* Note: The President, upon advice by the Prime Minister, dissolved the 14th Parliament on 15 April 2025.
"}],"takesSectionVOList":[{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Subsidies on Maternity Fees and Other Medical Bills for Foreigners who are Mothers or Relatives of Singapore Citizens","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"1 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry has received appeals from Singaporeans for help and subsidies to pay medical fees for their non-Singaporean relatives or foreign spouses in the past five years and if so, how many such cases there have been; and (b) whether the Ministry can work with ICA to consider implementing a policy requiring such foreign relatives or spouses visiting Singapore on long term visit pass to purchase medical insurance during their visit.
2 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the citizen-level subsidies for maternity fees accorded to foreign mothers giving birth to Singapore Citizens apply to all items incurred during a typical maternity hospitalisation or only to specified items; (b) if only for specified items, what are the specific items; and (c) whether a review will be done to equalise or reduce the disparity in the total bill size for all foreign mothers giving birth to Singapore Citizens.
\tThe Minister of State for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, may I seek your permission to answer Question Nos 1 and 2 together, please?
\tMr Speaker: Please proceed.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam: Ms Sylvia Lim asked about maternity hospitalisation subsidies accorded to foreign mothers giving birth to Singapore Citizens. The majority of foreign spouses with Singapore Citizen children are Permanent Residents (PRs) or holders of Long-Term Visit Pass-Plus (LTVP+). Therefore, they are eligible for healthcare subsidies in public healthcare institutions. In particular, mothers with permanent residency or LTVP+ who are married to Singapore Citizens receive the same level of subsidies as Singapore Citizens for all items and treatments incurred for the entire delivery episode, from admission for childbirth to discharge after delivery.
On Mr Gan’s question about help and subsidies for non-Singaporean relatives and spouses, the Ministry and our public healthcare institutions do receive appeals regarding financing for healthcare costs incurred by foreign spouses or relatives of Singapore Citizens. We assess them on a case-by-case basis based on individual circumstances and do not specifically track the number of appeals.
Ultimately, as healthcare subsidies are borne by all Singaporeans, any extension of these benefits to foreigners must be assessed carefully. Foreigners facing financial difficulties with their healthcare bills may approach our medical social workers for assistance.
Healthcare insurance is another way to help protect families with foreigner members on LTVP or Dependant’s Pass from large hospital bills. Today, such individuals may buy plans offered by Integrated Shield Plan insurers and pay premiums in cash or using their Singapore Citizen/PR family members’ MediSave. They may also be covered by employer medical benefits.
However, making healthcare insurance mandatory for all long-staying foreigners will have to be carefully considered, as this may in turn pose a financial burden on their Singapore Citizen family members. We will continue to study the feasibility of this.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
\tMs Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. I have three supplementary questions for the Minister of State.
First, I have asked for the figures from the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) for the answer to this, so I do not know, but does the Ministry of Health (MOH) also acknowledge that there is a significant number of Singaporean children being born to foreign mothers who are not holders of PR or LTVP+ but LTVP itself or less. So, does MOH acknowledge that fact?
Secondly, it is a national priority for us to increase our total fertility rate (TFR). So, if we look at the cost differential for foreign mothers giving birth to Singapore Citizens who are not holders of PR or LTVP+, does MOH not find that the total bill size is significantly higher than that for LTVP+ or PR mothers, in the sense that it works against our aim to increase our TFR, because the cost is just too high?
And finally, if we were to consider extending further support to this group of foreign mothers who are not PRs or LTVP+ holders, I think we are looking at probably a limited number of people and these delivery episodes are once in a lifetime, maybe twice. So, are we not able to afford to look into this?
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: I thank the Member for her interest. Firstly, on the numbers, I will leave MHA to respond to her queries. But based on the indications that we have in respect of delivery episodes in 2024, actually, in terms of the other Pass types – LTVP and others – the numbers are really a smaller percentage; I would say less than 10%. So, the majority of those who are foreign spouses, they are PRs or LTVP+ holders.
I would just highlight a couple of things to address the other questions that the Member has raised. I understand. The concern is really the Singapore child and you are helping a Singaporean with this situation. As I have mentioned earlier, firstly, the majority of the foreign spouses that we see are PRs or LTVP+ holders, which means that they are entitled to Singapore Citizen rates for the whole delivery episode. It means that from the time they are admitted for delivery to the discharge of the mother after birth, it is fully covered at Singaporean rates. In that sense, the issue of the Singaporean child not being supported, does not exist because for any mother who is delivering a Singaporean child and if they are a PR or LTVP+ holder, the whole episode of delivery is covered.
Also, it can be applied retrospectively. So, if the mother is in the process of applying for her LTVP+ and it has not yet been approved, and she then got admitted but there is a process or an application pending, she can actually apply for the rates to be applicable to her as well. This is also something that addresses those concerns.
There are two other points I wanted to make. If it is outside the episode of delivery, LTVP+ foreign spouses of Singapore Citizens are also eligible for healthcare benefits, such as subsidies for in-patient services at the restructured hospitals and this is at the same level as PRs. So, in that sense, they are also covered for some of their other expenses. In any case, if there are any difficulties, the foreign spouses may also seek help from medical social workers.
So, actually, a large part of the concerns that the Member has are already addressed with the existing policies. But we will continue to look at all gaps. We always review our financing policies regularly to see if there are emerging trends or needs that we need to address.
Mr Speaker: Ms Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim: Thank you, Sir. One more supplementary question for the Minister of State. She mentioned in her answer that the number of foreign mothers giving birth to Singaporean children who are not already PRs or LTVP+ holders is small, less than 10%. I think as she correctly acknowledged, we are all in this together. Every Singaporean child born is precious to us. So, given that the numbers are not large, according to what the Ministry has just said, then I think there is scope for us to review, to see how we can better support, financially at least, the delivery episodes of these mothers who are holders of LTVP or less Passes.
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: As I mentioned, we will continue to assess this situation. But the Member may want to consider for those situations where the mother comes in, what they can do is to apply for LTVP+ and if she satisfies that requirement, she will then be entitled to Singapore Citizen rates.
In the meantime, we will continue to assess and to see where we can continue supporting the mothers who have difficulties with the delivery costs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increase in Water Seepage Issues in HDB Flats and Adequacy of Staff Assigned to Rectify These Issues","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"3 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many cases of complex water seepage cases has the Housing and Development Board (HDB) received on a weekly basis in the past 12 months; and (b) what is the current staff strength and number of engineers within HDB who are responsible for assisting with rectification of complex water seepage issues.
4 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the current expected operating timeline for Housing and Development Board (HDB) engineers to respond and conduct joint visits to residents' homes to get accurate diagnosis of complex water seepage cases; and (b) what measures or technological enhancements will HDB be adopting to enhance the capability and capacity of its engineers to work more effectively with Town Councils to resolve these cases.
5 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether there has been a surge in the number of reported external water seepage incidents that occur in HDB flats during the recent March monsoon raining season; and (b) whether HDB is monitoring and rendering assistance to the Town Councils that are attending to such cases.
6 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether there is an update on the implementation of the improved diagnosis methods using better scanning technology to accurately pinpoint the root causes of external wall seepages; (b) if so, what are the results of the initial trials conducted by HDB; and (c) whether implementation of the improved methods can be expedited to help Town Councils rectify external wall seepage cases.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for National Development (Ms Sim Ann) (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to give a combined reply to Question Nos 3 through 6 in today’s Order Paper?
Mr Speaker: Go ahead.
Ms Sim Ann: In 2024, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) assisted Town Councils (TCs) and flat owners with a total of 859 complex water seepage cases. Such cases include water seepage from various sources, such as from the external wall or from the flat above.
TCs are responsible for the maintenance of the external walls of HDB flats as they are part of common property. Residents who encounter water seepage from external walls in their flat typically report it to the TC managing their estate. Where residents report such cases to HDB, HDB will refer these cases to the respective TC for follow-up. Based on the number of cases that HDB received, it did not observe a surge in March 2025. Notwithstanding, HDB has received feedback from some TCs that the number of external water seepage cases typically increases during the monsoon season. HDB will continue to support TCs in resolving these cases.
For complex cases involving external wall seepage, each HDB Zone’s dedicated team for handling repairs management will support TCs by conducting joint inspections and providing technical advice so that TCs can identify the root causes and carry out repairs expeditiously. This is typically within one week after the TC approaches HDB, subject to the availability of the flat owner and TC staff.
It is important for TCs to build up expertise in dealing with external wall seepage. To support this, HDB has been conducting regular training for TCs and has made available a training video on the diagnosis and repair of external wall seepage to further level up TC staff’s technical competency.
Flat owners are responsible for the maintenance of the interior of their flats, including the repair of leaks in the shared structure between units. HDB assists flat owners in resolving ceiling leaks through the Goodwill Repair Assistance scheme, where HDB pays 50% of the ceiling leak repair cost, while the remaining 50% is shared equally between the upper- and lower-floor flat owners.
HDB is constantly on the look-out for better and more effective maintenance methods and equipment. For example, HDB is working with industry partners and research institutes to develop better ways to address maintenance issues, especially those encountered in our older estates. This includes an ongoing trial at 70 flats island-wide on the use of better scanning technology which has the capability to scan through concrete to detect causes of seepage. Similar to an x-ray machine, this allows the inspection team to see beneath the surface and trace the root cause of the seepage. HDB will then monitor and assess if the technology can be scaled up for widespread use, including use by TCs to more effectively diagnose and resolve more complex water seepage cases upfront. If the trial is successful, HDB will share more details on the plans to scale up.
Mr Speaker: Ms Carrie Tan.
\tMs Carrie Tan (Nee Soon): I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for her reply. I would just like to check if there is any internal standard operating procedure and timeline for turnaround for the HDB engineers who are tasked to provide technical advice to TCs?
Also, while the delineation of duties between the TC in managing external wall seepages versus the inter-floor leakage where HDB steps in to facilitate in terms of resident arrangements, there are often difficulties to diagnose seepages that are not very clear – whether it is external wall or inside. What we have experienced in Nee Soon and to the frustration of many residents is that they often have to wait many months for a resolution. So, does the Ministry of National Development (MND) have any plans to invest further in the technical expertise or in the research and development technologies to find out and to have more accurate diagnosis of the sources of water seepages in a more timely manner to reduce the timeframe that it takes to have full resolution of the issues?
\tMs Sim Ann: In response to Ms Carrie Tan's question, there are two parts to the issue that we are trying to resolve here, when it comes to wall seepage. The first is the accurate diagnosis. Secondly, because HDB, as well as the TC responsible for the estate would have different areas of jurisdiction. So, sometimes when the diagnosis moves from one possible cause to another, there would be a need to hand over the case from the TC to HDB, or from HDB back to the TC. And we have found from experience that this process can take time, because the diagnosis process would not only require the personnel associated with either the TC or HDB to be available and present, but the presence and consent of the homeowner are also necessary.
So, first, there is the technical issue of diagnosis, but then there is also the human coordination involved. We will try to move things along as quickly as possible every time a TC approaches us for help.
Mr Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
\tMr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Sir, often, in a prolonged rainy season, such as as the last month or so, we will receive a large number of reports on cases of seepages, especially for the older, vintage flats. I hope that MND and HDB understand this is really a frustrating experience for residents having to deal with water seepage coming into their homes.
So, I want to ask the Senior Minister of State two questions. Firstly, I am glad that there is this technology, that works by x-ray, to look at where the root cause of the seepage is coming from. That should help because one of the pain points is not being able to know where the seepages are coming from, where is the source of the leaks. So, can I ask the Senior Minister of State whether our current seepage contractors that the TCs hire, do they have the expertise to deal with this in a way that will resolve the problem in a lasting way and not to keep having this recurring situation.
And secondly, for those more complex long-standing cases, can I also ask if HDB follows up continuously? As long as there is no resolution, does HDB follow through until we see a resolution to this seepage problem?
\tMs Sim Ann: Sir, in our experience, contractors are generally equipped with the capability to resolve wall seepage cases. But if the TC is in doubt about the capability of any particular contractor, we welcome the TC to also consult with HDB. What HDB has been doing aside from leaning forward to assist TCs where there are long-standing or difficult-to-resolve cases, is we have also been introducing methods that have been tested and proven to be effective in dealing with wall seepage cases, such as the Corrosion Resistant Repair method.
We understand the frustration of residents that Mr Liang and also Ms Carrie Tan have alluded to, and this is why we are committed to continue working together with TCs and to lean forward to help, especially for the difficult-to-resolve cases.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): I have two supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. Given that TCs rely primarily on waterproofing contractors to identify and resolve water seepage issues, what is the Ministry doing to uplift the baseline industry capabilities so that more contractors possess the diagnostic expertise needed to accurately detect seepage sources, without repeated trial and error?
And secondly, can HDB look into providing more funding to TCs to engage contractors to conduct re-roofing programmes more frequently than is currently prescribed, so that water seepage problems can be pre-empted or resolved more comprehensively?
\tMs Sim Ann: In terms of the methods or the initiatives that HDB is doing to help TCs resolve wall seepage, first of all, there are regular meetings between TC representatives as well as HDB. And I do believe that technical issues, such as wall seepage can be discussed and have been discussed at these settings.
I also mentioned earlier that we have a training video. This is to help TC staff better understand what are some of the possible causes of water seepage and we also hope that this would equip them with more information when making a decision on which contractors to engage.
And as for the issue of re-roofing, to date, our experience with TCs across the board is that they have been able to continue to do re-roofing based on the funding support that they have received from the Government, but also from the service and conservancy charges (S&CCs) that they have been collecting from residents. And Mr Giam will also recall that, not that long ago, all TCs underwent a revision of S&CCs and there has also been Government support for that. So, if there is a need to further increase funding, this is something that we can take up separately, if the TCs have a specific request.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
\tMs Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Sir, I have one clarification for the Senior Minister of State and it is about roof seepage cases. Some of the recent cases that we have encountered appear to be linked to HDB's project to install solar panels on the roofs. So, I wonder whether the Senior Minister of State is aware of this and whether she can comment on what HDB is doing, going forward, to try to minimise this sort of problems.
\tMs Sim Ann: If the TCs are of the view that solar panels deployed on the rooftops of HDB blocks could possibly affect insulation and therefore, affect seepage, then this is something which, in our experience, the contractors that have been responsible for installing the solar panels would work very closely with TC and also with HDB, if necessary, to resolve the issue.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Protection for Consumers of Fintech Platforms and Non-bank Institutions, and Regulations on Liquidity Levels and Responsible Marketing","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"7 Mr Mark Lee asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) how does MAS ensure that financial technology platforms and non-bank financial institutions offering high-yield investment products maintain sufficient liquidity and manage fund withdrawal risks; (b) whether MAS is considering additional safeguards to enhance consumer protection for retail investors engaging with such platforms, given recent liquidity challenges faced by fintech firms; and (c) what measures are in place to ensure that the public fully understands the risks of using financial services from non-bank entities, particularly fintech platforms offering investment-linked products.
8 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) what steps is MAS taking to ensure financial institutions and fintech companies (FIFCs) provide clear, accurate and timely communication regarding changes to their products and services; (b) what measures are in place to encourage FIFCs to adopt responsible marketing strategies, avoid overpromising on returns or benefits and avoid offering overly attractive promotional offers to customers; and (c) how does MAS ensure that fintech companies adhere to the same standards of risk management and consumer communications as banks.
\tThe Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, with your permission, may I take Question Nos 7 and 8 together please, as they touch on similar issues.
\tMr Speaker: Please go ahead.
\tMr Alvin Tan: Mr Speaker, investment platforms operating as digital advisers that manage investment portfolios on behalf of customers are licensed as Capital Markets Services Licensees (CMSLs) under the Securities and Futures Act. They offer portfolios which are invested into funds managed by other licensed fund management companies. These investment platforms are required by regulation to keep customers' assets legally separate and safekept by licensed custodians.
The recent incident involving a surge in withdrawals from an investment platform illustrate that the safeguards worked as intended. Customers' assets were properly segregated from the platform and requests for withdrawal were redeemed in an orderly manner, within the standard fund redemption timeframe of three to six working days. Customers received the market value of their investments within the typical three to six days.
In the specific case I mentioned above, the investment platform offered two unique features, which they marketed prominently to customers. First, it offered instant withdrawals for customers, up to a limit per account. Second, it allowed customers to spend on a debit card that was linked to the value of their underlying investments. The platform stopped both these features when the high usage of both these features became unsustainable for it to support.
The conditions and limitations of these features, including the ability of the investment platform to vary or stop these features, were disclosed in the product terms and conditions. However, these disclosures may not have been effective in providing customers a full understanding of the product.
While product features do not always require regulatory approval, there are regulatory requirements in place for robust risk management and clear disclosures, especially where they impact a firm's operations. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) is reviewing this particular case against these requirements, as well as, more generally, how to ensure investment platforms implement these requirements effectively.
At the same time, we urge customers to fully understand the features, including key terms and conditions, and risks of a financial product, before deciding to invest in it. Customers should also seek professional financial advice on the suitability of a product if they are unclear of its features. We also encourage customers to refer to our MoneySENSE website to learn more about what to look out for in an investment.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Mark Lee.
\tMr Mark Lee (Nominated Member): I thank the Minister of State Alvin Tan for the detailed reply and MAS' ongoing efforts to uphold trust while supporting innovation in our financial ecosystem. I think the recent fintech incident illustrates that even when a platform is MAS-licensed, many retail users may not clearly understand the regulatory boundaries or even the product risk, particularly in relation to liquidity and withdrawal expectations.
It is not necessarily a regulatory lapse, but I think a communication and perception challenge. And like what the Minister of State Alvin Tan has said, the provider did include disclaimers, but retail users still conflated the offering with bank-like products. And I understand, like what the Minister of State Alvin Tan has said, MAS has worked through initiatives, like MoneySENSE, to promote financial literacy.
But as fintech products evolve and marketing strategies become more sophisticated, some consumers may be drawn in by branding promotional hooks or platform design despite the presence of legally accurate disclosure. To address this, can I suggest the Ministry consider the following: first, requiring a mandatory plain language risk summary before investors proceed and with the user's acknowledgement; second, strengthening public education on such products; and third, encouraging perhaps tighter industry-led codes of conduct on marketing and promotions?
\tMr Alvin Tan: Sir, I thank Mr Mark Lee for his supplementary question. I think he made a really good point about the need to continue to foster trust and also to uphold innovation – and that is what we are trying to do with the fintech sector.
I think this particular episode has shown, in fact, that it is important for companies, and in fact, there are regulatory requirements, as I mentioned in my original reply for companies: first, to put in place these robust risk management practices; and second, to properly disclose their products and the features of their products as they impact the firm's operations.
So, we will do that. We will review this particular case in detail and work with platforms, work with the industry to ensure how to better implement these within these requirements that we have set out earlier on.
The additional part is also with regard to financial understanding of these products. And I think as more products are being introduced to the market, it is equally important for customers to be savvy about these. And we will continue to work with different platforms to promote the understanding of these products; but at the first base, to work with firms like the ones that I mentioned, the broader industry, to say, I think you need to make your disclosure just a little bit clearer and upfront. It is already there, but I think they can do more.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
\tMr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just have two supplementary questions to add to what Member Mr Mark Lee has spoken about. I thank the Minister of State and also Member Mark Lee for highlighting the innovation that we want to encourage in Singapore in the financial sector and the trust element.
The first supplementary question is, what more can MAS do to strengthen consumer financial literacy, which was highlighted just now by the Minister of State. But I think my question is, there is going to be more of these going forward as we push towards innovation in the financial sector, so whether we can streamline the complaints channel for retail investors and especially for fintech-related grievances. Because this is going to get a bit more complex as we allow some innovation space.
Second, in terms of the increasing use of digital platforms and artificial intelligence (AI)-based marketing by financial institutions and fintech companies, is there a way that MAS can share how it can enhance its oversight to ensure such technologies are not used to exploit consumer biases or obscure risks going forward? I think it is going to get a bit more complex. The Minister of State shared it somewhat just now, but I think with AI-based marketing, especially on the fintech side, how can we enhance our oversight?
\tMr Alvin Tan: Sir, we will do, I think, all of the above. Primarily, I think, consumer education is one. For customer complaints, I encourage the consumers and customers, if you do have complaints, to please raise them with MAS. MAS looks into these complaints holistically.
Second, we work very closely with the industry, for example, the fintech firms and the Singapore FinTech Association. I think there is scope for us to work closely with them to see how we can encourage these platforms, as I mentioned in my early reply to Member Mark Lee, to raise the standards and also to better disclose these product features.
Thirdly, I think with regard to more implementation of technology, I think we need to balance between financial innovation as well as regulatory conduct. And I think what is also important is one particular safeguard in this space. If you look at some of the safeguards for this particular case, this particular firm had a CMSL licence for fund management. Consumers can also look into the financial institutions directory to look at which firms and which financial institutions are regulated, and also, consult the Investor Alert List.
But with regard to this particular firm and the CMSL licence, if you look at it carefully, there is a requirement for the segregation of customer funds. So, a segregation of customer funds from the company's money. And that means that there is a segregation where customers' investments are safeguarded. And that is why when customers are requesting for withdrawal, there is an orderly withdrawal because these customer funds are placed under independent custody. They must remain intact – it is a requirement under the CMSL licence – and they cannot be used to meet the firm's liability at any point of time.
So, we have education, we have a good regulatory framework and also implementation. I think these will help us to foster a vibrant fintech ecosystem while making sure that we protect consumers' interests.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number and Causes of Passenger Fatalities onboard Buses","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"9 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Transport (a) how many bus passenger fatalities have there been in each year of the past 10 years; (b) what are the main causes of the fatalities; (c) whether the recent death of an 80-year-old man who lost his balance and fell on board an SBS Transit bus will expedite the planned implementation of the Bus Safety Tripartite Taskforce’s recommendations; and (d) what other measures are being considered to ensure the safety of our elderly on public buses.
\tThe Minister of State for Transport (Mr Murali Pillai) (for the Minister for Transport): Sir, over the past 10 years, there were five bus passenger fatalities. Four of these fatalities involved elderly commuters falling onboard, while the remaining case was the result of a serious collision.
The Land Transport Authority (LTA) works closely with the public bus operators to maintain and improve bus safety. Public buses in Singapore are equipped with features such as dedicated priority seats, non-slip flooring materials, bus kneeling function at bus stops, and grab bars at exit doors to facilitate boarding and alighting. Bus captains are also trained to ensure that elderly commuters are safely seated before moving off and to avoid harsh acceleration, braking or jerky movement.
LTA and the public bus operators also raise awareness amongst commuters on safe commuting practices. These include public education campaigns to promote safer habits, such as holding onto handrails or grab poles when standing or using the stairwell, and encouraging fellow commuters to look out for vulnerable commuters such as the elderly when onboard buses.
To further enhance bus safety, the Government has accepted the recommendations from the Bus Safety Tripartite Taskforce to improve the safety of commuters onboard buses. These include introducing audio reminders on our public buses to alert commuters that the bus is moving off, equipping our bus fleet with more safety technology to alert Bus Captains to potential safety risks and to modify our public buses to reduce sharp acceleration that could cause commuters to lose their balance when buses are moving off.
Mr Speaker: Mr Supaat.
\tMr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister of State for his answer. I got two supplementary questions. Mr Speaker, first, it is sad to hear that 80% of the fatalities are mostly seniors, so my first supplementary question, or maybe a suggestion, is whether we can expedite the planned implementation of the Bus Safety Tripartite Task Force recommendations, especially in terms of the safety features?
Second is, as our society ages, I think we will have a lot more of our seniors who are aged above 80, and maybe even 90 or 100, taking buses if they are physically fit. How can we enhance our safety features on our buses even more going forward? For example, how we can enhance our safety features, such that the seats are closer and with really strong guardrails and a lot more guardrails, so that they can actually have a safer ride. So, could the Minister of State share on that?
Mr Murali Pillai: Sir, in response to the hon Member, Mr Saktiandi Supaat's questions, while we have unfortunately seen a few passenger fatalities in the recent years, our broader accident patterns have remained actually quite stable. The bus network serves around four million trips per day and almost all of these trips are completed safely.
Of course, we are still concerned about the ageing population and the impact of falls on board could be more serious for them. So, even as an absolute number, we have not seen a rising trend of such incidents. We have taken measures such as improving the design of our public buses to have dedicated priority seats, and the hon Member would note that these seats are usually at the exits, and also having non-slip flooring materials.
As part of the enhancements recommended by the Bus Safety Tripartite Task Force, we are also looking into new technological tools and regular refresher training for our Bus Captains in safe and defensive driving techniques. We are working with the bus operators to progressively implement the recommendations of the task force from the second half of 2025. More details will be shared at a later date.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Common Causes for Fires in Indoor and Multi-storey Car Parks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many instances of fire have been reported at indoor and multi-storey car parks in each of the last five years; (b) what are the common causes of these fires; and (c) what are the measures put in place to ensure such fires are tackled and contained in a timely manner.
\tThe Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, the common causes of fires in indoor and multi-storey car parks include: firstly, vehicular issues such as the overheating of the engine compartment; secondly, electrical faults in ancillary car park infrastructure; and thirdly, indiscriminately disposed lighted materials.
The annual incidence of such fires remains low. Between 2020 and 2024, the number of fire incidents at indoor and multi-storey car parks each year was 14, 12, 18, 27 and 36 respectively. The increase in incidents in 2024 was largely driven by an increase in vehicular fires, none of which involved electric vehicles (EVs).
Car parks in Singapore are required to be designed with fire safety provisions. For example, indoor car parks are built with fire-rated walls and doors to contain the fire from spreading to other parts of the building. A car park should also be well-ventilated naturally or by mechanical means to dissipate any heat or smoke. In addition, sprinklers are required for enclosed basement car parks. These fire safety measures are regularly maintained and inspected, as required under the Fire Code.
Mr Speaker: Mr Yong.
\tMr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Sir, I thank the Minister of State for his response. If I heard correctly, he mentioned that none of the fires in the car parks are related to EVs, but as more and more car owners are adopting EVs, I would also want to highlight a concern with the EV chargers. And also, if I remember correctly, the Singapore Civil Defence Force did mention that to put out an EV fire is much harder than a traditional fire.
So, have there been experiments or trials to see how our firefighters can do better, should an EV fire happen in multi-storey car parks? And are there guidelines on where the EV chargers should be installed within a multi-storey car park to better facilitate, especially our firefighters, in combating a fire should it occur? For example, should chargers be placed only on the ground level of a multi-storey car park?
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. Yes, we understand that there have been developments, especially in EVs over the years. So, our officers and within the fire safety fraternity, there has also been discussion and also guidelines being developed. For Singapore, we have such guidelines. Particularly for EV chargers, we have the Technical Reference 25 (TR 25), which is a nationwide standard. And we do not restrict EV chargers to any level of the car parks, but they need to comply with safety distances and also install the power cut-off switch within a certain distance. So, that is one aspect.
And the Member also asked about the difference between how much time is taken. Essentially, most EV fires resulting from thermal runaway will take longer to extinguish because the fire is self-generating. And as the thermal runaway produces heat and with oxygen that continues to fuel the fire, it would take several hours to extinguish, whereas for the internal combustion engine vehicles, it takes about 10 to 15 minutes.
What is key is that we need to play our part, making sure to look out for such instances, where there are items. Also, at the same time, there are fire extinguishers available at the Housing and Development Board blocks, and when there are such fires, we should use these. But also be mindful that there are certain aspects where you just need to call 995 immediately. We are very fortunate today, we have many more people who are first responders and can help to fight fires and to keep our environment and amenities and infrastructures safe.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Safeguards on Non-licensed Individuals and Finfluencers who Provide Financial Advice","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance in view of the developments leading to a temporary suspension of immediate fund withdrawals in March 2025 by a financial services platform (a) whether MAS is reviewing the safeguards in place to ensure that non-licensed individuals do not provide financial advice and influence the public with opinions on licensed financial institutions; and (b) whether there has been an increase in complaints against non-licensed individuals and financial influencers given this recent incident.
\tThe Minister of State for Culture, Community and Youth and Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Prime Minister): Sir, I will refer to the question by Ms He on financial influencers as \"finfluencers\", which was also in a question asked by the Member, Mr Melvin Yong. So, I will use that term if it is not already familiar with Members of this House.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has received eight complaints against finfluencers in 2025, with the majority attributable to comments made recently by two finfluencers who shared their reasons for liquidating their investments from an investment platform. The number of complaints in 2025 is an increase from the average of five complaints per year in the last five years and MAS is monitoring this closely.
By and large, finfluencers help create awareness of products and services offered by financial institutions and some play a role in promoting financial literacy. However, they must do so responsibly and must not veer into providing financial advice, which is a regulated activity. MAS considers an individual as providing financial advice if he is remunerated for making a recommendation or expressing an opinion on the buying, selling or holding of investment products. Even if he is not remunerated, MAS considers a finfluencer to have provided financial advice if he makes such recommendations or expressions regularly. A finfluencer providing advice must be regulated under the Financial Advisers Act and must first be appointed as a representative by a licensed financial advisory firm.
Even if finfluencers are not providing financial advice, they must not make false or misleading statements on any capital markets products, or they may be liable for an offence under the Securities and Futures Act. For example, finfluencers cannot make false or misleading statements to induce others to deal in capital market products such as shares or units in collective investment schemes. This includes any statement made on social media. Finfluencers are also subject to the principles of the Singapore Code of Advertising Practice overseen by the Advertising Standards Authority of Singapore (ASAS). This requires advertisements to be prepared responsibly and for statements made to be \"legal, decent, honest and truthful\".
MAS will continue to work with ASAS to promote good practices as well as consider the sufficiency of existing safeguards.
Mr Speaker: Ms He.
\tMs He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for the reply earlier. I would just like to check with the Minister of State where he mentioned there were eight complaints received by MAS, so, whether the Minister of State can share if there is further action to be taken or if MAS is still further investigating these complaints that were made in 2025 – I assume that it is for the first quarter of this year.
The second supplementary question: I was wondering what efforts have MAS made so that finfluencers actually understand their obligations not to provide financial advice, and what they are allowed to do and what they are not allowed to do under the existing regulations.
Mr Alvin Tan: I thank Ms He for her questions. With regard to the complaints, the Member is absolutely right. In fact, we have responded to all the complaints and there are no outstanding issues. But moving forward, if there are consumers who suspect any wrongdoing related to any advice on financial products, including finfluencers, please lodge a complaint with MAS. And MAS will review these reports of breaches and misconduct, and take the appropriate regulatory action against the relevant parties found to be in breach of MAS regulations.
On the finfluencers, can I make a plea for the finfluencers: first, to share responsibly; second, to create content with care, and that means to check that the content that you are producing or creating is both accurate and balanced; and third, to disclose relevant financial interests in these contents or the products that you are talking about.
To Ms He's point, we are keen to have a discussion with the community to learn how to collectively improve this landscape. In fact, I have already spoken to some of the finfluencers and we intend to reach out to them to have further discussions on how to improve this particular landscape, as this landscape evolves over time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Support for Incarcerated Singaporeans to Help Dependants Seek Assistance","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"12 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Home Affairs what social support and assistance for seeking legal recourse is accessible to incarcerated Singaporeans to help a member of their family or dependant in need of community assistance, legal intervention or intervention from Government agencies.
\tThe Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Sir, inmates may raise concerns about their family's needs during their regular interviews with Prison Officers, who will refer these cases to the Singapore Prison Service's (SPS') Family Resource Centres (FRCs). Family members may also approach the FRCs directly, which are located at the Prison Link Centre where family members go to visit the inmates. FRCs will work with the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) and community partners to look into the inmates' requests.
In addition, inmates with children below 21 years old and elderly dependants above 60 years old are proactively identified by SPS under the Early Triaging Process upon their admission into prison. With the inmate's consent, trained social workers from SPS' FRCs will assess the family's needs and refer them to appropriate community resources. As for inmates who join the Yellow Ribbon Community Project, grassroots volunteers will engage their family members to offer befriending support and link them to community resources.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
\tMs Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have had residents who were due to be incarcerated who came to me, or if they were already incarcerated through their family members, concerned about their family or loved ones. Sometimes, it was about an unsettled child or a senior to whom they are caregivers to, or sometimes it is about who they can approach should they wish to find out more about how their loved ones or families are doing on the outside.
At times, my residents tell me that they have no other persons that they can trust on the outside to help check in on their dependants' well-being. In such cases, how can prison services provide a peace of mind to our prison mates if they have no larger support structure? If they suspect that their loved ones may have fallen victim to a crime, is the process of reporting their suspicions with a view to an investigation, a clearly communicated one to them, and understood within the prison systems?
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. We share her concerns and we understand there is always anxiety and a feeling of how their loved ones will be able to take it in terms of the incarceration, and those who are outside, particularly children, seniors and so forth.
Over the years, we have strengthened the ecosystem of care. For example, the FRCs, we have been able to strengthen it and we work with MSF regularly in a very deep manner. We make referrals and we work with the stakeholders to see how we can support those who are inside, and as well as their loved ones. And I must share that today, there are many more avenues. Even if the inmates may not be comfortable raising it within the prison, the family members are able to reach out to the various community organisations and the support given.
For me, I have been very fortunate to be able to work with the community organisations who have been very proactive. Sometimes, we know of some issues, we try our best to reach out to them, even when the inmates have given the permission to reach out through the Yellow Ribbon project. In order to reach to the families, it may not be easy, but the stakeholders continue to engage day by day, sometimes, we make many calls – all with the purpose of caring for fellow Singaporeans.
So, I want to assure the Member that we will continue to strengthen this ecosystem and at the same time, whenever there is any one suspecting that their loved ones outside, who may be affected, like being a victim to a crime, they can approach any of the community partners, they can also go to the local Police set-up and we will work together whenever we get any information, so that we protect each of us here in Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Long-term Strategy to Ensure Sufficient and Resilient Housing for Foreign Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"13 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower in light of the high occupancy rates and recent closures of purpose-built dormitories, what is the Ministry's long-term strategy to ensure sufficient and resilient housing for foreign workers.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Minister for Manpower): Sir, the Government has been working closely with the dormitory industry to increase dormitory bed supply. This includes extending the leases of expiring dormitories where feasible, as well as enabling existing purpose-built dormitories (PBDs) with excess space to increase their occupancy load, while meeting prevailing dormitory housing standards. We have also been streamlining and facilitating applications for new Factory-Converted Dormitories and temporary workers' quarters, such as Temporary Occupation Licence Quarters to provide more sources of bed supply.
Over the next few years, six new PBDs with around 45,000 beds will also be added to the market, including the Ministry of Manpower's 2,400-bed PBD in Jalan Tukang, set to be operational in early 2026.
While the Government has put in place measures to expand dormitory bed supply, this will not be sustainable if demand for work permit holders grows unabatedly. So, we urge employers to adopt productivity measures to reduce their reliance on migrant workers.
Mr Speaker: Mr Yip.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. With the push towards better living standards in our dormitories, including stricter regulatory requirements, how does the Ministry strike a balance between safeguarding workers' welfare and avoiding excessive compliance costs for businesses? What efforts are in place to ensure that the regulatory upgrades are implemented in a cost effective and phased manner?
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, I thank the Member for his supplementary questions. Briefly, the dormitory transition plan is a phased approach. We take into account the peak numbers of workers at any point in time as well as the existing available number of bed spaces, so that we stage the transition of existing dormitories to new standards in a phased manner, to make sure that as we take the transition of existing dormitories, we do not end up causing a supply shortage.
At the same time, we are also injecting new supply, as I said in my main reply. Together, this will ensure adequate supply, even as we require dormitories to transition to newer standards. And so, it is a progressive approach. We keep in close contact with the Dormitory Association of Singapore Limited, so that we hear the industry's voice constantly. They are also helping us connect employers who may need bed spaces for their workers to those dormitories that have excess spaces, so there is a matching effort that takes place at the industry level. With that, I think we can transit to the desired dormitory standards over time, without impacting too much of dormitory supply.
Over time, as the supply and demand balance is achieved, we will see dormitory prices stabilising. In fact, that has been the case over the past year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Managing Prison Inmates with Dementia and Supporting Their Re-integration into Society","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"14 Ms Usha Chandradas asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what are the challenges faced by (i) inmates with dementia during their incarceration and (ii) prisons in managing and accommodating such inmates; (b) how are these challenges being addressed; and (c) what measures and initiatives are available during imprisonment and after the release of such inmates to (i) support them in their re-integration into society and (ii) assist their families in the process, with the aim of reducing the risk of re-offending.
\tThe Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Sir, inmates with dementia face similar challenges as persons living with dementia in the community. For example, they may find it difficult to remember events, communicate with others and carry out daily tasks.
The Singapore Prison Service (SPS) calibrates the support for each inmate based on their individual needs, including the severity of their dementia. They receive specialist outpatient medical care for their dementia at the Institute of Mental Health and Changi General Hospital, and undergo regular follow-ups as required. They will be housed at the Complex Medical Centre of the prison if they require close monitoring by medical staff.
All inmates, including those with dementia, can attend programmes aimed at strengthening family relations. Families of inmates with dementia who require assistance can also approach SPS' Family Resource Centres (FRCs) which are located at the Prison Link Centre. The FRCs work with the Ministry of Social and Family Development and community partners to look into the needs of the inmates and their family.
Inmates with dementia who lack family support and require long-term residential care can be referred to nursing homes or welfare homes through the Agency for Integrated Care, upon their release.
Mr Speaker: Ms Usha Chandradas.
\tMs Usha Chandradas (Nominated Member): I thank the Minister of State for his replies. I have three supplementary questions. First of all, would the Ministry consider setting up a dedicated dementia ward in prisons to house prisoners with cognitive problems. As a country, Singapore is expected to attain super-aged status by 2026. I think this is something that we are all familiar with – by 2030, one-in-four Singaporeans will be aged 65 and above. So, this is a problem that is really going to be very prevalent in our society.
At the moment, I understand we do have special assisted living cells to help in the rehabilitation of inmates who have physical impairments. So, could a similar model be explored for those with dementia and related major neuro cognitive disorders? That is my first supplementary question.
My second supplementary question is, how regularly does the Ministry conduct assessments to evaluate the effectiveness of current in-prison support systems for inmates with dementia?
And my third supplementary question is, whether or not there are established protocols for early screening and diagnosis of dementia, especially amongst elderly, incoming and existing inmates?
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. I want to assure the Member that for every inmate who comes in, we will do the needs assessment and we also look at the security and risk level in terms of their offence, and assessment of the medical needs as well.
This is the premise that we start off with. No doubt they are spending their time there and they are being incarcerated, but they are human beings, just like any of us.
\t
So, with regard to dementia and also the kind of medical issues faced by our inmates – and we understand also that just like anyone else would know, we have an ageing society and similarly, it is reflected in the inmates population – as I have shared in my answer, we will provide the necessary treatment and care, depending on the medical needs of the inmates.
Currently, there are three inmates in SPS' custody who are diagnosed with dementia. We look after them, we work with the medical centre and also Changi General Hospital to see what their needs\tare. So, I want to assure the Member that we will continue to look at it, take care of them and at the same time, making sure that all of them have the opportunity to go through the programmes that are open to the inmates.
And from time to time, we do the assessment. We also are part of the international fraternity, whereby we are plugged into the system and we always make sure that we are able to care, and not only caring, it is also about that rehabilitation and re-integration process, so, a through-care process where we want to make sure that the inmates not only serve their sentence, but that they are able to rebuild their lives and be re-integrated into society.
I want to thank the Member for her care and concern about this issue, and assure her that we are consistent with her concerns, we share her concerns. And we will do our best to care for the inmates, regardless of what medical conditions they are facing.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reviewing and Enhancing Safety Measures in Marine Sector in View of Increased Workplace Fatalities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"15 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Manpower what are the Ministry’s plans to review and enhance safety measures in the marine sector, in view of the increase in workplace fatalities in the sector in 2024.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Zaqy Mohamad) (for the Minister for Manpower): Speaker, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) took corrective actions to address the increase in workplace fatalities in the marine sector last year. In October 2024, the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA), MOM and the Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) Council called on companies in the maritime industry to conduct a Safety Time-Out, with a focus on work activities carried out at anchorages and commercial diving activities. Companies were to review their WSH management systems, reiterate senior management’s focus on safety and refresh workers’ awareness of workplace safety protocols. Companies were also provided with materials on good safety practices and case studies to assist them in mitigating common WSH hazards in the marine sector, such as falling from height and working in confined spaces.
For diving activities, which contributed to two out of five of the sector’s fatalities in 2024, MOM has worked with the Commercial Diving Association of Singapore to emphasise to the commercial diving community on the importance of adhering to the code of practice for diving at work. This includes ensuring dive personnel are trained and use proper diving equipment. MPA also reminds applicants seeking a diving permit for commercial diving to adhere to the code of practice, amongst other conditions. To ensure compliance, MOM and MPA conducted a joint enforcement operation from September to December 2024, and will ramp up our enforcement efforts this year.
