises without a warrant, unless: one, there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the premises are, or have been, occupied by a suspect; or two, MAS has taken all reasonably practicable steps to give such notice to the occupier of the premises, but has not been able to do so.
Furthermore, after entering the premises without a warrant, MAS will not be able to seize evidence without a warrant. This is in itself another safeguard. If MAS wishes to seize evidence, it will have to apply to the Court for a warrant to enter premises and, at the same time, seize evidence.
Mr Chia thus asked whether the power to enter premises without a warrant will indeed be effective. The answer to this is that it depends on the circumstances. MAS will assess if gaining entry without a warrant will likely result in cooperation in producing the relevant evidence. If the assessment is that cooperation will not be forthcoming, then MAS may choose to apply for the court warrant to enter premises and seize evidence instead.
The power to enter premises without a warrant is not unique to the MAS. Financial regulators in the UK, Australia and Canada have the power in certain situations as well. For example, the UK Financial Conduct Authority has similar powers when carrying out anti-money laundering investigations. The Ontario Securities Commission can enter business premises without a warrant in respect of an investigation relating to the administration of Ontario securities laws or regulation of the capital markets in Ontario. Each jurisdiction has its own unique regulatory frameworks and operating environment, so such considerations do inform but they do not dictate our own approach.
The underlying concern Mr Chia raised is that MAS’ power to enter premises without a warrant should not adversely affect Singapore’s competitiveness as a financial hub. We do not think that it will.
Firstly, the power to enter premises without a warrant is not new. It already exists under the SFA and the FAA. The financial industry would therefore already be familiar with MAS’ ability to enter premises in investigations in that context. The proposed amendments will allow MAS to exercise this power to pursue misconduct more effectively and across additional sectors of the financial industry. Secondly, having robust powers of investigation will in fact further underscore MAS’ commitment and ability to uphold a clean and trusted financial sector.
Mr Neil Parekh asked how MAS intends to handle investigations involving digital data stored in cloud environments, including ensuring the security and confidentiality of unrelated data.
The proposed amendments make clear that MAS has the power to require a person to produce digital evidence and to access digital evidence, including evidence stored in a cloud. MAS will also have the power to apply to the court for a warrant to search and make a copy of any digital data.
MAS has in place procedures and guidelines to ensure that all data obtained in the course of investigations is kept confidential. Indeed, MAS officers have the obligation to keep such information confidential under the Official Secrets Act, the Monetary Authority of Singapore Act and prevailing Government policies.
I will now move on to the questions relating to the enhancements of MAS’ supervisory powers in the capital markets.
On the proposed power for MAS to issue directions to CMSL holders and their representatives that conduct unregulated businesses, Mr Chia asked how MAS would exercise the new direction-making power to address and manage the unique risk profiles of each CMSL holder, given the varied nature and scope of activities that these CMSL holders undertake. With the amendment, MAS will be able to issue directions to CMSL holders as a class as well as to individual CMSL holders. MAS is prepared to do the latter when there are unique risks characteristics exhibited by individual CMSL holders’ business models.
Mr Parekh and Mr Chia also asked about MAS’ process for developing and implementing the new scope of power and standards. MAS will conduct a public consultation to seek industry feedback on the proposed list of unregulated financial products and standards and will provide an appropriate transition period for industry to adopt these standards. Where relevant, MAS will engage the industry to keep them updated on new regulations.
Both Mr Don Wee and Mr Edward Chia have sought clarification on the criteria and processes that will guide MAS’ decision to approve the appointment of key persons or to direct their removal.
The fitness and propriety of a key person is an important consideration when MAS reviews whether to approve the appointment or direct the removal of a key person. Mr Wee asked about the attributes and factors MAS is looking for under the single fit and proper test, under the various Acts administered by MAS. MAS may consider, for example, whether the individual has previously been convicted for fraudulent or dishonest offences. Other factors that MAS may consider include honesty, integrity, competence and also financial soundness. These factors and how they are assessed are also currently set out in MAS’ Guidelines on Fit and Proper Criteria.
Sir, MAS is mindful that the removal of a key person has serious implications on the individual’s future livelihood, professional standing as well as his or her reputation. MAS' guidelines therefore also make clear that an individual who does not meet any particular criteria is not automatically deemed as being not fit and proper. MAS adopts a proportionate approach which considers the nature and the responsibilities of the individual in determining the relative emphasis and the standard expected of that person. Further, the financial institution and the affected key person can appeal MAS' decision. For example, if a key person is removed from office, both the affected financial institution and the key person may appeal to the Minister-in-charge.
Mr Edward Chia also asked about the timeframe for approval of appointment of key persons. MAS will endeavour to make the decision in a timely manner. However, the time taken to process an application would depend on factors such as the complexity of the application, the completeness of the information and documents provided, and any additional clarification that might be required.
Mr Wee and Mr Chia raised a few questions on the proposal to empower MAS to approve appointment of agents by foreign regulators to conduct inspections of financial institutions on their behalf.
Sir, when MAS receives a request from a foreign regulator for its agent to inspect a MAS-regulated financial institution, MAS will duly consider the request on a case-by-case basis and is not obliged to approve all such requests for appointments. MAS will approve such appointments when it is satisfied that the inspection of the financial institution is relevant to the foreign regulator’s discharge of its regulatory function and mandate. An example would be where the MAS-regulated financial institution is part of a financial services group under the consolidated supervision of the foreign regulator. MAS similarly conducts onsite inspections of regulated financial institutions in foreign jurisdictions under comparable arrangements.
These are inspections which rely on the cooperation of the financial institution and are not investigations and the question of a warrant does not arise.
Mr Edward Chia also asked about the type of information that will be shared with such foreign regulators. These would generally include compliance policies and procedures of the inspected financial institution as well as transaction information that may be relevant to the scope of the inspection. In granting its approval, MAS has the power to impose conditions or restrictions to ensure that the appropriate safeguards are in place, such as those for the protection of confidentiality of information.
Mr Don Wee asked whether MAS has considered the relevant risk factors for the service of notices, orders or documents, or the \"relevant documents\", by registered post and electronic service, and what measures will be imposed. Sir, the amendments are intended to clarify the existing practice of serving relevant documents through registered post or electronic service. Relevant documents may only be served through electronic service with a person’s prior consent to ensure that such documents are brought to the attention of the person as needed. If served through registered post, the envelope containing the relevant documents should be properly addressed, stamped and posted by registered post.
Mr Edward Chia sought clarification on what constitutes exercising \"reasonable care\" in the submission of information to MAS. Sir, to be precise, the term used in the provision is \"due care\" rather than \"reasonable care\". This is the same standard of care that is already adopted for the existing offences for the provision of false or misleading material information under the SFA, FAA and TCA. MAS is simply extending this standard of care to the provision of non-material false or misleading information. This new offence does not apply to individuals.
Mr Chia also asked how MAS will assess and enforce proposed standards to ensure fair treatment across the board. It is not MAS' intent to automatically or mechanistically take financial institutions to task for errors in their submissions. In assessing whether to take action against a financial institution, MAS would consider the nature of the information submitted, the significance of the error, the robustness of the financial institution's internal controls and processes, the frequency of erroneous submissions to MAS and the circumstances leading to the breach.
Mr Speaker, Sir, let me conclude by reiterating the importance of this set of amendments. The amendments are necessary to enable MAS to supervise FIs and uphold the regulatory regime under its purview more effectively in a rapidly-evolving financial system. It signals our commitment to maintain the high standards of integrity and trust in Singapore's financial system. Mr Speaker, I beg to move.
Mr Speaker: Are there any clarifications for Minister of State Tan? None.
[(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 Alvin Tan]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 3.40 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.17 pm until 3.40 pm.
Sitting resumed at 3.40 pm.