While we observe that there has been no further fatality in the marine sector in 2025 to date, we will continue to closely monitor the sector’s WSH compliance and improve its WSH performance. Together with MPA and the WSH Council, MOM will be engaging senior management of companies from the marine sector to emphasise the importance of building a strong WSH culture. MOM will also be working with MPA to strengthen safety oversight over the marine sector, including reviewing upstream measures to further tighten diving safety standards, especially on the use of proper diving equipment. I urge everyone to play our part in keeping our waters safe and befitting of Singapore’s status as a premier maritime hub.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
\tMr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State for his response, and I also thank the MOM and MPA team for stepping up inspections in the marine sector. But for the marine sector to record five fatalities in 2024, from none in 2023, is very concerning. I believe that the safety standards at our land-based shipyards have improved over the years and most of the recent fatality cases happened in the waters on vessels in anchorage.
I know some of these investigations are still ongoing, but can the Senior Minister of State share if MOM has a sense of what the common causes\tare in these cases? Were protective gear, such as life jackets and proper diving equipment provided by the companies, worn by the workers? Were there any links to adverse weather conditions in some of these cases?
Vessels in anchorage are considered remote sites, where it is harder for medical help to reach an injured person. And as we all know, response time in an emergency case can be a matter of life and death. Could response time therefore be a contributory factor in these cases because they happen on remote sites? If so, are there any plans to improve the response time of emergency medical help to these remote sites?
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I thank the Member for his questions. They are certainly very valid ones. Over the last few years, the safety records of our marine sector has fluctuated. We have had zero in 2023, five in 2024; but overall, it has been anywhere between zero and five.
If we look at the situation last year, indeed, as the Member pointed out, the anchorages were the point of concern, while shipyards have improved. But over time, if we look at the last five years, for example, I would say it is about 50-50. But that does not mean that we take our eyes off our shipyards as well because if you look at the issues at the shipyards, it is not necessarily at the shipyard itself, but it could also be the ancillary activities. The one incident that we had at the shipyard was a worker being struck by a forklift. So, it is not so much shipbuilding, but ancillary activities around the shipyard.
On the other activities in the anchorage, among the other things that happen, investigations aside, drowning during diving works, improper use of scuba gear instead of commercial diving gear, for example. There was another case of a worker being struck by the propeller of a boat during diving works – that was an unfortunate accident. There were others where workers fell from the vessel. If I recall correctly, a safety vest was used but still, unfortunately, perhaps due to the waters. So, there are different incidents. The numbers are quite small, therefore, you have different incidents and there is no clear pattern. But certainly, we will look to see how we can improve.
As for the nature of works, compared to, say, shipyards, I think you are in a better position because you can have land-based medical personnel nearby or you can be reached by ambulances a lot quicker. I think for some of these remote works, unfortunately, that is the case and certainly, we will take the feedback to MPA and see how we can improve access by the medical teams.
But we have to be realistic too that many of these works are also offshore, sometimes quite a distance away from land and not easily accessible. Therefore, I think one of the risk assessments has to also include that the workers out there need to be supported by their own colleagues or counterparts who have access to basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation and basic first aid training. I think those are also important aspects, where we can help to mitigate some of the risks while waiting for the medical personnel to come.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of Green Man Timings at Pedestrian Crossings","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"16 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Transport (a) how often are the durations of the Green Man crossing times at pedestrian crossings reviewed; and (b) what are the factors that determine if there is sufficient time for the young, the elderly and those with ambulatory issues to cross the road safely.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng) (for the Minister for Transport): The Green Man crossing times at pedestrian crossings are determined based on the crossing distance and the walking speed of a pedestrian.
The crossing time at a pedestrian crossing is reviewed when there are changes that affect these factors. For example, when a road is widened and the crossing distance increases, the Green Man crossing time is increased to ensure pedestrians have sufficient time to cross. Additionally, at pedestrian crossings within Silver Zones and Friendly Streets, where there are higher proportions of seniors and young families, the crossing times are increased, so that pedestrians will have additional time to cross at a more comfortable pace.
Pedestrian crossings that are frequently used by seniors or persons with disabilities, for example, near polyclinics and markets, also have the Green Man Plus scheme. When these pedestrians tap their concession cards on the reader, the crossing time will be increased for the next Green Man cycle.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Darryl David.
\tMr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Sir. I have one supplementary question. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his replies. The context of this Parliamentary Question is because on a walkabout visit to the Teck Ghee area in Ang Mo Kio, I had feedback from residents who told me that they felt a particular crossing near the market was not long enough for them. And I went to observe it and it turned out that indeed, after tapping the card, there were a couple of seniors who did still have problems making it across to the other side in time.
My supplementary question to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary is, does the Land Transport Authority (LTA) perhaps consult relevant agencies or authorities with their experience in gerontology to ascertain for residents of a certain age what the appropriate time, the adequate time would be for them to cross a certain distance when the Green Man is on?
\tMr Baey Yam Keng: Mr Speaker, all pedestrian crossings have a steady Green Man duration of about six to 10 seconds. And then, the remaining crossing time is calculated based on the distance of the pedestrian crossing. Then, we use a typical walking speed of about one metre per second to calculate the duration needed. This is also taking reference from other international standards. We make adjustments for a smaller Asian build as well. But we also take into account that the total time allocated for pedestrian crossing will also affect other traffic movements. So, it is a balance of vehicular traffic as well as pedestrian speed and comfort.
We will take the feedback and re-look at that particular crossing that the Member has highlighted and see how we can increase the crossing time to ensure safety and comfort for his residents.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assisting Claimants to Seek Recourse from Retailers who Ignore Enforcement Orders of Small Claims Tribunal","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"17 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Law (a) whether the Ministry can provide assistance to claimants to seek recourse from retailers who ignore and refuse to comply with the enforcement order of the Small Claims Tribunal (SCT); and (b) whether the SCT has the means to carry out enforcement actions.
\t
The Minister of State for Law (Mr Murali Pillai) (for the Minister for Law): Sir, orders of the Small Claims Tribunal (SCT) are like any other Court orders and are enforced through the State Courts. The process of applying for enforcement orders has been simplified with the introduction of the revised Rules of Court in 2021. It is now only necessary to file a single application for an enforcement order in the District Court.
Claimants who wish to enforce an order of the SCT also have the following means of assistance. Individuals with limited means may apply for legal advice and legal aid from the Legal Aid Bureau (LAB). More information on the eligibility criteria can be found at the LAB E-Services Portal on the Ministry of Law’s (MinLaw's) website. Parties who are unclear about the process can also seek advice from the Community Justice Centre, which is located on-site at the State Courts.
There are also legal clinics, like those organised by the Law Society Pro Bono SG and supported by MinLaw, which provide assistance and advice in specific cases. More information on legal assistance can be found on MinLaw’s website link to “Legal Support Resources Available to Members of the Public”.
MinLaw is working with stakeholders on further changes to make the enforcement of civil judgments, including SCT orders, as was mentioned by the hon Second Minister for Law at the Committee of Supply debates earlier this year.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
\tMr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Sir, I thank the Minister of State for the reply, which provided a lot of information, some of which I must say I may not be aware of. I am sure many Singaporeans may not be aware that there are so many other avenues that they can look for.
I had a case in my Meet-the-People Session, which I had sent to MinLaw as well, where the claimant got an order from SCT for the retailer to pay up, but the retailer just refused to pay. She felt helpless and was told that she had to go and seek legal advice, which defeats the purpose of why we have the SCT for small claims. So, whether can there be more of this hand-holding, especially for the seniors, to be able to ultimately get their claims back, which is what the whole effort is all about.
\tMr Murali Pillai: Sir, I completely appreciate the hon Member Mr Liang's views on behalf of his resident. As mentioned in my answer, there are a number of help measures and the issue perhaps is awareness. We seek his cooperation to bring to the attention of the resident these avenues and hopefully, through this, she will get the assistance that she needs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Excluding S-REITs from New Rules for Global Investor Programme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"18 Ms Usha Chandradas asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether he can clarify the rationale for excluding Singapore Real Estate Investment Trusts (S-REITs) from the new rules under the \"family office option\" of the Global Investor Programme, which require new applicants to allocate at least $50 million of their assets under management to equities listed on approved Singapore exchanges; and (b) whether there are any future plans to review this exclusion.
\tMs Usha Chandradas (Nominated Member): Question 18, Sir. For this question, I would like to declare my interest as an independent director of a Singapore-listed Real Estate Investment Trust (S-REIT).
The Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry): As part of measures announced by the Equities Market Review Group to strengthen Singapore’s equities market, the Government has refined the scope of qualifying investment categories for the Family Office option under the Global Investor Programme (GIP).
From 21 February 2025, new GIP applicants under this option, who are required to establish a Singapore-based Single Family Office (SFO) with at least S$200 million of assets under management (AUM), must deploy a minimum of S$50 million into equities listed on approved Singapore exchanges.
This enhancement is intended to draw investments into our equities market, which has comparatively less trading liquidity than S-REITs and bonds. In so doing, the Review Group hopes to make Singapore a more attractive location for companies to raise equity capital.
SFOs applying for GIP can continue to deploy their remaining AUM in other investment categories including S-REITs. SFOs whose owners are not applying for the GIP are not affected by this change. The criteria for MAS tax incentives for SFOs remain unchanged. SFOs under these schemes can continue to invest their funds into various investment products including S-REITs.
The Government will continue to review the GIP to ensure it remains relevant and effective in attracting entrepreneurs and business owners who intend to drive their businesses and investment growth from Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Risks Associated with NSFs in Frontline Firefighting Roles and Transitioning these Roles to Fully Professional Force","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"19 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what proportion of SCDF’s frontline firefighting force consists of full-time National Servicemen (NSFs) as opposed to regular personnel; (b) what assessments have been made regarding the long-term feasibility of transitioning frontline firefighting roles to a fully professional force; and (c) whether the Ministry has considered the risks associated with deploying NSFs in firefighting roles, given the demanding physical and operational requirements of the job.
\tThe Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Sir, full-time National Servicemen (NSFs) form about 42% of the Singapore Civil Defence Force’s (SCDF's) frontline firefighting force, which is also supplemented by Operationally Ready National Servicemen (ORNSmen), comprising about 9% of firefighters on duty and volunteer firefighters from the Civil Defence Auxiliary Unit.
As a small country, and even more so with an ageing population, we cannot afford to have a large enough standing force to meet all our civil defence needs, including responding to national emergencies. Hence, SCDF NSFs and ORNSmen have to be an integral part of SCDF’s workforce, performing critical frontline roles like firefighting, alongside regular officers.
SCDF’s frontline duties inherently involve risks. Thus, SCDF ensures that all its officers performing these roles are professionally trained and well equipped to carry out their duties safely and effectively.
The NSFs in the firefighting vocation learn the same firefighting skills as regular firefighters. They complete a four-week Basic Rescue Training and a 12-week Fire Fighter Course at the Civil Defence Academy (CDA). Firefighting training at the CDA is conducted with realistic \"live\" fire simulators to provide our firefighters the confidence to operate in real firefighting and rescue incidents. All officers must complete a series of proficiency and certification tests before they can be deployed as firefighters.
After graduating from CDA, training continues to be an integral part of a firefighter’s daily routine. Firefighters undergo exercises and drills during each shift to familiarise themselves with their respective roles and functions as part of a crew, as well as to maintain their individual fitness and skills competencies.
SCDF has protocols to ensure both training and operational safety and these are reviewed regularly. In addition, SCDF’s firefighters are well equipped with advanced firefighting and personal protection equipment. They operate sophisticated state-of-the-art vehicles and high tech equipment, such as the Light Fire Attack Vehicle, and firefighting robots and drones, to achieve the mission of saving lives and property, while maintaining personal safety.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): I thank the Minister of State for the replies. Sir, given the physically demanding nature of firefighting, how does the Ministry assess the long-term physical fitness of NS reservists who may be called back for operational duties years after completing their initial training? What measures are in place to ensure that NSFs deployed as firefighters are given adequate support to cope with the psychological and physical stresses of their roles during and after their service?
\t
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. I am very fortunate to have a chance and the opportunity to work very closely with our SCDF colleagues. I have engagement sessions with the NSF, the regulars, and in my role as President of HomeTeamNS, I work very closely with the NSmen and many of them are also from SCDF.
And like what I said in my answer, even today, as we speak, the SCDF officers who are in Myanmar, they are made up of NSFs, our regulars and our NSmen. And if you look at them, not only are they very well equipped in terms of skill but in terms of fitness, that is where the training that they do during each shift ensures that they are physically equipped with skills and know-how to use the devices and at the same time, they are able to keep themselves fit. So, this is an operational matter that we take seriously, because we know when emergencies happen, every single second counts; and that is made up of the fitness level of our officers and also the skills they have.
Maybe I will share further details about what we do to ensure their safety during training and operation. First, like what I shared earlier, they must be medically fit. We make sure that whoever is there, they are medically fit. Secondly, as I shared in my reply, they learn and demonstrate the necessary skills to perform the role before being deployed, so that is something that we do. And third, all firefighters have the necessary equipment to carry out their role safely and effectively.
What is important is that they work together as a team. When we look at their training, we also make sure that their training and operational safety protocols are being continuously assessed and we make sure that they follow such protocols.
So, we continue to do our best, Sir, to make sure that they are ready, they are fit and they can be a lifesaving force that will keep Singapore safe and secure.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Target Date to Revise Penalties for Animal Cruelty and Introduce Failure in Duty of Care Provisions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"20 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Government has a target date by which legislation to revise penalties for animal cruelty and failure to fulfil duty of care will be introduced; and (b) whether the Government actively enforces the Code of Animal Welfare (for the Pet Industry) and collates data on non-compliance with the Code.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for National Development (Mr Tan Kiat How) (for the Minister for National Development): Sir, as part of the National Parks Board's (NParks’) efforts to safeguard animal health and welfare, as well as public health and safety, NParks has embarked on a comprehensive review of the Animals and Birds Act 1965.
As highlighted in the reply to Mr Louis Ng on a similar Parliamentary Question last November and the recent update at the Committee of Supply debate in response to a cut by Mr Henry Kwek last month, the review covers several areas, including the regulatory framework for the prevention and control of animal diseases and veterinary health products, the penalty framework for animal welfare offences and enforcement powers for animal welfare and management.
NParks has been conducting small group discussions with relevant stakeholders and incorporating their inputs. NParks intends to conduct consultations with more stakeholders this year.
The Code of Animal Welfare (for the Pet Industry) specifies minimum standards and best practices for animal housing, management and care to safeguard the health and welfare of animals. Failure to comply to the minimum standards in the Code may be used as supporting evidence for prosecution. To date, non-compliance with the minimum standards in the Code has not been used as evidence to support prosecution, as the evidence gathered in cases that proceeded to prosecution was sufficient.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Chua.
\tMr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just two quick supplementary questions from me. The first is on the Code of Animal Welfare (for the Pet Industry) that the Senior Minister of State mentioned. How does the NParks ensure that these minimum standards are actually being adhered to? And second, I note that there is currently no licensing regime for pet groomers, and as part of the review, whether this is also being considered?
\t
\tMr Tan Kiat How: Sir, on the two questions that Mr Chua has raised, let me take them in turn.
On the first one around how we ensure compliance with the Code of Animal Welfare (for the Pet Industry), these are guidelines that we put forward. And if there are members of the public, industry players or operators who want to report any non-compliance, please let us know. NParks, as part of its broader licensing framework and regulatory ambit, will do spot checks and take a look at some of these places.
On the second point on the disqualification order (DO), just to confirm with Mr Chua that he was asking about DO? No? I could not hear the question.
\tMr Chua Kheng Wee Louis: The licensing regime – whether it is being considered?
\tMr Tan Kiat How: Sir, if I can get Mr Chua to just clarify his question because I could not quite understand his question.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Chua.
\tMr Chua Kheng Wee Louis: Thank you. I was just wondering in terms of the review that is currently ongoing, whether or not a licensing regime for groomers is actually being considered?
\t
\tMr Tan Kiat How: Sir, I thank the Member for the clarification. We are reviewing the Animals and Birds Act. As part of that, we are also looking at the licensing framework and the enforcement powers and the various regulatory levers. We will get inputs from the relevant stakeholders and we will share more details when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Reduce Levy for Hiring of First Migrant Domestic Workers to $60 for All Households with One Singapore Citizen","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"21 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Manpower whether the levy for a migrant domestic worker can be reduced to $60 for the hiring of the first migrant domestic worker for all households with at least one Singapore Citizen as a measure to reduce cost for households.
\tThe Minister of State for Manpower (Ms Gan Siow Huang) (for the Minister for Manpower): Mr Speaker, the foreign worker levy is a pricing mechanism to regulate the number of migrant workers in Singapore so that the employment of migrant workers is commensurate with need. The levy is currently $300 per month for the first migrant domestic worker (MDW) and $450 per month for subsequent MDWs.
To support families with greater need for MDWs, a concessionary levy of $60 per month is granted to local households with caregiving needs, defined as having either: (a) a Singaporean child below 16 years old, (b) a local elderly person at least 67 years old, or (c) a local person with disabilities living in the household. For other households, the concessionary levy of $60 will not apply.
Households that require help for lighter domestic chores may consider engaging part-time housekeeping services under the Household Services Scheme which could cost less than employing and providing for the upkeep of an MDW.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Lim.
\tMr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, just two short supplementary questions. First, currently, the United Nations define seniors as 65 years whereas we have set ours at 67 years. So, would the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) consider reducing to 65 years for the age eligibility criterion for getting the concessionary rate for the MDW?
Secondly, my Parliamentary Question is actually trying to address the issue of reducing costs for households. So, perhaps, MOM, will want to consider whether we can reduce this for households during the period when cost of living is quite high? So, reduce the levy for those who have a senior aged 65, rather than 67.
\t
\tMs Gan Siow Huang: I thank the Member for raising the two supplementary questions. I think our policies have to be taken in our local context – looking at the lifespan of seniors in Singapore and also to calibrate all our policies according to our local needs. We will, however, continue to review our policies so that they are kept relevant and also support households that are in need.
\t
\t
To the question of reducing or providing concessionary levies for all households in Singapore hiring MDWs, I would like to reiterate the point that the purpose of the levy as a pricing mechanism is to regulate the number of MDWs in Singapore. Today, we already have a growing and quite a large number of MDWs. We need to have some lever to be able to regulate the overpopulation of MDWs to keep it sustainable.
If there are households that the Member is aware of who are in financial need and require domestic help, please highlight to MOM. We will look at the case.
\tMr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. Clarifications. Minister Desmond Lee.
[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":"Clarification by Minister for National Development","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, I would like to make a clarification in relation to a written answer that we made on 11 November 2024 in response to a Parliamentary Question filed by Mr Louis Chua. [Please refer to \"Estimated HDB BTO Units to be Launched from 2025 Onwards Available for Eligible Singles\", Official Report, 11 November 2024, Vol 95, Issue 145, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
We had discovered this typographical error in the course of reviewing some of the answers. The answer cited the following statistic, \"From 2024 to 2026, HDB will launch up to 14,000 2-room flexi Build-To-Order (BTO) flats island-wide. This is more than a 50% increase from the 9,000 units launched in the non-mature estates from 2020 to 2023.\"
There was an error in that statistic. The period that we had meant to cite was not \"2020 to 2023\", but \"2021 to 2023\", which is a three-year period that is comparable to the period that we cited in the reply \"2024 to 2026\", which is a three-year period, in the sentence in my answer.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Second Minister for National Development","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Second Minister for National Development (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to make this clarification on the Housing and Development Board's (HDB's) policy for rental housing applicants undergoing divorce.
During the debate on the Motion on Supporting Singaporeans in Starting and Raising Families on 5 February 2025, Mr Faisal Manap sought a clarification on whether HDB would allow parents who are undergoing divorce and in urgent need of housing to apply for public rental housing before the divorce is finalised. [Please refer to \"Supporting Singaporeans in Starting and Raising Families\", Official Report, 5 February 2025, Vol 95, Issue 151, Motions section.]
I had replied that HDB does already allow individuals who have commenced divorce proceedings to apply for rental housing even before the interim or final judgments are obtained.
The Leader of the Opposition then sought a further clarification, quoting a letter his constituent had received from HDB, which stated that HDB would not be able to consider an applicant's application if they have not obtained a deed of separation or when their divorce is not finalised, and highlighted that the latter part of that sentence did not appear to be consistent with my reply.
In response, I said that for rental housing applicants, HDB takes a case-by-case approach, the deed of separation would enable an application to be made before the interim or final judgment was issued, and that I would review whether HDB's procedures can be more facilitative.
I have since checked the specific case and the letter referred to by Mr Pritam Singh, and would like to provide a clarification for the record.
First, I would like to confirm that my response to Mr Faisal's clarification was correct. That is to say, individuals who have commenced divorce proceedings can apply for rental housing before interim and final judgments are obtained. This is, of course, subject to the usual rental housing criteria, such as having no family support or other housing options.
In general, HDB requires legally binding documentation showing that ancillary matters, mainly the division of assets and the care and control of children, have been settled before they will accept applications for a public rental flat. This is so that HDB can assess the applicant's eligibility for and ability to afford their housing options.
In most cases, the interim judgment would settle the ancillary matters. So, if an interim judgment contains orders on the relevant ancillary matters, HDB will accept that. This is before the final order of divorce is issued.
However, HDB will consider applications even before the interim judgment if: first, the ancillary matters have been settled in a deed of separation, which typically takes place before an interim judgment; or second, on a case-by-case basis, if there is urgent need, an applicant's appeal to HDB via a social worker, so there is a proper assessment of the applicant's circumstances.
In the specific case referred by Mr Pritam Singh, the appeal letter stated that the couple was separated but had not yet filed for divorce. This means that there were no pending proceedings and hence, no interim judgment. Hence, the applicable exceptions would have been either by submitting a deed of separation or to make an appeal on the basis on urgent need via a social worker, both of which can be done before an interim judgment is obtained.
In the reply of 3 May 2024, which is the letter Mr Pritam Singh referred to, setting out when it was prepared to consider the application for a rental flat, HDB referred to the deed of separation, which is correct, but it also inadvertently and incorrectly referred to finalisation of divorce and finalised divorce documents. It should have referred to an interim judgment with provisions on ancillary matters instead.
In this case, I understand that HDB had been working with the appellant's social worker to obtain the necessary documents and information, but the input provided was insufficient for HDB's assessment. Hence, HDB was not able to accede to the appeal.
HDB understands, through the social worker, that the divorce was recently made final but without any reference to ancillary arrangements. However, the appellant has since told HDB that they intend to apply for a BTO flat. We have nonetheless advised the social worker to approach HDB again if they are in urgent housing need.
Mr Speaker: Ministerial Statements. Prime Minister and Minister for Finance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"US Tariffs and Implications","subTitle":"Statement by Prime Minister and Minister for Finance","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (Mr Lawrence Wong): Mr Speaker, we have known for some time that the world is in flux. The familiar signposts are fading, but the contours of a new global system have yet to take shape. We are in a period of transition – uncertain, unsettled and increasingly unstable.
The recent \"Liberation Day\" tariff announcements by the United States (US) confirms this stark reality – the era of rules-based globalisation and free trade is over.
This marks a profound turning point. We are entering a new phase in global affairs – one that is more arbitrary, protectionist and dangerous.
For nearly 80 years since the end of World War II, America was the anchor for the free market economies of the world. It championed free trade and open markets, and led efforts to build a multilateral trading system. This World Trade Organization (WTO) system ushered in decades of global growth and stability. It allowed trade to flourish and lifted millions out of poverty. It benefited the world and contributed to America's own economic strength.
Objectively, America continues to enjoy unrivalled economic heft. In fact, the US rebounded more quickly than other advanced economies from the COVID-19 pandemic. It has surged ahead of all its major competitors in the advanced industrial world.
But not all Americans feel this way about their economy. There are hollowed-out towns in what was once America's thriving industrial belt. There are workers whose jobs have disappeared and whose incomes have stagnated. They believe that the American economy is fundamentally broken.
Discontent was already visible in the 1990s when protestors disrupted the WTO meeting in Seattle. Frustrations deepened following the Global Financial Crisis of 2008 and more recently, after the COVID-19 pandemic.
To be clear, the global economic system is in need of reform. Singapore and many others have called for changes, and we have been working with like-minded partners at the WTO to reform its processes.
A key concern in America is China – the sense that the US had given away too much in allowing China to join the WTO and that China competes on an unfair basis, for example, by heavily subsidising its own companies, putting up non-tariff barriers and restricting market access to US firms.
These concerns should be addressed within the WTO framework. In particular, the trade arrangements and concessions made in the past when China was only 5% of the world's economy should be updated when China now makes up 15% of the world's gross domestic product (GDP). And if there are disagreements, they should be resolved through the WTO's dispute settlement system, which has been paralysed and urgently needs to be restored and reformed.
But what the US is doing now is not reform. It is rejecting the very system it created.
The US has imposed a blanket 10% tariff on imports for nearly all countries. On top of that, it has layered on higher tariffs, up to 50%, for selected countries, especially those that run a trade surplus with the US. According to the administration, the sweeping tariffs are needed to fix America's trade imbalances.
But there is nothing inherently wrong about running a trade deficit. It simply means that American consumers are buying more from the world than the world is buying from America. Moreover, the focus has been solely on the goods trade. That only gives a partial picture. In fact, the US runs a surplus with many of its trading partners in services, exporting software services, education, entertainment, financial and business services. But this fact has been completely ignored.
In Singapore's case, we have a free trade agreement (FTA) with America. We impose zero tariffs on US imports and we actually run a trade deficit with the US – meaning we buy more from them than they do from us. If the tariffs were truly reciprocal and if they were meant to target only those with trade surpluses, then the tariff for Singapore should be zero. But still, we are being subjected to the 10% tariff. We are very disappointed by the US move, especially considering the deep and long-standing friendship between our two countries. These are not actions one does to a friend.
Asia bears the brunt of the US tariff increase. Within the region, China is the hardest hit, facing a 34% tariff in this round. This is on top of the 20% tariff increase imposed over the past two months and the 20% from the first Trump administration. Taken together, the average US tariff on Chinese products now exceeds 60%.
In Southeast Asia, the tariff rates range from 10% to 49%.
These measures will accelerate the fracturing of the global economy. Instead of flowing based on economic efficiency, capital and trade will increasingly be diverted based on political alignment and security considerations.
Several Members have asked about the impact of the tariffs on specific industries in Singapore. We are assessing the situation carefully. But our deeper worry is not the direct impact that these businesses face. It is the wider implications for the global trading system and the world economy. Let me explain.
First, the \"reciprocal\" tariffs are a fundamental rejection of the WTO rules. One of the cornerstones of the WTO multilateral trading system is the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) principle. Most Favoured Nation sounds like giving special privileges. Actually, it means the opposite – that every member must treat all other members equally. In other words, if a country extends more favourable terms or imposes additional restrictions to one trading partner, it must do the same to all other WTO members.
There are some carve-outs and exceptions to the MFN rule, for example, to allow FTAs. But MFN has long been the bedrock of the multilateral trading system. It ensures a level playing field, prevents discrimination and enables countries, big and small, to compete fairly in global markets.
This has helped to liberalise trade amongst more than 100 WTO members, each with different economic and political and social concerns.
America's new tariff regime is a complete repudiation of the MFN principle. It opens the door to selective country-by-country trade relationships, based on unilateral preferences.
If other countries adopt the same approach as the US, the rules-based trading system will unravel. This will spell trouble for all nations. But smaller countries, like Singapore, will face more pressures because small countries have very limited bargaining power in one-on-one bilateral negotiations. So, the major powers will dictate the terms and we risk being marginalised and sidelined.
Second, the likelihood of a full-blown global trade war is growing. Singapore has decided not to impose retaliatory tariffs. Doing so will only lead to increased costs for Singaporeans. But other countries may not be guided by the same considerations and may have different perceptions and views.
China has already imposed retaliatory tariffs on US goods. Others, like the European Union, are considering their next steps.
Some think that the new tariffs are a negotiating tactic, a negotiating tool by the US to extract concessions in other areas. This was what President Richard Nixon did in 1971. He slapped a 10% surcharge on imports to pressure Germany and Japan to devalue their currencies and when they did, the tariffs came off.
Indeed, there is a brief window for countries to negotiate and get some reprieve from the US before their higher tariff rates take effect and it may be possible for some rates to be lowered. But we have to be realistic. Once trade barriers go up, they tend to stay up. Rolling them back is much harder, even after the original rationale no longer applies.
Even if some partial accommodations are eventually worked out, the uncertainty generated by such a drastic move will dampen global confidence and growth. It will be very hard to restore the previous status quo. And in particular, it does not look like the 10% universal rate is open for negotiation. This seems to be the fixed minimum tariff, regardless of a country's trade balance or existing trade arrangements.
Furthermore, there are other forces that could maintain the momentum for tariffs. In particular, many European countries are eager to protect their critical industries, like electric vehicles (EVs), green technologies and semi-conductors, from Chinese competition. They do not want to become a dumping ground for exports from China or other countries.
There is also a growing push across the West to strengthen their domestic manufacturing capabilities and to reduce dependence on global supply chains, especially in strategic industries.
So, this round of tariff increases by the US may just be the beginning of more increases to come globally. And we have seen this play out before. The US enacted sweeping tariff increases through the Smoot-Hawley Act in 1930. Many countries protested and a number retaliated with their own trade restrictions and tariffs. This deepened and extended the Great Depression.
In some ways, today's risks may be greater. The new US tariffs, if fully enacted, are higher than the ones in Smoot-Hawley. Trade is now a much bigger part of the American and global economy compared to the 1930s. Supply chains are also more deeply interconnected than they were back then. Any disruption to trade flows will have wider knock-on effects on the world.
This brings me to the third point, which is the impact on the global economy.
Business and consumer confidence has already been hit by the tariffs. International trade and investments will suffer. Our economic agencies got in touch with several multinational enterprises (MNEs) and local businesses after the tariff announcement. Even those who are not directly affected by the tariffs are worried about weakening demand from their consumers. Some have put new projects on hold while they assess the full implications of the tariffs.
These are reactions from companies based here. But I am sure similar conversations are happening in board rooms elsewhere.
Over the recent days, we have seen sharp negative reactions in global stock markets. It is too early to tell is all these will spill over into the real economy. But the downside risks are clearly rising. What is troubling is not just the tariffs themselves, which are already damaging, but the fact that this new wave of protectionism is unpredictable and unstable. Protectionism is already bad. Unstable protectionism is even worse.
Businesses do not know what to expect. Many are holding back, fearful that changing rules will leave them with stranded assets. And all these create an environment of deep uncertainty, one that could tip both the US and the global economy into recession.
The consequences extend far beyond economics. More and more countries are turning away from win-win cooperation and deeper integration. Instead, we see a rising \"me first\", win-lose mindset, where it is every country for itself. Some are even prepared to use aggressive or coercive means to get what they want at the expense of others.
Meanwhile, global institutions are getting weaker and long-standing norms of cooperation are breaking down.
One major concern is the US-China relationship. America views China as a strategic competitor and threat, which must be dealt with now while America still has the advantage. China says it is ready for a tariff war, a trade war or any other type of war. The US has now threatened an additional 50% tariff on China and China says it will fight till the end. There are fewer channels for dialogue, which can serve as guardrails to manage the relationship. So, if the disputes escalate and destabilise US-China relations, the consequences for the world would be disastrous.
We must be mentally prepared. The predictable and rules-based order we once knew is fading. The new era will be more volatile, with more frequent and unpredictable shocks. We must be ready to stand firm and protect our interests, no matter how the external winds may blow.
What does all this mean for Singapore?
In the near term, we expect weaker global growth, which means external demand for our goods and services will fall. The outward-oriented sectors of our economy will suffer the brunt of the impact. They include, manufacturing, especially segments like electronic and semi-conductors; biomedical science, which have higher exposure to the US; wholesale trade; and transport – these will be impacted. The global uncertainty and dampened sentiments will also impact some services industries, including finance and insurance.
Singapore may or may not go into recession this year. But I have no doubt that our growth will be significantly impacted. We had originally projected GDP growth of 1% to 3% for 2025. The Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) is reassessing the growth forecast and will likely revise it downwards.
Slower growth will mean fewer job opportunities and smaller wage increases for workers. And if more companies face difficulties or relocate their operations back to the US, there will be higher retrenchments and job losses.
For now, the measures announced in this year's Budget will provide support for any short-term strain. We have a comprehensive package of measures for households and individuals. They will receive the Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers, SG60 Vouchers and U-Save rebates to help with their cost of living. And there are also targeted measures, like increased ComCare Assistance, for the more vulnerable groups.
We are also supporting workers through investments in SkillsFuture. And those who find themselves involuntarily unemployed will receive help to get back on their feet through the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme which will start later this month.
We have also rolled out various measures in the Budget to help businesses. There are short-term support measures through corporate income tax rebates, as well as schemes to boost their productivity and competitiveness, and to pivot to new markets. Our economic agencies are also engaging the firms impacted by the tariffs to better understand their responses and see how we can support them and assist them with any specific issues they face.
Nevertheless, the situation is fluid and can change quickly. We will, therefore, set up a task force chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong to help businesses and workers address the immediate uncertainties, strengthen their resilience and better adapt to the new economic environment. In addition to our economic agencies, the task force will include the Singapore Business Federation, the Singapore National Employers Federation and the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC).
We will continue to monitor developments closely. The Government stands ready to do more, if and when necessary. We have the resources to do so because of the financial discipline and prudence we have exercised over the decades.
In this new environment, Singapore must redouble our efforts to remain a key node in global flows and a trusted business hub. We will forge closer ties with like-minded partners who share our commitment to open and free trade.
The US may have decided to turn protectionist, but the rest of the world does not have to follow the same path. We will identify other partners to join us and work around this, to ensure resilience and maintain critical parts of the multilateral system, while laying the foundations for a possible new and different global system that can be achievable later.
And this is why I have made the effort to engage and visit my counterparts in different countries. I touched base with the United Kingdom's Prime Minister Keir Starmer yesterday and have a few more conversations lined up in the coming weeks. They are all keen to do more with Singapore and to expand our economic cooperation, including in new areas in the digital and green economies.
In particular, we will strengthen our collaboration and integration within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Last Friday, I spoke with the Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. Malaysia is also the ASEAN Chair this year. We agreed to accelerate ASEAN's integration efforts to make our region more attractive and competitive.
A Special ASEAN Economic Ministers' Meeting will be convened later this week. They will discuss further ways that ASEAN can work together to strengthen intra-ASEAN Trade and to send a strong signal of ASEAN's commitment to regional economic integration. As a group, ASEAN will also continue to strengthen our links with like-minded partners in areas of mutual interest.
Mr Speaker, we are entering a changed world. The only way Singapore can make it through the gathering storm is to stay united, pool our resources, our resilience and our resolve.
The Government will do everything we can to steer Singapore through the choppy waters and make sure no one is left behind. We will keep our economy open, our society cohesive and our institutions strong. We will create new value propositions for businesses and investors. We will act boldly and decisively, when needed, to ensure Singapore continues to succeed.
Above all, we will put the interests of Singapore and Singaporeans at the centre of everything we do. The road ahead will be harder. The dangers are real, but so, too, is our determination.
In many ways, we are in a better position than we were 60 years ago when we became independent. We have built deep reserves as a strategic buffer. We have forged a strong compact, built on solidarity and trust in each other. And most of all, we have our ingenuity and wit, our grit and gumption – a never say die spirit that has seen us through every crisis, and will carry us through the ones to come.
So, Mr Speaker, I say to this House and to fellow Singaporeans: do not fear. Now, more than ever, we will stay resolute and united. Our little red dot will continue to shine. In a dark and troubled world, Singapore will hold our ground as a beacon of stability, purpose and hope. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Leader of the Opposition, Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, I thank the Prime Minister for his Ministerial Statement, which expands on the video message that he shared with Singaporeans on 4 April 2025. I refer to that video message and the Prime Minister's Statement today that referenced vigilance and building up capabilities.
Even though I accept it is early days and there are a lot of moving parts at the moment and how world economies are assessing their own positions and pivoting to a new reality, there have been references to de-risking and decoupling that have been in the global economy lexicon for some years now. I would be grateful if the Prime Minister could share, when he refers to building up capabilities, is the Prime Minister looking at improving local consumption, notwithstanding our small market, and measures to boost productivity?
Earlier on during Parliamentary Questions, the Senior Minister of State for Manpower suggested that companies should reduce their reliance on cheap foreign labour, do we foresee major structural changes in the way the Singapore economy is shaped, to deal with the new future that we see, which, in the Prime Minister's words, is far more unpredictable than before?
Secondly, the Prime Minister spoke of a task force. I think similar announcements have been made by the Malaysian government. I would like to confirm whether there is going to be a period of time before the Prime Minister makes more announcements, with regard to exchanges that he has had with stakeholders in both the private and public sectors so that Singaporeans can better understand the way forward, and which industries will be more affected.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Sir, we are certainly going to be taking steps to build capabilities. It is an ongoing endeavour and in this year's Budget, we set aside more resources to doing so, especially to strengthen our economy, to build up our capabilities in innovation and new technologies, which are the key drivers for any economy to be strong, dynamic and vibrant.
At the same time, we are building capabilities in our people, investing in human capital, investing in our workers, upgrading the skills of our workers through SkillsFuture, and we are putting significant resources into this effort to make SkillsFuture a key part and a key pillar in our social compact. So, the capability-building efforts will continue, in fact, we will redouble our efforts in this area. And the key reason why we are able to do all this is precisely because we have the fiscal resources to set aside. It is because we have, over many decades, exercised discipline and prudence in managing our resources, and that is why in these difficult times we are able to put in place the resources to build up the necessary capabilities to see us through the storms ahead.
On the task force, I may also ask Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong to say a little bit more later. But certainly, we are going to engage industries. We will continue the review and the monitoring of the global situation and if there is a need, we will provide further updates to Singaporeans as and when we are ready, and as and when there is a need to. Perhaps the Deputy Prime Minister Gan can elaborate.
The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Gan Kim Yong): With your permission, Mr Speaker, I just want to respond that this task force has just been announced. We are still working out the detailed composition as well as the tasks forward. But one of the key focus of the task force is going to be in terms of communication and information sharing.
We will be engaging the private sector, so that is why the Prime Minister announced that the composition will include private sector representatives. The idea is to gather information from the ground, understand the challenges that are faced by the enterprises on the ground and to also discuss with them how we can lean forward to support them, to help them navigate through these uncharted waters as we move ahead under this new landscape.
We also will include union representatives, because we do expect that jobs may be affected. It may not be immediately, but I think, in the medium to longer term. I think there will be a major restructure of the economy that will result in the restructure of the workforce as well. And I think, as the Prime Minister emphasised, the focus on training is always the key to our transformation journey and therefore, unions and employers and enterprises will play a key role.
As I said many times before, our main guiding principle is really to be as transparent as possible. When we know something important, we will share with the population, with the businesses, with the workers, with the unions and with Members. And when we do not know it yet, we will tell you, honestly, that we do not have the information yet. So, I think, this is still the early days, as the Leader of the Opposition has also acknowledged. It will take time for us to get to a better understanding, better assessment of the total impact of what is going to happen.
Also, we have to bear in mind that what would happen also has to take into account the reaction from the countries other than America, so their reaction will also add on to the potential impact on the tariffs and on Singapore's economy, and at the same time, we are also reaching out to our trading partners to share our information, share our assessment of the situation, to see how we can find different ways of working together, to continue to do business with one another, to continue to provide opportunities for businesses and for our enterprises.
Mr Speaker: Before we proceed, I would just like to take this opportunity to remind Members that pursuant to Standing Order 23, Members may seek clarifications on the Ministerial Statement, but no debate should be allowed thereon. Members can certainly seek clarifications by way of asking questions, so I seek Members' understanding to keep your clarifications clear and concise. Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Sir, while we are disappointed with the imposition of the 10% tariffs by the US, the US remains our key relations that go beyond the economic space, but into defence and others. So, can I ask the Prime Minister whether we continue to have access to the key administration officials in the US to negotiate on tariffs? And where can we land with these discussions, these negotiations? And also, whether the other initiatives that we are working on, for example, in the military, in the energy space, are these going to be affected by this increase in the tariffs?
The second question to the Prime Minister is, if we, indeed, do trade less with the US because of the tariffs, can I ask where else, and what other markets and corridors can we go to make up for it? For example, in the other groupings like the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), ASEAN and so on, and the European Union, are there new corridors, new markets where we can develop more trade relations?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Sir, we will actively engage members of the US administration to better understand their concerns about our trade relationship, to see if we can address any misperceptions about our bilateral trade with them, and then to discuss what is the best way forward. Of course, if the US decides that the baseline rate is universal across all countries, then it is a different consideration altogether, it is not bilateral. It is their view of the world and they have decided that every country should at least have a 10% tariff. But we are continuing to have these conversations with the US administration and also with other countries.
On the other aspects of our overall relationship with America, they continue to be important. We value the relationship. We believe the US values it too. In areas, like security and defence, we have such a close relationship built up over many decades and we will continue to maintain that; and we will also discuss cooperation in new areas, like critical new technologies, as well as energy. So, these areas of cooperation remain and we certainly want to continue advancing them as well.
On where else will there be new markets for our exports, well, we will continue to find export markets. We will help our companies identify new markets, including areas that they may not be so familiar with, and that is why we are redoubling our efforts to strengthen our links, including in areas in the Middle East, in Latin America, areas where we may not have such close links, but we think there is potential and opportunities to do more.
But fundamentally, we have to be prepared that if trade barriers around the world are higher than they were before, then, ultimately, we are entering a world where there will be slower growth, less demand for our goods and services. So, structurally, we are in for a more difficult ride, not to mention that if economic activities are going to be configured in a way that is not so much based on efficiency, but security, geopolitical and political considerations, then cost will be higher and at the end of the day, the world ends up operating on a higher cost base. So, these are the harsh realities that we have to be prepared for.
Mr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, I thank the Prime Minister for his Statement. I have two clarifications. Given that many local businesses operate within global supply chains, how will the anticipated pass-through effect of increased cost to Singapore consumers look like? And two, for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) that lack the skill to absorb the sudden cost increase, what tailored support is the Ministry considering to ensure that it will remain competitive and can continue to meet consumer demand without raising prices significantly? I assume this is something that Deputy Prime Minister Gan's task force will look into.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Sir, in the near term, if global demand slows down, it may actually mean less inflationary pressures, because global demand is coming off. It is the reason why you see oil prices coming off in the near term. But as I mentioned just now in my response to Mr Liang Eng Hwa, overall, if the entire global economy is going to be configured on a less efficient basis, it must mean higher cost; and this will impact Singaporeans as well, so we are watching for that and we will continue to monitor that closely.
The impact on Singaporeans, the impact on business and as the Member Mr Yip said, what additional measures may be needed. For now, we think that the Budget measures are adequate, but the task force chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Gan will monitor, will assess and will put up recommendations when ready.
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Sir, just a few questions. The first is on international trade and the other is on domestic economic policy.
For trade, I wonder if the Government will be looking to negotiate within the broader rubric of ASEAN or the CPTPP as a block? I understand that this may mean greater difficulty in arriving at a consensus position, especially with harder hit economies like Vietnam, potentially lowering the common denominator, but at the same time, it greatly strengthens our bargaining position as an economic entity. ASEAN, for example, is the world's fifth largest economy.
For the domestic economy, beyond the existing slate of vouchers, I wonder what other policies the Government will be considering in order to shore up consumer demand and to help rebalance the economy toward domestically-driven demand, at least in the short run. I understand that our small domestic market will never be sufficient alone as a driver of growth, but some short-run stabilisation, I feel, may be valuable.
And then, finally, has the Minister also considered the possibility of anti-dumping procedures that may be enacted if, indeed, nations with surpluses choose to export at low prices to Singapore?
Mr Speaker: Prime Minister. Or Deputy Prime Minister Gan?
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Thank you, Speaker. First, on external trade relationships, indeed, we are working with ASEAN members as well as our fellow CPTPP partners, as well as other trade organisations, to see how we can come together to discuss our strategy towards the US, how we can negotiate and discuss as an organisation.
We announced that we are going to have the ASEAN Economic Ministers Meeting shortly, if I am not wrong, on 10 April. And subsequently, we can then share with Members what is the outcome of the discussion. The idea is to come together to share our information, our assessment of the situation and to explore ways that we can work together moving forward, including discussions with the US, as well as how to further strengthen and deepen regional integration, which will be helpful to our economies as well.
In terms of domestic demand, I should just sound a word of caution that if we are over-stimulating demand, we will end up with inflationary pressures. So, it is something that we have to always be careful about. We need to strike a balance. And as Assoc Prof Lim pointed out, we have a very small economy. It will not be able to move the needle.
In terms of anti-dumping duties, it is a possibility provided under the WTO. But you also have to bear in mind that by imposing anti-dumping duties, that means consumers in Singapore will be paying the duty for the imports and that will add cost to Singaporeans. So, I think, we just have to bear that in mind. Usually, anti-dumping duties are introduced in order to protect local, domestic industries that are facing the onslaught of imported products at very low prices, and this is to balance the trade between imports and our local production. But if our industries are competitive and in fact, they are mostly export-oriented; therefore, I think we have to be very careful in considering introducing anti-dumping duties.
Mr Speaker: Mr Desmond Choo.
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Mr Speaker, I would like to thank Prime Minister for his Ministerial Statement. The Labour Movement has surveyed our unionists. They are rightly worried about growth issues, loss of jobs and cost of living, but they have also expressed confidence that the People's Action Party Government will stay us through these difficult times.
I would like to ask the Prime Minister how should the tripartite partners conduct themselves during this period of time to prepare themselves in both the short and medium term for impact that will certainly hit them in terms of jobs, lower wage growth and in fact, some of them might lose their jobs. How can we continue to prevent anti-foreigner sentiments from setting in, especially during such times?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Sir, we do so best by upholding that strong base of trust, mutual trust and understanding that we have developed over so many decades amongst our tripartite partners – working closely together, engaging one another, being upfront with the concerns we all share and addressing the problems together.
So, in the near term, whatever issues there are, whatever information the Government has, we will share with the unions, with the businesses, with workers through the task force and other mechanisms. If there are specific concerns, we will try our best to deal with them. And if we feel that the Budget measures we have or existing measures are not adequate, we will certainly be ready to introduce new measures.
I think it is that spirit of working together which has enabled us to overcome previous crises and it will enable us to get through the current difficulties as well.
Mr Speaker: Mr Mark Lee1,2, I know you had filed Parliamentary Questions on this. You have the floor.
Mr Mark Lee (Nominated Member): Thank you. The Prime Minister has rightly pointed out that global conditions are turning increasingly uncertain and many businesses are now bracing for a downturn. I just want to highlight three key concerns that have surfaced in recent engagements before my supplementary question.
The first is that there is a clear anticipation of a drop in global demand. Some US-based consumer brands are already advising their supply chain partners to prepare for a mid-term volume reduction of up to 30%. Long term, no one knows for certain; and this will have a ripple effect on Singapore-based companies. Second, Singapore businesses are facing margin erosion, especially with clients requesting their supply chain partners to absorb part of the cost shock from the new tariffs because these tariffs are too large to pass through via pricing adjustments in the short term. This will hit cash flow for our businesses. And third, Singapore firms have adopted a \"China plus one\" strategy investing in Vietnam, Cambodia and Indonesia but now, they are even hit with tariffs higher than the baseline of 10%. So, these companies are now under renewed pressure to diversify further, adding another base to stay competitive and it is costly and complex.
I hope Deputy Prime Minister Gan's task force will be looking at the near-term support and would like to clarify if this support will include measures to help Singapore companies in cash flow, relocating or reshoring their supply chains, as well as taking a longer-term view to seize new opportunities arising from these global supply chain shifts.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Sir, I thank Mr Mark Lee for sharing the very real and genuine concerns amongst businesses. We have heard similar feedback amongst our businesses. It is not just businesses based in Singapore who are impacted because, as Mr Lee says, some businesses have diversified, expanded and built factories in places like Vietnam, China, and now they are hit with even higher tariffs. And so, it will have impact on their operations and in the end, all this will spill over and impact growth this year and also our prospects for future growth.
That is why we are concerned. That is why we think the concerns have to be dealt with quickly. And so, Deputy Prime Minister Gan's task force will continue to engage businesses to better understand the full extent of the impact, because this situation is still unfolding; and eventually, to work out what additional measures we need.
Mr Speaker: Ms Hazel Poa, earlier on, you had raised your hand. No? I wanted to call on Members who had raised their hands earlier. But if it is no longer the case, Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Prime Minister for sharing his thoughts and highlighting to us about the setting up the task group. I have got three clarifications, Mr Speaker.
One is whether the Prime Minister can share with us a bit more about his negotiations within ASEAN, because the Prime Minister mentioned that he had a chat with the Prime Minister of Malaysia, and how the ASEAN negotiations would go ahead in terms of dispute resolution or in terms of the trade tariffs that have been introduced.
Second, I know the situation is still fluid, but there are concerns about the semi-conductor tariffs that might come onstream. Given that Singapore is a re-export hub, semi-conductor is a significant proportion of our manufacturing sector, can the Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister Gan share, on a sectoral basis, the impact of the semi-conductor tariffs, if they do come in, its impact on jobs and GDP in Singapore?
And the last clarification is whether the Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister Gan can share, at the interim and at the start, whether there has been macro counterfactual simulations of existing tariffs that have been introduced and whether if there is an addition of 5% or 10% tariffs or semi-conductor tariffs, the impact on growth and jobs for Singapore?
Mr Gan Kim Yong: I think I will give the Member a very broad assessment of the impacts, as I mentioned earlier. I think we still need to look at what the US is going to do with regard to semi-conductors. It is indeed something that is of great concern to us. We have been engaging the semi-conductor companies and to discuss with them what we can do to help them to make sure that they are able to manage the impact of the import duties.
Our semi-conductor exports to the US comprises about 8.9% of Singapore's total goods exports to the US and this is equivalent to 0.8% of Singapore's total goods exports to the world in 2024. So, it is not insignificant. It is something that we will continue to have to work with them and see how we can manage the potential impact of duties on Singapore's exports to the US.
Mr Lawrence Wong: On the first question about negotiations and whether we are going to do this bilaterally or collectively as ASEAN, I think the ASEAN member states, each one of us, bilaterally will already engage America – we will certainly do so and I am sure other countries are doing so as well. The Member would have read that about that in the media.
As for what position ASEAN takes as a whole, the ASEAN Economic Ministers are meeting soon and they will discuss further. But one key step that we can take, quite aside from engaging America as a collective, is really to redouble our efforts, work even harder to reduce non-tariff barriers within ASEAN itself. ASEAN's tariffs are already largely removed, but to reduce further non-tariff barriers, to facilitate better trade within ASEAN and to ensure that ASEAN remains even more attractive and competitive, I think those are actions that we certainly want to do.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong Man Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Speaker, the Progress Singapore Party welcomes the Prime Minister's reassuring message to Singaporeans just now: \"do not fear\".
I have four clarifications. As a nation, we have a good track record of overcoming challenges like the oil crisis, the Asian Financial Crisis, SARS and COVID-19. We can do it again. The tariffs are game-changing, but we do not know 100% the long-term economic impact on Singapore at this moment.
First question, as Singapore has the lowest 10% tariff in Asia, does the Government not believe that this will put us in a stronger competitive position to continue exporting to the US?
Second clarification, what are the chances that these tariffs will be temporary, perhaps not more than two years?
Three, does the Prime Minister believe that the world has been adjusting to a post-Pax Americana era for a while, and this move by the Trump Administration will only accelerate this process and the world may arrive at a new equilibrium sooner?
Fourth and last clarification, Singapore is now a far larger economy and diverse society than before. Does the Prime Minister agree that the right approach to dealing with adversity is to have free contestation of ideas and not group think?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Mr Speaker, certainly, we welcome all ideas. We have said it repeatedly. And the Government will continue to engage all stakeholders to build a better future for everyone in Singapore.
On the questions that Mr Leong raised, in fact, some of them were already addressed in my speech. I did say that today's order is eroding and a new order is coming in place. And indeed, America's actions may accelerate this move. But we are in a period of transition, one that is uncertain, unsettled and increasingly unstable. Transitions are always unstable until you eventually find a new equilibrium – and we have no idea what that new equilibrium will be or when we will get there.
Will the tariffs be up temporarily? I also mentioned this in my speech just now. There are some hopes that the negotiations may bring down the higher tariffs. But I think we have to be realistic, not sure that this can be done. And when tariffs are raised, it is usually, as you look at the historical record, very hard for them to come back down again. And in any case, the administration has already indicated the base tier is not for negotiation. For now, that is their position. We are engaging them, but if that is truly their position, then these are not temporary tariffs at all. We are not going back to the previous status quo. We are in a new phase with higher trade barriers.
Should we take comfort that we are in the lowest tier? Well, I suppose if you want to see silver linings in dark clouds, you can say so. But certainly, for us as a country, so reliant on trade for our growth, on external markets for our living, this new environment will be detrimental to Singapore's longer-term prospects. So, I take no comfort at all in us being in the lowest tier and I think that we have to brace ourselves for a much bumpier ride ahead.
Mr Speaker: Mr Neil Parekh.
Mr Neil Parekh Nimil Rajnikant (Nominated Member): I thank the Prime Minister for his video, his comments today as well as Deputy Prime Minister Gan for many of the details he provided about what we plan to do in the future.
The current US administration seems to have shown themselves to be fairly open to bilateral negotiations and in fact, has encouraged bilateral negotiations. For small countries like ourselves, it is obviously a lot harder to negotiate because the negotiation is not done on the basis of any straight international law but more of the laws of the jungle, which is, what can you do for me today?
From a perception standpoint, certainly, in the US and perceptions shared by many senior folks in the current administration, Singapore is seen as a rich country with significant, not natural but financial resources, especially in the three sovereign wealth funds, or two plus one, our sovereign wealth system.
I fully appreciate this is a hypothetical question, but the view is, if down the road, in a negotiation, we are asked, \"What can you give to us? Can you commit a $100 billion commitment to invest in US manufacturing to create x-number of jobs?\", how will we respond to that as a country, keeping in mind that our sovereign wealth funds are managed absolutely independently?
The second point is more regarding the domestic companies that we have in Singapore, whose margins have been shrinking even prior to this latest sell war. Whether the imports in the months to come come from China or from other countries where the duties are substantially higher, how will the Government be able to support domestic companies without any form of anti-dumping duties, keeping in mind that the margins are razor thin already, especially for our SMEs?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Sir, our companies as well as our sovereign wealth funds have major investments in America today and continue to see opportunities in US projects. They operate independently, as the Member said. They operate strictly on a commercial basis. They evaluate projects strictly on their own merits, not for diplomatic or political considerations.
So, they will continue with that approach and if indeed, the continued investments that we are making, that Singapore as a whole is making in the US, help to advance a bilateral relationship, so much the better. But we will not compromise our key principles of investing on a proper basis, commercial basis and evaluating projects on the basis that they are fundamentally good investment projects for Singapore.
On the second question on supporting companies, again, we have gone through that. We understand that there will be an impact on our local businesses. We will engage them more, understand better how exactly they are affected by the tariffs. A lot of this is still evolving, as many Members recognise. And so, as we get better information, as we drill down into some of the details, we will be in a better position to shape our responses.
Mr Speaker: Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim. Sorry, I meant Mr Sharael Taha.
Mr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Speaker, I would like to thank the Prime Minister for his assuring words on the uncertainty that is facing us today.
Sir, given the imposition of tariffs on our exports to the US, as Member Saktiandi Supaat has already highlighted, there could be significant implications for our semi-conductor and our biomedical sectors. Has there been any indication of a slowdown or withdrawal of foreign investments in Singapore?
My second clarification is, in light of the evolving global order or the transition, as the Prime Minister has mentioned, while we appreciate the grants and support measures to assist our companies and our workforce, how can Singapore adopt a more proactive stance in navigating this era of uncertainly? How do we find the opportunities in these troubled waters? What role can we play, especially in the global world order, and what unique value propositions can we offer to remain relevant and contribute meaningfully to this global economic transition?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Sir, on investments coming in to Singapore, I think these are still early days. At least in previous crises and slowdowns, we have continued to be able to attract a good and healthy pipeline of investments because Singapore's reputation as a trusted business hub is strong and companies do want to do more activities out of Singapore.
We hope this will continue to be the case, but it is still early days. It is hard to tell. We will continue to engage the key MNEs. What we do hear, for now, is that many are holding back – not so much that they do not want to come to Singapore, but they are just holding back on new projects, precisely because of the uncertainty that I highlighted just now.
That is why the concern is not just about tariffs alone, damaging though they are, but the wider uncertainty about potential changes in rules, which is causing companies everywhere to hold back on new projects, hold back on taking decisions. All that can easily tip the world into a slowdown.
On opportunities, Sir, I highlighted we are engaging our countries in ASEAN to see what more we can do as ASEAN to make ASEAN more competitive. There is renewed, I would say, emphasis and a strong desire to do more, particularly in this new environment. So, we are hopeful that we can push through some of these ASEAN initiatives.
There are other like-minded countries who believe firmly in a rules-based trading system, in open and free trade. We are in touch with them, engaging them to see what more we can do together.
As I mentioned in my Statement, even if the US has chosen to abandon the WTO, to reject WTO rules and to go in a more protectionist path, the rest of the world does not have to follow. There are will be a coalition of like-minded countries which we will be amongst them, identifying new opportunities for ourselves, finding ways to retain key elements of the multilateral system and seeing how we can evolve and shape a better global system together.
Mr Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Sir, since the 10% tariffs imposed on Singapore are lower than regional competitors like Taiwan, South Korea and Malaysia, which face tariffs ranging from 24% to 32%, this could present a near-term cost advantage for Singapore firms exporting semi-conductors, telecommunications equipment and electronics to the US, relative to exports from these higher-tariff countries.
The Prime Minister just now acknowledged that this was a silver lining. But are our economic agencies stepping up efforts to help Singapore firms secure US demand in these areas before global buyers reorganise their supply chains and lock in new sourcing arrangements?
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Certainly, I think this is part and parcel of the task force's strategy. We are looking at both the shorter term as well as the longer term, and some of these supply chain reorganisation will take some time. Logistics and some capacity have to be increased in order to open up new markets and new sources. So, I think some of these will take time to reorganise and that will happen in the medium to longer term, working with the industries, trying to attract more investments so that they are anchored in Singapore.
But always also bear in mind, as we have more investments into Singapore and taking advantage of a lower tariff, as the Member mentioned, to export to the US, our trade balance would start to shift. At some point in time, you will find that we are also going to face challenges as well. So, we have to exercise some care in organising this, but certainly, we will continue to explore.
Also bear in mind that unless we are in the same market, some of the components that we purchase will then become more expensive because they are going to face duties. But at the same time, some of the economies that are selling our products to may be exporting to the US. If they are facing a higher tariff from the US, then our exports may be affected because, then their demand will come down; they will buy less from us.
I think this is an entire global chain effect. We should not look at it just simply from any particular single segment of the trade because it is going to change the entire playing field. So, that is why the Prime Minister mentioned that this is going to be a new economic landscape that we need to appreciate, to understand how it is going to be reorganised and restructured.
One of the purposes of the task force is to engage the private sector, to engage the people on the ground who are operating this and to have a sense of where they are moving their pieces. Are they going to relocate their production base? Are they going to change their purchasing strategy? Where the products are going to come from and where our exports are going to?
All these, we need to have a better assessment. All these are in a flux today because everyone is still negotiating and they are still thinking through what they need to do. Particularly, in semi-conductor, it is a very complex supply chain. If you move one piece, you need to move the entire ecosystem. So, it is not so easy to adjust and to reconfigure the semi-conductor ecosystem.
Mr Speaker: Mr Xie Yao Quan.
Mr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong): Sir, the Prime Minister spoke about the rest of the world not needing to follow the US as it turns protectionist and about Singapore's hope to work with the rest of the world to double down on global integration. I agree with this point but my worry is about global leadership for and from the rest of the world to double down on this integration going forward. So, what is the Prime Minister's assessment of how the void in global leadership, left behind by the US, can be filled; and also how may Singapore contribute to and support this backfilling in the global leadership void?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Sir, we share the same concern. This is precisely why there is so much uncertainty in the world today. Who is going to step into the vacuum? There is no clear answer.
While Singapore can try to do our best to speak up, to carrel and to engage like-minded countries, let us be realistic. We are not going to be able to fill the vacuum ourselves. We need other big players to step in. So, we are engaging all of them in Europe, in Asia, in the Middle East and hopefully, together as a coalition or as a broader, wider group of countries, there will be enough voices that share a common interest in keeping the WTO system going, updating it and maintaining our rules-based trading system. These are efforts that we will continue to press on.
Mr Speaker: Ms Hazel Poa.
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Speaker. If I may be allowed to explain what happened earlier. I did have questions, but as clarification was going on, I was revising my questions and you caught me —
Mr Speaker: No worries, go ahead.
Ms Hazel Poa: Alright. I would like to seek confirmation that the latest round of tariff is a violation of the FTA between Singapore and the US, and if so, are we contemplating any action on that front? Given that we are a small country, are we exploring joint negotiations with other countries? I believe there are enough common interest for this to be feasible.
I also wish to note that I am glad to hear that the Government is trying to convert this challenge into an impetus to push for free trade with the rest of the world. I wish to convey my best wishes to the task force led by the Deputy Prime Minister Gan.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Sir, let me just explain the provisions under the FTA. The FTA provides for zero tariff on both sides – the US for us and us for imports from the US. Therefore, any imposition of import duty is a violation of the FTA. But there are exceptions that are granted under the FTA for emergency economic situations. We have that provision, too. In the event of an economic emergency, you have the right to invoke that provision to allow you to put in place measures, including tariffs.
And our understanding is that the US has now invoked emergency economic powers. And therefore, they are going under that provision to say, \"we have the right to introduce that\".
Of course, for parties to the FTA, you also have the right to challenge the assumption. And therefore, you go into a consultation, dispute resolution and to see how we can address the issue, whether first and foremost it is an economic emergency that entitles them to invoke that provision.
So, that is the technical part of the provision under the FTA. What we are doing now is, we are, first, going to embark on a consultation to work with them, to engage them, to first understand what their concerns are that caused them to introduce this basic tariff rate. And eventually, whether or not we want to take action is something that we will have to consider and if we need to take actions under the FTA that allows us to introduce counter-import duties on imports from the US.
We have already said that we do not anticipate the introduction of import duties on imports from the US for the time being. And therefore, I think we will just continue to focus on engaging with the US to find out what are their concerns, whether we are able to address their concerns, so as to, hopefully, as the Prime Minister said, if there is room to negotiate, we will see whether we can negotiate for a lowered or waiver of the import tariffs on Singapore's exports to the US.
But even if that is not possible, it is also useful for us to have this engagement to prevent further escalation of import duties, import tariffs on Singapore's exports. As the Member know, they are still in a flux and tariffs that we see today are not the final duties, and there could be additional duties, tariffs that could be imposed. So, I think it is very useful for us to continue this engagement.
I think the Member also earlier talked about whether we are looking at joining hands with our ASEAN partners to see how we can engage the US together, collectively. I think this is something that I mentioned earlier that we are working on. We are talking to our ASEAN counterparts and we are going to have our ASEAN Economic Ministers Meeting on 10 April to discuss this, how do we approach this issue, how can we engage the US collectively as ASEAN.
Mr Speaker: Ms Ng Ling Ling.
Ms Ng Ling Ling (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Speaker, I want to thank the Prime Minister Wong for a very clear Ministerial Statement that helped Singaporeans know the times that we have entered since \"Liberation Day\" announcements and the hard work that the Deputy Prime Minister Gan will be doing for the task force.
My question is, how will our Government communicate to younger people in Singapore from here onwards? I was only in my mid-20s and working in the banking sector during the Asian Financial Crisis, when I experienced treasury profits, hard-earned over months, wiped out in days. And I was in my mid-30s when I was working in the social service sector and saw how corporates who had been supporting us, charities or the lower-income, with donations and volunteers, had to roll out very painful retrenchment programmes to keep the companies afloat and keep as many jobs as they can.
So, my question to the Prime Minister is, our youths as young as 18 years to maybe 35 years from my Youth Network (YN) shared with me that they really benefited from the Prime Minister's engagement with them through the YN platform; so, how will we engage them to help them understand what is going to come going forward and go through the hard ride?
Mr Lawrence Wong: Sir, Ms Ng is correct. Communications are important. Engagements are important. So, we will not just stop at putting out clips on social media or discussing this in Parliament because we are facing real threats, real dangers that all Singaporeans should be aware of.
And so, beyond discussing these issues in this House and sharing them on social media, we will be engaging different engagement sessions with young people, with Singaporeans from different segments. We do that each time we encounter threats, dangers or deal with a crisis. We have done that during COVID-19 when we had to repeatedly engage Singaporeans to address the concerns and to help them understand the nature of the threat and how we are to respond.
In the same way now, when we are dealing with a new situation that poses very real economic threats to our livelihoods and jobs, we will do the same in engaging Singaporeans, young and old.
Mr Speaker: Any more clarifications for the Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister Gan? No.
Order. End of the Ministerial Statement by the Prime Minister. We will now move on to the next Ministerial Statement. Minister for Home Affairs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Question subsequently withdrawn: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Ministry will be working with industry associations to identify Singapore-based companies and sectors most affected by the new US import tariffs; and (b) how is Singapore positioning its economy and supply chain ecosystem to mitigate long-term displacement effects arising from the reconfiguration of global value chains.","2 : Question subsequently withdrawn: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry in light of the recent announcement by the United States to impose a 10 per cent baseline tariff on all imports from Singapore with effect from 5 April 2025, whether the Ministry will (i) support Singapore-owned companies with overseas manufacturing in jurisdictions subject to tariffs exceeding the baseline and are considering relocating or reshoring their supply chains and (ii) provide assistance through tax incentives or contingency support financing to help these companies during this adjustment period."],"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proceedings on Ministerial Statement","subTitle":"Suspension of Standing Order","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr K Shanmugam): Mr Speaker, Sir, before I proceed with the Ministerial Statement on the Government's Position on the Presumptions under the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA), may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move a Motion to suspend Standing Order No 50(2) for the purposes of Ministerial Statement.
This is to allow me to set out the Government's position on the presumptions under MDA 1973 and while there is a pending case on the MDA presumptions before the Courts, my Ministerial Statement will only set out the Government's position generally and will not discuss the specifics of the case.
Mr Speaker: I give my consent. Does the Minister have the general assent of hon Members present to so move?
[(proc text) Hon Members indicated assent. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Minister, please proceed.
Mr K Shanmugam: Thank you, Sir.
I move, \"That the proceedings on the Ministerial Statement on the Government's Position on the Presumptions under the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA), including any subsequent clarifications be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 50(2) to allow me to set out the Government's position on the MDA's presumptions in Parliament.\"
[(proc text) Question put and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, that the proceedings on the Ministerial Statement on the Government's Position on the Presumptions under the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA), including any subsequent clarifications be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 50(2) to allow the Minister for Home Affairs to set out the Government's position on the MDA's presumptions in Parliament. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"The Government's Position on the Presumptions under the Misuse of Drugs Act","subTitle":"Statement by Minister for Home Affairs","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr K Shanmugam): Sir, Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim1 has filed a Parliamentary Question for the Sitting on or after 14 April this year, asking whether the Government has any plans to introduce amendments to the Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA), in relation to the presumptions under the Act.
Mr Zhulkarnain’s question would not have come up for this Sitting. But given the importance of the matter he has raised, I have decided to make a Ministerial Statement.
There is a case pending before the Courts challenging the presumptions. Thus, we have to be careful on what we say in this House. I will, for my part, only set out the Government's policy positions, which has been stated publicly in the past. The law, as it stands now, is based on current policy. The Government has seen no reason to introduce any amendments with regard to those presumptions.
The MDA presumptions date back to the enactment of the MDA itself in 1973. They were debated in Parliament. This Parliament has also discussed the issue, most recently, during the Second Reading of the Misuse of Drugs (Amendment) Bill in 2023. The amendment Bill was passed unanimously.
Why are the presumptions in drug cases necessary? It is essentially to protect Singapore from drug trafficking.
The MDA presumptions deal with the practical challenges in proving certain facts that are often exclusively within the accused person's knowledge or which it would not be practical for the Prosecution to get direct evidence of. For example, the Prosecution will be able to prove that the drugs were in the accused person's possession. But it would be very easy for the accused to claim that he did not know they were drugs and by that way try and avoid conviction. And if he runs that defence, then it may not be easy for the Prosecution to rebut that claim or go get the necessary evidence to prove that the accused was indeed aware that they were drugs. For example, the evidence may be overseas and often quite elusive.
Therefore, the presumptions deal with the accused’s knowledge of the nature of the drugs.
Under the MDA, the onus is on the accused to prove that he did not know that what was found to be in his possession were drugs – and these are usually facts within his knowledge.
The Prosecution must first prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the drugs were in the accused person’s possession. That will then trigger the presumption of knowledge. Also, the Prosecution must still prove all the other elements of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt.
Let me cite a few examples I gave in 2017, when I spoke in Parliament about the evidential difficulties in drug cases and the necessity of the legal presumptions. These were the examples I gave, amongst several.
First was, I quote what I then said: “A person was arrested at Woodlands Checkpoint. He has got 145 grammes of diamorphine. He said he travelled to Kuala Lumpur to look for job opportunities. He was introduced to a man known as 'Uncle'. 'Uncle' then passed him 10 packets of substances and taped these on to his body. This chap then claimed he asked 'Uncle' what they were for, but 'Uncle' showed him three fingers in reply. And he accepted it. He was not aware of the contents and he came here.”
And I went on to say how can the Prosecution rebut this? The truth is only in the person’s mind. “This is why our first Prime Minister, who was a lawyer, knew what the problems would be and reversed the onus of proof.”
Let me give you another example, again, from the same speech: \"[there was a] chap, convicted in 2008. He was asked by one 'Maren' to deliver items in Singapore. He was told that it was medicine. He was told that it was rare and expensive, that it was wrapped up so that it could not be spoilt by coming into contact with air. And so he went to Johor, met 'Maren' and brought it over. You want CNB to disprove this? You think it is possible? Or do you think it is fair that the accused should prove it?”
As I said, \"[w]e are dealing with lives here. The life of a trafficker, yes. But we are also dealing with thousands of Singaporean lives. And the person must get a fair trial. Prosecution must prove what was the substance, how much was it, and possession, and any other evidence that they can find. If the person has a defence, it is only fair that he proves it.\"
Sir, that was what I said here in 2017. That has been the position in law since 1973.
While many other countries have faced huge difficulties in combating drugs, Singapore has been able to maintain one of the lowest rates of drug abuse in the world. That is despite the worsening global drug situation and our location at the doorstep of the Golden Triangle, one of the world’s leading areas for the production of illicit drugs. I went into detail on this just last year in my Ministerial Statement on Singapore’s national drug control policy.
The presumptions have been an essential part of the legal framework that enables us to deal effectively with the drug problem.
Sir, to conclude, as I said earlier, the Government has no plans to introduce any amendments as yet with regard to the presumptions, as the law now stands.
Mr Zhulkarnain’s question may have arisen by reason of a specific challenge before the Courts, which I referred to earlier. I can say that the Government will defend the constitutionality of the presumptions. We should be careful not to discuss the specifics of any challenge. That is for the Courts to decide.
Mr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Sir, thank you for the opportunity to seek some clarifications from the Minister.
Sir, I confirm, as the Minister shared, that there is no change to the Government's position on presumptions. And I believe the Minister of State for Home Affairs in March 2023, in his Second Reading speech, restated the Government's position on presumptions. I did not hear anything new from the Minister, so I am trying to understand the reason why the Minister has to restate the position, because it is the existing position.
I looked at some earlier Parliamentary Questions that were filed. In 2019, after the Court of Appeals judgment in Adili, there was a statement from the Government stating that it would be studying the observations made by the Court of Appeal and would set out its position in due course and as to whether any legislative amendments are necessary. This was with respect to the presumptions and specifically on the position of the Court of Appeal on wilful blindness.
So, can I just confirm that the Government actually is continuing to review that particular judgment from the Court of Appeal? Because that is the closest I think we have come to the Government saying that it is reviewing something on presumptions, but I am not sure whether that is the case that the Minister is referring to.
Mr K Shanmugam: No, that is not the case that I was referring to. I assume that Mr Zhulkarnain's question arose because there is now pending a challenge in the Court of Appeal.
Mr Speaker: Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim.
Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim (Chua Chu Kang): Grateful, Speaker. I thank the Minister for answering my Parliamentary Question. I would not go into that particular case and indeed, the question was precipitated by the recent constitutionality challenge.
I have two questions for the Minister. First, the landscape of drug abuse and habits would change. I think the MDA sets out certain fixed thresholds for presumptions. For instance, 15 grammes of diamorphine or pure heroin, which would actually feed an addict for almost a year, or almost 200 abusers within one week. First question, would the Government be looking or how is the Government continually reviewing the fixed quantity thresholds of the MDA presumptions; possibly to take into account the actual patterns of drug abuse or trafficking, the changing drug markets and the new substances that are coming up?
The second question is on section 33B(1) of the MDA, which requires: first, the offender's role to be limited to that of a courier; second, a certificate to be issued by the Public Prosecutor confirming the offenders' substantive assistance in disrupting drug trafficking activities. In this regard, is the Government studying the effectiveness of this discretionary sentencing on whether it is helping to apprehend more traffickers higher up on the supply chain, or an effective deterrence in this regard?
Mr K Shanmugam: Thank you, Sir. Sir, on the first question, the review is done annually, because what matters is not just the weight but the purities. So, the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) and the Ministry of Home Affairs review the weight of the purities annually, and also in discussion with Health Sciences Authority (HSA), so that HSA can flag out if there are any anomalies, in terms of purities and weight that we need to look at. So, the review is done annually, so that we make sure that it is proportionate and relevant to the patterns of consumption and the market.
On the second question, on the whole, having the Certificate of Substantive Assistance has been helpful. There have been a few successes, and our view is we are better off having it rather than not having it. That does not mean that a lot of cases get solved in that way, but there is now an incentive for the drug traffickers or the people persons who are apprehended with drugs on them, and both to show that they are both pure couriers, but also to give as much information as they can. It puts more difficulties on the part of the criminal organisation or people higher up in the chain. They have to take more steps. That itself is helpful, as long as we see it in context.
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Ministerial Statement. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the Day.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Question subsequently withdrawn: To ask the Minister for Home Affairs whether the Government has any plans to introduce amendments to the Misuse of Drugs Act 1973 with regard to the presumptions under that Act."],"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Social Residential Homes Bill ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Eric Chua) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Social and Family Development, I move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
Many Singaporeans have opportunities to flourish and thrive at every life stage. This is part of our social compact, where Singaporeans have access to opportunities and are valued, regardless of their backgrounds or circumstances.
However, some amongst us may not have sufficient means to provide for themselves and may need additional assistance.
Social residential homes provide alternative care arrangements for the most vulnerable amongst us. Today, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) oversees more than 60 social residential homes that provide 24/7 residential care to almost 4,000 residents. These include seniors, vulnerable adults, children and young persons in need of care and protection, persons with disabilities and destitute persons.
Members in this House may be familiar with some social residential homes.
Chen Su Lan Methodist Home, for example, operates a Children’s Home and a Children Disability Home within the same compound. This home provides residential care to children in need of care and protection, including some with developmental needs.
Thye Hua Kwan is another example. They operate seven social residential homes that provide residential care to children and adults with disabilities, and destitute persons.
Social residential homes have existed in Singapore, long before we gained Independence. In the past 60 years, we have journeyed with the sector to provide good quality care to residents through funding, licensing and training.
The Government first started funding Children’s Homes in the 1960s. In the 1970s and 1980s, funding was extended to Homes caring for seniors and persons with disabilities.
To improve the quality of care in Homes, we further introduced a licensing regime for Sheltered Homes under the Homes for the Aged Act in 1988, as well as Homes for Children and Young Persons, which include Children’s Homes and Children Disability Homes, under the amendments to the Children and Young Persons Act in 2011.
We also recognised the need to equip their staff with specialised skillsets to care for persons in residential care. In 2011, MSF and the Social Service Institute developed certificate programmes in residential care. To date, about 1,500 professionals have been trained.
More recently, in 2024, MSF and SG Enable introduced a skills and competency framework to guide Disability Sector Professionals, such as care staff and social workers, in effectively supporting and providing training for persons with disabilities.
Over the years, care models have evolved to better meet residents’ needs. Today, we adopt a tiered approach for the Children’s Homes, where more intensive care is provided to children with higher care needs.
The Social Residential Homes Bill is a proactive step taken by MSF to codify the good progress that has been made in raising the quality of care provided by the sector over the years.
The first question people ask tends to be “Why now?”. To be clear, we are not coming from a position of deficit. Incidents of a serious nature are rare and our Homes are upholding good standards. The introduction of the Bill is to prepare for the future.
Looking ahead, our population is rapidly ageing and family sizes are shrinking. The Government continues to strengthen efforts to help our seniors age in place, and enable persons with disabilities to live with dignity and participate in the community. Nonetheless, we recognise that there will always be some who are more vulnerable, who will need residential care. It is therefore important that we continually strive for higher quality care in social residential homes.
This Bill will uplift the quality of care across the social residential home sector and strengthen safeguards for the safety and well-being of residents.
Under this Bill, we will consolidate the existing licensing regimes for Sheltered Homes, and Homes for Children and Young Persons, which comprises Children’s Homes and Children Disability Homes. In addition, unlicensed Homes, which are mostly governed today through funding agreements, will now be brought under the ambit of this Bill.
In total, 61 Homes with about 4,000 residents will come under this Bill – a significant increase from the 35 Homes, with approximately 1,100 residents, that are currently licensed.
To arrive at this Bill, we conducted many engagements with the different stakeholders, such as Home operators, board members and members of the public. I would like to express my appreciation to all operators and board members of the 61 Homes who have worked closely with us to develop this Bill. Your views, ideas and feedback have helped us to better understand the needs in our social residential home landscape. Thank you for your active participation in co-creating solutions with us and for your tireless work over the years to care for our residents.
Before I go into the key provisions, allow me to first clarify the three main groups of people mentioned in the Bill.
First, the licensee. This refers to entities or individuals who are responsible and accountable for the overall compliance with requirements in the Bill.
Second, the key appointment holders. This refers to individuals who are responsible for strategic leadership and overall management of the Home.
Third, the person-in-charge. This refers to the head of the Home who oversees day-to-day management of Home operations.
I will now turn to the key provisions of the Bill, which are grouped into three key areas: first, setting clear standards for Homes to deliver quality care; second, establishing stronger safeguards for residents’ safety and well-being; and third, introducing a comprehensive enforcement framework as a deterrence against errant operators.
The first key area is setting clear standards for Homes to deliver quality care.
MSF will issue Codes of Practice, which comprises regulatory requirements pertaining to key areas, such as: one, governance of the Home; two, management of premises; three, resident management; and four, incident management.
Today, some Homes already comply with standards as set out in our service model requirements, in order to receive funding. Moving forward, these Codes of Practice will provide greater clarity to both operators and residents on the standards of care that are expected from operators. These Codes of Practice will be issued after close consultation with operators, with guidance and support from MSF to ensure that Homes can meet the specified requirements.
The second key area focuses on stronger safeguards for residents’ safety and well-being. Home residents require 24/7 care and are heavily reliant on others to fulfil daily living needs, such as dressing and toileting. Other residents are children. These are highly vulnerable persons. It is therefore necessary to ensure that residents not only receive quality care and support, but are also safeguarded from harm in these Homes.
Our Home operators share this common commitment with us. Mr Michael Gan, chief executive officer of the Bishan Home for the Intellectually Disabled, commended the Bill for building on the good foundations our sector has already established. He described these clear parameters as a step towards greater accountability to help us achieve our common goal of residents’ safety and well-being.
Ms Nura Binte Hassan, the head of Bukit Batok Home for the Aged, has been part of this sector for more than 10 years, and has seen the progress that we have made over this time. She, too, welcomes the Bill as a timely move that provides clarity to the sector and reaffirms our collective commitment towards the welfare and overall well-being of residents.
We will put in place measures to ensure residents are not placed at risk of harm in the Home. Firstly, it will be mandatory for all licensees, key appointment holders, persons-in-charge, staff and other individuals who perform prescribed duties, such as vendors who provide direct care to residents, to undergo a suitability assessment.
This requirement is not new to most of the Home operators. Today, suitability assessments already apply to staff in our funded Homes, as well as licensees and staff in our licensed Homes.
Under the Bill, we will extend this practice to all other Homes. We want to be sure that only individuals with good standing are allowed to be deployed in the Homes. This would ensure continuity of Home operations and continuity of care for residents within.
In so doing, we can also provide assurance to residents, their family members as well as operators that individuals deployed in these Homes can be trusted to provide quality care to residents.
Second, the use of reasonable force or mechanical restraints is prohibited unless under specified circumstances.
Today, some residents may exhibit aggressive or challenging behaviours due to underlying root causes, such as psychiatric conditions. These behaviours may put them at risk of harming themselves or others.
Under strictly defined circumstances, the use of reasonable force and/or mechanical restraints by properly trained staff could help to ensure that residents do not further harm themselves, or other persons in the Home, like fellow residents or staff.
We take a firm stance against any unauthorised or excessive use of force or mechanical restraints. Therefore, MSF will set out the parameters within which the use of force or mechanical restraints would be permitted under the Bill, to deter against any potential forms of abuse.
Under the Bill, MSF will appoint a Board of Visitors to conduct independent checks on social residential homes. The Board of Visitors comprises professionals who complement MSF’s licensing inspections to ensure that residents reside in safe and sanitary premises.
The Board of Visitors visits Homes regularly to check on its premises, speak to residents and provide third-party feedback to MSF on the Home’s living conditions and standards of care. They will also share best practices with the Homes they visit.
Today, some Homes, such as Welfare Homes and Children’s Homes, are already visited regularly by a Board of Visitors and have benefited from such visits. For Marymount Centre, a Children’s Home, these visits have provided a fresh perspective on the Home’s operations and enabled them to identify areas for improvement. For Bukit Batok Home for the Aged, their staff have come to regard such visits as invaluable opportunities for learning of best practices from other Homes. We will therefore extend this good practice to other Homes through this Bill.
The third key area focuses on a comprehensive enforcement framework to deter against errant operators.