[Deputy Speaker (Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo) in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Infectious Diseases (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Minister for Health (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\" The Infectious Diseases Act, or IDA, was first enacted in 1976 and is Singapore's principal legislation for the prevention and control of infectious diseases. It empowers the Ministry of Health (MOH) to undertake a range of public health measures to prevent the importation and spread of infectious diseases.
For example, the IDA empowers MOH to conduct surveillance for infectious diseases, isolate and treat the infected persons and quarantine close contacts. The IDA also allows us to investigate and manage outbreaks with measures, such as contact tracing and disinfection of premises. IDA has been an effective piece of legislation and saw Singapore through health crises, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003 and H1N1 in 2009.
Then, COVID-19 struck in 2019. Between influenza and SARS, COVID-19 is somewhere in-between. It had a case fatality rate of about 2% to 5% when it first emerged, far higher than influenza, but lower than SARS. However, COVID-19 was far more infectious than SARS, spreading via airborne droplets and by infected persons yet to display symptoms.
It became clear that we were facing a new enemy and it was no longer sufficient to solely rely on the approach of \"test, trace, isolate\", our main takeaway during SARS, to fight this new virus. Nationwide restrictions and community-based measures became necessary to curtail disease spread, reduce deaths and safeguard our healthcare system.
Part 7 of the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act – in short, I will refer to it as Part 7 – was, therefore, enacted in this House in 2020 to complement the IDA and provided additional powers to MOH to combat the pandemic. As different variants emerged and various infection waves hit us, Part 7 enabled the implementation of many measures, including the circuit breaker, various gradations of safe management measures (SMMs), vaccination-differentiated SMMs and it also facilitated the implementation of TraceTogether and SafeEntry systems.
As our population was increasingly protected by vaccinations and safe recovery from infections, we cautiously reopened our society and economy. Part 7 continued to provide the agility and allow us to calibrate our SMMs and to ease restrictions according to risk assessments.
The Government conducted a comprehensive review of our responses during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis and its findings were released as a White Paper and debated in this House in March 2023.
One of the key recommendations of the White Paper was the need to review and amend the IDA. A key motivation behind the recommendation is that while Part 7 served us well for COVID-19, it was intended to be temporary and, in fact, it will expire next month which is why we have to table this Bill today after the Committee of Supply. COVID-19 is not going to be the last pandemic and we need better and permanent tools for the next threat. The pandemic has given us fresh perspectives on the management of infectious disease threats, and our laws, namely the IDA, needs to be reviewed and be ready for the next pandemic.
In this comprehensive review of the IDA, various Part 7 powers that continue to be relevant to future pandemic responses will be ported over to the IDA. We have also taken this opportunity to streamline the legislation, iron out kinks and make provisions for operational effectiveness by drawing lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic.
I will introduce the key substantive amendments in the Bill in my speech. Thereafter, I will pass the time to Senior Parliamentary Secretary Ms Rahayu Mahzam to elaborate on the other amendments to the IDA.
The main change to the IDA is to provide for a hierarchy of responses to address outbreaks of differing severity. This was a key takeaway from COVID-19, when we had to step-up responses as the situation escalated and taper down measures when the threat subsided. We need the IDA to provide the Minister for Health the powers to effect relevant measures at different phases of the pandemic.
Currently, the IDA is somewhat binary. It is either peace or emergency. It only provides for the declaration of a Public Health Emergency (PHE) by the Minister for Health. This was not declared during COVID-19 because while the pandemic situation was dire, we felt it fell short of an emergency – partly also due to the way we had managed the situation. We would associate an emergency with more extreme situations, like widespread riots, or war; or in the context of a pandemic, a healthcare system that is totally overwhelmed.
The IDA will therefore enable the Minister for Health to declare either a Public Health Threat (PHT) or PHE, depending on the severity of the situation. It will also provide the powers for the Minister to respond appropriately, based on each situation.
Let me first explain PHT and what it entails. The Minister may declare a PHT if he or she is satisfied that the actual or likely incidence and transmission of an infectious disease in Singapore constitutes a serious threat to public health and it is necessary to take measures to prevent, protect against, delay or control such incidence or transmission.
The outbreak of COVID-19 in Singapore in 2020 would have been considered a PHT under the new provisions. Minister will also have the powers to make regulations to implement measures to respond to the PHT as we had. These include movement restrictions; prohibitions of gatherings or events beyond a specified group size; or the suspension of non-essential businesses; up to and including a circuit breaker. All these powers are currently found in Part 7 and will be ported over to the IDA, as powers under a PHT – a threat.
Then, what constitutes PHE? A PHE will trigger powers in the most dire of situations. Declaration of a PHE is already an existing provision in the IDA, but we are finetuning the criteria of a PHE and proposing to make adjustments to the powers of the Minister under this situation.
We have enhanced the existing criteria for the declaration of a PHE, by factoring in the state of our healthcare systems and resources, in addition to the epidemiology of the disease. The amended IDA will empower the Minister to declare a PHE if he or she is satisfied that the actual or likely incidence and transmission of an infectious disease in Singapore constitutes a serious threat to public health and he additionally finds that the disease poses a substantial risk of either: one, a significant number of fatalities or incidents of serious disability of persons in Singapore; or two, a severe shortage or impairment of healthcare services and supplies in Singapore. A PHE declaration, if done, will unlock two additional powers for the Minister for Health.
First, based on the current PHE powers in the IDA, the Minister will be able to declare the whole of or any area in Singapore to be a restricted zone and impose curfew-like measures in those zones. These are envisioned to be much more stringent than the measures, including a circuit breaker, provided under a PHT. For example, the Minister may impose an island-wide curfew during specific time periods of the day or limit the number of persons that may leave a home every day.
During COVID-19, some countries had imposed such curfew-like measures. For example, in parts of India, persons were restricted from leaving the home overnight; and some China provinces restricted the number of persons per household who could leave the home and then only to obtain necessities. Fortunately, we did not need to impose any of these highly-restrictive measures during COVID-19, partly because our hospitals, while strained and stressed, were never overwhelmed like in many other countries where a big number of patients had to be left unattended. But we cannot be complacent and assume that we will be as fortunate in the next pandemic. There is a need to be ready for a situation where more stringent measures are needed to avoid a public health catastrophe.
Second, the Minister for Health will be able to exercise relevant powers under the Requisition of Resources Act 1985 (RORA) for the requisition of necessary resources to secure the safety of human life and health.
The RORA can already be exercised by the Minister for Defence during a PHE. What we will be doing with the amendments to the IDA is to also allow the Minister for Health to exercise requisition powers in a PHE. This is consistent with the overall objective of RORA, one of which is to provide for requisition of resources as necessary for the securing of the safety of human life and health in the event of a PHE.
We can envision that in a situation when Disease X strikes, the Minister may need to acquire private hospital beds, medical equipment, ambulances and manpower to shore up resources to tend to our population who may otherwise not be able to receive care expediently. Parties affected by such requisitions will be appropriately compensated under the RORA.
PHT and PHE declarations can be in force for a duration of up to 90 days and the duration is extendable. Drawing from our experience with epidemic waves – including that of COVID-19 – 90 days will provide sufficient time for the effect of measures to kick in and for MOH to review and assess the impact on the public health situation. If needed, the duration can be extended. If the situation subsides early, the declaration may be revoked early.
The measures under a PHT and PHE can be intrusive and disruptive, so they need to be triggered only when necessary to protect lives. These decisions will only be taken, following careful consideration based on prevailing scientific evidence and risk assessments and at the highest level of Government.
There will also be safeguards in place. The Minister must first, by order, declare a PHT or PHE and publish a notice to bring the order to the public's attention. All orders to declare or extend a PHT or PHE and any regulations made during a PHT or PHE, must be published in the Gazette and presented to Parliament as soon as possible. Parliament has the authority to scrutinise the order or regulations and if unsatisfied with the decisions, vote to annul them.