To be clear, our Homes have been providing good care to residents. We have worked well with operators to continuously review the care provided and where needed, made operational adjustments to uphold quality care. Nonetheless, we do not take for granted that egregious incidents will never happen in our Homes. Our residents are highly vulnerable and we need effective levers to prevent and manage incidents, should they occur. Therefore, under this Bill, we have introduced a comprehensive enforcement framework as a deterrent against errant operators.
Under the Bill, MSF may take a range of regulatory action against errant operators. As part of a graduated approach to enforcement, we have introduced a range of tools that will allow us to take regulatory actions that correspond to the degree of harm caused.
Regulatory actions under the existing licensing regimes in the Homes for the Aged Act and Children and Young Persons Act are limited. Today, we can revoke a licence if a regulatory breach has occurred. However, some regulatory breaches could be minor and need not warrant a revocation of licence. Instead, it may be more appropriate to shorten the Home’s licence tenure and allow the Home a chance to rectify the breach. We are not able to do so today.
It is therefore timely for MSF to update our suite of regulatory actions. Under the Social Residential Homes Bill, in addition to the revocation of licence, we can also modify, shorten, or suspend licences, and these would be more appropriate for less severe breaches. MSF may also pursue criminal penalties for more serious contraventions.
Today, residents in our Homes are already protected under other legislation, such as the Children and Young Persons Act, and the Penal Code. MSF also closely manages our funded homes through funding agreements, to make sure residents are safe and well.
Under the Social Residential Homes Bill, we have taken the opportunity to review the penalty quanta to be imposed for egregious offences. For example, under MSF’s Homes for the Aged Act, operating a Sheltered Home without a licence may warrant a fine of no more than $5,000, or imprisonment for no more than two years, or both. This is the maximum penalty that can be imposed.
Under this Bill, the offence of operating a Home without a licence may now warrant a fine of no more than $100,000, with no change to the maximum jail term. This signals the importance of the safety and well-being of residents, who are vulnerable.
We recognise that Homes have concerns about the penalties under this Bill. Many operators in this space are driven by a sense of compassion and a deep sense of social responsibility, and many of their Board members are themselves volunteers.
First and foremost, MSF will take a developmental and supportive stance. Our goal is not to be punitive at the outset, but to support Homes in meeting standards that safeguard the well-being of their residents.
We intend to work closely with Homes to uplift the sector. To operators of live-in care facilities who are uncertain about their licensing obligations, we encourage you to reach out to MSF for support, as we transition to this new framework.
Further, to assuage Homes’ concerns, we will set out the responsibilities of each stakeholder in our Regulations and Codes of Practice. Homes will be consulted in this exercise conducted later this year.
MSF will also be able to issue step-in orders to temporarily take over a failing operator’s Home for continuity of care for residents.
As far as possible, MSF will work closely with operators to promptly resolve operational issues. However, we recognise that some operators may not be able do so even with other measures, such as capability building and regulatory action, in place. We must therefore have a fallback plan to minimise disruption and ensure the safety, welfare or well-being of the residents in the Home. This is when step-in powers will be activated.
This may take the form of appointing a third party to advise the licensee on the Home’s operations or a temporary transfer of residents to another Home. Should there be a need, MSF may also appoint another operator to temporarily take over operations to ensure continuity of care for residents.
MSF will adopt a risk-based regulatory approach. As a start, we will license social residential homes that provide long-term and 24/7 residential care. Homes that fall under the scope of the Social Residential Homes Bill are Adult Disability Homes, which includes Adult Disability Hostels, Homes for Children and Young Persons which comprises Children’s Homes and Children Disability Homes, Sheltered Homes and Welfare Homes. Operators whose homes fall under this scope have been consulted and notified of our intent to license the respective Homes. For other operators who are unsure if you fall under the scope of the Bill, please step forward to check with us in MSF.
Should the needs of clients in other Home types evolve, we will review whether to extend the licensing regime to these Homes as well. Consultations with the relevant stakeholders will be carried out as part of these reviews.
To support operators in transitioning to a new licensing regime, MSF and the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) have set aside a $33 million Transition Support Package for all social residential homes that will be licensed under this Bill. This is on top of ongoing adjustments to our programme funding for social residential homes. With this funding, Homes will be able to invest in:
Training for staff in critical areas such as management of violent behaviours by residents. This will help to keep both residents and staff in our Homes safe.
Updating or installing CCTV systems, to enable Homes to better monitor the safety of residents. This will also function as a deterrent against any form of abuse against residents or staff.
Change management efforts, such as planning and reviewing internal work processes, to adhere to the regulatory requirements under this Bill.
The Transition Support Package has been well-received by Home operators. The components of this package were designed based on operators’ feedback and suggestions on support that would help them transition successfully to the new licensing regime.
To our Home operators, we are committed to supporting you in this journey. Besides the Transition Support Package, MSF will also offer developmental consultations to social residential homes. These developmental consultations form a key part of our pre-implementation preparation. They will provide operators with greater clarity on key areas of improvement that they will need to focus on as they prepare to onboard the new licensing regime. It will also enable MSF to provide operators with more targeted support and guidance under this Bill.
I have shared extensively about the enhanced safeguards for residents’ safety and well-being that we will introduce under this Bill. I will now touch on what we are doing for the Homes’ staff.
The safety and well-being of staff are equally important to us. MSF adopts a zero-tolerance policy towards abuse or harassment of staff. Staff in these Homes are “public service workers” under the Protection from Harassment Act 2014 and as such, will receive enhanced protection under that Act. Any person who abuses staff in the Homes can also be taken to task under the Penal Code 1871.
Beyond the Bill, MSF and NCSS will continue to work closely with the sector to develop a strong and resilient social service workforce.
I want to convey my heartfelt appreciation to all staff working in our Homes. To all the dedicated staff, we want to express our deepest gratitude because we know your work is not easy. The challenges you face require strength, passion and most of all, compassion. The residents rely on you and your care, and I want to assure you that your contributions are appreciated every single day, even though the residents may not say it. We value your hard work and contributions and will continue to invest in your growth and well-being.
We regularly review the NCSS Skills and Salary Guidelines and work with Social Service Agencies to ensure that salaries in the sector are competitive with comparable roles in competing markets.
Your professional development matters to us. We have charted progression pathways through the Skills Framework for Social Service and will continue to provide support for staff to be equipped with the necessary competencies to upskill themselves and effectively deliver care.
We recognise that work in the social services can be demanding, which is why we are providing resources to both employers and employees. For instance, NCSS works closely with social service agencies to develop stronger organisational capabilities and create a supportive workplace environment. While we work to equip and empower leaders in social service agencies to create a supportive work environment, social service employees can also access well-being support resources provided by NCSS.
Sir, let me conclude. This Bill reflects the Government’s commitment to uplift and strengthen support for the most vulnerable amongst us, in partnership with our community partners.
The Bill builds upon past efforts by the Government and the social residential home operators to provide good quality care for these residents. We will continue to work closely with Homes to achieve our collective vision to care for the vulnerable in our society, to realise our ambition for a caring Singapore where no one is left behind.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Mr Speaker, social residential homes play an essential role in our society, providing a sanctuary for many of our elderly and vulnerable citizens.
First, let us take a moment to appreciate the progress that Singapore has made in establishing a framework of care within our social residential homes. These facilities are often staffed with trained and dedicated caregivers. And many have adopted person-centred care practices that focus on the individual needs, preferences and dignity of their residents.
However, there is still much work to be done. Standards of care can vary significantly from one home to another, depending largely on the resources, training and infrastructure of the facility. While some residential homes provide exemplary care, others fall short in key areas such as staffing, training and the availability of specialised care for those with dementia, physical disability or other chronic conditions.
It is therefore vital that we assess and enhance the standards of care in these facilities, confront the myriad challenges they face and prepare for the future demand that will inevitably arise from our changing population demographics.
Sir, social residential homes face numerous challenges that threaten their ability to maintain high standards of care. One of the more pressing issues is the acute shortage of skilled caregivers. As our population ages, the demand for caregiving services is expected to increase, yet, we struggle to recruit and retain competent staff. Low wages, high job demands and difficult working conditions contribute to high turnover rates that would inevitably compromise the quality of care residents receive.
Additionally, financial sustainability is a recurrent concern. Many homes rely heavily on Government funding, donations and the goodwill of volunteerism. As the economic landscape fluctuates, securing the necessary funds to maintain and improve these homes becomes increasingly challenging. This precarious financial situation can lead to a detrimental ripple effect on both the quality of care and the emotional well-being of the residents.
By 2030, Singapore will have one in four residents above the age of 65. We can expect this growing elderly population to lead to an increased demand for social residential homes. The complexity of caregiving will escalate, necessitating not only more beds but also more robust support systems that can cater to an ageing population with diverse needs. This Bill is, therefore, timely as we proactively address the structure and function of our social residential homes to ensure they can meet both present and future needs and challenges. However, I have some questions and suggestions.
Sir, the Bill proposes to increase penalties significantly. The penalty for unauthorised operation of a home is proposed to increase from the current maximum fine of $5,000 and/or up to two years of imprisonment; to a maximum fine of $100,000 and/or up to two years of imprisonment. I would like to ask, what the rationale was behind increasing the penalties by 20-fold and whether such a hefty fine is reasonable, with respect to the level of harm done.
Will MSF be making clear the responsibilities and liabilities of the board members of these homes, many of whom are volunteers? My concern is that the sharp increase in penalties may result in a chilling effect that deters volunteers from serving on the boards of the social residential homes.
Sir, my next two points pertain to standards and regulatory costs. Social residential homes are currently required to comply with sector-specific requirements based on their service models. I would like to ask how have such sector-specific standards changed over the years since the various types of homes were set up and how does MSF see the different standards evolving as we consolidate all the various requirements under one licensing regime? For example, will we see a lower caregiver-to-residents ratio?
With all homes grappling with a lean workforce, will the new licensing requirements lead to a higher regulatory cost? What is the expected increase in costs that MSF projects will be passed down to consumers? Will the one-off Transition Support Package that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned in his opening speech be sufficient in helping the homes transit to the new licensing regime, especially for homes with much lesser resources? Can MSF consider a stepped-down support package to help defray the expected increases in recurring operational costs for a few more additional years?
Sir, I understand that the Singapore Boys' Home and Singapore Girls' Home are not covered under this Bill. What are the reasons for excluding them out of the ambit of this regulatory regime? Are the Boys' and Girls' Homes subject to the same standards as those provided under this Bill? Who is responsible for ensuring the quality of care at these homes?
Sir, the proposed provisions make clear the parameters within which a staff may use reasonable force and mechanical restraints on a resident, for the safety of other residents and staff working in the home. A staff who causes grievous hurt or harm to a resident arising from the use of excessive force or unauthorised forms of restraints can be subjected to criminal penalties under the Penal Code; and regulatory actions under the Act.
What is reasonable force may differ from person to person and proper training is, therefore, crucial to ensure that the staff assigned to conduct such functions are equipped to do so. I would like to ask if MSF has data on the number of cases of social residential home staff that have been investigated and taken to task for use of excessive force over the past 10 years.
Can MSF share more details about how such cases get picked up for investigation? Is there a whistle-blowing channel for family members or members of public to report any perceived use of excessive force? Will there be an ombudsman to investigate such reports?
Sir, the proposed provisions will also empower MSF to issue a step-in order to completely or partially takeover a failing social residential home to ensure a continuity of care for residents. I would like to ask how many such homes have required a change of operators over the past 10 years? In the event of MSF taking over or asking another operator to take over a failing facility, how does MSF intend to ensure a smooth transition, especially for the affected staff and the residents involved?
Does MSF have a projection on the number of social residential homes that will be required in the next 10 years? What is the projected number of staff needed to operate these homes? Will MSF consider managing some of these facilities directly, given the amount of resources required?
Sir, in closing, I would like to commend the MSF team and the many caregivers in our social residential homes for the tireless and often difficult work in providing round-the-clock care for our vulnerable residents. We must continue to invest in comprehensive training and continuous professional development for these caregivers. Partnering with educational institutions and industry experts can help equip caregivers with the necessary skills and knowledge to provide exceptional care.
To retain skilled workers, we must offer competitive salaries, benefits and support systems. Initiatives, such as mental health support for caregivers and career development opportunities, can contribute to staff satisfaction and retention.
We should also explore diversified funding models that go beyond Government dependence. Increased collaboration with the private sector and philanthropic organisations can help create a more sustainable financial ecosystem for these homes and I hope the Government can play a useful matchmaker role in this.
The homes should also be encouraged to leverage technology to improve care delivery. From telemedicine to digital health monitoring, innovative solutions can enhance the quality of care and keep residents connected with their loved ones. Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Mr Speaker, under the Social Residential Homes Bill, social residential homes include any premises they are used to provide residential accommodation to persons who require care or social intervention. We are told that MSF oversees a range of social residential homes that provide short- to long-term residential care to different residential profiles.
We are told that MSF has taken feedback from Children's Homes, Children's Disability Homes, Sheltered Homes, Welfare Homes, Adult Disability Homes and Adult Disability Hostels, and MSF will support 61 social residential homes to be licensed under this Bill, once passed, to meet the requirements of the Bill. This Bill aims to codify and harmonise existing standards under a common framework to enable Singaporeans in these homes to benefit from a robust regulatory regime.
Mr Speaker, while I welcome the introduction of this Bill and the regime, I would like to seek some clarifications.
Minister Masagos mentioned on 10 March 2025 that MSF has worked closely with social residential homes to raise standards of care for residents and that the new licensing regime is proposed to ensure the safety and wellness of these residents. May I clarify if MSF has uncovered uneven standards of care among these homes, requiring the proposed increase and harmonisation of regulations under this Bill? And, if so, what are some of these shortfalls and the reasons behind them?
Second, a licensing regime, while well-intentioned, also involves the meeting of Government-mandated standards in staffing requirements and other service quality matters. This will involve both upfront and recurrent costs on the part of social service agencies operating these homes. May I know how MSF is reviewing its funding arrangements with these social service agencies, whom I believe would have shared their feedback on their operational challenges, especially in light of the requirements of the new regime.
Third, staffing requirements are a common concern shared by many social service agencies that manage MSF-funded programmes. The resident or client profile of MSF-funded programmes, especially those in residential programmes, is often challenging and complex.
Running a social residential home is also a labour-intensive operation, requiring dedicated staff whose pay often does not commensurate with their work. Understaffing and staff burnout often lead to poor service and care standards. May I clarify whether MSF has received feedback from social service agencies running these residential homes for a lower staff-resident ratio and how is the Government going to provide more support for the manpower manning in the social residential homes, which is critical to the requirements and improvements expected under this Bill, even if this may require more funding support?
The Minister has also said that this Bill provides for the possibility of homes evolving to meet residents needs where different client profiles could be housed together. As I have mentioned earlier about challenging client profiles, may I clarify the rationale behind MSF considering the possibility of housing different client profiles together? Can the Minister elaborate with some details on this? While there could be economies of scale from a bureaucratic perspective; from the operational perspective, it could be a layering of one challenge onto another.
I hope MSF will adopt a consultative approach with social service agencies before imposing requirements that, if not appropriately funded, may be difficult to meet.
We are also told that MSF will support all social residential homes licensed under this Bill with a one-off transition support package. For social residential homes seeking to be licensed for the first time, MSF will also offer pre-licensing checks to identify areas for improvement prior to implementation. Granted that the 61 social residential homes may consist of organisations of different sizes, resources or strengths. May I ask, what does the transition support package consist and would the support vary depending on the size of the organisation or even the extent of assistance as required by specific organisations, rather than a one-size-fits-all?
I also hope that the Ministry will exercise sufficient flexibility so that all social residential homes have sufficient time and resources to make the necessary conversion to adapt to the new regulatory regime without being penalised, especially social residential homes who may have been relatively constrained by their resources.
We should ensure that the welfare of the clients in these social residential homes will remain the top priority, even as social service agencies convert and adjust to the requirements of the new regime. Mr Speaker, notwithstanding my questions, I support this Bill, which is a step in the right direction and I hope that MSF will consider the concerns I have raised.
Mr Speaker: Ms Ng Ling Ling.
Ms Ng Ling Ling: Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Social Residential Homes Bill. About 10 years ago, when I was the managing director of Community Chest in NCSS, I remember being invited by MSF colleagues then to visit a social residential home run by a charitable social service agency, looking after young children who had experienced severe abuses, including verbal, physical and sexual transgressions committed against them.
I was carefully prepared by MSF for the visit, so as not to be shocked by behaviours, such as punching fists in the walls and others, before I was brought to visit the Home, as MSF colleagues wanted to discuss fundraising required to improve the care model of these children. While I was prepared for the worst, what greeted me at the Home – specifically in a room where some of the children were having tuition for their homework – were innocent young faces, not unlike that of my own son who was about the same age as these children then.
All I could conclude from that visit was that these children were born in the wrong families and wrong homes. What I was thankful for after the visit was an anonymous donor, whom I still do not know the identity of, who eventually donated half a million dollars to Community Chest through a former NCSS Board member and helped MSF pilot a better care model for these children.
Sir, social residential homes in Singapore house some of the most vulnerable Singaporeans of all ages, genders, race and religions. A strong legislative framework and rules to safeguard their living are thus extremely important and necessary. According to MSF, there are currently 61 such Homes run by various social service agencies. They range from Children's Homes, Homes for the Disabled, Aged Homes, Welfare Homes for Women and six Homes, such as Angsana, Banyan, Meranti Home in Pelangi Village in my Jalan Kayu constituency for the destitute, some of whom suffer from mental illnesses.
These Homes provide their residents with 24-hour by seven days residential accommodation and care as their own families or homes can no longer house them for a variety of reasons, often complex and not easy to resolve. This Social Residential Homes Bill which codifies the rules and changes that are important for the protection of how the Homes should be run for the welfare and well-being of these vulnerable residents, our fellow Singaporeans, is thus much needed. I strongly support the Bill, but will like to raise three areas for clarifications and suggestions.
Firstly, on the Transition Support Package of $33 million one-off transition amount for training, safety and capability building, for example, to install CCTV systems for safety purposes, I wonder if MSF should not let this be just a one-time transition funding support, but instead, set up a more committed long-term capability fund, similar to the successful multi-year VWO Capability Fund (VCF) that MSF and NCSS are both experienced in designing, administering, evaluating and extending when the needs remain. I have seen VCF alleviate the standards and capabilities of many social service agencies delivering strategic and critical programmes over more than a decade of serving in the social service sector in my work at NCSS.
The social service agencies like Metta Welfare Association (Metta), Movement for the Intellectually Disabled of Singapore (MINDS), Thye Hua Kwan, St Andrew's, Asian Women Welfare Association (AWWA), TOUCH, Pertapis and Trybe, just to name a few, running social residential homes will know well that these Homes are some of the hardest programmes that they need to deliver among their range of social service programmes that they provide. Helping them build standards, staff competencies and operational capabilities should not be a one-off effort but a long-term commitment.
Another help that MSF and NCSS should seriously consider is the facilitation for better use of public funds to help these social service agencies, such as in the bulk procurement for common equipment like CCTV systems, which can be very costly if each Home procures on its own.
Next, on clarifying responsibilities of board members and volunteers. I note that the Bill provides for powers for MSF to issue Codes of Practices to codify standards of care, including governance, management of premises, resident management and incident management in the Homes. Breach of these Codes of Practices may result in regulatory actions for all social residential homes, irrespective of whether they are funded by MSF or not.
The Bill also provides for comprehensive framework to deter errant operators, where MSF may take regulatory actions and pursue criminal penalties against errant and/or failing social residential homes operators. MSF may also issue step-in orders to temporarily take over a failing operator's social residential home to ensure continuity of care. Further, MSF has introduced a new licensing regime with criminal penalties and regulatory actions revised to be proportionate to comparable offences under other Acts, such as the Healthcare Services Act.
While I appreciate the good intentions to safeguard residents and the running such Homes through these changes, I would like to clarify at what level in MSF will the Codes of Practices, that can be issued from time to time with regulatory penalties for non-compliance, be approved. I understand that such codes may contain more details and requirements on operators than what the Bill has shown. Again, how does MSF strike a balance, considering the capabilities of the operators, and how will potential penalties for breaches be informed to the operators in each Code issued?
I know of several friends in busy professions who are serving voluntarily on the Boards of the social service agencies running some of these social residential homes out of care and concerns for these vulnerable residents. They are unsure how the stiffer regulatory penalties will be imposed on the Board members, individually or collectively, in situations of breaches that are not of their doing. They asked what are the implications on the Board, the management and the staff, and how will MSF assess where the buck stops.
Lastly, on long-term capacity and capability building, I cannot empathise more with the challenges that the social service agencies running these homes face in manpower recruitment, retention and development. Many of them are highly reliant on foreign staff as it is difficult to get Singaporeans to work in many of the roles needed to run such Homes.
On the screening of foreign staff, I will like to ask how is MSF helping the agencies to ensure if the background checks of these staff are true and correct, especially if they come from countries that may have less developed systems of records on criminal or civil acts of delinquency, abuse or violence.
I would like to take a moment to extend my deep appreciation to Singaporeans who volunteer to be on the Board of Visitors and Case Review Committees of these social residential homes, especially those who visit the residents on a monthly frequency. From my visits of some of these Homes over the years that I worked in NCSS, I have seen the most vulnerable of vulnerable Singaporeans living in them.
Many of them, children and seniors included, may not be able to articulate their needs, given their disabilities or trauma that they have experienced unless a responsible adult visits them regularly and is observant of their behaviours and moods. The Board of Visitors forms an essential protective channel to give voices to some of these voiceless residents. I urge MSF to step up in expanding the group of the Board of Visitors for these Homes and encourage Singaporeans who have the compassion and commitment to step up and volunteer in these important roles.
Each of the 61 Homes need good Singaporeans who are more privileged to be their volunteers, to serve on their Boards of Visitors and to be donors, like the anonymous donor that I mentioned, who had given to the Community Chest, in my opening paragraph.
My final appeal is to the Government, including the Ministry of Finance, to consider providing more budgets for MSF to gradually convert these social residential homes for the vulnerable to purpose-built Homes, like what the Ministry of Education (MOE) did for special education (SPED) schools over the past decades. MOE's efforts with the SPED schools have transformed what used to be disused and barely retrofitted SPED schools that I visited in the early 2000s, when I first entered the social service sector, to state-of-the-art well designed SPED Schools, like Pathlight School, that we see today in the Ang Mo Kio Group Representation Constituency where I serve as a Member of Parliament.
When the homes of our most vulnerable of the vulnerable Singaporeans, the least, the last and the lost are much like better homes that most Singaporeans experience through the decades as Singapore matures as a highly developed nation. I think then, we can truly be proud to bear the hallmark of a strong and caring nation who leaves no one behind. With that Sir, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, today, we are here to discuss a Bill that speaks to the very heart of who we are as a society. The Social Residential Homes Bill is about care, dignity and responsibility. It is about how we treat the most vulnerable amongst us – our children, seniors, disabled – those who, for whatever reason, cannot care for themselves.
Some of these individuals have loving families who simply do not have the means or ability to provide round-the-clock care. Others have no one – no family, no safety net, no place to call home, except for these social residential homes. Their well-being, their safety, their quality of life, all of it rests on the people who run and work in these facilities. That is a profound responsibility. And it is our duty to make sure that responsibility is met – not just with good intentions, but with real, enforceable standards that ensure quality care.
This Bill takes important steps. But the real question before us today is this: are we setting the highest possible standards? And more importantly, are we making sure that those standards are upheld every single day, for every single resident? I seek several clarifications.
First, Mr Speaker, Sir, we all know that Singapore is ageing. By 2030, one in four Singaporeans will be over the age of 65. That is just six years away. That means more people will need affordable, accessible residential care. This Bill introduces a licensing framework, which is good. But let us be clear – this is only useful, if these homes are accessible to the intended users. What is the plan to ensure that we have enough Homes to meet the growing demand in the next decade? Have we mapped out where these Homes are needed most? Are they evenly distributed, or are we going to see some areas well-served while others are left behind?
The Bill also gives the Director-General the power to set capacity limits for social residential homes. I understand the need to prevent overcrowding. Conversely, how do we make sure we are not turning people away because there are simply not enough beds?
We should also be encouraging community and private-sector efforts to fill the gaps. Could we introduce more incentives for non-profit organisations and businesses to build more Homes where they are needed most? Because no one – no senior, no vulnerable person – should have to struggle just to find a place to live with dignity.
Mr Speaker, Sir, my next point is about quality of care, because at the end of the day, it is not just about having a bed to sleep in. It is about having a home where residents are treated with respect, compassion and real care.
This Bill gives the Director-General the power to set licensing conditions, but nowhere does it say that the Homes must have minimum staffing ratios. Let me put this simply: if there are not enough caregivers, the residents will suffer. In hospitals, there are nurse-to-patient ratios. Why should it be any different in social residential homes, where people need daily assistance with everything, from eating to moving to managing their mental well-being?
We also need to talk about the people who do the work. Many caregivers in these Homes are foreign workers or volunteers. They are the ones feeding, bathing and caring for residents. But are we making sure that they are properly trained? Are we paying them fairly? And are we providing them with enough support, so they do not burn out? Because if we do not take care of them, they would not be able to take care of our residents.
We also have to ask: will the Government issue more work passes for this sector to ensure we have enough trained caregivers? Will the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) also relax the local-to-Work Permit holder ratios for this sector? Because care work is essential work. And we need to start treating it that way.
Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, regulations are only as strong as the enforcement behind them. This Bill gives the Government the power to revoke the licences of those homes which fail to meet the standards. That is important. However, nowhere does it say that violations must be made public. If a home is failing its residents, should not the families have the right to know? Should not there be a public rating or inspection system, like we have for food establishments, so people can make informed choices?
And what about step-in orders? This Bill allows the Government to take over a failing Home, under section 27, but it does not tell us when that will happen. What are the criteria? How bad does a home have to be, before action is taken? Who will take over the day-to-day operations after the takeover?
The Bill also introduces Boards of Visitors to check on homes. That is a good step. But who will be on these boards? Will they be independent committee members or just Government appointees?
Finally, residents and families need a clear feedback mechanism. Right now, if a resident or their family has concerns, where do they go? Who do they call? Should there be a public hotline or an independent mediator to handle grievances fairly and transparently? Because transparency builds trust, and if we want families to feel safe placing their loved ones in these homes, trust is essential.
Lastly, Mr Speaker, Sir, at its core, this Bill is about people. Not numbers, not statistics. People. Residents should have a voice in how these Homes are run. Could we establish feedback channels so that they can participate in decisions that affect their daily lives?
This Bill also restricts the publication of information about residents under section 38, and while privacy is important, does this mean whistle-blowers cannot report poor conditions? How do we balance privacy with accountability? And can we go a step further and introduce a Residents’ Bill of Rights, like some other countries have, to guarantee dignity, choice and respect for every resident?
Consequently, a social residential home should not just be a place to stay. It should be a place to live with dignity.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, at the heart of this Bill lies a simple but profound question – how do we care for those who have no one else to care for them? Because the true strength of our society is not found in how far the most successful can go, but in how well we care for those who struggle, those who are vulnerable and those who are left behind.
Right now, across Singapore, there are seniors, persons with disabilities and individuals without families who depend on social residential homes for their well-being. They are not just names in a system. They are our mothers and fathers, our sisters and brothers. Some of them are even workers who built this nation, who spent their years caring for others, contributing to society. And now, the question before us is – are we doing enough to care for them?
This Bill is a step forward. It creates a licensing system. It introduces new regulations. But let us be honest, a licence alone does not build a caring home. A set of rules is not the same as a system that truly cares. That is why we must go further.
First, we must plan for the future. Singapore is ageing. The demand for care will only grow. We need a roadmap, not just for today, but for the next 10 to 20 years, so that every Singaporean in need has a place to turn to.
Second, quality care must be more than just words on a page. We need minimum staffing ratios so that every resident gets the attention they deserve. We need real mental health support for caregivers because care must go beyond just physical needs. And we must value and support our caregivers because if we do not care for them, they will not be able to care for our loved ones.
Third, transparency builds trust. If a home is failing, families deserve to know. If the Government needs to intervene, there must be clear, objective rules on when and how that happens. We need public accountability, real oversight and a complaint system that works.
And fourth, we must protect the dignity and rights of residents. No one should feel like they have lost their freedom or their voice just because they need care. No one should feel like they are trapped in an institution when they should feel at home.
This is not just about passing a Bill. This is about living our values. If we say we want to build an inclusive, caring and just society, then we have to mean it. We have to live it. This is what Forward Singapore is about. Not just economic growth, but ensuring every Singaporean matters, every Singaporean has dignity and every Singaporean belongs. Because in Singapore, we do not leave people behind. We lift them up.
One day, when history looks back at this moment, we would not be judged by the regulations we wrote but by the lives we touched, the dignity we restored and the care we gave. Let us get this right. I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, this Bill proposes to strengthen safeguards for the safety, welfare and well-being of residents in social residential homes. The Bill introduces a licensing framework for social residential homes, which raises standards of care and strengthens enforcement when these standards are not met.
I have three points of clarifications to raise.
My first clarification is on the approval required to deploy individuals to carry out certain prescribed duties. Under section 19, prior approval of the Director-General is required to deploy an individual to carry out certain prescribed duties. During the public consultation on the Bill, respondents expressed concerns about reduced autonomy and potential hiring delays. MSF responded that it will work closely with the social residential homes to streamline the approval process and partner the social residential homes in recruitment planning. Given that the social residential homes often already face manpower challenges from high staff turnover, the new requirement for pre-approval may further constrain the social residential homes already limited manpower resources.
Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary share the duties that are likely to require pre-approval for deployment? Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary share the likely timeframe for such pre-approval? Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary also share more details on the approval process and how it will support the social residential homes in recruitment planning?
My second clarification is on step-in arrangements. Part 6 of the Bill provides for step-in arrangements for licensees where necessary to ensure the safety, welfare and well-being of residents. The step-in arrangements may include appointing another individual to be the person-in-charge of the social residential home, appointing another licensee to operate the social residential home or transferring residents to another social residential home. These are exceptional powers that should be used as a last resort. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary share whether MSF will have a framework for deciding when the step-in powers will be exercised and which arrangements will be ordered?
For step-in arrangements involving another licensee, can MSF also share how it will prepare another licensee to take over the operations or residents of another social residential home? This is especially given that many social residential homes may not be operating with significant spare capacity. For instance, will there be a process for MSF to gradually prepare other social residential homes to support step-in arrangements where an social residential home operator appears unable or unwilling to comply with regulatory actions?
My final clarification is on whistle-blowing protections under the Bill. Section 53 provides that a person who suspects that an offence has been committed may notify an inspecting officer of the relevant facts and circumstances. It also provides that the identity of the person is protected from disclosure in proceedings. However, a person who suspects an offence relating to a social residential home may not necessarily have access to or make the report to an inspecting officer. An informer may instead make the report to a Police officer or any other MSF officer.
Under the Prevention of Corruption Act, as long as the complaint relates to an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the identity of the informer is protected. It does not matter whether the report was made to the Police or the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau.
Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary clarify whether an individual who reports an offence under the Bill to the Police will be similarly protected by the whistle-blowing protections under section 53? If not, what is the rationale for limiting the protection to individuals who make the report specifically to an inspecting officer?
Notwithstanding these clarifications, Sir, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua.
Mr Eric Chua: Mr Speaker, I thank the Members for the robust debate and support for the Social Residential Homes Bill. Let me now respond to the Members’ questions and suggestions.
Firstly, on measures to ensure residents’ safety and well-being. Mr Yip Hon Weng asked why MSF does not stipulate minimum staffing ratios for Homes in the Bill. Today, all Homes funded by MSF, which includes most Homes licensed under the existing Homes for the Aged Act and Children and Young Persons Act, need to abide by minimum staffing ratios set out by MSF. This Bill will allow MSF to set out minimum staffing ratios for all licensed Homes.
Mr Melvin Yong also asked about the evolution of sector standards over the years. As mentioned in my opening speech, we have enhanced our care models. In addition to Children’s Homes, Adult Disability Homes, Sheltered Homes and Welfare Homes have also adopted a tiered approach to provide more intensive care and targeted support to residents with higher care needs. As the sector continues to grow, our standards of care will also evolve to meet changing needs.
Mr Louis Ng asked about the types of duties carried out by individuals who require MSF’s approval prior to deployment in the Home. Broadly, these duties would include first, those relating to the overall governance, leadership and management of the Home, such as management of the Home’s financial accounts. We want to be sure that any individual who takes on any leadership or management responsibilities, such as key appointment holders and person-in-charge, is of good standing.
Second, those involving direct unsupervised contact with residents, such as helping residents who are less mobile with their personal hygiene and meals. This is so that we do not place vulnerable residents at undue risk of harm through exposure to individuals with a record of egregious offences.
Mr Ng also asked how long the pre-approval would take and also, support for Homes with recruitment planning. Generally, we endeavour to inform Homes of the outcome of the assessment within two weeks. Concurrently, MSF is reviewing ways to complete the process even faster, including through streamlining or automating some parts of the suitability assessment processes.
Ms Ng Ling Ling asked about the accuracy of background checks on foreign staff. Under this Bill, all prospective foreign staff in licensed Homes will be required to submit a self-declaration if they had committed any offence in any country, as specified by MOM. If we find out that a false declaration had been made, the individual may be liable to regulatory actions under the Bill, such as cancellation of approval to work in the Home, and/or prosecution under the Penal Code.
Mr Yong asked about the number of cases of Home staff that were investigated and taken to task for excessive use of force. Such cases are fortunately uncommon. Over the 2020 to 2024 period, MSF received an average of six reports per year on resident abuse, including that of excessive use of force. Several were not substantiated, and where substantiated, staff were taken to task. MSF adopts a zero-tolerance approach towards the use of excessive force on our residents and will thoroughly investigate these allegations.
Mr Yip suggested creating a public rating system for Homes, so that family members and the public will be made aware if a Home is performing poorly. To address the Member’s underlying concern on accountability, MSF works closely with Homes in the case of incidents to ensure that residents and their family members are aware of the situation, what is being done to address the concerns and to involve them in decisions regarding their care arrangements, where possible. We will consider practices in other countries to strengthen public accountability. The goal should be to help the Homes enhance their performance and accountability, and create a culture of continual improvement.
Mr Yip and Mr Yong would also be assured to know that we have multiple channels in place for residents and family members to provide feedback on Homes. A Board of Visitors consisting of independent members of the community, such as private and social sector professionals, will visit Homes at least once a quarter. The Board of Visitors may also visit certain Homes more frequently, if there is a need to monitor them more closely. These visits are unannounced to enable the Board of Visitors to check on residents’ living conditions and speak with residents to hear any concerns they may have.
Residents and their family members may also provide their feedback to MSF via our hotline or email. Through these channels, we can promptly address concerns and foster greater accountability from Homes.
Mr Dennis Tan asked if there were any shortfalls or uneven standards of care across the Homes. As mentioned in my opening speech earlier, MSF introduced this Bill to codify the good progress that has been made in raising the quality of care over the years. It is not in response to uneven standards of care or any incidents of a serious nature.
Mr Yong raised a few questions on the Singapore Boys’ Home and Singapore Girls’ Home. In particular, the reasons for excluding them from this Bill, whether these Homes are subjected to the same standards in this Bill and who is responsible for ensuring the quality of care in these Homes.
The Singapore Boys’ Home and the Singapore Girls’ Home are operated by the Government and are excluded from the licensing regime under this Bill. However, this does not mean that they do not need to meet the standards of care. In fact, they are held to the same standards, if not higher. To ensure good quality care is provided in the Singapore Boys’ Home and Singapore Girls’ Home, these Homes are subjected to independent inspections, as well as regular visits by a Review Board. Similar to the Board of Visitors, the Review Board comprises independent members of the community, who review the living standards and standards of care in these Homes.
Next, I will address the queries raised on the enforcement framework against errant operators.
Mr Louis Ng and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked if MSF will have a framework to decide when the step-in powers will be exercised and which arrangements will be ordered. The answer to this is yes. In determining when and how to exercise the step-in powers, MSF will thoroughly assess the facts of each case, such as the severity of harm caused to residents. I wish to emphasise that these step-in powers are meant to be a measure of last resort, after all other avenues are exhausted. Accordingly, the use of step-in powers will cease once the operations of the affected home have stabilised and we are assured of the residents' safety and wellbeing.
Mr Yong asked about the number of homes that have required a change of operators in the past 10 years. Thus far, only one home underwent a change of operator as the operator had decided not to continue running the home following a thorough evaluation of the organisation's resources and strategic direction. MSF, the affected home as well as the incoming home operator worked closely to ensure a smooth transition for staff and continuity of care for residents.
Mr Ng and Mr Yong also asked how MSF would prepare other licensed homes to take over the operations or residents of a failing home. MSF will work closely with both the incoming and outgoing operators to facilitate the handover processes, including the care arrangements for residents during the step-in period. We will also ensure that capacity is sufficient. Our priority is to ensure that the continuity of care for residents in the affected home is assured.
To be clear, activating another licensed home to step-in is only one option that MSF may take under step-in powers. Other options, include appointing a third-party to advise the licensee on the home's operations or revoking the appointment of an existing key appointment holder and reappointing another individual to take over the responsibilities.
Mr Ng asked whether whistle-blowing protections under clause 53 apply to individuals who report offences under the Bill to the Police. The whistle-blower will be referred to the MSF inspecting officers to assist investigations of the offence and will be conferred protection under clause 53.
Mr Yip asked if whistle-blowers would be constrained in reporting poor living or care conditions because of the restriction on publishing information about residents. The answer is no. Clause 38 protects the identities of residents in these homes from being published or broadcasted. Whistle-blowers come to MSF to share information privately rather than broadcast identifiable details of clients in the public sphere.
In addition, under clause 53(2) of the Bill on whistle-blowing, a person who whistle-blows to MSF in good faith cannot be held in any legal proceedings with respect to any restriction on disclosure imposed by any rule of law. Such a provision was included in our Bill precisely to encourage whistle-blowers to step forward if they have such concerns.
Ms Ng Ling Ling raised several questions on the level of approval for the Codes of Practice, calibration of penalties for breaches of Codes of Practice and the lines of accountability for regulatory breaches.
First, the Codes of Practice that are issued to homes are approved by the Director-General. Second, the type of regulatory action taken will be calibrated, depending on factors, such as degree of harm caused and if it is a repeated breach by the home. In some cases, we may suspend approval of specific individuals working in the home. In others, we may shorten a home's licence while giving the home guidance on issues that need to be rectified. Third, in deciding who to take regulatory actions on, please be assured that we have every intention to be fair and reasonable. We will not be overly punitive to our stakeholders.
Allow me to illustrate with a hypothetical example. We intend to introduce a regulatory requirement on the licensee to ensure that staff are adequately trained. If a staff member of the home fails to meet the minimum first aid training requirements and is, thus, unable to promptly attend to residents' need for first aid, we may take action against the licensee.
Mr Yong expressed concern that the enhanced penalties may be excessive and could inadvertently discourage operators or staff from joining the sector. The penalties under this Bill are commensurate with that of comparable offences under other legislation. One notable example is the Healthcare Services Act, which licenses the provision of nursing home service.
Much like our homes, residents in nursing homes are vulnerable and reliant on the home for 24/7 care. The safety and well-being of our homes' residents are no less important.
We recognise that some homes may be anxious about the enhanced penalties. To provide the various stakeholder groups, such as board members, with greater clarity about their duties, we will set out their roles and responsibilities in the Subsidiary Legislation and Codes of Practice. We will not be punitive from the outset. Instead, we will work closely with homes to ensure that they are well-supported to meet the regulatory requirements under this Bill.
Next, I will move on to questions and suggestions pertaining to capability building for our homes.
Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Dennis Tan asked about the regulatory costs arising from this Bill and the support to homes to transit to the new licensing regime. We do not expect the regulatory costs to be significantly higher than today, as the requirements build upon existing legislation and service requirements that homes are familiar with. Nonetheless, MSF and NCSS have set aside a $33 million Transition Support Package for all licensable homes.
Mr Tan will be pleased to know that with this funding, homes will be able to invest in training for staff, updating or installing CCTV systems and change management efforts as they transit to this new licensing regime. Funding will be customised based on the needs of each home.
In addition to the one-off Transition Support Package, Ms Ng and Mr Yong suggested setting up a long-term capability building fund to support homes in building up their operational capabilities and staff competencies.
Investing in sector capabilities is one of our key priorities and we have several schemes and grants available to help social service agencies level up. NCSS administers the Transformation Sustainability Scheme that provides funding to social service agencies to enhance their strategic and organisational capabilities. With this funding, social service agencies are supported in improving staff retention, strengthening volunteer engagement and thereafter, successfully delivering on other capability-building projects.
The Charities Capability Fund, formerly known as VCF that Ms Ng mentioned, continues to be available to social service agencies. It covers a range of capability building matters, including governance and management training for charities' board members and staff.
Ms Ng suggested exploring bulk procurement of common equipment to optimise public funds and resources available to the homes. We thank her for the suggestion. MSF and NCSS will work with social service agencies to optimise resource utilisation and adopt solutions that would best meet their needs.