To sum up, what I have just described can be found under clause 22 of the Bill, which inserts into the IDA a new Part 3A on the control of infectious disease during a PHT and PHE. Further details on amendments to enhance operational efficiency during a PHT and PHE will be elaborated on by Senior Parliamentary Secretary Ms Rahayu Mahzam.
In effect, with these amendments, our public health response will comprise four postures.
First, \"Baseline\". This is a peacetime state where routine disease prevention and control measures, along with public health surveillance programmes, are in place. During peacetime, the primary objective is to detect outbreaks early to prevent and mitigate disease spread.
Second, \"Outbreak Management\", where there are signs of an emerging infectious disease overseas, upstream measures, such as pre-departure health requirements, temperature screening or stay orders on persons entering Singapore, may be implemented to prevent the disease from being introduced into Singapore. This will help prevent disease importation and transmission and buy us time to understand the new disease. In the event of a local outbreak, measures such as testing, treatment and contact tracing, may be implemented. This is what we did recently at Bukit Merah due to a local tuberculosis outbreak.
The IDA does not explicitly mention \"Baseline\" and \"Outbreak Management\" situation tiers. These measures are already well-established and routinely carried out and for these two tiers, they are already legally backed by various sections in the IDA; but these two are useful lexicons for us to remember.
Third tier is \"Public Health Threat\", which I have described to be for situations that may require more widespread or prolonged measures, up to and including those that were imposed during the circuit breaker.
Fourth, \"Public Health Emergency\", being the most dire of public health crises where even stricter measures, such as curfews or requisition of resources, may be implemented.
These four public health postures will inform the application of the IDA henceforth and will greatly facilitate nimbler management of different stages of an outbreak or pandemic. They will also become our common language.
As part of this Bill, the Government will be proposing the repeal of Part 11 of the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act, in short, I will refer to it as Part 11. Part 11 was introduced in 2021 to provide assurance to the public that personal contact tracing data collected during digital contact tracing systems, including TraceTogether and SafeEntry were limited for the purposes of contact tracing for COVID-19 and for criminal investigations and proceedings in respect of serious offences.
TraceTogether and SafeEntry have not been active for about a year as we transitioned to treating COVID-19 as an endemic disease and SMMs were stepped down. Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean, as the Minister charged with the responsibility for digital Government and public sector data governance, in consultation with MOH, determined that these digital contact tracing systems would no longer be required after 5 January 2024.
TraceTogether and SafeEntry have since been removed from the app stores and the backend digital infrastructure supporting the TraceTogether and SafeEntry systems have been dismantled. The TraceTogether and SafeEntry websites have also been shut down. As of 1 February 2024, all COVID-19 related personal contact tracing data derived from TraceTogether and SafeEntry has been deleted; with the exception of TraceTogether data pertaining to a murder case in May 2020, which will be retained by the Police indefinitely. With the deactivation of TraceTogether and SafeEntry, and the deletion of personal contact tracing data, Part 11 is no longer required and we will therefore repeal it.
As for the future, with the rapid advancement of digital technology, precision medicine and artificial intelligence, it may not be wise to pre-judge what we may or can do in future pandemics. We may collect different kinds of data digitally. We may use them differently to fight the pandemic. The public may need new forms of assurances. Part 11 is bound to be obsolete when the next pandemic hits us.
In the event of a future pandemic crisis and should we implement a digital personal data collection tool to be part of our arsenal to fight the pandemic, we will need to address data protection concerns and provide assurance to the public. To do so, the Government will come back to Parliament to pass legislation, if necessary.
In the meantime, we will closely monitor the technologies available, their possible use cases and relevance for future pandemics. This will allow us to quickly determine, at the onset of the next outbreak, whether and what tools should be deployed as well as the relevant safeguards to be implemented to ensure that an individual's personal data are used with discernment.
Mdm Deputy Speaker, besides the amendments relating to pandemic management, there are also other refinements to the IDA. I will now pass the time to Senior Parliamentary Secretary Ms Rahayu Mahzam to elaborate on these amendments.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu. Sorry, could you take a seat first?
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam): Mdm Deputy Speaker, as mentioned by the Minister for Health, a key intent behind the amendments to the IDA is to introduce powers that provide for a gradation of measures that can be taken during a PHT and a PHE. Besides the Minister's powers to make regulations during a PHT or PHE, the following amendments are also being introduced to enhance operational and enforcement efficiency during a PHT or PHE.
One, the Minister may direct all persons or any class of persons in charge of premises, such as the owners of shopping malls, to implement contact tracing or surveillance measures.
Two, oral directions may be given by authorised Health Officers to require persons to comply with the relevant PHT or PHE regulations in force. For example, if there is a regulation that imposes limits on the size of gatherings and a Health Officer comes across a gathering that exceeds this limit, the Health Officer may give an oral direction to the group requiring them to disperse.
Three, a higher maximum penalty can be provided for repeat offenders who do not comply with PHT or PHE regulations. The effectiveness of disease containment efforts is contingent on the public's cooperation in taking public health measures seriously. Non-compliance does not only put oneself at risk of disease, but also others in the community and can set our national efforts back significantly.
Four, to focus our resources on the pandemic response, statutory appeals to the Minister will be temporarily suspended during a PHT and PHE. Members of the public will still be able to reach out to MOH to seek exceptional handling on a case-by-case basis, and MOH will attend to these quickly and administratively.
These amendments will allow the expeditious implementation of public health measures during a PHT or PHE.
Besides incorporating the relevant powers under Part 7 of the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act and providing a gradation of responses under the IDA, MOH has also taken this opportunity to review and update the IDA in its entirety.
The COVID-19 pandemic has required us to adopt new ways to prevent, mitigate and manage infectious disease outbreaks. Advancements in scientific technology and ever-growing international connectivity have demonstrated the need for a new paradigm of infectious disease management measures to fit the modern times.
Let me start with the appointment of officers who need to carry out the public health actions. Public health actions under the IDA are mainly carried out by the Health Officers appointed by the Director-General of Health, the Director-General of Public Health, or the Director-General, Food Administration. As the powers exercisable under the IDA may potentially be intrusive, only public officers, officers of statutory bodies and employees of prescribed institutions, may currently be appointed as Health Officers.
However, manpower from the public service forms a relatively smaller portion of the local workforce. When faced with a pandemic, there is often the need to tap on the rest of the workforce to supplement the national response. With diverse partnerships or working arrangements, less intrusive functions can be performed by other parties in partnership with the public service.
Clause 4 of the Bill thus expands the pool of people who can be appointed as Health Officers to implement and enforce the IDA. The first new group of persons are employees of prescribed entities and institutions. These will include employees of private healthcare providers and MOH-linked entities such as MOH Holdings and the Agency for Integrated Care. The second new group are employees of prescribed service providers that the Government or statutory bodies have engaged. These could include call centres engaged to do contact tracing. The third group are auxiliary police officers. These three groups were in fact closest to the action during the COVID-19 pandemic, and will be the first sources of manpower MOH will tap on, especially during an escalating outbreak.
As public sector resources will be stretched further during a PHT or PHE, there may be a need to bring together additional manpower to supplement and support these Health Officers. Clause 22 introduces a new section 21I of the Bill, which will allow persons who are deemed suitable to be appointed as adjunct Health Officers during a PHT or PHE, to perform the functions of a Health Officer. These persons could include volunteers, such as former nurses, who have stepped forward to help with contact tracing and surveillance.
To ensure proper oversight over these Health Officers and adjunct Health Officers, they will need to be appointed and authorised with powers on an as-needed basis. They will also be informed of the scope of their powers and the validity period of their appointments and receive appropriate training before being tasked to carry out their functions under the IDA.
The IDA also provides for specific situations where the arrest of offenders may be carried out by authorised Health Officers without a warrant, such as the arrest of persons who breach isolation orders. MOH recognises that the power of arrest is a serious one which should only be exercised by persons who are trained to do so. Accordingly, clauses 14 and 36, and the new section 21H of the Bill, insert an additional safeguard where only Health Officers who are public officers, officers of statutory bodies and auxiliary police officers can be authorised to arrest persons without a warrant. In addition, these officers must also be separately authorised by the Minister to exercise such powers of arrest.
We also will be strengthening our levers to safeguard our population against the importation of disease. Global connectivity in modern times can facilitate the spread and migration of diseases. Outbreaks in one country can spread rapidly to the rest of the world. We saw that for COVID-19 and SARS. Given that Singapore is an international trade and travel hub, we remain vulnerable to the importation of emerging infectious diseases and must take the necessary precautions.
Many would be familiar with the concept of pre-departure testing and mask-wearing on international flights implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic. These measures were implemented through sectoral levers. As circumstances may differ in future outbreaks, clause 27 of the Bill introduces new provisions to empower the Minister to specify pre-departure or onboard health requirements which persons travelling to Singapore are required to comply with. Upon arrival, travellers may also be required to produce proof of their compliance with any pre-departure health requirement. Non-compliance with any of these requirements can give rise to an offence. Clause 27 of the Bill will provide us with the ability to impose such requirements uniformly and to take firm action against incoming travellers who do not comply with them.
Currently, section 31 of the IDA requires persons arriving in Singapore by air or sea to fulfil specified vaccination requirements and show proof of such vaccination. In line with the World Health Organization’s (WHO's) recommendations, this provision is currently applied in respect of yellow fever vaccinations for travellers from certain African and South American countries that are endemic for yellow fever. This is intended to protect Singapore against the risk of importation of the disease. To guard against new diseases and to capture all possible modalities of travel into Singapore, clause 28 of the Bill will expand section 31 to include travellers entering Singapore by land.
Besides strengthening our levers to prevent the importation of diseases into Singapore, Singapore should also be responsible in preventing the exportation of diseases if we are experiencing an outbreak. Therefore, clause 32 of the Bill removes the prerequisite under section 45B of the IDA for a PHE to be declared before the Minister can require persons to undergo medical examinations before leaving Singapore. Such medical examinations, also known as \"exit-screening\", are implemented in advance of a PHT or PHE as a key measure to prevent the cross-border spread of an infectious disease. Such measures are also in line with the WHO’s recommendations under the International Health Regulations.
Singapore is a densely populated country, and this can accelerate the spread of an infectious disease within the population. Therefore, additionally, we will be strengthening our levers to prevent disease transmission within our communities.
Currently, the IDA recognises three categories of persons in relation to an infectious disease: one, actual infected \"cases\" who have the disease; two, \"carriers\" who are harbouring, likely to or suspected of harbouring the disease; and three, \"contacts\" who have been exposed to the risk of infection from the disease. The COVID-19 pandemic showed that there may be situations where we will need to take public health measures pre-emptively for persons who do not fall within any of these three categories, but are still at a higher risk of exposure to infection and onward transmission of the disease due to their unique circumstances and the nature of that particular disease.
Hence, clause 2 of the Bill supplements these three categories by introducing the concept of an \"at-risk individual\". An \"at-risk individual\" includes an individual who is or appears to the Director-General of Health or a Health Officer to be a contact or carrier of an infectious disease. Examples of such individuals include those who live in high-risk living arrangements or work in high-risk occupations where prolonged close contact with others may be unavoidable. An \"at-risk individual\" would also include individuals entering Singapore from a country during a period when there is an outbreak or suspected outbreak in that country. Individuals who have undergone a medical examination in connection with an infectious disease but have not received a conclusive test result are also \"at-risk individuals\". The recognition of \"at-risk individuals\" and the application of the powers under the IDA to such individuals allow public health measures, such as testing or isolation, to be carried out at an early stage to stem the spread of an infectious disease.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, there were instances where persons who were served with isolation orders went about running errands or having meals, before heading home to be isolated. Such actions have heightened the risk of disease transmission. Clause 12 of the Bill introduces a new provision that makes it an offence if such persons, without reasonable cause, fail to proceed to the place of isolation as soon as possible, if the isolation order does not specify a time to do so.
Currently, section 21A of the IDA requires persons who know or have reason to suspect that they are a case, carrier or contact of a dangerous infectious disease to not expose others to the risk of infection in places outside of their homes. Household members inherently face higher transmission risk, and the current provision assumes that they are willing to accept such risks due to their close relationship or living arrangements with one another. However, the COVID-19 pandemic showed us that there can be varied living arrangements in Singapore where the assumption may not apply. These include co-tenants or employer-employee living arrangements. Additionally, there may also be cases where a person behaves irresponsibly inside their home to the detriment of other household members.
Hence, clause 20 of the Bill amends section 21A by additionally making it an offence to deliberately or recklessly put another person in one’s own place of residence at risk of infection by one’s own conduct. This would allow us to act against infected persons who refuse to isolate in their rooms or continue to use communal areas without taking reasonable precautions.
Various provisions in the IDA will also be refined to meet our operational needs in managing the outbreak of infectious diseases.
Clause 3 of the Bill introduces a new section 2A, which provides that, one, parents or guardians of minors and, two, guardians of persons with any intellectual disability or lacking in mental capacity, may be notified of any requirement, direction, notice or order that has been issued to the person under their care. Upon receipt of such notice, the parent or guardian will be personally required to ensure that the person under their care complies with the requirement, direction, notice or order, as the case may be.
Currently, section 17 of the IDA requires the declaration of an isolation area to be published in the Gazette before it can take effect. Clause 14 of the Bill amends section 17 to provide that the declaration of an isolation area takes effect once it is brought to the notice of all persons who need to be aware of the declaration. This amendment will allow for the effective and timely isolation of persons within a particular area to prevent the spread of disease. For public awareness, MOH will continue to publish the declaration of an isolation area in the Gazette.
The IDA will also be updated to account for the latest modalities and approaches to disease management. For example, the definition of \"medical examination\" in section 2 of the IDA will be expanded to include self-administered examinations such as antigen-rapid tests. Separately, for clarity, the service of orders and notices under the IDA using electronic means such as email and SMS will also be explicitly recognised.
The powers under the IDA that involve public health assessment will now reside with the Director-General of Health instead of the Minister for Health. These amendments are in recognition that such decisions would be better suited to the professional expertise of the Director-General. These powers include imposing requirements on healthcare professionals or institutions for the purposes of investigating or preventing the spread of an infectious disease; the declaration of isolation areas; and orders to disseminate health advisories.
Finally, in addition to the amendments relating to outbreak response, we have also updated other sections of the IDA. MOH will be removing the requirement which circumscribes the group of persons who can perform vaccinations. The provision of vaccination, including the persons who may perform vaccinations, will be regulated under relevant levers that govern healthcare service delivery and the conduct of practitioners, such as the Healthcare Services Act 2020 and the Medical Registration Act 1997.
Let me now discuss the proposed amendment concerning the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Section 23(1) of the IDA was introduced in 1992 as one of the public health measures to control and curb HIV transmission. It requires persons living with HIV to inform their sexual partners, prior to sexual activity, of the risk of contracting HIV from them and to obtain the partner’s consent to accept the risk of transmission. This allows the sexual partner to make an informed decision on whether to proceed with the sexual activity and take necessary precautions to minimise the risk of contracting HIV. In practice, doctors regularly inform patients about this legal obligation at the point of HIV diagnosis.
The intention of this disclosure requirement was to control the spread of HIV and deter the irresponsible behaviour of those that put others at risk of contracting HIV. The disclosure requirement remains relevant as a public health safeguard to protect the sexual partners of persons living with HIV.
Section 23(2) of the IDA similarly requires persons who do not know that they have HIV but have reason to believe that they may have HIV, to inform their sexual partners of the risk of infection. These safeguards remain and will continue to deter irresponsible behaviour, including from those who attempt to hide behind the ignorance of their HIV status.