Mr Yip and Mr Yong asked if staff in our homes are paid fairly and are sufficiently supported to ensure that they do not burn out while caring for residents. Mr Dennis Tan asked a related question about how we intend to support homes' manpower needs.
We are invested in the manpower sustainability of this sector. In my Opening speech, I shared about our reviews of the Skills and Salary Guidelines to ensure that staff are paid competitively and about NCSS working closely with social service agencies to develop stronger organisational capabilities and a supportive workplace environment.
To attract and retain talent in the sector, MSF has also embarked on a job redesign pilot with selected homes. Through this pilot, we hope to enhance the value proposition of a career in the sector, specifically, by improving the working conditions and supporting the career development of care staff.
Mr Yip also asked about the support that MSF provides to ensure that homes have sufficient trained caregivers, including those from foreign countries, and whether foreign worker ratios need to be relaxed. To this end, MSF will continue to work with MOM to ensure that homes have sufficient work pass quota and flexibility to recruit foreign care staff whilst also ensuring opportunities for local staff to progress in their careers.
Mr Yip spoke about the need for adequate capacity. MSF keeps a close eye on the demand and supply of the capacity of our homes. For Adult Disability Homes, which includes Adult Disability Hostels, we are actively addressing waitlist management through several initiatives. We are expanding capacity by adding new facilities and are optimising placement processes to ensure cases with urgent needs are prioritised.
Additionally, we are strengthening community-based support services to provide alternatives to residential care, where appropriate. One example is the Enabled Living Programme pilot, which is an alternative to residential care and seeks to enable persons with disabilities to live and age in the community.
We will continue to ensure sufficient capacity to meet projected demand over the long term, an issue that Mr Yong also spoke about.
As caregivers age and with shrinking family sizes, we expect a slight increase in demand over the next decade. At the same time, MSF and the Ministry of Health are ramping up our support for persons with disabilities and seniors to age in place and for those in homes to be reintegrated more quickly back to the community so that fewer of them need to stay in institutional care.
With the slight increase in demand, manpower needs will also increase. We will continue to invest in technology and process redesign to enhance workforce productivity.
Relatedly, Mr Yip noted that the Bill empowers the Director-General to set capacity limits on homes and expressed concern that this could lead to turning residents in need away. To be clear, the key objective of setting capacity limits is to ensure that quality care can be provided to residents. These limits are determined based on practical considerations, which include, physical space requirements, infrastructure capabilities and staffing ratios. As I had mentioned earlier, MSF will continue to monitor demand and supply trends to ensure sufficient capacity.
Mr Tan asked why the Bill would need to provide for the possibility of housing different client types or profiles together. Let me share an example. Some seniors may have acquired disability while some persons with disabilities have aged and have become seniors themselves, so we may need to equip our homes to cater to both types of needs.
We are in the early stages of reviewing how the sector can evolve over the longer term to improve care quality, leverage technology and build capabilities for better client outcomes. We will work closely with the sector to co-create the future of social residential homes.
Earlier, Ms Ng expressed her appreciation to the individuals who have readily volunteered to be members of the Board of Visitors. I echo Ms Ng's appreciation for Board of Visitors volunteers and would like to share the example of one such volunteer.
Ms Sharifah Masturah Shahab-Yokoyama. She is a veteran special educator with over 30 years of experience working with children and adults with developmental needs. As the Vice Chairperson of one of our Boards of Visitors, Ms Sharifah used her expertise to provide valuable insights to homes on how they can improve the care they provide to residents.
Volunteers like Ms Sharifah play a pivotal role in ensuring that good quality care is provided to residents. Let me share an example from the Singapore Boys' Hostel, a children's home. The Board of Visitors had alerted the management team to feedback from residents on the lack of variety in meals. To address this, the Singapore Boys' Hostel has engaged two caterers to provide greater variety in the food menu.
The close partnership between homes, Boards of Visitors and MSF ensures that residents' voices are heard, a point that Mr Yip earlier alluded to with his suggestion for a separate Residents' Bill of Rights to engender dignity, choice and respect for residents. Under this Bill, MSF will be expanding the Boards of Visitors to cover all these licensable homes. I would like to call upon more interested individuals with the relevant experience and expertise to step forward as our volunteers and join MSF in this journey of caring for the most vulnerable amongst us.
Mr Speaker, having addressed the comments and suggestions raised by Members, I would now like to take this opportunity to place on record, my deepest appreciation for staff in these homes. Many of us may not be familiar with the work that these homes do and the residents that they care for. This is because the majority of our 4,000 residents live in the homes 24/7.
Today, I want to spotlight the dedication of staff in these homes. These 4,000 residents are cared for by about 2,000 staff, many of whom are care staff doing shift work to supervise and assist residents with their activities of daily living. Social workers are another key group that play an important role in journeying with the resident through the challenges and milestones in life. Many of the residents have no one else in their lives to advocate for their needs and to ensure they have access to various resources and opportunities, except for these staff.
To be clear, the work that the home staff do is tough. It is not for the faint-hearted. But it is extremely meaningful.
Under their care, residents are given the help they need to facilitate their recovery, to preserve their health and cognitive functions and be meaningfully engaged. Residents with the potential to live independently or return to their families are also equipped with relevant independent living skills, such as personal care, household chores, budgeting, money management, social skills and help-seeking skills. This ensures that residents are set up for success when they are reintegrated back into society.
I want to share the story of Beatrice, a resident of Thuja Home at Pelangi Village. Beatrice was admitted into the Welfare Home in December 2019 with schizophrenia. Over the years, staff in Thuja Home worked closely with Beatrice in various areas. This includes regular check-ins as well as referrals for psychoeducation and employment. With their care and guidance, Beatrice succeeded in securing employment. Today, she has secured a Housing and Development Board rental flat and will soon be discharged from the home.
To the staff in our homes, thank you for all that you do. Your dedication to uplifting the lives of those in need is the reason why residents, like Beatrice, can rebuild their lives, regain independence and step into the future filled with hope.
Finally, I thank Members for their support for this Bill. I believe this Bill is a much-needed step as we strive to uphold the good quality of care provided to residents across the sector and ensure that every single resident is kept safe and well in our homes. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Are there any clarifications for the Senior Minister of State Eric Chua? Looks like there is 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 Eric Chua]. (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 4.25 pm. Order. Order.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 4.06 pm until 4.25 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.25 pm.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Anti-Money Laundering and Other Matters (Estate Agents and Developers) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Second Minister for National Development (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
Sir, as a reputable and trusted financial centre and business hub, Singapore takes a firm stance against money laundering, terrorism financing and proliferation financing.
In the real estate sector, estate agents, salespersons and developers play an important role in detecting and deterring illicit activities, alongside financial institutions, lawyers, and law practice entities.
Over the years, we have established a robust risk management framework for the real estate sector, guided by the recommendations made by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). FATF sets international standards to tackle money laundering, terrorism financing and proliferation financing.
This Bill is part of our continuing efforts to bolster our ability to detect and deter such illicit activities within the real estate sector, thereby reinforcing our commitment to stamp out the laundering of criminal proceeds and financing of illicit activities through Singapore. Specifically, this Bill seeks to: (a) strengthen current penalty frameworks; (b) further align our regulatory regime with FATF standards; and (c) make miscellaneous amendments to clarify restrictions against convicted persons.
I will take Members through the key amendments in these three key areas.
The first set of amendments strengthens our penalty frameworks to strengthen the deterrent effect of our current regime.
Today, estate agents and salespersons are required to perform duties in relation to countering money laundering and terrorism financing activities. Examples include the requirement to conduct customer due diligence (CDD) measures by salespersons on their clients.
Currently, non-compliant estate agents and salespersons may be subject to a financial penalty of up to $5,000 per case under the Council for Estate Agencies’ (CEA’s) Letter of Censure disciplinary regime for minor breaches. Estate agents and salespersons who commit more serious breaches may face disciplinary action before a Disciplinary Committee, which is an independent tribunal comprising members from CEA’s Disciplinary Panel. These members are from various backgrounds such as practising solicitors, architects, engineers or individuals from the real estate agency industry.
The Disciplinary Committee may impose a financial penalty of up to $200,000 per case on estate agents or $100,000 per case on salespersons.
However, the current penalty framework which allows financial penalties to be imposed on a per case basis does not provide sufficient deterrence. This is because the potential monetary benefits that estate agents and salespersons might obtain for facilitating illicit transactions could be significantly higher than the maximum financial penalty of $200,000 for estate agents, or $100,000 for salespersons.
In the recent $3 billion money laundering case, the total estimated value of properties seized was more than $370 million from the 10 convicted offenders. Assuming that a salesperson facilitates the sale of one such property valued at, say, $10 million, a 2% commission for such a transaction would amount to $200,000. When such financial gains far exceed the current maximum penalties for these offences, there is a clear need to raise the penalties for stronger deterrence.
To ensure that our penalty frameworks are sufficiently deterrent, clauses 8 and 9 of the Bill will amend the Estate Agents Act to impose maximum financial penalties on a per contravention basis.
Estate agents and salespersons who contravene any legislation or provision of a code of practice, ethics and conduct relating to money laundering, terrorism financing or proliferation financing, will now be subjected to a maximum penalty of up to $5,000 per contravention under CEA’s Letter of Censure regime. For cases heard by the Disciplinary Committee, errant estate agents and salespersons will be subjected to a maximum penalty of up to $200,000 and $100,000 per contravention for estate agents and salespersons respectively. Maximum penalties for other disciplinary breaches will remain on a per case basis.
Let me illustrate the changes with a hypothetical example. Assume an errant salesperson has committed four disciplinary breaches that are referred to a Disciplinary Committee to be heard. Of these breaches, two concern anti-money laundering obligations and the other two concern the salesperson’s negligence in handling a transaction. Based on the existing penalty framework, the maximum financial penalty that can be imposed for all four breaches is $100,000.
Under the new penalty framework, the maximum financial penalty that can be imposed is now $300,000. For the two breaches of anti-money laundering obligations, a maximum of $200,000 in financial penalties can be imposed as each breach is now subjected to a maximum of $100,000. As for the two breaches of professional misconduct, an aggregate maximum financial penalty of $100,000 applies.
The amendments in this Bill will also enhance the composition framework for developers. Similar to estate agents and salespersons, developers are required to perform duties to counter money laundering and terrorism financing activities.
Currently, for less serious offences, non-compliant housing developers may be offered composition of up to $5,000 under the Housing Developers Control and Licensing Act (HDCLA). However, this is significantly lower than the maximum fine for money laundering and terrorism financing offences, at $100,000 per offence upon conviction.
To strengthen deterrence, clause 13 of the Bill amends the HDCLA to increase the maximum composition sum for housing developers from $5,000, to 50% of the maximum fine prescribed for the offence. This means that the maximum composition sums for some offences will be increased to $50,000.
Clause 16 of the Bill will also amend the Sale of Commercial Properties Act (SCPA) to allow offences by commercial and industrial developers to be compounded. Similar to the HDCLA, the maximum composition sum under the SCPA will be up to 50% of the maximum fine prescribed for the offence.
With these amendments, the approach for the maximum composition sums for money laundering and terrorism financing offences in the HDCLA and SCPA will be aligned with that of other sectors, such as precious stones and metal dealers.
The second set of amendments further align our regulatory regime with international standards set by the FATF.
Currently, estate agents and salespersons are only required to conduct due diligence measures on their own clients. Hence, in transactions where either the buyer or seller are not represented by estate agents and salespersons, property-related due diligence measures may not be conducted on the buyer or seller who is unrepresented.
To align with FATF standards, clause 6 of the Bill amends the Estate Agents Act to require estate agents and salespersons to conduct due diligence measures on such unrepresented counterparties of property transactions.
In recent years, FATF has also updated its standards to clearly set out the standards to identify, assess and mitigate risks associated with the financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, or proliferation financing in short.
Clauses 3 to 5, 12, 14, 15 and 17 of the Bill thus update the regulatory regime for estate agents, salespersons and developers to cover proliferation financing. This is similar to the relevant legislative frameworks for other sectors.
The amendments to the composition regime for developers in clauses 13 and 16 of the bill would also allow proliferation financing related offences to be compounded.
In the same vein, clauses 14 and 17 of the Bill amend the HDCLA and SCPA respectively to require developers to perform prescribed measures related to targeted financial sanctions for terrorism financing and proliferation financing, in addition to terrorism.
Today, developers are required to assess whether a purchaser is designated as a terrorist or terrorist entity under relevant lists, or sanctioned by the United Nations. If so, developers are required to decline to enter into or terminate transactions with the potential purchaser, and report the matter to the Police.
The amendments will make clear that this also applies to purchasers who are on the designated or sanction lists due to terrorism financing and proliferation financing.
These measures for terrorism financing and proliferation financing are generally not new to estate agents, salespersons and developers. Such measures are already part of existing anti-money laundering requirements as the underlying terrorism financing and proliferation financing offences are also money laundering predicate offences. Efforts to combat terrorism financing and proliferation financing are also already part of the current measures performed by estate agents, salespersons and developers.
We now come to the third set of amendments which are clarifications to restrictions against persons convicted of money laundering, terrorism financing or proliferation financing offences.
Clause 2 of the Bill clarifies that persons who have been convicted of money laundering, terrorism financing, or proliferation financing offences, whether committed in Singapore or overseas, are not deemed fit and proper to hold an estate agent licence, or a salesperson registration under the Estate Agents Act, given the seriousness of such offences.
Similarly, clauses 12 and 15 of the Bill amend the HDCLA and SCPA respectively to clarify that money laundering, terrorism financing and proliferation financing offences include offences under the law of any foreign country or territory. In this way, persons convicted of such offences regardless of where they are committed will be subjected to prohibitions against becoming a housing developer, becoming a substantial shareholder, or holding a responsible position in a developer or in substantial shareholders of a developer.
CEA and the Urban Redevelopment Authority will disseminate more information on these upcoming amendments to the real estate sector.
Let me conclude. This Bill aligns the real estate sector with international standards and is another step in strengthening our national strategy against money laundering, terrorism financing and proliferation financing.
As criminals get more sophisticated over time, we will continue to remain vigilant and will not hesitate to tighten our regime further where necessary. As a society, we must also remain watchful and vigilant. Countering money laundering, terrorism financing and proliferation financing in the real estate sector requires a concerted effort not just by the Government, but all stakeholders, such as businesses and individuals. This collective partnership is key to our continued efforts to act decisively to detect and deter such illicit activities, while ensuring that our financial and business ecosystem remains reputable and trusted, and continues to thrive. Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Vikram Nair.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill proposes certain amendments to the Estate Agents Act and Housing Developers (Control and Licensing) Act in order to introduce further safeguards against money laundering. According to the Explanatory Statement, this is based on recommendations of FATF.
Fighting money laundering is clearly an important matter, especially in a financial centre like Singapore. The recent arrests related to the multi-billion dollar money laundering cases in Singapore also highlighted that a number of those involved had used their ill-gotten gains for the purchase of properties in Singapore. Against this backdrop, it is understandable that we would want to impose obligations on real estate agents.
Real estate agents, though, are a diverse group and typically self-employed. There are currently 36,058 registered property agents according to a report in January 2025. Their income is based on commissions and is generally irregular, depending on whether or not they have transactions.
The legislation now imposes on them higher penalties and obligations for the failure to do due diligence on either clients or counterparties where they have reason to suspect money laundering, proliferation financing or terrorism financing, where earlier due diligence exercises give them reason to doubt the veracity of the information provided to them. It also expands the existing obligations to cover counterparties to transactions.
While the test is phrased subjectively, I expect in practice, they will be judged objectively on whether or not they would have had reason to suspect money laundering. Otherwise, there will be a perverse incentive on agents to turn a blind eye – the infamous Nelsonian blindness. This means in a situation where a normal person would suspect there might be money laundering, it is likely an agent would be expected to do so as well.
Currently, due diligence obligations exist on banks and on law firms, who have to be especially careful when they take in client monies for conveyancing transactions. I also take the Minister's point that they do apply to real estate agents as well – at least, in recent years, I think since 2021. This actually already creates quite a secure backdrop to limit money laundering in property transactions. Essentially, if a party takes a loan or pays through a bank account, the bank would already have done due diligence or should have done due diligence on the source of funds. If instead of going to a bank, the person brings a pile of cash to his conveyancing lawyer's office, the lawyer would then clearly have their obligations triggered.
Against this backdrop, I will be grateful if the Minister can clarify whether the existing framework has had any shortcomings such that the due diligence obligations imposed on real estate agents have to be expanded. I would also be grateful if the Minister can clarify whether estate agents have had any issues complying with existing 2021 regulations, including obligations such as keeping records.
My main concern with expanding legislation is compared to banks and law firms, estate agents have more limited resources to conduct due diligence. Of course, if there is greater mischief that needs to be addressed, then I think this legislation would be fair. I would be grateful for the Minister to clarify the additional mischief that is intended to be captured by this legislation.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Mr Deputy Speaker, the Bill at hand is focused on bringing to effect the recommendations of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on anti-money laundering (AML) and, in particular, those that relate to AML efforts in the real estate sector.
Improving the regulatory framework is critical, not least because the so-called Fujian Gang had parked a significant amount of their three billion in illicit funds in property. This is unsurprising, given the big ticket nature of real estate transactions and the sky high prices of our housing. But it just underscores the importance of enhancing our regulatory efforts in the sector to prevent a recurrence of the events of August 2023.
For this reason, there is little reason to reject legislative effort – changes that edify such efforts. Hence, I support the Bill.
Given the importance of the issue, I was therefore surprised to see how the proposed amendments did not appear to be all that extensive. Many of them entail logical, but seemingly minor expansions of scope from changing the term \"money laundering and terrorism financing\" to money laundering, proliferation, financing and terrorism financing. Indeed, by my count, half of the clauses in the Bill relate to this change.
While I do not necessarily question the value of enfolding the illicit financing of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) into the scope of our anti-money laundering regime, it would nevertheless be helpful to this House to understand why this definition or expansion is deemed to be so crucial and relevant for our continued efforts in the real estate sector at this particular point in time. How many of the recent cases that have come under investigation have involved the financing of WMDs relative to plain vanilla AML or terrorism financing?
Based on my reading, the remaining provisions introduced are also somewhat fairly mild. Changing penalties to each instance of contravention, adding a requirement that unrepresented counterparties in real estate transactions be subject to more scrutiny and raising the maximum penalty from $100,000 to $200,000.
It is only in clause 10 where there seems at first glance to be some real teeth. It proposes amendments to the regulation making powers of the Council in section 72 of the Estate Agents Act, but when one returns to the original Act, one may be disappointed again. Here the change is again to be to insert \"proliferation financing\" to the list of requirements for what may be subject to regulation.
Sir, perhaps the underlying reason for the seemingly limited slate of amendments to the law is because there is already a robust set of laws in place to ensure the proper due diligence of real estate transactions even back in 2023.
The Council for Estate Agencies in its guide on 2021 regulations related to the prevention of money laundering and terrorism financing had already set out a comprehensive set of guidelines for how to conduct customer due diligence, including enhanced procedures for when the risk of money laundering or terrorism financing is greater.
The January 2025 version of the guide does indeed update the list of red flag indicators, doubling the page coverage in process, but my point is simply that we will not be raft of laws to combat so-called Singapore-washing even before this present update. And the Government has acknowledged as much. In response to a Parliamentary Question posed by my hon friend Mr Leong Mun Wai, the Minister for National Development indicated that, and I quote, \"property agencies and property agents are required to perform due diligence checks on their clients before commencing business, any business relationship or facilitating transaction with them.\"
Yet, in our conversations with those working in the sector, some have raised a nagging sense that AML procedures in the industry are somehow not as robust as those for the financial sector more generally. The Inter-Ministerial Committee report observed this too, noting that the, and I quote, \"uneven implementation practices across and within sectors\".
And in response to this clarification question that I had posed on the Inter-Ministerial Committee last year, Minister Indranee conceded that the Government had, and I quote, \"already started to do more in this space and will certainly see what they can do to strengthen the regulations in the sector\".
So, the relevant question beyond whether these changes proposed in today's Bill are only marginal is whether more substantive legislation is actually required to bring the industry to the frontier of AML best practices than the rest of the financial sector in Singapore is required to abide by.
I am not a lawyer, but I would appreciate if the Minister would be willing to share if the laws, as they stand, together with the amendments proposed today are indeed sufficient to have brought about an earlier detection and detention of the Fujian Gang. If so, was it a matter of execution that fell short rather than the legal framework per se? And if not, what laws would be necessary? And why have these laws not been proposed to this House today?
The essence of my message, Sir, is simple. I do not believe that we actually lack the laws necessary to investigate, apprehend and prosecute egregious money-laundering practices in the real estate sector. What I feel is more important is a steely eye focus on ensuring enforcement and compliance, for which I hope the Government would redouble the efforts to stamp out the scourge of Singapore-washing.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Neil Parekh.
Mr Neil Parekh Nimil Rajnikant (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join the debate which seeks to strengthen Singapore’s regulatory framework for estate agents and property developers by incorporating recommendations from FATF.
Singapore’s battle against money launderers now moves to the real estate and property sector as we strive to uphold our nation’s financial integrity and a strong reputation as a global financial hub.
This Bill introduces tougher penalties and record-keeping obligations to ensure that estate agents and developers are better equipped to detect and report suspicious transactions. This Bill also has some important initiatives towards safeguarding our real estate market from illicit financial flows.
These reforms come at a critical time. While Singapore must remain open for business, it must also be a place that is hostile to money launderers. This Bill reflects that balance – fortifying our defenses while preserving confidence in our institutions.
This Bill also introduces stricter licensing criteria which is very important to protect the integrity of the sector. Specifically, institutions such as the CEA and the relevant housing authorities will gain stronger investigative powers and broader authority to enforce compliance.
The two-year implementation timeline is also very prudent. It provides businesses with the space to understand, prepare for, and adapt to the new requirements. This phased approach balances urgency with realism.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, while the Bill is a necessary response to global risks, we must be candid about the challenges it introduces, especially for small and medium-sized firms operating in the space.
Implementing these new requirements will mean higher operational costs for all. [Background noise.]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Can we have that switched off, please? Mr Neil Parekh, carry on.
Mr Neil Parekh Nimil Rajnikant: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Estate agencies and property developers may need to hire more compliance professionals, invest in new technology and restructure internal processes to meet reporting obligations.
I now have six clarifications for the Minister.
One, while the Bill addresses proliferation financing, it would be useful to clarify how this concept specifically applies to estate agents and property developers. For instance, how will transactions involving foreign buyers be monitored for potential links to such financing and what specific indicators or red flags should agents look out for?
Two, will digital property platforms involved in cross-border transactions fall under the same compliance regime. It would be helpful to understand how enforcement will be operationalised in these more complex situations, providing stakeholders with reassurance and confidence in the regulatory process.
Three, this Bill introduces stricter obligations, but stakeholders may need more clarity on the level of verification required, especially in complex commercial property transactions. It would be helpful to specify the legal obligations and liabilities when a client refuses to provide due diligence documentation.
Four, given the additional compliance requirements, smaller firms may face challenges in adapting to this new setup. It would be helpful to know if there are any scaled compliance measures for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) or support initiatives such as training, grants, or digital tools to help them meet these obligations without compromising their competitiveness. Clarity on whether penalties will be calibrated based on business size or intent would ensure that SMEs are not disproportionately impacted by unintentional lapses.
Five, this Bill aims to align with FATF's recommendations, but estate agents and developers may need more guidance on handling transactions involving foreign jurisdictions that do not have equivalent AML/CFT standards. It would be important to consider how stricter checks might affect legitimate foreign investment. What strategies will be employed to ensure that the enhanced compliance measures do not deter investment flows, thereby maintaining Singapore’s appeal as a financial hub?
Lastly, while the Bill outlines the need for compliance, businesses would benefit from a more structured transitional support. Beyond the implementation window, what forms of assistance – such as grants, digital compliance tools or subsidised training – are planned to help businesses operationalise these requirements efficiently? Such support will be crucial, especially for SMEs navigating the new regulatory landscape.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this Bill marks a pivotal step in protecting Singapore’s financial system and real estate sector from abuse. Strengthening due diligence, tightening enforcement, and embracing global standards affirms our position as a responsible, forward-looking financial hub.
But as we raise the bar, we must also bring our businesses – especially the smaller ones – along with us. Implementation must be firm but fair. The regulatory net must be tight, but not so tangled that it stifles legitimate activity or innovation. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding my clarifications, this Bill has my full support.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Don Wee.
Mr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): I rise in support of the Anti-Money Laundering and Other Matters (Estate Agents and Developers) Bill. There are already clear regulations and detailed guidelines against money laundering in our real estate sector. However, the $3 billion money laundering incident last year showed the need for more controls and necessitated the introduction of this Bill.
I support the key provisions of this Bill. But I have some questions and would like to seek clarifications from the Minister.
Firstly, regarding the scope of due diligence. What specific guidelines will be provided to estate agents to accurately identify suspicious activities? How will these guidelines be tailored to address the unique challenges within the real estate sector?
Next, on the implementation timeline. What is the planned timeline for the roll-out of the new measures? How will the Government ensure that all stakeholders will be adequately prepared for the compliance system? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Thirdly, support for small agencies. Smaller agencies may face resource constraints in sending their staff for training and implementing compliance measures. What support mechanisms will be in place to assist them in meeting the new regulatory requirements?
Fourthly, monitoring and enforcement. How does the government plan to monitor compliance with these new regulations? What penalties will be imposed for non-compliance and how will enforcement be balanced to avoid overburdening legitimate businesses?
Another pertinent issue is that of inter-Ministry and agency collaboration. Given the complexity of money laundering schemes, how will various government agencies collaborate to ensure a cohesive and effective approach to enforcement?
(In English): Finally, it is about public awareness. Beyond the real estate sector, what efforts will be made to educate the general public about these challenges to foster a culture of vigilance against money laundering?
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this Bill demonstrates Singapore’s commitment to uphold and strengthen the integrity of our financial system. By addressing the vulnerabilities within the real estate sector, we have taken a decisive step to safeguard our reputation as a global financial centre. I look forward to the deliberations on this Bill and the collaborative efforts to ensure its effective implementation.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister Indranee Rajah. Mr Yip Hon Weng, are you speaking on this Bill? Right, please proceed.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this Bill. Strengthening our defences against financial crime is a critical national priority. I commend the Government's efforts to align our regulations with the recommendations of FATF. This Bill represents a significant step forward in safeguarding our financial system and housing market from exploitation.
However, while I applaud the intent behind this legislation, I have several clarifications.
First, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the amendments may create an unintended burden on small estate agencies and independent agents, which operate on tight margins and often lack the resources of larger firms. The additional compliance costs imposed by this Bill, particularly regarding counterparty due diligence under clause 6, section 44BA, could prove disproportionately challenging. If these smaller players are overburdened, it could stifle their growth or even drive them out of business entirely. This would reduce competition and limit consumer choice within the already big-company-dominated real estate market.
In addition, the lack of expertise and resources among smaller estate agents could result in higher compliance costs. This may ultimately be passed on to consumers or salespeople. We must ensure that this legislation does not inadvertently create an uneven playing field, where only large firms have the capacity to absorb these new obligations.
As such, regarding clause 6, section 44BA, how does the Government plan to help smaller agencies and independent agents meet these new compliance requirements without incurring excessive costs? Will there be financial support or training subsidies available to smaller agencies to ensure they do not unintentionally fall afoul of these new regulations? Similarly, will resources be made available to smaller firms when dealing with foreign clients? How can we ensure that they are able to perform due diligence without being penalised due to limited means?
What safeguards are in place to prevent large firms from passing on their increased compliance costs to smaller subcontractors or resellers, thereby exacerbating the burden? Finally, have thorough industry consultations been conducted, specifically with small and independent estate agents, to assess whether the burden imposed by this Bill is truly proportional to their capacity and the risks they face?
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my second concern pertains to the practical challenges of enforcement and the risk of achieving mere paper compliance without genuine oversight. While robust regulations are essential, they are meaningless without effective mechanisms to ensure adherence. If enforcement is weak or overly focused on procedural matters, bad actors will inevitably find ways to circumvent the rules, while legitimate businesses continue to shoulder the burden of compliance.
We cannot allow this law to become a paper tiger – compliance on paper must translate into effective enforcement in practice. To this end, does CEA currently possess the necessary manpower and specialised expertise to effectively detect sophisticated money laundering schemes, given their complexity and evolving nature? Or will enforcement remain largely reactive, relying on reports rather than proactive investigation? How does this Bill, beyond increasing reporting requirements, actively improve the detection of real estate transactions linked to illicit funds? What proactive measures are being implemented to identify deceitful activities and prevent them before they occur?
Finally, how will the success of this Bill's enforcement be measured? What key performance indicators (KPIs) will be used to assess its effectiveness? Is success determined by the number of fines collected, the number of cases prosecuted or, more importantly, by a reduction in real estate-related financial crime?
Third, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, addressing financial crime in the real estate sector is not solely the responsibility of estate agents. Consumers, including buyers, sellers, landlords, tenants and developers, must also be aware of their role in preventing illicit transactions. While estate agencies must enforce strict controls, property owners themselves have a duty to conduct their own checks and declarations, particularly in cases like harboring illicit funds.
A holistic approach is needed. The policy should incorporate strong consumer education efforts to ensure that all parties involved in a real estate transaction understand their responsibilities. Hence, what measures are in place to enhance consumer education about financial crime risks in real estate transactions? How will the Government ensure their buyers, sellers and landlords are equipped with the knowledge to detect and report suspicious activities?
In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the need for stronger anti-money laundering measures within the real estate sector is undeniable. Singapore has witnessed several high-profile cases highlighting vulnerabilities in our current system. The 2023 money laundering case, involving $3 billion in assets, stands as a stark reminder of the scale and sophistication of these activities. The impact on the real estate market was significant, with at least 105 properties facing prohibition of disposal orders, and at least 54 properties liquidated. This underscores the urgent need for enhanced due diligence and stricter enforcement.
To ensure this Bill achieves its intended goals, we must adopt a balanced approach. First, we need targeted support for small estate agents so they are not disproportionately burdened by compliance costs. Second, enforcement must be robust and proactive, not just a box-ticking exercise. Finally, consumer education must be strengthened, so that buyers, sellers and landlords understand their responsibilities in preventing financial crime.
This Bill is a critical step in the right direction, but its effectiveness will depend on thoughtful implementation and ongoing industry engagement. Let us work together to ensure that while we strengthen our defences against financial crime, we do not unintentionally weaken the competitiveness and sustainability of our real estate industry.
I urge the Minister to take these concerns into serious consideration and to put in place the necessary safeguards and support measures. Let us send a clear message that Singapore remains a place of integrity, fairness and accountability in real estate transactions. I support the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister Indranee Rajah.
Ms Indranee Rajah: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Members for their comments and their support for this Bill. Let me address the issues raised.
Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Vikram Nair asked how this Bill improves the detection of real estate transactions linked to illicit funds and whether the additional obligations are necessary. Today, licensed estate agents, registered salespersons and developers are mandated to perform a robust set of customer due diligence measures on the clients they represent or purchasers. However, a buyer or seller who is unrepresented by an estate agent or salesperson may not be covered by such due diligence measures.
Through this Bill, we are requiring estate agents and salespersons to conduct due diligence measures on unrepresented counterparties, so that both parties in a property transaction are subject to robust checks. This will strengthen our regulatory and governance framework, and help to ensure more timely detection and prevention of illicit activities within the real estate sector.
Mr Don Wee, Mr Neil Parekh and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked how we will support the real estate sector in meeting these requirements, especially salespersons and smaller estate agents. Mr Neil Parekh also asked how estate agents, salespersons and developers can better monitor transactions that may be related to proliferation financing.
I would like to clarify that the required due diligence measures are not new. All estate agents, salespersons and developers are familiar with how these checks should be done, as they are already required to conduct such measures on their own clients or purchasers. The amendments to include proliferation financing will make clear that estate agents, salespersons and developers would also have to screen the necessary parties for proliferation financing risks against relevant designated or sanction lists, which they have already been doing as part of countering terrorism financing.
For estate agents and salespersons specifically, the relevant content on the required due diligence measures is covered in the courses for new salespersons and continuing professional development courses for existing salespersons. To further support our estate agents and salespersons in meeting these obligations, we will be stepping up on training.
For the next continuing professional development cycle, anti-money laundering, countering terrorism financing and countering proliferation financing continuing professional development courses will be made mandatory. This is part of our earlier announced initiative to enhance the continuing professional development framework for the real estate agency industry, by increasing the annual continuing professional development training requirement to 16 hours from the end of this year.
CEA has also set out clear guidelines on how customer due diligence measures should be done, including providing indicators of potential high-risk or suspicious transactions. CEA will update its resource webpage to put out more comprehensive information. This webpage will also be updated regularly to factor in new threats or vulnerabilities that arise over time.
To support smaller players, one of the industry associations in the real estate agency industry, namely the Singapore Estate Agents Association (SEAA), also provides subsidised access to commercial screening services, which its members can subscribe to.
We share Mr Don Wee's concern of a compliance burden on legitimate businesses. Mr Yip Hon Weng already raised the issue of how we will ensure that compliance costs are manageable. I would like to assure the Members that our requirements strike a balance between building a robust regime to uphold our reputation as an attractive and trusted financial centre, while minimising the regulatory burden imposed on the industry.
For example, the degree of checks required varies based on the assessed risk profile of the purchaser or client. The Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) and CEA had also consulted the industry and took their feedback into account when developing the requirements. Our consultation included major estate agents, industry associations that represent many small and mid-sized estate agents and developers. Stakeholders understood the need for the changes and were supportive.
Mr Neil Parekh asked if the existing regime covers digital property platforms and cross-border transactions. Let me clarify, estate agents and salespersons who facilitate cross-border transactions by doing estate agency work in Singapore, wherein their clients purchase foreign properties will fall under the same compliance regime. Regarding digital property platforms, if an entity only publishes advertisements or disseminates information and does not perform work that constitutes estate agency work, it will not be subject to the requirements of the Estate Agents Act.
Concerning developers, the Housing Developers (Control and Licensing) Act and Sale of Commercial Properties Act cover all developers regulated by URA, including cross-border transactions and transactions on digital property platforms by these developers.
On Mr Don Wee's question on how the Government plans to monitor compliance with these new regulations. Let me assure the Member that CEA and URA already conduct regular inspections on estate agents, salespersons and developers today. During such inspections, CEA and URA check if the appropriate due diligence measures were performed. CEA and URA also conduct ad hoc inspections based on information from other law enforcement agencies, whistle-blowers or complaints received on possible infringements.
We share Mr Neil Parekh's view on the need to maintain Singapore's appeal to legitimate foreign investors while enforcing stricter checks. Having a strong system and measures in place to combat money laundering, terrorism financing and proliferation financing provides certainty and makes our business environment more robust and attractive to foreign investors.
In this regard, CEA and URA adopt a risk-based approach when conducting inspections. For example, estate agents, salespersons and developers that are identified to be of higher risk are prioritised for inspections and subject to more regular inspections. Such risk factors include the customer profile and type of property being purchased or sold.
Mr Neil Parekh asked what the obligations and liabilities of estate agents and developers are, if a client or purchaser refuses to provide necessary due diligence documents. If an estate agent, salesperson or developer is unable to complete the required customer due diligence measures, the estate agent, salesperson or developer cannot proceed with the transaction and must also assess whether a Suspicious Transaction Report should be filed to the Suspicious Transaction Reporting Office.
Mr Don Wee asked about the penalties that will be imposed for non-compliance. Mr Neil Parekh asked if penalties will be calibrated based on the size of the business or intent. The key changes to the penalty framework are as per what I had set out in my opening speech. I would like to clarify that all estate agents, salespersons and developers are required to comply with the requirements in this Bill and are subject to the same maximum penalties in their respective categories, regardless of size. Contraventions of anti-money laundering obligations are assessed based on the facts and circumstances of each case. It would not be appropriate to calibrate penalties based on company size.
On Mr Don Wee's and Mr Neil Parekh's clarifications on this Bill’s implementation timeline, we will bring it into force in June 2025. CEA and URA will share the revised guidelines and implementation details in advance of that.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked how we would measure the effectiveness of the proposals in this Bill. Potential indications will include the number of severe cases that have been averted due to the existence of this latest set of requirements.
Members Mr Don Wee and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked what efforts will be made to educate the general public about the changes in this Bill and to foster a culture of vigilance against money laundering. The ongoing efforts by URA, CEA and law enforcement agencies will continue. These include educating homebuyers on the need to provide information to facilitate customer due diligence measures, and outreach efforts to the wider society through digital posters on money laundering risks.
Next, Mr Don Wee asked how Government agencies collaborate to ensure a cohesive and effective approach to countering money laundering. Mr Yip Hon Weng also asked what proactive measures are being implemented to identify deceitful activities and prevent them before they occur.
Today, we already have an inter-agency taskforce to deal with money laundering cases. We have reinforced this taskforce by expanding its membership to include all agencies involved in combatting money laundering, including CEA and URA. This will strengthen inter-agency coordination for supervisory and enforcement action. We are also developing a new interface to facilitate data-sharing across Government agencies so that we will have a more comprehensive picture of potential money laundering risks.
Mr Yip Hon Weng asked whether CEA is equipped to deal with evolving money laundering threats. The close partnership between Government agencies ensures that agencies, like CEA and URA, can tap on the various inter-agency platforms to share intelligence, detect suspicious activities and coordinate enforcement.
I turn, now, to the points raised by Assoc Prof Jamus Lim and let me just check my records and my notes of what he said. If I can summarise, essentially, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim suggested that the changes or the amendments in this Bill do not appear to go very far. But at the same time, he, in a sense, actually answered his own question because he said he assumed that the underlying reason for the seemingly limited state of affairs is that we have an already robust regime. And that is exactly right.
So, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim's starting point is correct. We have a very robust regime and that is the reason why we were able to crack that $3 billion money laundering case. But that said, it is clearly not perfect, and we felt, after that, that it was necessary to see what the gaps were and how we could further strengthen an already strong regime.
So, there were two points that Assoc Prof Jamus Lim raised. He asked about the inclusion of proliferation financing, suggesting that this appeared to be an add-on that did not take things very far. And then, the enhancement of penalties which also did not appear to be big moves.
The answer to that is, actually, I think, maybe Assoc Prof Lim may have missed the bigger picture. The bigger picture being this, first, on proliferation financing. As I mentioned in my opening speech, I said, \"This Bill seeks to strengthen current penalty frameworks and to further align our regulatory regime with FATF standards and then to make miscellaneous amendments to clarify certain things.\"
So, that second point, \"aligning our regulatory regime with FATF standards\". The old FATF standards dealt with money laundering and countering terrorism. But the updated standards include proliferation financing. So, the reason for these amendments is because FATF updated its recommendations to member countries to include mitigation of proliferation financing risks and we are, therefore, updating our legislation to align with the FATF standards. So, that takes care of the proliferation financing part.
But the much bigger picture is this, and Assoc Prof Lim actually did refer to it in the course of his speech, which was, he said, and this is again exactly correct, that the amendments in this Bill are actually pursuant to the recommendations of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Anti-Money Laundering, which I co-chaired with various other Ministers of State.
And under that report, which is available on the MAS website, there was a whole slew of measures. First, it started out by explaining our already strong system. Then, it talked about the recommendations that we were making and there were three key broad categories falling under the headings of \"Prevent\", \"Detect\" and \"Enforce\".
And under prevention and detection, there was a wide range of measures in the report. Under enforcement, it was recommended that we do a few things, one of which was to strengthen sense-making and information-sharing, and also to enhance legislative levers for law enforcement agencies and then also to continuously review penalty frameworks to ensure they remain proportionate and dissuasive.
So, in other words, the Inter-Ministerial Committee report contain the whole slew of things under those three broad categories; and under the third one, enforcement, there were various things, one of which was to really review the penalty framework. And this is what this Act does. So, this Act implements one small section of what was a very large body of work with extensive recommendations to strengthen our regime. So, I hope that that addresses the question that Assoc Prof Jamus Lim raised.
So, in conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank hon Members who have spoken and supported this Bill. This Bill is part of our continuing efforts to bolster our ability to detect and deter money laundering, terrorism financing and proliferation financing within the real estate sector. This ensures that our financial and business ecosystem remains reputable and trusted, and continues to thrive.
Mr Deputy Speaker: The question is, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
Ms Indranee Rajah: I believe Assoc Prof Jamus Lim has a clarification.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Are there any clarifications? There are? Yes, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, much obliged. Just a quick clarification. I wish to state for the record, I have no quarrel with the proposed amendments to the existing regime, which is why I supported the Bill and I do believe that they will make it stronger, at least on paper.
But the matter in question, if you will, is a question that I also posed in my speech. Would any of the clauses in the current Bill have helped us to potentially apprehend the Fujian Gang any sooner and if not, is the Government implicitly saying that there were indeed no lapses during the incident that we could have learnt from, that would have been identified by the Inter-Ministerial Committee that we could not have put into the legislation being debated today?
Ms Indranee Rajah: I am not sure that the question actually gels, because I think the question is whether any of the clauses would have helped us to catch them sooner. So, I think what Assoc Prof Jamus Lim is talking about is the prevention and actually, more importantly, the detection portion. Because in order to catch them earlier, that is a \"detect\" provision.
This Bill is primarily concerned with the \"enforce\" category. So, you enforce only after you have caught. So, this one deals with the penalties, the review of the penalties.
Moving back to the \"detect\" portion, that was not really so much a matter of legislation. So, the provision in these Bills are not really aimed at the detection portion. And as I mentioned earlier, actually, this was dealt with in the Ministerial Statements. The detection was actually done quite early, if Members recall. Because we explained that the agencies were tracking them for some time and then only took action, I think, several months or maybe almost a year later because they wanted to make sure they caught everybody in the net.
That said, were there things that could be strengthened in order to assist with detection? The answer is yes, because no system is perfect and that is set out in the Inter-Ministerial Committee report as to how to be able to better detect and that includes various measures, including making the individuals in various sectors part of our gatekeepers and part of the system, hence helping and educating them to be able to identify suspicious transactions earlier and also training them on filing Suspicious Transaction Reports. So, I hope that answers.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Are there any more clarifications for the Minister? If not, I shall pose the question.
[(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. – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Competition (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Ms Low Yen Ling) (for the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister of State for Trade and Industry): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry, I move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
Sir, the Competition (Amendment) Bill amends the Competition Act 2004 and the Enterprise Singapore Board Act 2018 to transfer the product safety and legal metrology functions from the Enterprise Singapore Board to the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS). Related amendments will also be made to the Consumer Protection (Trade Descriptions and Safety Requirements) Act 1975 and the Weights and Measures Act 1975.
Since taking over the fair-trading function from then-SPRING Singapore in 2018, CCCS has deepened its expertise and established itself as one of the key pillars underpinning our consumer protection ecosystem today. It works closely with relevant Government agencies and the Consumers Association of Singapore to promote consumer education and awareness. CCCS also takes action against unfair practices under the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act 2003 (or CPFTA). It plays an important role in safeguarding consumer interests, ensuring they can transact with businesses with peace of mind.
Product safety and the accurate measurement of products are vital in protecting consumer interests. Today, product safety and legal metrology functions are administered by Enterprise Singapore’s Consumer Product Safety Office (CPSO), and the Weights and Measures Office (WMO), respectively. This results in the consumer protection functions to reside across two agencies.
To ensure greater synergy in the administration and enforcement of consumer protection matters under a single agency, the Bill amendments seek to transfer the product safety and legal metrology functions from Enterprise Singapore to CCCS. Such a move would reinforce the mandate of CCCS’ to protect consumers by enhancing its oversight of consumer protection issues.
Sir, I will now explain the key features of the Bill.
The Bill will transfer the following functions from Enterprise Singapore to CCCS, namely:
One, promoting the supply of safe consumer goods among suppliers in Singapore and educating consumers on safety information of the goods they buy and legal metrology.
Two, preventing the supply of unsafe consumer goods in Singapore.
Three, the administration and enforcement of the Weights and Measures Act, including the regulation of weighing and measuring instruments used for trade, the provision of relevant information relating to quantity in the supply of goods, and enforcement actions against suppliers whose goods are short-weighted.
Four, representing Singapore internationally and advising Government agencies and consumer protection organisations on promoting and enforcing the supply of safe consumer goods in Singapore, including providing relevant safety information about consumer goods and legal metrology.
The Bill will also empower CCCS to designate or recognise persons who perform conformity assessment, testing or certification related to product safety of consumer goods, to regulate such persons, or to carry out the conformity assessment or testing itself. CCCS will also be empowered to administer and enforce certain regulations under Consumer Protection (Trade Descriptions and Safety Requirements) Act, including regulations relating to the supply of safe consumer goods. This further complements the existing enforcement functions against unfair practices under the CPFTA.
If passed, all assets, liabilities and records of the CPSO and WMO in Enterprise Singapore will be transferred to CCCS. Enterprise Singapore and CCCS will ensure smooth continuity of operations and provide support to the public and industry stakeholders. We will engage with all relevant stakeholders in the lead-up to the transfer.
Sir, this Bill will better position CCCS to address issues relating to unfair trading, product safety and legal metrology holistically, thereby strengthening CCCS’ ability to safeguard consumer interests. Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this Bill consolidates product safety and legal metrology functions under CCCS. This move will reshape the regulatory landscape for businesses and consumers alike. At the heart of this Bill lies a fundamental question: how do we strike the right balance between protecting consumers and ensuring that businesses, especially small ones, can continue to thrive?
Let us be clear: consumer protection is not just about making sure products are safe. It is about trust – trust that when you buy something, it works as promised; trust that businesses play fair; trust that when things go wrong, the system will act, quickly and decisively. I have several clarifications on the Bill.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
First, Mr Speaker, Sir, I have concerns about the impact of this Bill on small businesses and SMEs.
Regulations should not be a burden that crushes them under mountains of paperwork. We must not build a system so rigid that it punishes those who are simply trying to make an honest living. In time, CCCS will likely introduce new legislations. When the time comes, will there be Government assistance like transitional support for SMEs so that they are not caught off guard by new compliance requirements? How will CCCS ensure that regulations are practical and not just punitive? Does CCCS have the specialised expertise to regulate product safety effectively, given that its primary focus has always been competition law? And most importantly, will small businesses have a seat at the table when these new policies are shaped?
Because, Mr Speaker, Sir, this is not just about writing laws. It is about writing them in a way that the people who live with them every day can comprehend and follow. Consumer protection should not come at the cost of business survival. We must ensure that SMEs are guided, not simply penalised by additional regulations. This is especially pertinent as SMEs may operate on thin margins. The cost of compliance due to a few rotten apples may erode the profits that the honest SMEs may have.
Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, we need to ensure clarity in reporting for consumer safety. The everyday consumer – the busy parent, the elderly resident, the working adult – just wants to know one thing: if I buy something unsafe, where do I go for help?
Right now, some people report to Enterprise Singapore's CPSO, while others turn to CCCS for unfair trade practices. Moving forward, how will CCCS ensure that every consumer in Singapore knows exactly where to go when they need help? Will CCCS introduce a one-stop digital reporting platform to make it easier for consumers to flag unsafe products? How can we speed up product recalls? Can we adopt international best practices, such as real-time public alerts, for hazardous products? Will the products covered by CCCS be limited to non-consumables, or will there be overlaps with other Government agencies like the Health Sciences Authority (HSA)?
Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, regulations only work if they are enforced properly. Right now, CCCS is excellent at enforcing competition laws, but product safety regulation is an entirely different challenge. This is not just about watching out for monopolies. It is about testing, certifying, and recalling products that could harm people if they fail.
So, does CCCS have the budget and manpower to ensure strong enforcement? Will they work with third-party labs to verify product safety, or will they depend solely on businesses' self-declarations? How will CCCS coordinate with agencies like HSA and the National Environment Agency to prevent enforcement overlaps or if the matters overlap, ensure adequate cooperation without waste of resources? Will there be clear service standards, ensuring that unsafe product complaints are swiftly addressed? How many staff will move over from Enterprise Singapore to preserve the expertise? Will there be lay-offs?
A law is only as strong as its enforcement. And without the right expertise and resources, regulation risks becoming just another layer of red tape.
Lastly, Mr Speaker, Sir, we are moving into an era where digital goods and online marketplaces play an equally important role in consumer safety. Will CCCS have the power to regulate unsafe digital products, like smart home devices with cybersecurity risks? How will CCCS ensure that overseas e-commerce platforms comply with our product safety laws? Should we hold marketplace platforms accountable for hosting and selling unsafe products? And as artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content becomes more common, should we update our laws to include misleading AI-generated product claims?
The future of consumer protection is not just about what we buy in stores. It is about what we buy online, in apps, and in the cloud. Consumer protection in the 21st century must evolve beyond physical goods because today's unsafe products are just as often virtual as they are tangible.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, at the heart of this Bill lies a promise – a promise that when people in Singapore buy something, they can trust that it is safe, that it is fair, and that if something goes wrong, help is just a step away.
But trust does not happen by itself. It is built. It is built through smart policies that protect consumers without crushing businesses. It is built through clear, simple rules that everyday people can understand and follow. And it is built through strong enforcement because a law that is not enforced is just words on a page.
This Bill takes us in the right direction. It streamlines enforcement, consolidates oversight and modernises how we regulate product safety. But we must get the details right because details matter. We must ensure that small businesses are supported, not drowned in red tape. We must ensure that every consumer knows exactly where to go when they need help. We must give CCCS the resources to do its job effectively, decisively and fairly. And we must prepare for the future because consumer protection is not just about physical goods anymore.
Mr Speaker, Sir, this is not just about regulations or the regulatory body. This is about confidence – confidence that when you buy a product, you are not gambling with your safety; confidence that businesses, big and small, are held to the same fair standard; confidence that when the Government sets a rule, it is enforced consistently, transparently and in the public interest. I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill, which seeks to transfer the product safety and legal metrology functions of the Enterprise Singapore to CCCS.
Sir, before I begin, I would like to first declare my interest as President of the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE). CASE has and continues to work closely with CCCS on many issues relating to consumer protection. CASE therefore supports the proposed amendments as they will effectively consolidate the enforcement of consumer protection issues under CCCS.
As the Statutory Board responsible for enforcing the CPFTA, CCCS should have the mandate to enforce all issues related to unfair business practices across all sectors and industries. I therefore fully support the proposal for CCCS to take on the functions of ensuring product safety and to administer and enforce the Weights and Measures Act.
Over the years, CASE has been conducting its own product safety testing. With this amendment, I foresee that CASE will work even more closely with CCCS to identify issues related to product safety and misleading product claims, to better protect consumers. However, I have some questions and suggestions regarding this Bill.
Sir, in his speech at the launch of Enterprise Singapore in 2018, the then-Minister for Trade and Industry had highlighted the synergies of housing the development of standards and ensuring consumer product safety under Enterprise Singapore to build trust in Singapore's products and services.
Seven years later, I would like to ask if this was achieved and how does the Ministry intend to ensure that we do not lose this competitive advantage once the product safety and legal metrology functions are transferred to CCCS?
How will stakeholders, such as the businesses, Conformity Assessment Bodies and registered suppliers of Controlled Goods, be impacted by this transfer of functions? Will there be any impact on CCCS and Enterprise Singapore officers as a result of the transfer? How does the Ministry intend to ensure a smooth transition for the affected officers?
Sir, the proposed transfer of functions to CCCS will also allow the agency to have a wider view of consumer protection, especially in its efforts to enforce against unfair trade practices under the CPFTA. This is particularly crucial as we move to embark on a unit pricing trial later this year, for common grocery items at selected outlets across our four major supermarkets.
As Members of this House would be aware, I have been calling for unit pricing since 2022, to tackle the phenomenon of shrinkflation. I therefore, welcome the trial, which will see supermarket operators display unit pricing for daily essentials, such as rice, meat, eggs, cooking oils, fruits and vegetables. I hope that the trial will provide useful insights that could lead to a nationwide implementation of unit pricing soon.
CASE has been studying issues related to unit pricing rollout in other key jurisdictions and I am keenly aware of some of the operational challenges faced overseas. Let me use cooking oil as an example.
Cooking oil is supplied in Singapore, both in terms of volume, meaning in litres; and also in weight, meaning in kilogrammes. One of the challenges of trying to unit price cooking oil will be if a retailer tries to convert all varieties of cooking oil into a standardised unit of measure. Different oils have different densities and the formula will differ across, for example, vegetable oil, sesame oil and avocado oil.
Such variables could lead to potential disputes. I would, therefore, like to suggest for CCCS to have powers under the Weights and Measures Act or under CPFTA, to make decisions on the exact conversion formula to be used, if a complaint is made to the agency regarding such matters.
Sir, as we expand the ambit of CCCS, it is important that we provide the agency with greater administrative powers to strengthen its ability to enforce against unfair trade practices.
In 2022, I spoke about the need to significantly shorten the time taken by CCCS to obtain an injunction order to stop errant businesses from perpetuating their unfair business practices. I urge the Government to reconsider my proposals for CCCS to have the ability to impose financial penalties on errant businesses without having to first obtain an injunction order from the Courts.
Additionally, even if CCCS successfully obtains an injunction order against an errant business, affected consumers are still required to separately file their cases at the Small Claims Tribunals to seek compensation. I hope that CCCS could be provided powers to issue Directions to businesses to compensate consumers, in cases where the agency has been awarded an injunction order by the Courts.
As the number of complaints handled by CASE continues to rise on a yearly basis, I urge the Government to provide CCCS with greater enforcement powers so that we can have a robust consumer protection regime.
Sir, in closing, the proposal to consolidate the enforcement of consumer protection issues under CCCS is a timely move. As we do so, we should have an eye on future consumer protection issues, including potential disputes pertaining to the roll-out of unit pricing and to provide CCCS with greater administrative and enforcement powers.\tMr Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Senior Minister of State.
Ms Low Yen Ling: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Members for their support and their constructive views on this Bill.
Sir, to recap, this Bill seeks to consolidate and streamline our regulatory landscape on consumer protection by transferring the product safety and legal metrology functions from Enterprise Singapore to CCCS. This will enhance CCCS' oversight of consumer protection issues and relevant regulations and strengthen its ability to engage both consumers and businesses on consumer protection matters.
I will, first, address the Members' specific questions about the transfer of functions, before addressing the broader points raised by both Members on our consumer protection regime.
President of CASE, Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about CCCS' ability to administer the product safety and legal metrology regimes following the transfer. I would like to assure them and the House that the transfer process has been thoroughly planned and will be executed in a seamless manner to ensure that the functions continue to be delivered efficiently.
First, such enforcement functions are not new to CCCS. As I had shared earlier, during the start of the reading, CCCS has developed expertise as well as experience as a regulatory authority on unfair trading practices since 2018. Taking over these additional consumer protection functions on product safety and legal metrology is complementary and, in fact, synergistic to its existing functions.
Second, Enterprise Singapore's CPSO and WMO – both their officers as well as the budgets – will be wholly transferred from Enterprise Singapore to CCCS. All public officers in CPSO and WMO will move over accordingly to ensure continuity and enhance cross-sharing of expertise and there will be no impact to other officers in either Enterprise Singapore or CCCS.
As there will be no change to the capabilities and processes of CPSO and WMO, industry stakeholders as well as the members of the public can continue to access the services and the resources that are provided by CPSO as well as WMO during the transfer. More details on the new contact touchpoints following the transfer will certainly be provided to involve stakeholders soon.
These steps will set CCCS' ability to administer the product safety and legal metrology regimes from the get-go following the transfer.
I will now address the two Members' questions on our broader approach towards consumer protection.
As shared in my speech at the Ministry of Trade and Industry's Committee of Supply debate, in fact, just last month, the Government is certainly very mindful that for markets to function properly, consumers' trust in merchants and markets must be upheld. To do so, we must ensure that the regulatory system is fair and transparent to protect consumers while ensuring that the businesses can operate efficiently and are on the same level playing field. So, I fully agree with Mr Yip Hon Weng on the importance of maintaining this balance and I also agree with Mr Melvin Yong on the need to ensure that our regulations remain robust and effective. Let me elaborate.
First, we believe that regulations should be clear, transparent and fit-for-purpose without creating excessive burden. We also take a practical approach to consumer protection regulations. For example, our product safety regime adopts a risk-based approach where stricter regulations, including registration and testing, apply only to a defined list of higher-risk household appliances, such as refrigerators and cooking appliances.
For most of general consumer goods, for example, sports equipment and furniture, we then take a more self-regulatory approach, requiring the products to adhere to applicable international as well as local safety standards.
We also provide guidelines and resources to help businesses better understand and comply with our regulations. For example, CPSO and WMO send compliance advisories to our businesses, including SMEs, through the trade associations and also e-commerce platforms. Because when everyone understands the rules, it then creates a fairer marketplace where businesses can focus on what they do best and provide safe and high-quality products for our consumers.
Consumer education is also critical in ensuring consumers are aware of product characteristics and are able to make informed decisions when purchasing and also using the products. For example, CPSO communicates educational information and safety tips via its website to educate and also alert the consumers of products that are at higher risk of safety breaches.
Second, we proactively consult and also engage industry stakeholders, including SMEs, as well as other partners, when reviewing our regulations, to ensure that we incorporate the perspectives of the private sector and consider the latest developments. For instance, CPSO has set up an Advisory Committee comprising industry experts, academics and Government representatives to provide objective and independent advice on whether certain household appliances should be added to or should be removed from the list of controlled goods.
As both Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Yip Hon Weng have pointed out, consumer markets are constantly evolving and becoming more diverse, from digital goods and online marketplaces to groceries and daily essentials. The Government is certainly cognisant of these developments and is certainly working with the industry to closely monitoring all the developments. We have already started our work to actively consult the industries as part of a more fundamental review of our consumer protection regime.
Just last month, Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister for Trade and Industry, Mr Gan Kim Yong, announced that the Government has convened a Consumer Protection Review Panel to review key consumer concerns in Singapore, such as prepayment losses, online commerce and also to assess the need to strengthen our enforcement powers and ability to deal with emerging trends.
The Panel is co-chaired by Mr Melvin Yong and retired judicial commissioner Ms Foo Tuat Yien. The Panel will develop recommendations to drive consumer empowerment, raise industry standards and strengthen regulatory levers, where appropriate. The Panel held its kick-off meeting last week and we certainly look forward to receiving and studying the Panel's recommendations in time to come.
Sir, to conclude, our goal is to create a system that works for consumers, that works for businesses and that works for the economy. Where errant trading practices present real risks to consumers and honest businesses, we must make sure that appropriate safeguards and enforcement actions are in place without burdening the businesses and consumers.
Where regulations can be streamlined and requirements made efficient, we will certainly pursue these solutions. These key elements of balance, trust and partnership underpin the Government's approach to consumer protection and we will certainly continue to refine and strengthen our approach.
I would like to thank both Members once again for their support of this Bill. Mr Speaker, I seek to move.
Mr Speaker: Are there any clarifications for Senior Minister of State Low Yen Ling? No.
[(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. – [Ms Low Yen Ling]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That at its rising today, Parliament do stand adjourned to a date to be fixed.\" – [Mr Zaqy Mohamad]. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Understanding and Responding to Intimate Partner Violence in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Deputy Leader of the House (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\"
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Razwana Begum.
Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, I stand today to discuss a topic as old as history, a topic that touches the lives of people across the globe and from all walks of life, no matter their age, gender, background, beliefs, income or ability.
Mr Speaker, I am talking about domestic violence, sometimes also referred to as family violence, relationship violence or intimate partner violence.
Mr Speaker, I have never been overly comfortable with any of those terms as I find it incongruous to qualify the word \"violence\" with the words \"domestic\", \"family\", \"relationship\" or \"intimate partner\". They are contradictions in terms as the use of violence automatically negates the notion of family or intimacy or relationship. The two concepts cannot and should not coexist in the same space.
Families and intimate relationships are, by definition, places of love, safety and comfort, not places where any member lives in fear of being controlled, humiliated, hurt, raped or killed.
Despite my misgivings, throughout my speech, I will use the term \"intimate partner violence\" (IPV) as this term tends to emphasise the relational nature of the violence rather than where the violence occurs.
Mr Speaker, I should also declare that I am the head of the Public Safety and Security programme at the Singapore University of Social Sciences and in this role, I work with many different groups on projects related to gender equality, safety and well-being. I am also the president of Persatuan Pemudi Islam Singapura (PPIS), a non-profit organisation focused on women empowerment.
Mr Speaker, just like in other countries, it is difficult to get contemporary, population-wide data on the prevalence and nature of IPV in Singapore. What we do know, however, is that in a 2019 survey conducted in collaboration with United Women Singapore, 30% of participants reported that they or someone close to them have experienced domestic violence.
The Singapore Council of Women’s Organisations who run Star Shelter, a residential service for women who have experienced family violence, reports that it takes women living with violence an average of between four and seven years before they seek help.
According to data published by the Ministry of Home Affairs in 2021, 2023 and 2024, and the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) in 2024, there were 5,134 Police reports about family violence in 2020. Between 2021 and 2024, the number of new spousal violence cases increased by 23% over the three years. Between 2018 and 2020, the number of enquiries related to family violence received by Family Service Centres or Protection Specialist Centres increased by 57% over the two years. The number of new cases of family violence taken up by Family Service Centres or Protection Specialist Centres increased by 125% over the five years.
On a global level, in 2014, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described violence against women and girls as \"A global pandemic that destroys lives, fractures communities and holds back development\" and \"the most extreme example of the political, financial, social and economic oppression of women and girls worldwide.\"
Mr Speaker, data published in 2022 by Lancet indicates that globally, about 27% of women aged between 15 and 49 years who have ever been in a relationship have experienced physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence, with 13% experiencing it in the year before they were surveyed. The same data shows that this violence starts early, with 24% of girls aged 15 to 19 years and 26% of young women aged 19 to 24 years who have ever been in a relationship having experienced physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence.
Mr Speaker, according to data published by the Singapore Department of Statistics, in 2024, there were very close to one million women residents aged between 15 and 49 years living in Singapore. Going on the conservative assumption that half of those women who have ever been in a relationship and using the Lancet figure of 27% I quoted above, up to 135,000 Singaporean women aged between 15 and 49 years could have experienced physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence. This figure is almost 30 times higher than the 5,000-plus reports on family violence made to Police in 2020.
Mr Speaker, considering the above, I think it is timely to commission comprehensive and population-wide research on the prevalence, reporting and nature of IPV across Singapore. In doing so, we should consider definitions and the scope of IPV, trends across age, ethnicity, faith and gender, as well as emerging trends such as online violence, coercive control and violence where children are the perpetrators. Importantly, we also need to have age and culturally sensitive discussions with women and girls as well as men and boys about gender roles and the causes and use of IPV.
Mr Speaker, before I progress, I need to note that my speech today is primarily about women and women who live with or have lived with IPV. This is in no way intended to discount or diminish the stories of the many men who live with or have lived with IPV, but to honour the countless girls and women I have met and known personally and professionally throughout my life whose lives have been altered profoundly because of violence used by men.
Mr Speaker, it is undeniable that men are victims of IPV, however, it is also undeniable that the overwhelming proportion of victims of IPV are women and that violence used by men tends to be more severe, more likely to result in injury or fear and more often part of a pattern of coercive control than that used by women. It is, however, important that men who are victims of IPV feel empowered to break their silence, are believed when they come forward and receive timely, effective and gender-sensitive support.
Mr Speaker, I am talking today about IPV not only because it is an important issue that has far reaching personal, social, health and economic implications, but because a life-long and dear friend of mine encouraged me to do so.
I met my friend when we were both 12 years old and we grew up together. She was a sister to me and a daughter to my parents, and I watched with sadness as her life trajectory was hampered because of violence. The impact of IPV on my friend was not just cuts and bruises, but long-term emotional vulnerability, ongoing health issues, financial hardship, accommodation insecurity, difficulty in forming trusting relationships and children who grew up with a destructive male role model rather than a father.
Mr Speaker, my friend died suddenly last year, due in some part to long-standing stress, distress and illness caused by IPV and associated issues. Three weeks before her death, I was talking with her about a speech I was going to make in Parliament about gender inequality and my hope that my speech might make a difference.
The day of my speech, my friend sent me a text message which I will read, \"You will be great. Just think of all the oppressed women out there and that they need a voice. That's you. Speak from the heart, and with the strength you have so bravely built in yourself over the years.\" So, this is for you, my beautiful friend, and for all the other women, like my friend, whose lives are now not how they should be.
Mr Speaker, IPV can have a significant impact on the health and wellbeing of women, and include: (a) injuries, such as cuts, burns, bruises, and fractures; (b) reproductive issues, such as unwanted pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases and miscarriages; (c) long-term health problems, such as gastrointestinal, gynaecological, cardiovascular and neurological issues; (d) depression and anxiety, post-traumatic stress symptoms, suicidal thoughts and behaviours, low self-esteem and feelings of helplessness; (e) isolation from friends and family, difficulty forming functional relationships, homelessness or accommodation insecurity, and stigma and victim-blaming; and (f) loss of income or employment, financial dependency on others, including an abuser, and difficulty accessing housing or legal services.
Mr Speaker, when listening to such a list, it is important to keep in mind that we are not just describing an inventory of clinical outcomes or abstract possibilities. We are talking about real women with real lives and with real pain, sorrow, disadvantage and trauma. IPV can so easily be dismissed as simply \"he hit her\", but, Mr Speaker, it is so much more. It is a betrayal of a women's trust, confidence, safety and a sense of self – and it can stay with her forever.
Mr Speaker, exposure to IPV can also have immediate and long-term impacts on children, including physical, emotional, psychological, behavioural, cognitive, developmental and social issues.
Mr Speaker, Dr Howard Bath, an Australian psychologist who specialises in trauma and who was keynote speaker at a PPIS forum on trauma informed care in November last year notes, \"When children witness domestic violence, it is not just exposure – it is trauma.\"
Despite such an understanding about the impact of IPV on children, I remain alarmed at the number of times I have heard from women living with violence that they are somehow, magically, able to shield their children from knowing what is happening in the house. As also noted by Dr Bath, \"Children see. Children hear. Children know. More than we think.\"
I am not raising this issue to criticise the choice made by some women with children to remain living with IPV, as many simply have no alternative, but to highlight that we as a system must do far more to protect children.
Where violence exists, children should never be a second thought. Children should be the primary client. The system needs to be far faster and better at removing the abuser and ensuring that women and their children are physically and emotionally safe, and have immediate access to dignified and secure accommodation, free legal advice, income support when needed and trauma informed care.
Mr Speaker, it is also important to consider childhood exposure to IPV through a gendered lens. Girls exposed to IPV are more likely to tolerate or even seek out such behaviour in their own future relationships. Boys exposed to IPV are more likely to see violence against women as the norm and to use violence in their own future relationships. By failing to protect children from exposure to IPV, we are not only harming children, we are also perpetuating the inter-generational cycle of accepting and using violence in relationships.
Mr Speaker, this is corroborated by the joint MSF and National Council of Social Service longitudinal study on Resilience and Empowerment amidst Adversities of Childhood, which found that maltreated children and young offenders who witnessed family violence tended to have a higher risk of developing emotional and behavioural problems than the general comparative population.
Mr Speaker, at the other end of the spectrum is elder abuse. While some may argue that elder abuse is not technically IPV, it is still a form of violence that occurs within a domestic environment and which usually involves family members or those living within the family home as perpetrators. For this reason, and because many elderly people are inherently vulnerable, I am including elder abuse in my comments today.
Like with other forms of in-home violence, information about elder abuse in Singapore is slim. What we do know, however, is that data published in 2018 in the Journal of Elder Abuse and Neglect indicates that 8.3% of older adults in Singapore have experienced mistreatment and according to data published by MSF in 2024, between 2012 and 2023, the number of new cases of elder abuse taken up by Family Service Centres or Protection Specialist Centres increased by 5% over the two years.
As with the data on general rates of IPV, these figures may not capture the full extent of elder abuse in Singapore as it is likely that many incidents go unreported.
Mr Speaker, according to a 2023 paper published by the US National Bureau of Economic Research, approximately 82% of older adults in Singapore who are in need of assistance are cared for at home, either by family members, migrant domestic workers or a combination of both.
While the preference for home-based care is influenced by cultural values, and the unavailability and expense of professional residential care, home-based care carries with it significant risks, including: inadequate carer qualifications or training; social isolation and a lack of external oversight; inadequate or inaccessible home infrastructure; cramped or undignified living conditions and caregiver stress and fatigue.
Mr Speaker, given Singapore's continued reliance on home-based elder care, it may be timely to introduce a home visitation service to ensure proper oversight and support for older individuals receiving care at home. While this might be difficult, given the sheer number of older people being cared for at home and cultural barriers about accepting such a service, current practice remains inherently risky.
Mr Speaker, since 2021, when the findings of the Taskforce on Family Violence, chaired by Minister of State for Social and Family Development, Ms Sun Xueling, and Minister of State for Home Affairs, Assoc Prof Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim, were released, Singapore has introduced a suite of initiatives to combat IPV. This is on top of previously existing initiatives, some of which have been in place for decades.
Mr Speaker, time prohibits me from mentioning even a snapshot of these initiatives, however I would like to extend my personal thanks to the many hundreds of Singaporeans who work every day to prevent and respond to IPV. It can be tough work and can take its toll; particularly when it sometimes feels as if the broader system is unaware or indifferent to the issue.
I know what it is like to work in a sector that is specialised, frequently under-resourced and for the most part, invisible. To all of you out there in IPV land, you are not invisible to me, nor to many of my colleagues in Government, academia and the community sector; and, once again, I thank you for everything you do.
Mr Speaker, I will now conclude with 10 recommendations. Mr Speaker, my recommendations are drawn from several sources including direct feedback from the IPV sector and women with lived experience of IPV, emerging international best practice, and perspectives based on my professional experiences and expertise.
Mr Speaker, I should also note that my recommendations are intended to complement and enhance the 16 recommendations made in 2021 by the Taskforce on Family Violence that I referred to earlier.
Mr Speaker, I recommend, that we draft legislations that: allows women leaving an IPV situation to immediately purchase or rent a Housing and Development Board (HDB) property with no stamp-duty or, where this is not feasible, to provide equivalent rent-subsidised accommodation; allows the provision of immediate living-wage income support to women leaving an IPV situation; and allows Police to issue on-the-spot Personal Protection Orders for women and children, and to compel a perpetrator of IPV to immediately leave a home or building or to reside at either self-selected or emergency relief accommodations.
Mr Speaker, I also recommend that we trial artificial intelligence-assisted technologies, including wearable devices that use real-time physiological data to alert Police to the use of IPV; decision-making tools to assist women to create objective safety and action plans; online therapeutic support for women; data analysis systems to predict families at high risk of IPV; and virtual reality simulators to train Police, healthcare providers and social service sector staff.
To assist and improve governance, I recommend that we establish a National Commissioner to oversee and coordinate a Singapore-wide response to IPV; a National Partnership on IVP to engage all stakeholders and encourage coordinated service delivery; and a National Plan to End Violence against Children and Women that sets out a national framework and a whole-of-Government approach to IPV.
From a workplace perspective, I recommend that we enhance Employee Assistance Programmes to include specialised counselling and support for employees seeking help for IVP related behaviours. And, require organisations to provide Domestic Violence Awareness Training to all managers and staff, and have policies to guide organisational response to employees who may be affected by IPV.
To assist and improve our statutory and social sector response to IPV, I recommend that we integrate therapeutic and restorative justice into Syariah Court processes; provide safe access to faith, culturally and gender-aligned counsellors and support groups; and embed IPV screening into all routine healthcare assessments, including dental checks.
Mr Speaker, IPV has no place in Singapore, not now, not ever. Every one of us has a right and an inherent need to feel and be safe, always and everywhere, and not just by chance or life circumstances, but by assurance. Mr Speaker, let us stand united in our resolve to act, to do more and do better to ensure that safety, justice and dignity is guaranteed for all. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Minister of State Sun.
The Minister of State for Social and Family Development (Ms Sun Xueling): Mr Speaker, Sir, my condolences to Assoc Prof Razwana on the death of her good friend and I thank her for making this important speech in Parliament.
In 2024, MSF released our Domestic Violence Trends Report. This is an inaugural report. Singapore does not tolerate violence against persons. No one should experience violence, especially at the hands of a person whom they should love and trust.
Our work to prevent and eradicate domestic violence is a continuous, intensive piece of work that we engage in together with our community and social service partners. Every day, we are thinking about how to better protect survivors and to hold perpetrators to account.
Kindly allow me to share the framework we have in place in Singapore to tackle domestic violence. First and foremost, our legislative system. We have five key pieces of legislation in place to address domestic violence.
First, for protection of family members, the Women's Charter was amended in 2023 to empower survivors, regardless of gender, to better protect themselves and their children; strengthen the Government's ability to intervene in family violence cases; and empower the Courts to make additional rehabilitative orders.
Rehabilitative orders can be issued with a Personal Protection Order. This includes the counselling order, which can be mandated by the Courts and the counselling conducted by the social service agencies. This reflects the Ministry's approach to domestic violence, which emphasises the repairing of harm and the mending of relationships, and is aligned with the spirit of Restorative Justice.
Second, the Penal Code was amended in 2019 to double the maximum penalties for certain offences when committed against vulnerable victims, including those in intimate or close relationships with the perpetrator. In line with the enhanced punishments under the Penal Code for offences against vulnerable persons and intimate partners, the penalties for offences under the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) against vulnerable persons and intimate partners was doubled in 2019.
Third, the POHA Protection Orders regime was strengthened by establishing a dedicated Protection from Harassment Court.
Fourth, for those who cannot protect themselves from abuse because of a mental or physical infirmity, disability or incapacity, we have the Vulnerable Adults Act introduced in 2018.
Fifth, underwriting all this is the Criminal Procedure Code, which is the main piece of legislation that provides the powers and procedures for enforcing our criminal laws to hold perpetrators to account.
Complementing the legal framework, we have upstream and downstream efforts to tackle domestic violence. I appreciate the Member's call for the community to be engaged. And indeed, preventing and addressing violence is a whole of society effort.
Examples of MSF's upstream efforts include: partnering Institutes of Higher Learning to drive awareness on respectful relationships amongst youths; partnering ethnic organisations and community agencies on domestic violence topics to foster community awareness; and running domestic violence awareness training workshops to equip the community with the knowledge to spot and safely intervene when they see potential cases of domestic violence in the community. We have also invested in public education to increase awareness of abuse through our \"Break The Silence\" campaign.
We note the Member's feedback that home-based care for the elderly may increase the risk of social isolation or abuse due to caregiver stress, and her suggestion for home visitation services. Our Silver Generation Office currently reaches out to those aged 60 and above to identify needs and refer them to relevant support or services, such as Active Ageing Centres for befriending and buddying service.
Where violence has taken place, 24-hour services are available to facilitate reporting and for survivors to receive immediate help: the National Anti-Violence and Sexual Harassment Helpline was enhanced in 2022 to include online reporting. The Domestic Violence Emergency Response Team (DVERT) was introduced in 2023, where social service professionals respond jointly with the Police in high-risk cases with immediate safety concerns.
The Member suggested on-site issuance of Personal Protection Orders against perpetrators. The Women's Charter amendments, which were operationalised in January 2025, allow the issuance of Emergency Orders on site by DVERT officers, in high-risk cases to better protect the survivors. The Emergency Order may also include a Domestic Exclusion Order, a Stay Away Order or a No Contact Order imposed on the perpetrator. A breach of any of these orders is an arrestable offence.
Our social service agencies are our key partners in the efforts to tackle domestic violence, and I would like to commend our Family Service Centres, Protection Specialist Centres and the Integrated Service for Individual and Family Protection Specialist Centre, for partnering us on this journey.
The Member highlighted the importance of other elements of support, such as immediate financial support and expediting purchase or rental of HDB property for survivors. I understand where she is coming from. Mr Speaker, Assoc Prof Razwana, I have worked with several of these survivors before. Their immediate need is to be referred to crisis shelters, who will work with survivors to address their safety concerns and to assist them in subsequently securing stable housing arrangements.
I have also written letters to the Ministry of National Development before, to facilitate rental housing for these survivors, so I know that it can be done. And those who require urgent financial assistance may also tap on Interim Assistance, which provides immediate one-off financial assistance to individuals and families requiring urgent and temporary financial relief. Those who need longer term support for their basic needs can also be referred to the Social Service Offices for ComCare assistance.
These efforts aim to empower survivors to stay safe and work towards financial independence, in line with what the Member has suggested. There is also support for perpetrators who cannot remain in their homes due to statutory orders. If they are unable to find alternate accommodation, they can seek assistance from transitional shelters.
What is important also is our capabilities to better support domestic violence survivors. And over the years, the training of social workers to deliver support and services to the survivors has been enhanced. Social workers, counsellors and psychologists now undergo more specialised training to strengthen their ability to deliver timely and effective psychosocial support and trauma interventions, including being sensitive to the diverse needs of survivors of domestic violence. I thank the Member for her suggestions to use technology to enhance the training for professionals and the support provided to survivors. We will review these suggestions.
The Member has also highlighted the importance of a nationwide response and framework to end domestic violence. As she has shared, this is in the form of the Taskforce on Family Violence, which I co-chaired with Minister of State for Home Affairs Assoc Prof Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim. And within the MSF, we also have specialised Protective Service units, which are part of a larger Rehabilitation and Protection Group in the MSF.
As for the suggestions on workplace initiatives and for better healthcare integration and support, this is something we will explore with the tripartite partners. The employers' greatest contribution is to support survivors to rebuild their lives, by giving them the opportunity of a job and to thrive in the workplace. Beyond that, I am a bit mindful that we should not make employers do things which the Government or the community is better equipped to do.
To conclude, I would like to reiterate that the Government takes a strong stance against violence. But we cannot do this alone because of the hidden nature of domestic violence. Addressing domestic violence requires a whole-of-society approach, and I thank the Member for her speech, which not only highlights this important issue, but also emphasises how this is a shared responsibility. Domestic violence is not a private matter. Everyone has a part to play in building a society where families are strong and everyone feels safe.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 6.31 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":"Matter Raised On Adjournment Motion","questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Divorced Couples with Shared Care and Control of Their Children Each Listing Children in Public Housing Applications","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"22 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development in each year for the past five years (a) how many appeals has the Ministry received from divorced parents with shared care and control of their child for both parents to each list their child in their application for public housing; (b) how many appeals have been granted; (c) whether any of the rejected appeals have been due to the parents abusing the system to obtain subsidised public housing; and (d) if so, how many such cases are there.
Mr Desmond Lee: From 2020 to 2024, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) received one appeal from divorced parents with shared care and control of their child to list the same child in their respective applications to purchase a flat. As there were no apparent extenuating reasons, HDB turned down the appeal. The divorced parents then reached an agreement between them for one party to list the child in a flat application.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effectiveness of \"The Next Step\" Programme in Helping Sex Workers Find Alternative Career Pathways","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"23 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the funding provided by the National Council of Social Service for ''The Next Step'' programme to help sex workers find alternative career pathways has helped the programme achieve its goals; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider providing increased and longer-term funding for the programme.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: \"The Next Step\" is a programme initiated and run by non-profit organisation, Project X. It provides sex workers with upskilling and employment support, and social support in the form of peer groups and counselling services, to enable them to leave the commercial sex industry.
The programme is partially supported by funding administered by the National Council of Social Service from October 2023 to September 2026. Project X raises funds to cover the remainder. As a general approach, all funding is time-bound so that the grant recipient's performance can be evaluated and the benefit of extension weighed against other social needs. Hence, we encourage grant recipients to make sure their programmes deliver strong results and to seek wider support from the community.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Regulations for Use of Power Banks during Flights on Airlines Departing From and Arriving at Changi Airport","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"24 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Transport (a) what are Singapore's current regulations on power banks carried by passengers on airlines departing from and arriving at Changi Airport; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider restricting the use of power banks during flights and banning them from being stored in the overhead cabins
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has guidelines for all contracting states on the carriage of lithium batteries by passengers. In light of recent incidents, ICAO plans to discuss the issues relating to power banks soon.
The Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore's (CAAS') safety regulations are aligned with ICAO's prevailing guidelines: (a) for checked baggage, power banks of any capacity are prohibited; (b) for hand-carry luggage, passengers are allowed to carry power banks of capacity not exceeding 100 watt-hours; (c) passengers who wish to hand-carry power banks with a capacity exceeding 100 watt-hours, but not more than 160 watt-hours, must obtain approval from the airline before travel; (d) power banks with a capacity above 160 watt-hours are prohibited in hand carry luggage; and (e) the use of all power banks is also prohibited during critical flight phases including take-off, landing and taxiing.
CAAS regularly reviews and updates its regulations to ensure high safety standards. In doing so, CAAS takes into account international guidelines and latest developments related to the carriage and use of power banks in aircraft. This will include the outcome of safety investigations into recent incidents involving power banks in aircraft, which are still ongoing.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for \"Let's Have One\" Campaign to Boost Total Fertility Rate","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"25 Ms Ng Ling Ling asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) how will the Government re-imagine a \"Let's Have One\" campaign to promote growth in birth rate in a manner similar to the \"Stop at Two\" family planning campaign launched in 1972 to moderate population growth then; and (b) what lessons can be learnt from the \"Stop at Two\" campaign to make the ''Let's Have One'' campaign as successful for reversing the downward trend in total fertility rate.
Ms Indranee Rajah (for the Prime Minister): Today's environment is vastly different compared to the 1970s. Then, we were a developing country with few resources, insufficient housing and amenities, and a population with much lower levels of education. Mindsets and attitudes to family formation, too, were different.
In the half-century that has since passed, Singapore has changed tremendously. Individual priorities and societal norms surrounding marriage and parenthood have also shifted, in line with global trends across advanced societies around the world. As such, using an approach like the \"Stop at Two\" campaign, which was developed for circumstances and views prevalent more than 50 years ago, may not be the most effective to change mindsets and attitudes in the current day.
Addressing our declining fertility is a national priority. Yet, we also understand that marriage and parenthood are deeply personal decisions. Young couples have many considerations in deciding whether to marry and have children. Hence, we are focusing on understanding their viewpoint and are working to address their concerns over starting and raising families. We are also working to foster a more conducive and enabling environment in which Singaporeans feel secure and supported in having children.