While the safeguards are in place to deter irresponsible behaviour, it is important also for our HIV legislation to be aligned with medical advancements in HIV treatment, in order to encourage early detection and treatment of HIV. HIV remains incurable. However, with medical advancements in HIV treatment, persons living with HIV who adhere to their HIV treatment as prescribed by their doctors are now able to reduce the amount of HIV in their bodies to an undetectable level. This is referred to as having an undetectable viral load. A person who maintains a stable undetectable viral load over time, as a result of a consistent adherence to their treatment, cannot transmit HIV to their sexual partner. The sexual partner therefore is not at risk of contracting HIV from these individuals.
The amendment Bill introduces a provision which excludes persons living with HIV from the disclosure requirement under section 23(1), if the person has maintained an undetectable viral load for a certain period of time preceding the sexual activity in question. A person is presumed to have done so if certain conditions are met.
These conditions are that the person living with HIV adhere to treatment, have stable and consistent undetectable viral load test results from a licensed laboratory in Singapore, and have an undetectable viral load test result within a specified period prior to sexual activity. More details will be set out in subsidiary legislation. This amendment aligns with medical advancements and our public health objective to curb transmission by shifting greater responsibility to individuals to get tested and treated for HIV in order to achieve and maintain a stable undetectable viral load.
The objectives of the amendments are to encourage individuals who are at high risk of getting HIV to be tested regularly for HIV, and if possible, to get treated early, so that they can achieve undetectable viral load as early as possible. We urge persons living with HIV to adhere to HIV treatment and monitor their viral load closely with their doctors. In doing so, we aim to reduce the risk of HIV transmission.
Singapore is not the first or only country to amend the law on this. Other jurisdictions such as Sweden, Taiwan, United States have removed the disclosure requirement for persons living with HIV who have no risk of transmitting HIV. I would like to emphasise that in proposing the amendments, we are not relaxing the public health safeguards against HIV transmission, but encouraging infected persons to come forward to be tested and treated, thereby better protecting their sexual partners. Irresponsible behaviour that can lead to the transmission of HIV remains an offence in Singapore and appropriate enforcement action will be taken as required.
To conclude, I return to the primary aim behind the amendment Bill. We have sought to enhance the IDA to enable the swift prevention and control of infectious diseases, and the flexibility to calibrate our response according to the public health situation. We have ported over relevant provisions under the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act, Part 7, which served us well and updated the existing IDA provisions.
As experts have cautioned, the likelihood of another pathogen with even deadlier potential than COVID-19 remains. The intent behind these amendments is to better equip MOH and Singapore to tackle future outbreaks and pandemics, safeguard the lives of our people and the functioning of our healthcare system.
I ask for the support of all Members for this Bill. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
Mdm Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): This Bill will enhance the Government’s powers to deal with future pandemics, introduce more nuanced public health measures and align HIV disclosure requirements with scientific developments. I have four points of clarification to raise.
My first point is on the responsibility of parents and guardians. The new section 2A places responsibility on parents and guardians to ensure that an individual with an intellectual disability or who otherwise lacks mental capacity to comply with requirements under the Infectious Disease Act. The parent or guardian may be served with a notice to ensure the compliance of the individual. The parent or guardian may be found liable for an offence if they fail to ensure that the individual complies with any requirement of the Act.
Under the Mental Capacity Act, there are certain principles to balance a person’s right to make their own decisions and the need to protect them. These principles include that before an act is done or a decision is made, it must be considered whether the purpose of the act or decision can be effectively achieved in a way that is less restrictive of the person’s rights and freedom of action. Another principle is that a person must be assumed to have capacity unless it is established that the person lacks capacity. A further principle is that a person is not to be treated as unable to make a decision merely because the person makes an unwise decision.
When a parent or guardian is served with a notice to ensure compliance of the individual, the measures taken to ensure compliance may involve some restriction of rights or freedom of action. Can the Minister clarify whether these principles under the Mental Capacity Act continue to apply when the parent or guardian is served with a notice to ensure the compliance of the individual with requirements under the Infectious Diseases Act? How should a parent or guardian of an individual lacking mental capacity balance their responsibilities under the Infectious Diseases Act and the principles they must abide under the Mental Capacity Act?
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
My second point is on the Director-General’s power to require classes of persons to provide information or samples for any public health surveillance programmes, investigations or surveys. The Director-General already has powers to require any person to provide any information or sample. The amendment to section 7 will expand the scope of the powers from any person to any classes of persons.
While there is public health interest in doing so, there is also greater risk from any breach of data privacy. Can Minister share what safeguards are in place for the management and storage of the information collected? Will the data collected be anonymised? Are there any time limits for how long the data collected can be stored? Will there be an effort to heighten safeguards when the provision of information or sample is from classes of persons as opposed to from individuals?
My third point is on Director-General’s power to order detention and isolation. The Director-General already has the power to order detention and isolation of certain individuals under the existing section 15 of the Infectious Diseases Act. The new section 15 expands and specifies this power. It specifies that individuals may now be ordered to isolate for a period of time “necessary for the protection of the public.” This proviso about being necessary for the protection of the public is not included in relation to individuals ordered to isolate in a hospital. Can the Minister clarify the significance of this difference?
Additionally, there are certain renewable time limits prescribed for Director-General’s other powers. For example, under the new section 17, the Director-General may declare a premise to be an isolation area for up to a period of 90 days. This can be extended for a period up to 90 days at any one time. Can the Minister share if the Ministry considered including similar renewable time limits for the isolation and detention of individuals?
My final point is on updates to the HIV disclosure laws. Under the new section 23(1A), the disclosure requirement for a person with HIV infection does not apply if he or she has maintained an undetectable HIV viral load for at least the prescribed period preceding the sexual activity. I thank the Ministry for updating our HIV disclosure law to be aligned with the latest scientific understanding. Members of civil society have also shared with me that they are heartened by this development. Can the Minister confirm that the length of the prescribed period and the threshold for determining undetectable HIV viral load will be determined and periodically updated based on the latest state of scientific knowledge?
Notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms He Ting Ru.
Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Sir, I support the amendment to section 23 of the IDA, which contains provisions dealing with sexual activity by persons with HIV infection. For too long, the law has lagged behind medical developments and the proposed amendment to section 23 will recognise the recognised principle \"U equals U\", or undetectable equals untransmittable.
However, I am concerned that the proposed amendment to section 23 does not go far enough to assist in our journey towards the UN AIDS 90-90-90 targets for 90% of people living with HIV knowing their status, 90% of people living with HIV who know their status being on antiretroviral therapy and 90% of people living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy achieving viral suppression.
As Asst Prof Dr Rayner Tan from the National University of Singapore (NUS) Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health argued in a recent CNA commentary, stigma and a lack of access to prevention methods stand in the way of an HIV-free future. The 2023 Global Update by the Joint United Nations (UN) Programme on HIV and AIDS has also found that punitive laws are more likely to drive people away from seeking HIV support and services and may be counterproductive to public health efforts. In light of the consensus among public health experts on the ineffectiveness of criminal law in ending HIV, does the Government plan to eventually do away with section 23? If so, can the Government explain its decision to tweak section 23 instead of entirely repealing this law?
Sir, I also wish to seek the Government's clarification on the duty of disclosure under section 23 in light of the Singapore High Court's decision in GCP vs Public Prosecutor. In that case, the Judge held that even though the accused had only been informed by the Public Health Officer working at the National Public Health Unit that he was required to disclose his HIV-positive status to his sexual partners, the Public Health Officer's opinion of the law was not conclusive. Instead, the High Court held that the plain language of section 23 means that a person must communicate the risk of contracting HIV and not merely one's HIV status. This judgement has caused confusion among people who are subject to the disclosure obligation under section 23 as to what would satisfy this requirement to communicate the risk of contracting HIV. What steps have or will the Government take to clarify the ambiguity in section 23?
Finally, under section 23(2) of the IDA, persons who have reason to believe that they have been exposed to a significant risk of contracting HIV similarly have a legal duty to disclose the risk of contracting HIV to their sexual partners or take other precautionary steps before engaging in sexual activity. Can the Government provide an update on the number of complaints it has received and the number of investigations it has conducted under this law since it was introduced in 2008? Can the Government also confirm if, in light of medical advances, the reasonable precautions under section 23(2)(c) will include the correct use of pre-exposure prophylaxis, also known as PrEP? If so, would the Government consider amending this sub clause to remove the phrase during the sexual activity and or explicitly recognise the use of PrEP as reasonable precaution? If not, can the Government explain why not?
Mr Speaker: Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Suspension of Standing Orders","subTitle":"Senior Parliamentary Secretary to speak more than once","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, I understand that Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam is doing the response to the speeches. As such, Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move that the proceedings on item No 5 in the Order Paper for today be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 48(3) so far as it is necessary to enable Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam to speak more than once?
Mr Speaker: I give my consent. Does the Leader of the House have the general assent of the hon Members present to so move?
[(proc text) Hon Members indicated assent. (proc text)]
[(proc text) With the consent of Mr Speaker, and the general assent of Members present, question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the proceedings on item No 5 in the Order Paper for today be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 48(3) in respect of Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam speaking more than once.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah] (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Infectious Diseases (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam): Thank you. Members have sought clarifications on the proposed amendments. Allow me to respond.
Mr Louis Ng sought clarifications on how the guardian of an individual who lacks mental capacity should balance their responsibilities under the Infectious Diseases Act (IDA) and the principles under the Mental Capacity Act. I would like to clarify that the IDA does not limit the Mental Capacity Act. The principles under the Mental Capacity Act will therefore continue to apply.
Under the new section 2A, the IDA notice must first be served on the minor or individual. Where the minor or individual is not able to fully understand and follow through with the requirements in the IDA notice, the same IDA notice is then served on the parent or guardian, requiring them to facilitate the minor or individual’s compliance. This is a reasonable expectation, that the parent or guardian should play a part. Section 2A allows the Ministry of Health (MOH) to take action in cases of irresponsible parents or guardians, who without reasonable excuse, fail to do so.
Mr Ng asked about the safeguards for the management of information collected from classes of persons under section 7. The current section 7 already allows the Director-General of Health (DGH) to require any person to provide information for the purposes of public health surveillance, epidemiological investigations or surveys. The amendment is not an expansion of powers. Rather, it clarifies and makes explicit the manner in which DGH may exercise his power to require information from classes of persons. This facilitates operational efficiency. For example, a notice can be issued to the class of “persons who are in charge of a laboratory”, as opposed to multiple individual notices issued to each person in charge of a laboratory.
Data collected may not necessarily be anonymised. It may be necessary to match the samples collected to the data collected for the right patient. But where data can be used in anonymised form, such as to conduct trend analysis, MOH will do so.
MOH treats the management and protection of personal data very seriously, regardless of whether the information is collected from individuals or a class of persons. Sensitive personal data is managed and protected in compliance with whole-of-Government standards. Disclosure of information under the IDA requires DGH’s authorisation and is only for public health purposes, including measures to prevent and control an outbreak and national public health research. DGH may also impose additional conditions on the receiving party to better protect the information.
In relation to section 15 on the detection and isolation of persons, Mr Ng pointed out that while an individual may be ordered to be isolated in his own residence \"for the protection of the public\", this phrase is not used in relation to individuals being ordered to isolate in a hospital.
The difference in language is not new and already exists in the current Act. Isolation of persons in a hospital protects other patients and hospital staff, whereas isolation of individuals in their residence is more directly for the protection of the public within the community.
On whether MOH considered providing for a time limit for isolation orders under section 15, the duration of a section 15 isolation order is not open ended or arbitrary. During the COVID-19 pandemic and also in the context of other communicable diseases, the duration has always been based on public health considerations and grounded in medical science, typically until the individual is no longer infectious or potentially infectious.
I note that Mr Louis Ng as well as Ms He Ting Ru welcomed the provisions in relation to HIV. Mr Ng asked about the definition of undetectable viral load, length of the prescribed period and whether these would be periodically updated.
I would like to emphasise that the criteria for the maintenance of an undetectable viral load were rigorously determined based on latest scientific evidence and clinical knowledge after consultation with HIV and infectious diseases experts.
Ms He Ting Ru has also raised some other questions. In response, I would say that section 23 remains relevant to reduce sexual transmission of HIV, by requiring persons living with HIV with a detectable viral load and persons who do not know of their status, but have reasons to believe that they have HIV, to disclose their risk of acquiring HIV to their sexual partners prior to sexual activity. This allows sexual partners to make an informed decision before engaging in sexual activities and to encourage responsible sexual behaviour by taking mitigating measures such as ensuring condom use to protect themselves. The intention of the HIV laws is not to criminalise persons living with HIV, but to deter irresponsible behaviour.
She had also made reference to the high court judgment. The high court judgment will be superseded by the amendment.
In relation to the queries on the prosecution, from 2015 to 2023, seven people were convicted under section 23(1) for failing to inform their sexual partners of the risk of getting HIV infection from them. Of the seven, four had undetectable viral loads at the time of their offences. All four convictions had aggravating circumstances, including simultaneous offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act; committing a second offence while under investigation for a first offence; one victim was a minor; and one deceived and exploited a victim by lying and posing as a police officer. The law at that time was that a person living with HIV was required to inform their sexual partners of the risk of getting HIV infection from them. This law was informed by the state of medical science and there have since been developments in this, and that is why we are updating the laws to align with these developments.
Mr Speaker, to summarise, persons living with HIV do not need to disclose the risk of HIV transmission to their sexual partners if they have, first, maintained stable undetectable HIV viral load consistently below 200 copies per millilitre of blood, for at least six months, based on test results from a recognised laboratory. Second, their most recent undetectable viral load test result should be nine months or less before the sexual activity in question. Third, they had adhered to medical treatment for HIV infection up to the time of the sexual activity in question. Persons living with HIV who have met these criteria would have effectively zero risk of transmitting HIV to their sexual partner. We will set out the criteria in subsidiary legislation, to allow for timely and responsive adjustments should the state of medical science change in the future.
Mr Speaker, the COVID-19 pandemic has greatly widened our perspectives on the management of infectious diseases. The proposed amendments will allow Singapore to respond more nimbly to future infectious diseases threats, by providing the flexibility to calibrate our measures in accordance with the public health situation.
COVID-19 will not be the last pandemic that we encounter. The world remains vigilant against the next infectious disease threat; likewise, we must stand ready.
I am confident that with these amendments, Singapore will be better equipped to tackle future outbreaks and pandemics and safeguard the health of our population. I thank Members for their support of this Bill.
Mr Speaker: Minister Ong Ye Kung.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Thank you, Speaker. I just want to add a comment to the amendment to section 23. We are keeping section 23 because it is still relevant for those who are infected, or think that they are infected, that they continue to have an obligation to inform. At the same time, the Bill provides an exemption for those who have tested, sought treatment and then lower themselves to an undetectable and untransmissible level.
We think this combination best protects public health. Other countries might have come to a different combination, but MOH has studied together with the experts, and we find that this combination probably best protects public health.
As Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam has answered all questions, I have nothing further to add.
Mr Speaker: Are there any clarifications for the Minister and Senior Parliamentary Secretary? Dr Tan.
Dr Tan Wu Meng: Mr Speaker, I declare that I am a medical doctor at a public healthcare institution.