In the Forward Singapore report, we have stated our commitment for Singapore to be the best place for Singaporeans to start, grow and nurture their families. Since then, we have progressively enhanced our policies to address key areas of concerns, for example, through enhancements to the Baby Bonus Scheme, introduction of the new Shared Parental Leave scheme, the Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement Requests as well as the new Large Families Scheme.
To shift mindsets and culture, we have also started the Made For Families movement, which is an ongoing effort to rally employers, organisations, community groups and individuals to create a Singapore where families can thrive. The Made For Families movement also includes public communications efforts to encourage conversations around parenthood as well as to assure those keen to have children that they will be supported at every step along the way. We will continue to partner the whole-of-society to build a Singapore Made For Families.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Rationale for Stopping Government's Matching Support for Enhanced Fund-Raising Programme in FY2027","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"26 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance what is the rationale behind the cessation of the Government's share of matching support for the Tote Board's Enhanced Fund-Raising Programme in FY2027.
Ms Indranee Rajah (for the Prime Minister): In financial year 2020, the Government partnered Tote Board to enhance support for charities during the COVID-19 pandemic by raising matching support for donations under the Enhanced Fund-Raising (EFR) Programme. The pandemic had greatly disrupted operations in the charity sector, including fundraising activities and events. The enhanced support was intended to help charities during the crisis brought about by the pandemic.
It is now timely to taper matching support under the EFR Programme to pre-COVID-19 levels. This will be done gradually to provide charities sufficient time to adjust their fundraising plans.
Notwithstanding the tapering of support for the EFR Programme, the Government continues to provide broad-based support for charities. This includes 250% tax deductions for qualifying donations to Institutions of a Public Character and the Charities Capabilities Fund, which provides funding support to enhance the governance and management capabilities of charities. The Government also has matching grant schemes to support charities in specific sectors, such as the Cultural Matching Fund, One Team Singapore Fund and Community Silver Trust.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Singaporeans Registering Wills with Singapore Academy of Law","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"27 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Law (a) what is the current number of Singaporeans who have registered their Wills with the Singapore Academy of Law; and (b) how the Government can further encourage more Singaporeans to make their Wills.
Mr K Shanmugam: As at 1 April 2025, there are over 153,000 Will records deposited with the Singapore Academy of Law's Wills Registry. Registration with the Wills Registry is voluntary. Doing so makes it easier to locate the Will when needed. But the validity of a testator's Will does not depend on whether one has registered his or her Will with the Registry.
The Government has embarked on a national legacy planning campaign, to encourage legacy planning, as it would allow Singaporeans to plan ahead on how they would like to be cared for or their assets to be distributed, in the event that they lose mental capacity or pass on, thus reducing uncertainty and disputes over their estate.
This national campaign promotes, among many things, MyLegacy@LifeSG (mylegacy.life.gov.sg), a one-stop Government portal that provides citizens with information and services on legacy planning. This includes, useful tips and facts on Will-making and information to dispel common myths and misconceptions about Wills as well as how to make a Lasting Power of Attorney, Advance Care Plan and CPF nomination. The campaign is jointly organised by the Agency for Integrated Care, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Social and Family Development, Central Provident Fund Board and ServiceSG from the Public Service Division.
The Government will continue its efforts to raise awareness and encourage citizens to take action to plan for their legacies. For example, it will be organising a legacy planning event in July 2025, that will provide guidance and resources to help citizens begin their legacy planning journey. We also encourage Singaporeans to visit the My Legacy portal for more information on Will-making.
Beyond these efforts, my Ministry regularly conducts reviews of our laws, including legislation governing wills, to ensure that our legal system remains efficient and effective, and that justice continues to remain accessible. This includes ensuring that the Will-making process remains accessible to Singaporeans.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Efforts to Tackle Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"28 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Manpower what are the Ministry's plans to expand surveillance and preventive efforts to address work-related musculoskeletal disorders, in view that they are the second highest type of occupational disease cases reported in each year from 2022 to 2024.
Dr Tan See Leng: To improve detection and strengthen prevention of occupational diseases, such as work-related musculoskeletal disorders, we will further raise awareness of occupational diseases among employers, employees, the medical community, and trade associations and chambers. For example, we are collaborating with the Ministry of Health to raise the medical community's awareness to detect and report occupational diseases.
However, it is challenging to identify the origin of work-related musculoskeletal disorders, as the disorders develop over time and employers may attribute them to non-work-related sources. This notwithstanding, we will continue to track the development of work-related musculoskeletal disorder cases at workplaces and tailor our interventions for higher-risk sectors.
We will also provide resources and guidelines to support employers and workers in adopting good ergonomic practices and technology solutions to mitigate work-related musculoskeletal disorder risks. This includes the Approved Codes of Practice for Manual Handling, Office Ergonomics and the Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) Guidelines on Improving Ergonomics in the Workplace. The Total WSH Programme for companies also provides free ergonomics-related training to help workers better understand and prevent these disorders.
Preventing work-related musculoskeletal disorders requires collective ownership by employers and workers. Employers need to design proper work processes and provide mechanical aids and equipment; while workers need to exercise ownership in practising good ergonomics, such as adopting proper posture and correct lifting techniques. We look forward to working closely with the National Trades Union Congress and industry partners via the Tripartite Committee on Workplace Health, to explore more ways to raise awareness, prevent occupational health hazards and track post-diagnosis management and prevention.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress of Extending Covered Linkways to 800-metre Radius of MRT Stations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"29 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport whether a status update can be provided on LTA's enhanced first and last mile connectivity plans to extend covered linkways to within an 800-metre radius of MRT stations including the current projected number of additional high and low covered linkways which will be built in the next five years under the expanded scope of the plans.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Land Transport Authority (LTA) has built 186 kilometres of covered linkways since the launch of the Walk2Ride programme in 2013. This programme makes walking to key public transport nodes more convenient and comfortable by building covered linkways connecting public transport nodes to key amenities within a 400-metre radius.
In 2024, we announced plans to build covered linkways to Friendly Streets within an 800-metre radius of a Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station. In the next five years, with new MRT stations and more Friendly Streets launched, LTA will build an additional 50 kilometres of covered linkways to enhance first and last mile connectivity.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Supporting Use of Low-formaldehyde Building Materials and Raising Consumer Awareness","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"30 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the Ministry is considering measures, beyond the current certification schemes, to further support the use of low-formaldehyde building materials; (b) how does the Ministry plan to enhance consumer awareness and education regarding low-formaldehyde building materials; and (c) whether the Ministry is taking measures to address emissions of other harmful volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from interior building materials.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: From 1 January 2026, interior paints with formaldehyde will not be allowed for sale in Singapore.
To increase awareness about the harmful effects of formaldehyde exposure, the National Environment Agency (NEA) has published information on its website, produced circulars for industry and engaged the public through media features. We also encourage the public to use products that are certified under the Singapore Green Labelling Scheme administered by the Singapore Environment Council, or the Singapore Green Building Product Certification Scheme administered by the Singapore Green Building Council. The formaldehyde levels of such certified products are low or undetectable.
NEA is actively reviewing potential regulatory requirements for formaldehyde in other interior building products. NEA is also studying the emission levels and health impact of other volatile organic compounds from interior building products.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Demand and Expansion Plans for Single Room Shared Facilities Pilot Project","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"31 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the total demand for the current Single Room Shared Facilities (SRSF) pilot; (b) whether the Government has plans to launch further SRSF sites in the next five years; and (c) what is the target number of beds to be made available under the SRSF model in the next five years.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Single Room Shared Facilities (SRSF) pilot is designed to improve the experience of singles under the Public Rental Scheme by providing them with more privacy while reducing the risk of social isolation. It is part of the Housing and Development Board's (HDB's) efforts to provide more public rental housing options for singles.
The SRSF model is being piloted at the former Anderson Junior College student hostel. Since the opening of applications to SRSF in May 2024, HDB has received 1,100 applications, of which about half were assessed to be eligible and have been progressively moving in.
HDB is reviewing the SRSF pilot, including the study of other possible SRSF sites, and will share more details when the plans are ready. There is currently no target number of beds to provide under the SRSF model.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Long-term Strategies to Ensure Healthcare Cost Containment and Reduction of Unnecessary Medical Tests","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"32 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Health (a) what long-term strategies is the Government implementing to ensure healthcare cost containment, beyond annual premium adjustments and fee controls; (b) whether Singapore has studied international best practices in medical cost control, especially where they relate to new medical technologies; and (c) how does the Government plan to balance medical innovation and patient outcomes with cost sustainability.
33 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry has assessed the extent to which unnecessary medical tests, procedures or prescriptions contribute to rising hospital bill sizes; (b) what measures are in place to prevent over-servicing by healthcare providers; and (c) whether patient cost-sharing mechanisms can be enhanced to deter excessive consumption of medical services.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Ministry of Health (MOH) outlined its key strategies to manage healthcare cost during the recent Committee of Supply (COS) debate. These are widely regarded as international best practices.
To manage growth in cost of delivery, we implemented Health Technology Assessments to ensure that we fund and encourage the use of health technologies that are clinically- and cost-effective. With these efforts, we observed that drug spending growth in the public healthcare system has slowed from around 10% before financial year (FY) 2021 to 5% in FY2023.
We have also implemented a value-driven care programme throughout our public healthcare clusters, tracking and benchmarking quality and cost outcomes across common conditions and identifying areas for improvement. These ensure that what we spend on healthcare is commensurate with good health outcomes for Singaporeans.
Demand for healthcare will grow with an ageing population. Through Healthier SG and Age Well SG, we are investing in population health to keep Singaporeans healthier for longer. We are transforming care to anchor care in communities as far as possible, instead of over-relying on acute hospitals.
We developed and publish fee benchmarks for close to 2,200 common procedures and conditions to guide fee setting in the private healthcare sector. We also publish hospital bill size information across all hospitals and ward types to enable patients to make comparisons. Through a Claims Management Office that we set up in 2022, we have stepped-up monitoring and enforcement against inappropriate MediShield Life claims that may drive up costs and healthcare insurance premiums.
Finally, an important factor to manage costs is to ensure that we maintain financial discipline in how we pay for healthcare. We try not to over-rely on only subsidy or insurance. Instead, through a combination of subsidy, MediShield Life and MediSave, and maintaining some co-payment from patients, we try to keep healthcare affordable. As a result, our national healthcare spending is under 5% of the gross domestic product as of 2022, which is significantly lower than the 10% to 12% of other developed economies. This translates into a lower healthcare financial burden for Singaporeans.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Owners Selling HDB Flats to Pay Personal Debts and Subsequently Obtaining HDB Loans for Other Flats or Applying for Rental Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"34 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Government has any data on HDB flat owners selling their flats to pay personal debts and thereafter proceeding to obtain a loan from HDB to buy another HDB flat or filing an application for a HDB rental flat; and (b) if so, how many of such cases are there in the last five years.
Mr Desmond Lee: Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats are meant for long-term owner-occupation and selling one's HDB home is a significant decision. Flat owners are urged to plan responsibly and not rush into selling their flat without a firm plan for their next housing arrangement.
Today, prospective flat sellers need to register an Intent to Sell with HDB and wait out seven days before they may grant an Option to Purchase to prospective flat buyers. The Intent to Sell has various features to encourage them to plan for their next housing before they commit to selling their flat. These include: (a)\trequiring them to state their next housing arrangement after the sale of their flat; (b)\tadvising them on important policies and procedures to take note of before committing to sell their flat; and (c)\tsupporting them in planning for their next flat purchase by reminding them to apply for an HDB Flat Eligibility letter and use HDB's financial calculators to estimate the net proceeds from the sale of their flat and their budget available for the next flat purchase.
HDB does not have data on flat owners selling their flats to pay off personal debts. For applicants who apply for a second HDB housing loan to buy another flat or apply for public rental flats, HDB takes into account the proceeds that they have received from the sale of their previous property in determining the eligible loan amount or their need for a rental flat.
Flat owners are urged to consider carefully before committing to sell their flat. Those who face difficulties in keeping up with their mortgage instalment payments may approach their HDB Branch for a holistic assessment of their situation and work out the required assistance. Those in other types of debt can ask for assistance from Credit Counselling Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extending Sport-in-Precinct Scheme to HDB Estates Managed by Opposition Town Councils","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"36 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether SportSG will extend the Sport-in-Precinct scheme to HDB estates managed by opposition Town Councils; and (b) what is the typical budget allocated for each project.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: In allocating resources for sporting facilities, the Government aims to provide Singaporeans with convenient access to affordable public sports facilities so that they can enjoy sports as part of a healthy and active lifestyle, and for recreation. These include a variety of facilities from SportSG's 21 comprehensive sport centres with gyms and swimming pools spread across Singapore to the People's Association’s over 100 community centres or clubs across Singapore and numerous free-to-play sport spaces located conveniently in our housing estates. The Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth and Sport Singapore will also continue to work with the Ministry of Education to provide more access to sporting and recreational facilities on top of the current 393 operational facilities under the Dual Use Scheme, and collaborate with other agencies to meet the evolving needs of the community.
The Sport-in-Precinct (SIP) facilities is one of several types of sporting facilities for the public. Across Singapore, we currently have 10 completed SIP facilities, including in Boon Lay, Sembawang and Sengkang. There are plans for the development of more SIP projects. We will announce the plans for these SIPs when the plans are firmed up.
Planning and including the siting for public sport facilities, including SIP facilities, is done at the national level, considering a range of different factors. These include, the nature of facilities already available, a site's proximity to other existing and upcoming locations of sports and recreational facilities, availability of suitable sites, town population size and popularity of sports.
The cost of an SIP facility depends on several factors, such as market conditions at the time of tender and the size and type of facilities being built.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reason for Projected Dwelling Units Figure Being Increased to 1.61 Million in HDB 2023/2024 Annual Report","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"38 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for National Development (a) on what basis is the figure for the projected ultimate dwelling units in the HDB Annual Report 2019/2020 increased to 1.61 million in the HDB 2023/2024 Annual Report; (b) what is the overall population size the Government anticipates in parallel with this increase in the number of projected ultimate dwelling units; and (c) based on the current URA Masterplan, what is the maximum number of projected ultimate dwelling units that can be accommodated across Singapore.
Mr Desmond Lee: The projected ultimate number of dwelling units in the Housing and Development Board's (HDB's) Annual Report is an estimate of the dwelling units that HDB towns can accommodate when fully developed. This figure is only a planning parameter and not a target to be reached. It is regularly updated as it is affected by several variables which can change over time.
For example, in recent years, we have observed trends, such as strong household formation rates and smaller household sizes, contributing to strong broad-based housing demand. This has resulted in an increase in the estimated number of households in the Singapore population which are eligible to purchase public housing flats. Consequently, we have set aside more residential land within existing towns and new areas, such as Bayshore under Bedok town and Ulu Pandan under Queenstown. As a result, since the 2019/2020 Annual Report, town boundaries were expanded and the estimated number of ultimate residential dwelling units has increased.
In response to these housing demand trends, HDB has adjusted its housing mix and built more flats. This is unlike the proposal from the Workers' Party in 2019 that recommended HDB to cut back its building programme from around 16,000 to 17,000 dwelling units to around 9,000 dwelling units every year. Had we followed the recommendation, we would have faced a serious shortage of housing supply, longer waiting times and much higher prices for resale flats.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Plan and Approximate Cost for Installation of Lifts at Pedestrian Overhead Bridges","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether an update can be provided on the plans to install lifts at pedestrian overhead bridges (POBs) under the Land Transport Master Plan 2040; and (b) what is the approximate cost of installing lifts at POBs.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Since 2018, all newly-constructed Pedestrian Overhead Bridges (POBs) are installed with lifts. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) has also been retrofitting existing POBs with lifts since 2011. To date, LTA has retrofitted lifts at 91 existing POBs, including the 29 POBs committed under the Land Transport Master Plan 2040. LTA aims to retrofit another 150 POBs with lifts by the end of 2030.
Currently, it costs about $5 million to retrofit a POB with a pair of lifts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Corporate Governance Standards for Family Offices that Seek Tax Incentives","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"40 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) what specific standards of corporate governance are imposed on Family Offices (FOs) seeking tax incentives under the fund tax incentive schemes for FOs; (b) whether MAS requires such entities to implement robust fraud prevention mechanisms, third-party audits, and whistleblower protections; (c) what percentage of these FOs have been subjected to intensive supervision or compliance review in the past three years; and (d) why are these FOs not required to undertake mandatory risk assessments for fraud vulnerabilities.
Mr Gan Kim Yong (for the Prime Minister): Single Family Offices (SFO) manage only the family's own private wealth and do not handle third-party funds. It is for the family to establish the governance and controls needed and to hire the right people to manage their private wealth vehicle. They do not need to be regulated nor be subject to specific corporate governance standards beyond those which apply to all corporate entities, whether they receive tax incentives or otherwise. This approach is consistent with major financial centres worldwide. Our approach towards SFOs is focused on addressing money laundering risks. Imposing unnecessary regulations will increase compliance costs and undermine Singapore's position as a business and financial centre.
On the recent case of alleged misappropriation of funds by former employees of a Chinese family office, misappropriation of funds is a risk faced by all businesses and not unique to SFOs. All businesses should institute appropriate controls to guard against such risks. Where misappropriation of funds occur, Singapore's legal regime allows for recourse against such misconduct.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Framework and Key Performance Indicators for Evaluation of School Principals'","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"41 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for Education (a) how is the Ministry currently evaluating school principals' performance; (b) what are the key performance indicators (KPIs) that principals are expected to meet; and (c) when was the performance evaluation framework for school principals last reviewed and how have the KPIs changed or shifted in recent years.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Ministry of Education adopts the Civil Service performance management framework for all our officers, which aims to support competency driven growth. Our educators, including Principals, are assessed based on \"what\" they have done also known as \"Key Result Areas\"; and \"how\" they go about doing their work also known as \"Competencies\". We assess Principals based on their holistic leadership impact, including the achievements in their Key Result Areas, and the demonstration of the Competencies expected of their role.
We review the performance management framework for educators regularly in tandem with the rest of the Civil Service.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Transfer of Patient Health Records from National Healthcare Group to SingHealth Group Entities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"42 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Minister for Health whether there is a seamless transfer of patients and their health records from the National Healthcare Group hospitals to SingHealth Group entities such as the National Cancer Centre.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Public Healthcare Institutions (PHIs) have put in place protocols and processes to ensure patient safety and continuity of care when patients are transferred across clusters. Medical information, including the patient's condition and the treatments rendered prior to the transfer are documented and provided to the receiving PHI.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore's Contributions to Continuation of Ceasefire Negotiations in Gaza and Impact of Resumption of Hostilities on Flow of Humanitarian Aid","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs in view of the breach of ceasefire and the resumption of military strikes in Gaza (a) whether the Government's plans to deliver humanitarian aid assistance and to deploy medical teams to provide further medical assistance to people in Gaza will be affected; and (b) what can Singapore do, whether through diplomatic channels or otherwise, to convince the relevant parties to resume ceasefire negotiations and ensure the protection of civilians.
44 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) in view of the destruction of hospitals in Gaza caused by Israeli strikes after the recent resumption of hostilities, how effective will Singapore's medical support teams render assistance in situ; (b) whether Singapore can step up its medical assistance in any way; and (c) whether transporting Palestinian civilians who require more complex medical procedures to Singapore's medical facilities for treatment is a viable alternative.
45 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) whether there have been recent exchanges at the leaders', ministerial or officials' levels between Singapore and Israel on the recent resumption of hostilities in Gaza; (b) what is the Ministry's assessment of the impact of the resumption of hostilities on the previously agreed ceasefire; and (c) whether Singapore plans to bilaterally, or in concert with our partners in ASEAN, the Middle East, and beyond, engage the parties involved in the conflict towards a permanent ceasefire.
46 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether he can provide an update on (i) recent discussions in ASEAN and the UN on the resumption of hostilities in Gaza and (ii) Singapore's efforts in multilateral fora towards a reduction or cessation of hostilities in Gaza.\n
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: My response will address questions raised by Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong and Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap; as well as questions set for written answer by Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin and Dr Wan Rizal. My response will also cover questions raised by Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim scheduled for subsequent Sittings.
Singapore remains gravely concerned about the resumption of hostilities in Gaza which has resulted in a further loss of civilian life and internal displacement of the Palestinians. The dire humanitarian situation in Gaza has worsened as aid has not been allowed in since 2 March 2025. Singapore has consistently called for all parties in the conflict to comply with international law, including international humanitarian law, and ensure that all civilians are kept out of harm's way. Civilian infrastructure, including medical facilities as well as medical workers, must be accorded due protection. We call on Israel to facilitate the resumption of critical life-saving humanitarian aid to Gaza. Such aid must not be used as a bargaining chip. We also call on Hamas to release all remaining hostages immediately and unconditionally. We urge all parties to resume negotiations and make progress towards a permanent ceasefire.
Singapore is committed to supporting international relief efforts for Gaza. While Israeli restrictions on the entry of aid into Gaza are in place, we have continued to explore ways to provide humanitarian assistance with our partners in the Middle East. We will also look to contribute towards supporting post-conflict recovery efforts in partnership with the United Nations (UN) and others in the region. The needs in Gaza will be significant and Singapore will do our part to help.
Minister for Defence Ng Eng Hen has stated in his speech at the Committee of Supply last month that the Singapore Armed Forces is also making plans to provide further medical assistance to the people in Gaza. We are assessing the possibility of such deployments in close coordination with our regional partners, taking into account the ground conditions, including safety. We have not received any requests on transporting Palestinian patients who may need more complex care to Singapore to-date, but such requests would have to be carefully assessed, taking into account the relevant medical risk factors, especially those associated with long-distance transport of patients needing complex care and treatment options.
Both the Israelis and Palestinians are well aware of our longstanding position, that the only viable path for achieving a comprehensive, just and durable solution to the longstanding Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a negotiated two-state solution, consistent with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. Our positions on the need to adhere to international law, including international humanitarian law, the need to refrain from unilateral actions which hinder or delay progress on a peace process and the need to ensure the protection of civilians, are also clear. We will continue to vote in support of relevant UN General Assembly resolutions that are consistent with our principled positions. At the same time, we need to be circumspect and recognise our limitations in influencing the outcome of this war and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It falls, ultimately, on the leaders on both sides to find the political will, courage and imagination to resume negotiations to resolving this longstanding conflict, difficult as it may be.
In our region, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member states have been aligned on the core issues. Specifically, ASEAN has consistently supported the call for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, immediate release of hostages, provision of humanitarian assistance and a negotiated two-state solution. Earlier this year, the ASEAN Foreign Ministers issued a statement reaffirming our longstanding support for the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to their homeland.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs was in touch with the Mercy Relief team that visited the West Bank in March 2025. They are professionals with long experience operating and implementing humanitarian assistance projects in challenging environments. I commend them for their efforts to help Palestinians on behalf of Singapore.
Singaporeans have responded to the Gaza conflict with a deep sense of empathy and compassion. I thank Singaporeans for contributing to humanitarian aid efforts for Gaza. We encourage everyone to continue supporting local fundraising efforts by reputable organisations, such as the Singapore Red Cross and Rahmatan Lil Alamin Foundation, which have extensive experience in working with a wide network of credible and reliable partners to effectively deliver critical aid on the ground. Donors can check via the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth's Charity Portal if the fundraiser is a registered charity in Singapore and possesses a valid fund-raising permit for foreign charitable purposes from the Commissioner of Charities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Doctor Visits Per Worker and Other Assumptions Considered in Pricing of Companies' Primary Care Plans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"47 Mr Mark Lee asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the annual average number of doctor visits per worker under the Primary Care Plan (PCP); (b) how do the utilisation trends compare with the initial assumptions that are used to determine pricing for employers under the PCP; and (c) what feedback has the Ministry received from employers and workers regarding the affordability and effectiveness of the PCP.
Dr Tan See Leng: Based on a fixed annual capitation rate achieved through risk pooling, the Primary Care Plan (PCP) provides employers with peace of mind, offering cost certainty while protecting against unexpected medical expenses. Migrant workers pay a small co-payment fee per consultation, but there is no cap on the number of times a worker can consult a doctor. PCP covers the cost of basic medication and also includes an annual basic health screening or medical examination for work pass issuance or renewal, basic laboratory tests and x-ray examination. This model of primary care allows doctors to intervene early and undertake preventive care and chronic disease management to enable more effective care and disease control, and lowers long-term healthcare cost for employers.
On average, the monthly utilisation for care sought by migrant workers enrolled on PCP is about 12%. This means each worker would seek care through PCP one to two times a year, which is broadly in line with our projections at the start of the scheme. Utilisation can vary from month to month, for example when there are surges in acute respiratory infections. However, PCP is currently underutilised for annual basic health screening and chronic care management. Employers save at least 20% when compared to the total estimated annual cost of similar treatments and medical services at general practitioner clinics.
In a National University of Singapore Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health study published in September 2024, 88% of migrant workers expressed willingness to utilise PCP due to affordability and accessibility of its medical centres and in-dormitory clinics. The majority of migrant workers are satisfied with the services under PCP based on the surveys conducted. Feedback from employers also suggests that PCP has lowered the medical costs for similar treatments and medical services for migrant workers in general. The Ministry of Manpower will continue to engage the migrant workers and employers to encourage early care seeking, including preventive care and early management of chronic conditions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Safeguarding Non-partisan Nature of NMP Scheme and Proposal for Cooling-off Period before NMPs Run for Elected Office","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"48 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance with regard to the Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) scheme (a) whether there are plans to further safeguard public confidence in its non-partisan nature; and (b) whether the Government will consider a cooling-off period before NMPs can run for elected office, especially on a partisan platform.
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister): The Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) scheme was introduced in 1990 to enhance the quality of Parliamentary debate by bringing in non-partisan and independent voices into Parliament, particularly with expertise and experience from various sectors of society.
Safeguards are in place to ensure the non-partisan nature of the NMP scheme. For example, the Special Select Committee on Nominations for Appointment as NMPs, which considers the potential candidates put forth by the public for nomination as NMPs, comprises MPs from both the ruling and opposition parties. The Constitution of the Republic of Singapore also expressly requires an NMP to vacate his seat if he stands as a candidate for any political party in an election.
I believe that many Members of this House would agree that our NMPs have, over the years, enriched our debates in Parliament and that they have been non-partisan in their conduct, even as they participate actively in the Parliamentary process.
The Government currently has no plan to review the NMP scheme.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Determining Number of Lifts for An HDB Block","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"49 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for National Development what are the considerations to determine the number of lifts serving a HDB residential block of flats.
Mr Desmond Lee: At the development stage, the Housing and Development Board determines the number of lifts to be provided in a residential block based on several factors, such as the number and type of dwelling units, the block layout and the number of storeys. The objective is to ensure that there are sufficient lifts to meet residents' needs in terms of lift access and reasonable waiting times, while balancing cost effectiveness and efficient use of space. The lift provision also needs to comply with other regulatory requirements, such as fire safety.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Requiring Local Vehicles to be Serviced at Authorised Workshops and Foreign Vehicles to Submit Roadworthiness Proof Given Recurring Fire Incidents","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"50 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry will consider requiring (i) local vehicle owners to service their vehicles at selected authorised workshops in Singapore and (ii) foreign vehicles to submit proof of vehicle roadworthiness from selected authorised foreign workshops as part of their periodic vehicle inspection regime, in view of the recurring incidents of vehicle fires and other problems related to roadworthiness.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: To ensure that vehicles remain roadworthy and are safe for use on our roads, all Singapore-registered vehicles are required to be inspected regularly at Authorised Inspection Centres. Vehicles that do not pass these inspections cannot be used on the roads.
For foreign vehicles, the cross-border movement of vehicles is governed by the United Nations Convention on Road Traffic 1949, which Singapore and many of our neighbouring countries, including Malaysia and Thailand, are signatories to. Vehicles from signatory countries that meet the standards on vehicle construction and functionality stipulated in the Convention are allowed to enter Singapore.
The owner of a vehicle is responsible for ensuring that it is roadworthy. The Land Transport Authority conducts spot checks on local and foreign vehicles travelling on the roads. Vehicles that do not meet roadworthiness standards are impounded and the owners penalised under the Road Traffic Act.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Financial Institutions' Responsibility in Promoting Prudent Borrowing and Limiting Credit Issuance","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"51 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance in view of the escalation in credit card debt, whether the Government plans to (i) impose more responsibility on financial institutions to promote prudent borrowing and (ii) implement stricter guidelines on credit issuance by financial institutions.
Mr Gan Kim Yong (for the Prime Minister): While credit card borrowings have increased, as a share of personal disposal income, such borrowings remain in line with their historical average at 2.4%. Based on latest available data, credit card delinquency rates as a share of total cardholders have also remained stable at less than 1%, which is below the historical average. These suggest that most borrowers have been able to service their credit card debt.
Consumers should be prudent when borrowing. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has, therefore, implemented safeguards to reduce the risk of consumers borrowing beyond their ability to repay. These safeguards are generally more extensive and stringent than in many countries. For instance, Financial Institutions (FIs) must ensure borrowers meet the minimum annual income requirement of $30,000 to qualify for a credit card. FIs must also check a borrower’s income and credit bureau records when he applies for a credit card or credit limit increase, or when the FI receives information that raises concerns on his creditworthiness.
To limit debt build up, FIs cannot grant further credit to individuals whose aggregate unsecured borrowings across all FIs exceed their annual income for three consecutive months. FIs must also suspend the unsecured accounts of borrowers who are more than 60 days past due.
To complement our regulations, MoneySense, our national financial education programme, regularly educates the public on money management skills, reminds consumers not to spend beyond one's means and to prioritise paying off high interest-bearing borrowings, like credit card debts. Borrowers in distress can also contact their FIs to explore options to restructure and consolidate their debts. They can also approach Credit Counselling Singapore for guidance and assistance to restructure their debts or work out sustainable repayment plans.
These suite of measures is generally adequate to promote prudent borrowing. MAS will keep a close watch on developments and adjust its policies where warranted.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"First-time HDB Flat Applicants Who Are Ineligible for Enhanced CPF Housing Grant and Deferred Income Assessment Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"52 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether HDB tracks how many couples applying for their first HDB flat are ineligible for both the Enhanced CPF Housing Grant and the deferred income assessment scheme because one partner has not worked continuously for 12 months and the other is not in full-time studies or National Service; and (b) what targeted assistance is provided for such couples.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Government is committed to keeping public housing affordable and accessible for Singaporeans. Eligible first-timers (FTs) can receive an Enhanced CPF (Central Provident Fund) Housing Grant (EHG) of up to $120,000 when they buy a new or resale flat. To help young couples who want to settle down earlier, the Deferred Income Assessment (DIA) scheme allows eligible couples to apply for a new flat first and defer their income assessment for EHG and the Housing and Development Board (HDB) housing loan nearer to key collection, when their incomes are more stable and likely higher.
In 2024, fewer than 200 FT households, where at least one party was aged 30 and below, did not qualify for both (a) EHG as they did not meet the continuous employment condition, and (b) the DIA, but HDB does not track the reasons for disqualification as requested by the Member. They formed fewer than 2% of all FT couples in this age group.
We expect the number of young households who do not qualify for these schemes to decrease. From the July 2025 sales exercise, we will expand the DIA scheme to require only one party of a couple to be a full-time student or National Serviceman, or have recently been one, instead of both of them.
We understand that each young couple's life journey is unique and we will continue to review our policies to support their housing aspirations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Preschools' Procedures in Reporting Suspected Child Abuse and Preventing Withdrawal of Suspected Victims by Parents","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"53 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether there is a need to lay down detailed rules and procedures that must be followed before a preschool allows a victim of suspected child abuse to be withdrawn by the child's parent or guardian; and (b) whether the existing monitoring and whistle-blowing avenues are adequate to protect young children from domestic abuse.
54 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) in ECDA's oversight and monitoring of preschools for signs of neglect and abuse in children, what measures are in place to ensure staff report suspected child abuse directly to the authorities regardless of internal escalation protocols; and (b) what additional training and support can be provided to ensure staff can confidently identify and act on early warning signs.
55 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether licensees must follow up or alert the authorities in suspected cases of child abuse under the ECDA Code of Practice on mandatory reporting of child abuse, when a child is subsequently or suddenly withdrawn from school, particularly in cases where there may have been concerns about the child’s well-being; and (b) whether training requirements are updated to ensure that staff are equipped to identify signs of abuse and are aware of their legal obligations to report such cases.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Early Childhood Development Centres (ECDC) Regulations impose a duty on all educators and preschool staff to report suspected child abuse to the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA). Signs of child abuse or neglect and the legal obligation to report to ECDA are covered in the training curriculum for all educators.
In 2021, the ECDC Code of Practice was updated to include additional operational guidelines and workflows to guide preschools on actions to take if there are suspicions that a child is being abused. Preschools are now required to use the Sector-Specific Screening Guide, a standardised assessment tool, to assess signs of abuse or neglect and report any child abuse concerns to ECDA within 24 hours. If there are concerns about sexual abuse, noticeable injuries or signs of immediate threat to the child's safety, preschools are required to consult the National Anti-Violence and Sexual Harassment Helpline (NAVH) within two hours.
Since 2021, ECDA introduced protocols relating to the withdrawal or frequent absence from preschool. If a child with child abuse concerns has been regularly absent or is withdrawn from preschool without valid reasons, preschools are required to inform the social worker or the Ministry of Social and Family Development's (MSF's) Child Protection Officer working with the child. If the child is not known to any social service agency or MSF's Child Protective Service (CPS), preschools must report the matter to ECDA, which will then assess whether a report to CPS is necessary.
Aside from preschools, frontline professionals in schools, healthcare institutions and social service agencies are also trained in the use of assessment tools to pick up safety concerns involving children and to intervene based on established protocols. Any member of public, including whistle-blowers, should call the 24-hour NAVH, make an online report via the MSF website or LifeSG app to report suspected child abuse, or call the Police if there is imminent danger to a child. Cases with child abuse and neglect concerns will be referred for support or intervention by relevant agencies, such as Family Service Centres, Child Protection Specialist Centres, based on the assessed risk and severity.
Megan's mother and the mother’s boyfriend were sentenced on 3 April 2025. The protocols outlined in this reply are the result of MSF's review of the case, aimed at identifying areas for improvement and systematically enhancing the overall child protection system. The Members may wish to refer to MSF's more detailed statement \"Strengthening the Child Protection Ecosystem – Learning from the Past\", published on its website on 8 April 2025.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Manage Otters Going into Residential Areas and Destroying Fishes in Homes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"56 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for National Development in view of the regular feedback on otter cases received by NParks each month since 2022, what are NParks' further plans for managing otters that have moved into residential areas and are destroying fishes in residential homes.
Mr Desmond Lee: Otters are native to Singapore and human-otter conflicts arise from time to time.
To manage such conflicts, the National Parks Board (NParks) works closely with community partners, like the Otter Working Group. This Group includes Government agencies, academic experts and members of the nature community. We have jointly developed measures, such as cordoning off areas where adult otters may display protective behaviour in the presence of young otters, and using olfactory irritants to guide otters away from residential areas. To safeguard public safety, NParks may also trap and relocate otters away from areas of intensified human-otter conflict.
NParks also carries out public engagement and outreach, including school assembly talks and public webinars, to raise awareness on wildlife management. NParks will continue to conduct house visits and town hall sessions with residents affected by otter-related disamenities and share advisories for the community on how to guard against otter intrusion. For instance, in areas where otters are prevalent, homeowners who keep ornamental fish are advised to install wire mesh and other barriers to prevent otters from entering their homes.
NParks will continue to monitor the otter population in Singapore closely and review the current suite of measures to manage the otter population.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Singaporeans who have Completed Lasting Power of Attorney and Efforts to Increase Uptake","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"57 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether he can provide an update on the number of Singaporeans who have completed their Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) to date; and (b) how can the Ministry further encourage more Singaporeans to make their LPA.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: As of March 2025, about 320,000 Singaporeans have made their Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPAs).
Digitalising the LPA-making process has significantly improved the uptake of LPAs, with monthly LPA registrations doubling since the launch of the Office of the Public Guardian Online portal in 2022.
To increase the awareness and adoption of legacy planning tools, such as LPA, the Ministry of Social and Family Development launched a three-year Legacy Planning Campaign in July 2023, in collaboration with the Agency for Integrated Care, Ministry of Health and Public Service Division. The campaign comprised public education initiatives, such as roadshows and mobile clinics that offered pro bono LPA certification, to Singapore citizens aged 50 years and above. This year, we will be expanding our partnerships with Institutes of Higher Learning, insurance companies and banks.
We will also increase targeted communications to seniors, to encourage them to make their LPAs and to take advantage of the LPA Form 1 fee waiver that will end on 31 March 2026.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reviewing HPV Vaccination Policy to Enhance Public Awareness and Extend Coverage to Include Males","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"58 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry has reviewed its policies on the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination; (b) if so, whether the Ministry will (i) raise more public awareness about HPV amongst men and (ii) promote HPV vaccination to include men; and (c) whether the subsidy for HPV vaccination under the National Childhood Immunisation Schedule (NCIS) can be extended to males given that HPV affects both sexes.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: As the incidence of anal cancer amongst males is several times lower than cervical cancer amongst females, Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination of males to prevent anal cancer does not provide the same level of benefit as for preventing cervical cancer in females. It is, therefore, not likely to be cost effective at the population level. Hence, HPV vaccination of males is not in the national immunisation schedules and subsidies do not apply.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Sharing Retrenchment Data with IRAS to Enable Automatic Income Tax Deferment for Retrenched Employees","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"59 Mr Ong Hua Han asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance given the mandatory requirement under the Employment Act for employers with at least 10 employees who have retrenched any employee to submit Mandatory Retrenchment Notification to the Ministry of Manpower, whether such data can be shared with the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore to consider automatically granting income tax deferment for the retrenched employees.
Mr Chee Hong Tat (for the Prime Minister): Taxpayers who face difficulties in paying their taxes due to unexpected or extenuating circumstances, such as retrenchment, can apply to the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) for extended instalment plans beyond the standard 12 months interest-free instalment plan for payments via GIRO. This can be done via an e-service on IRAS' myTax Portal. Alternatively, taxpayers can also reach out to IRAS via email or phone.
As every individual's financial situation is unique and not all taxpayers who have been retrenched need an extended tax instalment plan, it is not automatically granted to all taxpayers who have been retrenched. For example, some may have secured another job shortly after retrenchment.
Upon receiving a Mandatory Retrenchment Notification submission from an employer, the Taskforce for Responsible Retrenchment and Employment Facilitation, led by Workforce Singapore, will reach out to retrenched workers via their employers to provide an information kit containing links to different types of support that these workers may find useful, such as employment facilitation services as well as the SupportGoWhere webpage where they may submit a request to IRAS for extended instalment plans.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Minimum Occupation Period for Individuals who Buy Over Ex-spouses' Share of HDB Flat","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"60 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether all HDB leaseholders who purchase a part-share of their flat from their ex-spouse in accordance with the terms of a divorce judgment are automatically subject to a new five-year minimum occupation period (MOP); (b) if so, what is the rationale for this policy; (c) in each of the last five years, how many requests have been made to waive such new MOP period; and (d) how many of these requests have been granted.
Mr Desmond Lee: Divorcees who choose to take over their ex-spouse's share of the flat can do so through in two ways: (a) a change in flat ownership not through a sale, commonly referred to as a \"transfer of flat\"; and (b) resale of part-share in the flat.
Resales of part-share are done for many reasons. While some are due to unfortunate circumstances, such as divorce, there are also transactions done for commercial reasons. For example, when one of the co-owners under the Joint Singles Scheme sells his or her share of the flat to an unrelated third-party. As such, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) treats all resale of part-share no differently from a typical resale transaction. This includes subjecting the remaining owners and any incoming owners to a fresh Minimum Occupation Period (MOP), which starts from the day the transaction is legally completed.
However, HDB waives the need to serve a fresh MOP for majority of resale of part-share cases due to divorce. From 2020 to 2024, on a case-by-case basis, HDB approved MOP waivers for about 30 such cases. HDB does not track the total number of such appeals received.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trend where Defects in Leased or Hire Purchase Vehicles Were Not Reported but Vehicles Were Bought Back and Resold at Higher Prices","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"61 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) in the last two years, how many reports have been received by the Ministry where defects in vehicles on lease or hire purchase agreements were discovered within six months but belatedly reported; (b) how many cases involved vendors buying back defective vehicles and selling them at a price significantly above the buyback amount; and (c) whether there is evidence of such practices becoming an emerging business model to extract disproportionate amounts of profits from uninformed purchasers.
62 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how many reports were received by the Ministry in 2023 and 2024 of hire purchase firms allowing buybacks of cars sold with undisclosed defects, under express or implied assurances that penalties for contractual breaches will be waived, but which then levy such penalties on hirers and their guarantors; and (b) what assistance is available for hirers of limited means in such situations.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: In the past two years, the Ministry of Trade and Industry has received only one report matching the description that the hon Member has outlined in his questions.