I have a clarification to ask of Minister for Health Mr Ong Ye Kung. With the new Act and the new classifications of public health threat and public health emergency, a number of Clementi residents will be wondering what becomes of the older DORSCON classification – the Disease Outbreak Response System Condition Classification. A number of residents had shared that the different colours green, yellow, orange and red can mean different things to different people. So, can the Minister advise us what will become of DORSCON now that we have the clearer status of public health threat and public health emergency.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: That was a very good question from Clementi residents. DORSCON stands for Disease Outbreak Response System Condition, it has four colours. It was used by the Public Service for agencies to coordinate response and to plan resources. It is actually internal. But during COVID-19, somehow it became an external communication code and it triggered all kinds of reactions in supermarkets.
With this change, now that we have the new Act, we have four levels of alerts, which is: Baseline, Outbreak, Threat and Emergency. I think it is more intuitive and clearer. So, amongst the agencies, through our Homefront Crisis Executive Group (HCEG), we agreed that this new four tiers will replace DORSCON, both for internal planning as well as our external communications.
Mr Speaker: Yes, Ms He Ting Ru.
Ms He Ting Ru: Thank you, Speaker. I have two quick clarifications.
The first is, I thank Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam for saying that the amendment supersedes the ruling in GCP vs Public Prosecutor. I acknowledge that amendment supersedes the court sentencing framework. However, I am not clear about the use of the interpretation of meaning of risk of disclosing HIV. So, I would like to ask for further clarifications about that. What specifically in particular are the persons living with HIV are supposed to do in that context.
The second point that I wanted to seek further clarifications on is that I do not believe that there is any local study on the effectiveness of criminalisation of HIV non-disclosure on reducing HIV infection rates, albeit this time where we are talking about a reduced group of people that this applies to. I am just wondering what can MOH do to address the potential stigma that might arise from this continued criminalisation.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam: I thank Member for the question. In relation to her point, actually how this works is that when a complaint is made, the person investigated for the offence would then have to produce the necessary evidence or show undetectable viral load (UVL) that they have had.
So, when at that juncture, the strongest evidence for adherence of medical treatment would be the UVL test result from a recognised laboratory at the next regular medical follow-up visit for HIV after the sexual activity in question because it will show that they have maintained their UVL, as this would not have been possible without treatment.
There would be other circumstantial evidence for adherence to treatment that may include contemporaneous records at the next follow-up visit after the sexual activity in question, of documented treatment adherence, or documentation in past medical records of a consistent pattern of treatment adherence and consistent past UVL test results carried out by a recognised laboratory. These are the things that they would have to show in the event there is a complaint made and investigations follow.
In as far as how they would conduct themselves, the reality is that this is a law, a provision that says you are not supposed to do it. So, if they then do this and there is a complaint made, investigations will follow, and these are the provisions and the evidence that they can rely on.
On the second question on the criminalisation of non-disclosure, the amendments consider the established scientific evidence that transmission risk with an undetectable viral load is effectively zero. That is the premise upon which we are making this change.
In contrast, other sexual activities, although lower risk, pose some transmission risk. So, we will not want to change our position completely on this because what we are doing is based on data, based on evidence, and requiring disclosure of the risk of acquiring HIV prior to sexual activity so as to allow the sexual partners to make an informed decision before engaging in sexual activities, and be able to then take the mitigating measures, such as medications, to protect themselves.
Mr Speaker: Any other clarifications for the Minister and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary? None.
[(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 Ong Ye Kung]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Order. Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Rearrangement of Business","subTitle":"Business Motion","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, that pursuant to Standing Order 10(2), the introduction of the Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill be taken now.
As Mr Speaker and Members may be aware, an issue arose earlier when the Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill was not laid on the table.
While I had earlier obtained Speaker's consent to dispense with the need to lay the Bill on the table at that time, I am moving this Motion now to allow the First Reading of the Bill to take place in accordance with the provisions of the Standing Orders, including the requirement for the Bill to be laid on the table.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, (proc text)]
[(proc text) That pursuant to Standing Order 10(2), the introduction of the Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill be taken now. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act 1906, the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act 2008, the Police Force Act 2004 and certain other Acts to update and enhance certain procedures relating to law enforcement, insert new offences and update other matters\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Minister of State for Home Affairs (Ms Sun Xueling), on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting on or after 1 April 2024, 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":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, the moment that Members have been waiting eagerly for.
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 4.45 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessment of Recent Classroom Sharing of Israel-Hamas Conflict","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"13 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Education (a) how are lessons on the war and humanitarian crisis in Gaza shared with students in schools; and (b) whether teachers are engaged or consulted before such lessons are made, considering the teachers’ diverse individual views and convictions.
14 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Education (a) how are schools equipped to engage students in current affairs such as the Israel-Palestine crisis; (b) whether the Ministry can provide some examples of current affairs issues which have been incorporated into school lessons; and (c) what is the role which educational institutions play in encouraging youths to be thoughtful and compassionate global citizens.
16 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Education what have been the lessons learnt arising from feedback and concerns raised by some parents about the historically selective and allegedly imbalanced treatment of the Israel-Hamas conflict under the Character and Citizenship Education curriculum.
18 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Education (a) how does the Ministry incorporate feedback from stakeholders including students,\nparents and educators in the development and periodic review of the Character and\nCitizenship Education curriculum; and (b) whether there are plans to increase transparency\nand stakeholder involvement in curriculum updates concerning global issues.
19 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Minister for Education (a) whether teachers have the option to express their unease in delivering the Character and Citizenship Education lesson package on the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza; (b) what support is provided to these teachers in their delivery of the lesson package where they receive backlash from parents, stakeholders and the general public; and (c) whether the school management will take actions against teachers who are the subject of complaints.\n
20 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Minister for Education (a) what considerations does the Ministry take into account when deciding which current issues to include as a compulsory part of the Character and Citizenship Education curriculum; (b) how does the Ministry identify which global events and international conflicts will require it to provide students with a safe space to discuss such topics; and (c) how does the Ministry determine that its curriculum content on such topics is up to date and provides a comprehensive overview. \n\n\n
21 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Minister for Education (a) how does the Ministry prepare teachers to deliver the Character and Citizenship Education lesson package on the crisis in Gaza to ensure students appreciate the different dimensions of the crisis and discuss issues in a sensitive and respectful manner; and (b) how does the Ministry ensure that teachers do not impose their own views or advocate the interests of one of the parties involved. \n\n
Mr Chan Chun Sing: These questions have been addressed in the Ministry of Education’s Committee of Supply Debate on 4 March 2024 Sitting. [Please refer to \"Committee of Supply – Head K (Ministry of Education)\", Official Report, 4 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 129, Budget section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Updates on Funds Disbursed under and Key Successes of Exploiting Distributed Generation Programme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether he can provide an update on how much funds have been disbursed under the $20 million Exploiting Distributed Generation Programme in partnership with the Singapore Institute of Technology since 2018; and (b) what are the key successes of the programme to date.\n\n
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Energy Market Authority and the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) launched the $20 million Exploiting Distributed Generation programme in 2018 to support the development of distributed energy technologies in Singapore. About $14 million has been awarded to four research projects thus far, across two grant calls in 2019 and 2023.
The projects awarded under the first grant call in 2019 focused on microgrid design as well as distributed energy management. Some of the interesting findings from the projects will be tested at the Multi-Energy Microgrid at SIT's Punggol Campus later this year, to assess their potential for improving energy efficiency and generating cost savings.
The research project awarded under the second grant call will test-bed vehicle-to-grid (V2G) technology. This three-year project, which commenced in November 2023, is studying approaches to intelligently manage electricity demand through large-scale V2G adoption.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Students in Institutes of Higher Learning with Criminal Records or Criminal Antecedents","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Education in each year from 2019 to 2023 (a) what is the number of students including undergraduates and postgraduates with criminal records or criminal antecedents admitted into (i) polytechnics and (ii) autonomous universities; and (b) if such data is currently unavailable, whether the Ministry will consider collecting this data.\n\n
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Ministry of Education does not track the number of students with criminal records or criminal antecedents admitted to the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs).
IHLs assess all applicants based on their demonstrated abilities and/or interests. As part of the admissions process, IHLs ask applicants to declare any criminal antecedents. Such information is handled with strict confidence and is intended to help the IHLs extend pastoral care and support. Education and career counselling will also be provided where there are course-specific restrictions.
The IHLs are committed to providing a safe learning environment for all students and staff.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Classroom Management Strategies for Teachers and Students to Navigate Difficult Discussions and Handling Students’ Emotional Well-being","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Education (a) what are the steps taken by the Ministry to check on the emotional well-being of\nstudents during and after discussions on global conflicts; and (b) how are students encouraged to express their thoughts and emotions in a respectful and constructive manner.
4 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Education (a) what specific training and resources does the Ministry provide to equip teachers to handle sensitive discussions, such as global conflicts in a balanced, sensitive and informative manner; and (b) how does the Ministry ensure that personal biases do not influence the delivery of such topics.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: These questions have been addressed in the Ministry of Education's Committee of Supply debate on the Order Paper for the 4 March 2024 Sitting. [Please refer to \"Committee of Supply – Head K (Ministry of Education)\", Official Report, 4 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 129, Budget section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Persons with Criminal Records or Criminal Antecedents Undertaking SkillsFuture Courses","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Education (a) from 2019 to 2023, what is the annual number of persons with criminal records or criminal antecedents who undertook SkillsFuture courses; and (b) if such data is unavailable, whether the Ministry will collect this data to provide ex-offenders a better second chance.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Ministry of Education does not track the number of learners with criminal records or criminal antecedents who undertook SkillsFuture courses.
Under the national SkillsFuture movement, the Government is committed to providing all Singaporeans with the opportunities to develop to their fullest potential throughout life. To enhance ex-offenders' skills and career development opportunities, SkillsFuture Singapore works closely with Yellow Ribbon Singapore and training providers to provide skills training and employment facilitation for ex-offenders.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singaporeans Diagnosed with Young Onset Dementia and Support and Insurance Coverage Available","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Ms See Jinli Jean asked the Minister for Health (a) over the last five years, what is the annual number of Singaporeans diagnosed with young onset dementia (YOD); (b) what are the support extended to families whose breadwinners are affected by YOD; (c) to what extent is treatment of YOD covered under prevailing healthcare insurances; and (d) what are the plans to increase awareness of YOD symptoms and screening venues among those aged 35 and above.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Ministry of Health does not track the number of Singaporeans diagnosed with young onset dementia (YOD). Nevertheless, there are programmes and services to support these young patients and their families.
Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents with YOD can receive means-tested subsidies of up to 80% at our Public Healthcare Institutions. They can tap on MediShield Life and their Integrated Shield Plans, if applicable, when they receive inpatient treatment. For outpatient treatment, they can tap on the Community Health Assist Scheme and can use their MediSave for payment. Eligible persons with YOD may also tap on schemes, like the Home Caregiving Grant or CareShield Life, to alleviate caregiving expenses. The Post-Diagnostic Support Community Outreach Teams provide such families with resources on caregiver support and equip caregivers with coping skills.
The Agency for Integrated Care has been raising awareness of dementia through the Dementia-Friendly Singapore initiative in the community for early identification and treatment. Community Outreach Teams conduct outreach activities, including early and basic detection of dementia.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Funding and Support for Patients with Rare Diseases and Their Caregivers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) besides MediFund and MediSave, what other sources of funding can patients or caregivers of patients with rare diseases tap on when the treatments are not covered by the Rare Disease Fund considering that treatments are often expensive; and (b) whether the Ministry can provide avenues for social support to caregivers of patients with rare diseases so that they do not feel isolated.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Patients who are ineligible or not supported by Rare Disease Fund (RDF) may be supported by other charity funds. We encourage members of the public to donate to RDF, so that more Singaporeans with rare diseases can be supported. Every dollar donated to the RDF will be matched by three dollars from the Government.
As for caregivers, there are various initiatives they can draw support from, such as the Caregiver Support Networks (CSNs). Caregivers can also call the Agency for Integrated Care's (AIC's) hotline or approach a nearby AIC Link for assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Recourse for Workers with Work Injury Compensation Claims Taking Longer Than One-year Limit to Process","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower what recourse is available to workers whose work injury compensation claims take more than a year to process given the one-year limit for making a claim.
Dr Tan See Leng: Under the Work Injury Compensation Act, workers are no longer required to submit a work injury compensation (WIC) claim since September 2020. The incident report filed by the employer is considered a deemed WIC claim. Workers are eligible for medical expenses and medical leave wages up to one year from the date of the incident, as well as lump sum compensation for permanent incapacity or death. Claims processing time does not affect whether a claim will be admitted.
Workers can approach insurers directly to check on the status of their claims via a hotline and email that designated WIC insurers are required to provide. They can approach the Ministry of Manpower for assistance if the insurer does not provide the necessary updates.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Confidential Reports Made on Employment Infringements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower in each year of the past five years (a) how many confidential reports on employment infringements have been made to the Ministry; and (b) what are the top three categories of violations reported to the Ministry.
Dr Tan See Leng: In the last five years from 2019 to 2023, an average of about 1,800 Employment Act complaints were made to the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) each year. The top three categories of Employment Act complaints were related to: (a) itemised pay slips and key employment terms not being provided, (b) salary payment issues and (c) working hours. Majority of employers rectified these infringements upon MOM’s intervention. Employers who were not able to rectify mainly involved those with salary payment issues due to financial difficulties.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Using Revenues from Adjustment in Foreign Worker Levy to Subsidise Training of Lower-wage Work Permit Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Government can consider using the revenues generated from the increase and adjustment in foreign worker levy rates for S Pass and Work Permit holders as set out in Budget 2022 to subsidise the training of lower-wage work permit workers, particularly in workplace safety and health to enhance safety and improve productivity.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Government does not earmark revenue for specific uses. Instead, the revenue collected will be considered as a whole and allocated to meritorious projects based on the Government’s needs.
The Government already uses part of its overall revenue to support firms undertaking workforce and enterprise transformation efforts, which can include the training of lower-wage Work Permit (WP) holders. For example, the SkillsFuture Enterprise Credit provides financial support to firms sending their employees for eligible training courses, whether these employees are local or foreign. Eligible courses include those aligned to the Workplace Safety and Health Skills Framework.
In addition, we also incentivise employers to upskill existing WP holders or hire higher-skilled WP holders by subjecting them to lower levy rates.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Minister for Culture, Community and Youth","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WS","content":"[(proc text) The following statement was made in the speech given by the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai) during the Committee of Supply debate for the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth at the Sitting of 7 March 2024: (proc text)]
The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai): In addition, from August 2024, the spexPotential programme will support more young athletes trying to make the transition to the next level. I spoke earlier about how we had good young athletes at SEA Games, debutants who won a third of our gold medals. [Please refer to \"Committee of Supply – Head X (Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth)\", Official Report, 7 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 132, Budget section.]
[(proc text) Written statement by Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5): (proc text)]
I wish to make the following factual correction to my speech given during the Sitting of 7 March 2024. My statement should read as follows:
The Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai): In addition, from April 2024, the spexPotential programme will support more young athletes trying to make the transition to the next level. I spoke earlier about how we had good young athletes at SEA Games, debutants who won a third of our gold medals.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":5985,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Low Yen Ling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240307/vernacular-Low Yen Ling MCCY 7Mar2024_Chinese(MCCY).pdf","fileName":"Low Yen Ling MCCY 7Mar2024_Chinese(MCCY).pdf"},{"vernacularID":5986,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Eric Chua","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240307/vernacular-Eric Chua MCCY 7Mar2024 -Chinese (mccy).pdf","fileName":"Eric Chua MCCY 7Mar2024 -Chinese (mccy).pdf"},{"vernacularID":5987,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Don Wee","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240307/vernacular-Don Wee FI 7Mar2024_Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Don Wee FI 7Mar2024_Chinese.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}