Under the Lemon Law outlined in the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act, businesses must repair, replace or refund consumers for defective goods if a defect is found within six months of delivery. Consumers may approach the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) for assistance in seeking redress from suppliers, including errant car dealers. CASE can represent a consumer in negotiating a settlement or mediating with the car dealers. If negotiation or mediation fails, consumers may file a claim with the courts, including the Small Claims Tribunals.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Response to Recommendations in Report on Transportation of Migrant Workers on Lorries","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"64 Mr Ong Hua Han asked the Minister for Transport whether the Government will consider accepting the recommendations in the recent Report on the Transportation of Migrant Workers on Lorries by the Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics to (i) remove the exception under section 126(1)(a) of the Road Traffic Act with implementation timelines of 18 months for larger firms and 36 months for smaller firms (ii) provide transport subsidies for firms to adjust to the change and (iii) work with industry partners to operationalise bus transport for migrant workers.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The reply will also address a related question filed by Ms He Ting Ru for a subsequent Sitting.
Improving the safety of all road users is a priority for the Ministry of Transport. We had explained during the 26 February 2025 Sitting that it is not operationally possible to ban the transportation of workers on the back of lorries. [Please refer to \"Stakeholders' Feedback on Safety of Transporting Workers on Back of Lorries and Suggestions to Ban This\", Official Report, 26 February 2025, Vol 95, Issue 153, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
Doing so will have a serious impact on many small- and medium-sized enterprises who may have to cease operations, leading to job losses for workers, project delays and higher costs for Singaporeans. This is why agencies have been engaging companies to understand the challenges of shifting to other modes of transportation to see how best to scale the adoption of alternative modes in a sustainable, safe and effective manner.
We continue to work closely with the industry and other Government agencies to improve the safety of transportation for our workers, which is the crux of the matter.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monitoring K-pop Training Academies Operating in Singapore and Ensuring Well-being of Trainees","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"65 Ms Usha Chandradas asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether the Ministry tracks the number of K-pop training academies operating in Singapore and, if so, what is the current number; and (b) whether the National Arts Council has any concerns about the rigour and intensity of the training curriculum at such academies and, if so, whether there are plans to monitor the well-being of their trainees.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: The Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) and the National Arts Council (NAC) do not track the number of K-pop training academies operating in Singapore. NAC does not currently fund any of such academies.
Singapore's dance scene has a wide range of artists and groups spanning many genres. This includes ballet, contemporary, jazz and traditional and so on.
MCCY and NAC recognise the growing interest in K-pop and the various training institutions that have emerged to cater to this interest. We encourage all training academies to adhere to best practices, policies and regulations in education and training. This includes prioritising the physical and mental well-being of trainees as well as encouraging collaboration across genres to create innovative new works that our audiences can enjoy.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adopting Preschools' Anchor Operator Partnership Model for Other Sectors to Moderate Costs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"66 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Anchor Operator partnership model in the preschool sector can be considered for partners in other sectors for the purposes of moderating the cost of living and enhancing supply chain security of food and essential items.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Anchor Operator scheme in the preschool sector is designed to enable access to quality and affordable early childhood education by subsidising selected operators. Such a scheme is not appropriate for businesses supplying food and essential items, such as the supermarket sector, as the prices of these items are subject to global market conditions, like supply chain disruptions and cost fluctuations. Providing funding support to these businesses may distort market prices and undermine fair and healthy competition.
As a small and open economy that imports most of our supplies for food and essential items, the Government's priority is to diversify our import sources and promote free market competition, so that businesses will price their goods competitively and provide consumers with more choices.
The Government recognises that households continue to face cost of living challenges. To address this, we have rolled out further enhancements to the Assurance Package as announced at Budget 2025. These include $800 in Community Development Council Vouchers in financial year 2025 for all Singaporean households to defray their daily expenses as well as additional U-Save for eligible HDB households to cope with their utilities expenses.
Social enterprises and industry partners also have a part to play in expanding households' access to value-for-money products and equipping consumers with the tools to make informed choices. For example, the FairPrice Group has introduced various initiatives to help moderate the cost of living for Singaporeans, such as by controlling price increases for selected essential items, offering regular discounts for Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) card holders and seniors and giving special SG60 discounts for its Own Brands products. Consumers can also use the Price Kaki app developed by the Consumers Association of Singapore to compare prices of hawker food and daily essentials across different stalls and shops and stretch their dollar.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Accidents and Traffic Congestions along Expressways towards Woodgrove Division during March 2025 Monsoon Surge","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"67 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Transport whether LTA has observed an increase in vehicular accidents or traffic congestion issues along the expressways travelling towards Woodgrove division during the monsoon surge that the Meteorological Service Singapore forecasted from 19 March to 21 March 2025.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: For the period of 19 to 21 March 2025, the Land Transport Authority did not observe an increase in vehicular accidents or traffic congestion along the relevant portions of the Bukit Timah Expressway and the Seletar Expressway leading towards Woodgrove division.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"SkillsFuture Credits to Cover Cost of Qualifying Examinations for Registered Patent Agents","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"68 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Education (a) whether SkillsFuture Credits can be used to cover the costs of sitting for qualifying examinations to be a registered patent agent; (b) if so, to what extent can SkillsFuture Credits be used to cover such costs; (c) if not, whether the Ministry will consider working with The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore to see if SkillsFuture Credits can be used to cover such costs.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The qualifying examinations to be a registered patent agent are administered by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS). Candidates are typically sponsored by their employers for these examinations. For the small group of self-sponsoring candidates, SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) will allow individuals to use their base tier of SkillsFuture Credit to offset the cost of these qualifying examinations, as they are recognised by IPOS. The base tier comprises the $500 opening credit given to Singaporeans at age 25 and the one-off $500 top-up given to Singaporeans aged 25 and above in 2020.
We will continue to work with sector agencies to enhance the SkillsFuture Credit scheme to support Singaporeans in their professional development through industry-relevant training and certifications.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Utilising Portion of Foreign Worker Levy Revenue for Fund to Improve Migrant Worker Safety and Well-being","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"69 Mr Ong Hua Han asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Government will consider using a portion of revenue collected from the foreign worker levies to seed a fund dedicated to improving the safety and well-being of migrant workers.
Dr Tan See Leng: To ensure optimal use of public resources, the revenue collected by a Ministry is consolidated across the Government. The pooled funds are then allocated to projects based on merit and needs.
The Government already directs part of its overall revenue towards initiatives that improve the safety and well-being of migrant workers. For example, resources have been put into the set up and management of recreation centres that aim to meet the social and recreational needs of migrant workers. The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) has also established a permanent division, the Assurance, Care and Engagement Group, to develop the ecosystem of measures that support migrant workers well-being.
Additionally, MOM works closely with the Workplace Safety and Health Council and partners, such as non-governmental organisations (NGOs), to improve the safety, health and well-being of migrant workers. This includes, providing funding to NGOs to run programmes aimed at promoting their mental wellbeing and establishing channels for them to seek help, amongst others. The Government also provides grants to companies, especially for the higher-risk sectors where migrant workers are employed, for the adoption of technologies that improve workplace safety and health.
Improving the safety and wellbeing of migrant workers requires a whole-of-society effort and we urge employers to also fulfil their responsibilities by providing safe and healthy workplaces for their migrant workers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expanding Pilot Project That Mandates Sterilisation and Licensing of Dogs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"70 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry will consider expanding the pilot project mandating the sterilisation and licensing of dogs on Pulau Ubin to industrial areas on mainland Singapore, such as Lim Chu Kang, Neo Tiew estate and Sungei Kadut.
Mr Desmond Lee: In 2018, the National Parks Board (NParks) had introduced requirements for Pulau Ubin residents to license their pet dogs and sterilise female pet dogs. These requirements were introduced to promote responsible pet ownership and to manage the dog population on Pulau Ubin, which was growing because pet dogs were allowed to roam freely and breed. These requirements complement the Trap-Neuter-Rehome/Release-Manage (TNRM) programme, under which free-roaming dogs are trapped and sterilised.
Majority of the dogs in industrial areas on mainland Singapore are free-roaming and not pet dogs, and are covered under the TNRM programme. Since the introduction of the TNRM programme, an estimated 80% of the free-roaming dog population in Singapore has been sterilised, resulting in more than an 80% reduction in associated public feedback cases. Hence, there are no plans to mandate the sterilisation of pet dogs in the industrial areas.
NParks will continue to monitor the free-roaming dog population in industrial areas with Animal Welfare Group (AWG) partners, to maintain the high sterilisation rates. If a member of the public encounters an unsterilised free-roaming dog, they may call NParks' Animal Response Centre hotline or the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals' hotline.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Safeguards to Prevent Diversion of Restricted Goods to Countries Targeted by Export Controls","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"71 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how does the Ministry ensure that export controls extend beyond direct exports to cover third-party transshipment risks; and (b) how does the Ministry assess whether current safeguards are sufficient to prevent the diversion of restricted goods to countries targeted by export controls.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: On the Member's first query, I had addressed similar questions raised by members, at the Sitting on 18 February 2025. [Please refer to \"Impact of US Export Controls on Singapore's Semi-conductor Industry and Ensuring Singapore-based Chip Companies Abide by New Rules to Safeguard Country's Business Reputation\", Official Report, 18 February 2025, Vol 95, Issue 152, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
On the Member's second query about the adequacy of our current safeguards, Singapore Customs takes a risk-based approach to strike the right balance such that we can enforce our laws without impeding our port operations unnecessarily. This is done through cargo-targeting and inspections to ensure compliance with our laws. If a company or individual in Singapore is engaged in fraudulent or dishonest practices to evade export controls that it is subject to, Singapore Customs will investigate and take appropriate action in accordance with our laws.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Prevention of and Punishment for Sale of Data by Bank Employees with Access to Clients' Credit Card Information","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"72 Ms Ng Ling Ling asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) how does MAS ensure that bank employees with access to clients’ credit card and Card Verification Value numbers, do not abuse the clients' trust and sell such data to scammers or cause scammers to gain access to them; (b) what is the punishment for employees who commit such offences; and (c) what are MAS' requirements on banks to conduct audits to uncover potential risks and offences.
Mr Gan Kim Yong (for the Prime Minister): Under the Banking Act, banks and their officers are strictly prohibited from disclosing customer information to any external party unless expressly permitted. Individuals found to be in breach of the Banking Act are liable to fines or imprisonment, or both.
As required under the Monetary Authority of Singapore's (MAS') Notice on Technology Risk Management, banks must and have put in place information technology controls to protect customer information from unauthorised access or disclosure. This includes controls to limit employees access to systems containing customer data on a need-to basis.
MAS expects banks' internal audit functions to address all material risks, including data loss. Banks have conducted audits to review their controls for data loss and users' access to systems containing customer information, and have taken measures to address issues identified.
With improvements in technology, banks are continually strengthening their ability to detect unusual staff activity using digital screen watermarks, artificial intelligence and other advanced techniques. The ability to protect the confidentiality of customer information is core to a bank's business and MAS expects that they continue to invest in this area.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Obtain UNESCO City of Gastronomy Recognition for Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"73 Ms Ng Ling Ling asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth in respect of the Ministry's and Singapore Tourism Board’s marketing plans to promote Singapore as a culinary capital, whether the Government is also planning to have Singapore recognised as a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization's (UNESCO's) City of Gastronomy as the country's gastronomy scenes have met most of the criteria set by UNESCO.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Creative Cities Network's (UCCN's) guidelines stipulate that each city can be recognised in only one creative field at any given time. As Singapore has been designated as a Creative City of Design under UCCN, we currently have no plans to seek UCCN recognition as a City of Gastronomy.
The Government continues to promote our food and beverage offerings globally through various initiatives, as outlined in the written answer by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry for the Sitting on 26 February 2025. [Please refer to \"Plans to Promote and Support Local and Heritage Food and Beverage Operators in Singapore and Overseas\", Official Report, 26 February 2025, Vol 95, Issue 153, Written Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Bail and Conditional Warnings for Alleged Reoffenders","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"74 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what are the considerations for the police to release an accused on bail again even if the accused is alleged to have committed similar offences while on bail; and (b) what are the considerations for issuing conditional warnings to an accused who had previously breached such conditional warnings or reoffended after the lapse of such conditional warnings.
Mr K Shanmugam: At the stage of the Police investigations, guilt is yet to be established by the Courts. We need, therefore, to consider carefully if we need to hold the accused in custody or it is safe enough to release him on bail.
In such decisions, the Police will consider factors, such as whether the alleged offence is bailable under the Criminal Procedure Code, the gravity of the offence, the danger of the offence being continued or repeated and whether the person had attempted to abscond previously. The Police will impose bail conditions as necessary if they grant the accused bail, including the condition that he must not commit any offence while released on bail.
When an accused commits a new offence while on bail, he is likely to have breached a bail condition and have his bail revoked. In deciding whether to release the accused on bail again, the Police will take into account his breach of the bail condition, in addition to the factors I have mentioned earlier. If assessed suitable for bail again, the Police are likely to increase the bail amount or impose further bail conditions.
A conditional warning is issued to an offender in lieu of prosecution. That is, the Public Prosecutor will not prosecute him for the current offence, on condition that he does not commit any offence within the specified period of the conditional warning. When determining whether to issue a conditional warning at the conclusion of the Police's investigations, the Public Prosecutor considers factors, such as the gravity of the offence, the likelihood of reoffending and past offences committed by the person. In particular, whether the offence is similar in nature to the past offences and how much time has passed between the offences.
These are the general considerations for bail and conditional warnings. It is not possible to exhaustively describe the considerations, as each case will, ultimately, be assessed on its own unique facts and circumstances.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Support for Children, Teachers and Parents Affected by Relocation of Ang Mo Kio Preschool","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"75 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) has been consulted on any plan for the relocation of The Schoolhouse that is currently sited at the premises of The Grassroots’ Club in Ang Mo Kio; (b) if so, whether the timelines for such relocation comply with the ECDA Code of Practice; and (c) whether ECDA has any plan to support affected children, teachers and parents.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Code of Practice under the Early Childhood Development Centres Act requires preschool operators to provide at least six months' written notice to parents and the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) before they relocate or cease operations. This allows parents sufficient time to make alternative arrangements for their children. Preschools that breach this requirement may face regulatory actions.
In June 2024, The Schoolhouse informed ECDA of The Grassroots' Club centre's cessation and relocation plans. The Schoolhouse officially informed parents on 17 September 2024 of its planned cessation of operations on 31 December 2025. These notices complied with the timelines specified in the Code of Practice.
In February 2025, The Schoolhouse sought parents' views on the preschool ceasing operations earlier in May 2025 and offered options for their children to be transferred to another of its preschool branches. When this proposal was brought to ECDA's attention, ECDA had reminded the operator of the requirement to provide six months' notice. The Schoolhouse has since maintained its original cessation date of 31 December 2025.
The Schoolhouse has been engaging parents on alternative care and education arrangements and is managing affected staff at the current Grassroots' Club branch, while maintaining adequate staffing of both current and new branches to ensure continuity of care and education. ECDA will also continue to monitor the situation to ensure the orderly transition of operations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Stricter Guidelines for Advertisements of \"Buy Now, Pay Later\" Schemes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Government assesses a need to introduce stricter advertising guidelines for Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) schemes similar to the regulations for advertisement on gambling or high-risk financial products in view that BNPL providers heavily market their services on social media and often use influencers to promote instalment payments on discretionary spending, such as fashion, travel and entertainment, to young consumers who may be particularly susceptible to these psychological nudges.
Mr Gan Kim Yong (for the Prime Minister): Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) firms operating in Singapore have committed to the industry-led BNPL Code of Conduct (Code), that was developed under the Monetary Authority of Singapore's (MAS') guidance, to mitigate the risk of debt accumulation and protect consumer interests. Under the Code, accredited firms commit to ensuring that advertisements on BNPL services are clear and not misleading in any way, such as through inaccuracy, ambiguity, exaggeration, omission or otherwise. The advertisements must also clearly disclose any fees or late charges, and not imply that BNPL services are \"risk-free\" or suitable for all customers. Accredited firms must also ensure that their advertisements on BNPL services comply with the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act 2003 as well as the advertising codes set out by the Advertising Standards Authority of Singapore.
The guidelines on fair marketing are complemented by other safeguards in the Code that limit debt accumulation through BNPL, such as not charging compound interest, suspending users who fail to make repayments on time, and committing to only offer BNPL services to those aged 18 and over. MAS had provided further details on these safeguards in its reply to a Parliamentary Question in February this year. [Please refer to \"Reports of Non-compliance with Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) Code of Conduct and Data on BNPL Customers\", Official Report, 4 February 2025, Vol 95, Issue 150, Written Answers to Questions section.]
Financial education efforts through MoneySENSE also seek to empower consumers to make informed and responsible borrowing decisions.
We assess this approach to be appropriate and proportionate for now. MAS continues to monitor developments in the BNPL sector and will review its regulatory framework as appropriate.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Promote Understanding for Immigration as Strategic Imperative for Sustained Economic Growth and National Security","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Neil Parekh Nimil Rajnikant asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance what further policy initiatives can the Government introduce to enhance public understanding and support for immigration as a strategic imperative for Singapore's sustained economic growth and national security.
Ms Indranee Rajah (for the Prime Minister): Like many other advanced societies, Singapore faces the demographic challenge of a low fertility rate and ageing population. The Government is strongly committed to supporting Singaporeans' marriage and parenthood aspirations. Immigration supplements this to keep our citizen population from shrinking over the longer term.
Most Singaporeans understand Singapore's overall need for immigrants. A 2021 Institute of Policy Studies survey found that over 75% of Singaporeans agreed that immigrants are generally good for Singapore's economy, and 62% agreed that immigrants improve Singapore society by bringing in new ideas and culture. However, some may be concerned that immigrants dilute our national identity or that immigrants do not put in effort to integrate with locals.
These are valid concerns that we seek to address as follows. First, we keep the pace of immigration measured and stable, and are careful to grant Permanent Residency and Singapore Citizenship to those who can contribute to Singapore, integrate well and are committed to sinking their roots here. The majority of the immigrants we take in are of working age and contribute meaningfully to our economy. Many of them share family ties with Singaporeans or have studied, worked or lived in Singapore for some time. We continually review our immigration framework to ensure it remains relevant to our social context.
Second, we have programmes to help immigrants to adapt to local norms and way of life. Our new citizens undergo a mandatory Singapore Citizenship Journey to improve their understanding of Singapore's history, norms and values. The People's Association has a nationwide network of over 1,500 Integration and Naturalisation Champions to drive integration efforts at the local level and foster good relations between new citizens and their Singaporean neighbours. A National Integration Council (NIC) was also set up in 2009 to coordinate and encourage integration efforts across the public, people and private sectors. The NIC offers resources, such as the Unity in Diversity resource kit and the Community Integration Fund, to support ground-up integration initiatives.
Third, we foster understanding of immigration in our public education and communication efforts. For example, our students learn about the value of integration and harmony through National Education in schools and through events such as International Friendship Day. Through lower secondary History classes, students grow an appreciation for our forefathers' contributions to Singapore's development as a port city under the British and how Singapore continued to remain open to the rest of the world after it became a nation-state in 1965. In Social Studies classes, students explore the contemporary experiences of living in a diverse society and how to strengthen cohesion and contribute towards harmony, while appreciating the economic and cultural contributions of different groups.
Integration is ultimately a two-way process that takes time and effort. While immigrants need to make an effort to integrate and adapt to local ways of life, it is equally important for Singaporeans to be understanding and welcoming, and support our new neighbours, friends and colleagues in becoming part of Singapore society.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Applications for Longer Instalment Plans for Income Tax Payments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Ong Hua Han asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance in the past five years (a) how many individuals have applied for a longer instalment plan to pay their income taxes; and (b) what percentage of these applications have been approved.
Mr Chee Hong Tat (for the Prime Minister): Taxpayers who face difficulties in paying their taxes due to unexpected or extenuating circumstances, can apply to the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) for extended instalment plans beyond the standard 12 months interest-free instalment plan for payments via General Interbank Recurring Order (GIRO).
Almost all applications in the past five years were approved by IRAS as these taxpayers were generally able to provide valid reasons for why an extended instalment plan was needed. The number of individuals who applied for and received an extended instalment plan in the past five years are provided in the table below.
4 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what are the Singapore Tourism Board's (STB's) efforts to support local businesses in the entertainment and nightlife sectors in rejuvenating Singapore as an attraction hub; and (b) how can STB enhance its outreach to attract high-profile concerts and cultural performers in various languages catering to Singapore’s diverse communities and tourists.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Singapore Tourism Board (STB) collaborates with industry stakeholders to curate different types of programme offerings to inject vibrancy in our entertainment and nightlife sectors. For example, STB partnered the Orchard Road Business Association to introduce a bar hopping passport experience for consumers to visit nightlife establishments around Orchard Road at accessible prices. STB also supports free-to-public events that enhance precinct vibrancy in the night-time, such as iLight Singapore and Light to Night Singapore. Entertainment and nightlife businesses can leverage these and other STB-supported events, such as Grand Prix Season Singapore, to create promotions or special experiences to attract local consumers and visitors.
Singapore's excellent infrastructure, good connectivity to the region and reputation as a safe and vibrant business and lifestyle hub make us a prime destination for international shows and world-class events. STB works closely with concert promoters and partners, such as the National Arts Council and the Singapore Repertory Theatre, to curate a diverse line-up of cultural performances with local and international appeal. For example, Pongal Festival 2025 saw performances by folk artists from South India. The upcoming Five Foot Way Festival will include performances by Cantonese and Teochew opera groups, a roving Chinese opera exhibition, a talk on the Hokkien dialect, dialect singing performances and wushu performances.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Projected Cost Per Tonne of Carbon Dioxide Abated through Carbon Capture and Storage in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the projected cost per tonne of carbon dioxide abated through carbon capture and storage (CCS) in Singapore, including infrastructure, operational and transport costs; (b) how does this compare to the projected cost of transporting and storing carbon dioxide in Indonesia under the proposed bilateral arrangement; and (c) how do these costs compare to alternative decarbonisation strategies, such as renewables and energy efficiency.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is an internationally recognised decarbonisation pathway, especially for activities that produce carbon dioxide as part of their industrial processes. The Government is studying the feasibility of a cross-border CCS project from Singapore. This includes working with potential service providers to form a complete CCS value chain and getting clearer estimates of the costs of capture, transport and permanent storage.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Formal Body to Protect Interests of and Provide Dispute Resolution Assistance to Micro and Small Enterprises","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Government will consider establishing a formal body or mechanism to (i) protect the interests of micro and small enterprises and (ii) mediate or provide advice to assist micro and small enterprises on any potential disputes with larger suppliers, such as e-commerce platforms.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: There are established mechanisms for enterprises, including micro and small enterprises, to resolve commercial disputes. For disputes involving claims of up to $30,000, enterprises can submit their disputes through the Small Claims Tribunals, which provide a quicker and less expensive process compared to a civil trial. Enterprises can also seek mediation and adjudication services provided by mediation bodies, such as the Singapore Mediation Centre.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Resumption of Hostilities on Singapore's Humanitarian and Diplomatic Efforts in Gaza","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what are the implications of the resumption of Israeli military strikes in Gaza on Singapore's provision of humanitarian aid including food and supplies to those in need in Gaza; and (b) what are the safety considerations for deployment of Singaporean medical personnel to countries near Gaza.
8 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs in view of the resumption of hostilities in Gaza, how will Singapore's ongoing and planned humanitarian assistance, including the delivery of aid and deployment of medical support teams, be adapted to ensure (i) the safety of our personnel and (ii) the effective provision of aid under these volatile conditions.
9 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs in view of the resumption of hostilities in Gaza, what role can Singapore play, alongside international partners, in (i) advocating for the protection of civilians; (ii) adhering to international humanitarian law and (iii) supporting post-conflict recovery efforts for affected communities in Gaza.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: My response will address questions raised by Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong and Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap, as well as questions set for written answer by Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin and Dr Wan Rizal. My response will also cover questions raised by Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim scheduled for subsequent Sittings.
Singapore remains gravely concerned about the resumption of hostilities in Gaza, which has resulted in a further loss of civilian life and internal displacement of the Palestinians. The dire humanitarian situation in Gaza has worsened as aid has not been allowed in since 2 March 2025. Singapore has consistently called for all parties in the conflict to comply with international law, including international humanitarian law, and ensure that all civilians are kept out of harm's way. Civilian infrastructure, including medical facilities as well as medical workers, must be accorded due protection. We call on Israel to facilitate the resumption of critical life-saving humanitarian aid to Gaza. Such aid must not be used as a bargaining chip. We also call on Hamas to release all remaining hostages immediately and unconditionally. We urge all parties to resume negotiations and make progress towards a permanent ceasefire.
Singapore is committed to supporting international relief efforts for Gaza. While Israeli restrictions on the entry of aid into Gaza are in place, we have continued to explore ways to provide humanitarian assistance with our partners in the Middle East. We will also look to contribute towards supporting post-conflict recovery efforts in partnership with the United Nations (UN) and others in the region. The needs in Gaza will be significant and Singapore will do our part to help.
The Minister for Defence Ng Eng Hen has stated in his speech at the Committee of Supply last month that the Singapore Armed Forces is also making plans to provide further medical assistance to the people in Gaza. We are assessing the possibility of such deployments in close coordination with our regional partners, taking into account the ground conditions, including safety. We have not received any requests on transporting Palestinian patients who may need more complex care to Singapore to date, but such requests would have to be carefully assessed, taking into account the relevant medical risk factors especially those associated with long distance transport of patients needing complex care and treatment options.
Both the Israelis and Palestinians are well aware of our long-standing position that the only viable path for achieving a comprehensive, just and durable solution to the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a negotiated two-state solution, consistent with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. Our positions on the need to adhere to international law, including international humanitarian law, the need to refrain from unilateral actions which hinder or delay progress on a peace process, and the need to ensure the protection of civilians, are also clear. We will continue to vote in support of relevant UN General Assembly resolutions that are consistent with our principled positions. At the same time, we need to be circumspect and recognise our limitations in influencing the outcome of this war and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It falls ultimately on the leaders on both sides to find the political will, courage and imagination to resume negotiations to resolve this long-standing conflict, difficult as it may be.
In our region, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Member States have been aligned on the core issues. Specifically, ASEAN has consistently supported the call for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, immediate release of hostages, provision of humanitarian assistance and a negotiated two-state solution. Earlier this year, the ASEAN Foreign Ministers issued a statement reaffirming our longstanding support for the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to their homeland.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs was in touch with the Mercy Relief team that visited the West Bank in March 2025. They are professionals with long experience operating and implementing humanitarian assistance projects in challenging environments. I commend them for their efforts to help Palestinians on behalf of Singapore.
Singaporeans have responded to the Gaza conflict with a deep sense of empathy and compassion. I thank Singaporeans for contributing to humanitarian aid efforts for Gaza. We encourage everyone to continue supporting local fundraising efforts by reputable organisations, such as the Singapore Red Cross and Rahmatan Lil Alamin Foundation, which have extensive experience in working with a wide network of credible and reliable partners to effectively deliver critical aid on the ground. Donors can check via the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth's Charity Portal if the fundraiser is a registered charity in Singapore; and possesses a valid fundraising permit for foreign charitable purposes from the Commissioner of Charities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessing Status of Civil War and Humanitarian Assistance in Myanmar","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what assessment has ASEAN made of the current status of the civil war in Myanmar; and (b) whether there are plans to enhance assistance, including humanitarian assistance, pursuant to Article 33 of the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration to alleviate the suffering of civilians displaced by ongoing violence.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Leaders review the situation in Myanmar regularly. In their latest review last October, they expressed deep concern over the escalation of the conflict and the humanitarian situation there. They urged all stakeholders and parties in Myanmar, in particular, the armed forces and security forces concerned, to de-escalate violence and stop attacks on civilians and public facilities.
The safe, effective and transparent delivery of humanitarian assistance without discrimination remains a priority under ASEAN's Five-Point Consensus. The ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management (AHA Centre), with support from ASEAN member states, external partners, the United Nations and the private sector, has delivered several tranches of aid so far.
The 7.7 magnitude earthquake that struck central Myanmar on 28 March 2025 has worsened the already dire humanitarian situation. Singapore responded quickly and was one of the first foreign countries to provide assistance through our 80-member strong Operation Lionheart Urban Search and Rescue contingent. We have also deployed the Singapore Emergency Medical Team (SGEMT), comprising a team of over 30 medical, technical and administrative personnel, to provide emergency services and medical care in the field. The Singapore Government has contributed $150,000 to match the Singapore Red Cross' (SRC's) seed money for the SRC’s fundraising efforts for quake victims as well as humanitarian supplies, like food, water filters and medical supplies, delivered by the Republic of Singapore Air Force aircraft to Myanmar.
At the emergency meeting of ASEAN Foreign Ministers on 30 March 2025, Singapore pledged to support ASEAN's efforts to expand humanitarian support coordinated by the AHA Centre. I called for an immediate and effective ceasefire in Myanmar, which would facilitate the efforts to deliver humanitarian assistance and longer-term national reconciliation, peace and reconstruction. ASEAN will consider how our assistance can be augmented.
In the longer term, the reality is that the humanitarian situation can only be adequately addressed through genuine national reconciliation and constructive dialogue among all the key stakeholders, to help the people of Myanmar to achieve an inclusive, comprehensive and durable peaceful resolution that is Myanmar-owned and -led, as envisaged in the Five-Point Consensus.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"ASEAN Cooperation to Tackle Labour Trafficking and Scam Centres in the Region and Number of Singaporeans Exploited","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) how is Singapore cooperating with ASEAN partners to combat the growing threat of labour trafficking and scam centres in Southeast Asia; and (b) whether there are plans to strengthen enforcement capabilities to better protect vulnerable groups of persons from exploitation.
12 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Home Affairs since 2023, how many Singaporeans have been exploited by or caught up in labour trafficking scams in the region.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Government has been closely monitoring the rise of scam centres in the region, to where scam victims are lured, trafficked and held captive by scam syndicates to \"work\". To date, there are no verified incidents of Singaporeans being victims of such human trafficking. To be clear, since 2023, the Government has offered consular assistance to five Singaporeans upon receiving information that they might have been exploited in overseas scam centres. However, none accepted the offer of assistance.
To combat this transnational threat, Singapore has stepped up in recent years, bilateral and multilateral collaboration with foreign law enforcement agencies through intelligence exchanges, joint investigations and coordinated enforcement. For instance, in 2024, the Singapore Police Force collaborated with various foreign law enforcement agencies to successfully take down 16 scam syndicates.
Singapore also participates in various regional platforms to discuss cooperation in combatting transnational crimes, including scams and trafficking in persons. These platforms include the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Senior Officials Meeting on Transnational Crime and its Working Group on Trafficking in Persons, as well as the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Transnational Crime.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Accidents Involving Foreign-registered Motorcycles and Raising Awareness of Safe Riding Techniques","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Home Affairs, in light of the increase in accidents involving motorcyclists in 2024, based on Singapore Police Force's recent Annual Road Traffic Situation report, (a) how many of such accidents, in terms of percentage, involve foreign registered motorcycles; and (b) what measures can the Ministry take to raise awareness of safe riding techniques or habits among foreign motorcyclists, whether on its own or in concert with foreign counterparts.
Mr K Shanmugam: Thirty-three percent of accidents involving motorcycles in 2024 involved foreign-registered motorcycles.
The Traffic Police (TP) conducts regular enforcement operations at our land checkpoints against errant motorcyclists. TP also delivers regular road safety talks at workplaces, including those with a sizeable population of foreign workers who ride foreign-registered motorcycles.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore Citizens Born to Foreign Mothers of Different Residential Status","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Home Affairs for the past two years, how many Singapore citizens were born in Singapore to foreign mothers who were: (i) Permanent Residents; (ii) holders of the Long-Term Visit Pass Plus; (iii) holders of the Long-Term Visit Pass; and (iv) of other immigration statuses, respectively.
Mr K Shanmugam: Based on data of Singapore citizens born in Singapore in 2023 and 2024 to foreign mothers, an annual average of 3,525 (72%) of the foreign mothers were Permanent Residents, 725 (15%) held a Long-Term Visit Pass Plus, 414 (8%) held a Long-Term Visit Pass and the remaining 245 (5%) held other passes, including employment passes, at the point of the child's birth.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Efforts to Curb Illegal E-sports Betting in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether an update can be provided on the Ministry's efforts to curb illegal e-sports betting in Singapore.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Singapore Police Force (SPF) restricts access by persons in Singapore to illegal remote gambling services, including e-sports betting, by blocking illegal remote gambling websites. SPF also blocks payment services, including bank accounts and credit card payments, linked to illegal remote gambling. As of 31 December 2024, we have blocked more than 3,800 illegal gambling websites and more than 145,000 illegal gambling transactions amounting to approximately $37 million. While SPF has taken these steps, it has to be recognised that this is an extremely challenging situation. It is not easy to deal with.
SPF takes enforcement action against illegal remote gambling and those who assist gambling syndicates. In the five-year period from 2020 to 2024, SPF arrested more than 950 persons for their involvement in illegal remote gambling.
These enforcement actions are part of our strategy to divert gamblers away from illegal operators. The Singapore Pools (Private) Limited is the only operator licensed to provide remote gambling services in Singapore and is required to implement social safeguards to mitigate the harms caused.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Concurrent Installation of Speed Limiters and ERP 2.0 System on Lorries","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Home Affairs, in view of the low take-up rate for the installation of speed limiters on lorries, whether the Traffic Police will consider working with LTA to facilitate the concurrent installation of speed limiters when lorries are sent to workshops for the installation of the ERP 2.0 system, to improve the early installation of speed limiters on lorries.
Mr K Shanmugam: For now, lorry owners can concurrently install the speed limiter and the Electronic Road Pricing 2.0 On-Board Unit at six workshops. The Traffic Police will be appointing more workshops that are able to install both devices.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Status and Terms of Tenancy Renewal and Agreements for 26 and 31 Ridout Road","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Law (a) whether the Singapore Land Authority has renewed the tenancy agreements for 26 and 31 Ridout Road in 2024; and (b) if so, what are the terms of the renewal and how do the rental rates compare with other black-and-white bungalow rental transactions in the Ridout Road estate in 2024.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai (The Second Minister for Law): The Singapore Land Authority (SLA) does not typically make public information on the renewal of tenancies for specific residential State properties. Most tenants will consider this private information. Nonetheless, given that 26 Ridout Road and 31 Ridout Road are currently occupied by Minister K Shanmugam and Minister Vivian Balakrishnan respectively and there has been public interest in the matter, relevant information on the renewal of the tenancies of the two properties are set out below.
The house on 26 Ridout Road is subject to a Tenancy Agreement of 3+3+3 years commencing in June 20181. In line with SLA's prevailing guidelines, the tenancy was renewed for a third three-year term commencing in June 2024, with an increased rental that was assessed by SLA's professional valuers based on prevailing market rates. The renewal rental rate, on a per unit floor area basis, falls within the range for renewal transactions for other heritage bungalows in the Ridout Road estate from the third quarter of 2023 to the second quarter of 2024.
The house on 31 Ridout Road is subject to a Tenancy Agreement of 3+3+2 years commencing in October 20192. The second three-year term commenced in October 2022 and has yet to be completed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : This information was provided in Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean's Ministerial Statement on 3 July 2023 on the Review of the Rentals of State Properties at 26 and 31 Ridout Road and Senior Minister Teo's report dated 26 June 2023 on the Review of the Rentals of State Properties at 26 and 31 Ridout Road.","2 : This information was provided in Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean's Ministerial Statement on 3 July 2023 on the Review of the Rentals of State Properties at 26 and 31 Ridout Road and Senior Minister Teo's report dated 26 June 2023 on the Review of the Rentals of State Properties at 26 and 31 Ridout Road."],"footNoteQuestions":["17"],"questionNo":"17"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Further Renovation Works and Felling of Trees at 26 and 31 Ridout Road","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Law (a) since July 2023, whether any further renovation or construction work has been done at 26 and 31 Ridout Road with any part of the costs borne by the Singapore Land Authority; (b) if so, how much is the cost borne by SLA; and (c) whether any trees with more than one-metre girth have been felled.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai (The Second Minister for Law): The Singapore Land Authority (SLA) does not typically make public information on works carried out on specific residential state properties. Nonetheless, given that 26 Ridout Road and 31 Ridout Road are currently occupied by Minister K Shanmugam and Minister Vivian Balakrishnan respectively and there has been public interest on this matter, relevant information on the works carried out on the two properties are set out below.
SLA carries out building maintenance and inspection works to the residential state properties it manages to ensure that the properties remain tenantable in the longer term1. These works are part of SLA's obligations, as the landlord, to ensure that the properties are in reasonably good condition so that tenants are able to reside in these properties safely2.
For residential state properties that are subject to conservation requirements, like 26 Ridout Road and 31 Ridout Road, specialised building maintenance and inspection works are carried out in accordance with the relevant conservation guidelines to protect their heritage value3. In addition, in line with an established framework, SLA also carries out maintenance and other works as it is legally required, as the landlord, to do. This is done for all its tenantable properties, including those at 26 Ridout Road and 31 Ridout Road.
During the tenancy term, tenants are responsible for the general day-to-day maintenance of the building and facilities and for all land within the tenancy boundary. Tenants are also generally allowed by SLA to carry out improvement works on their property during the tenancy.
In this case, since July 2023, the tenant of 26 Ridout Road has carried out various substantial improvement works on the property. These were done with all the necessary regulatory approvals obtained and at the tenant's own cost. These improvements will become part of the property and can be retained for the benefit of the landlord upon the termination of the lease.
In the period since July 2023, two trees with more than one-metre girth were felled and replaced at 26 Ridout Road and one tree with more than one-metre girth was felled and replaced at 31 Ridout Road. The health of the two trees at 26 Ridout Road had deteriorated, whilst the tree at 31 Ridout Road was struck by lightning and, subsequently, infected by disease. The necessary approvals for the felling and replacement of these trees were obtained from the National Parks Board prior to felling.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : This information was provided in Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean's report dated 26 June 2023 on the Review of the Rentals of State Properties at 26 and 31 Ridout Road.","2 : This information was provided in Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean's Ministerial Statement on 3 July 2023 on the Review of the Rentals of State Properties at 26 and 31 Ridout Road and Senior Minister Teo's report dated 26 June 2023 on the Review of the Rentals of State Properties at 26 and 31 Ridout Road.","3 : A similar point was made by Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong in his Ministerial Statement on 3 July 2023 on the Rentals of State Properties."],"footNoteQuestions":["18"],"questionNo":"18"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Timeline between Discovery of Corporate Misappropriation and Securing of Asset Freezing Orders","subTitle":"Implication on dissipation of assets","sectionType":"WA","content":"19 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Law (a) what is the average duration between discovery of corporate misappropriation exceeding $5 million and the securing of worldwide freezing orders; (b) whether the Government is concerned that the current civil procedure timeline allows sophisticated actors to dissipate assets; (c) what specific measures have been implemented to expedite ex-parte freezing applications involving cross-border transactions; and (d) whether the Ministry will introduce legislative amendments to lower the evidentiary threshold for proprietary injunctions in cases involving prima facie financial fraud.
Mr K Shanmugam: The question relates to civil disputes, usually between two commercial parties. The Courts have the power to grant injunctions prohibiting the disposal of assets, also referred to as freezing orders or Mareva injunctions. The Courts have described it as one of the law's \"nuclear\" weapons. The Government does not track the statistics on the average duration to secure a freezing order. These are within the remit of the Courts.
The grant of freezing orders is the subject of extensive and established case law developed over several decades in Singapore and elsewhere. As with many aspects of civil procedure, the case law has been developed by the Courts based on commercial needs and also takes reference from international jurisprudence.
The current civil procedure framework allows applicants to obtain an injunction ex parte, and quickly in urgent cases. The ability to obtain an order to freeze a party's assets around the world, based on limited evidence, can be abused. The Courts have developed a framework, including requiring appropriate evidence, before such freezing orders are given, to try and reduce the scope for abuse. An abuse of the process can have serious implications on legitimate businesses. Hence, the Courts seek to strike the right balance between providing for expediency in obtaining the order and ensuring that the Court is satisfied that such an order should be given – the Court has to be satisfied that there is basis for such an order to be given and with suitable safeguards in place. This is reflected in the law and procedural rules developed by the Courts in Singapore and across many jurisdictions.
While the current civil procedure framework does provide a process for parties to obtain a freezing order quickly, it may still be possible for unscrupulous persons to try and spirit assets away either before or even after a freezing order has been given. This is due to the differences in the laws of different countries, the nature of assets, which may vary and be in different places; and difficulties that applicants may have in establishing where a party's assets may be.
Implicit in the Member's question is the suggestion that the evidentiary threshold for obtaining such orders should be lowered. The Member can, perhaps, explain which aspects of the evidentiary threshold should be lowered and why he thinks the current balance the Courts have arrived at are wrong, so that we can better consider his suggestion. In any such exercise, it must be borne in mind that lowering the threshold may also widen the scope for abuse by applicants. This can cause legitimate businesses to be unable to access their assets, local and overseas, and payments until the order can be set aside.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expansion of List of Products Eligible for Climate Vouchers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the list of eligible products for purchase using the Climate Vouchers can be expanded to include (i) air-conditioning servicing; (ii) energy efficient de-humidifiers; and (iii) energy efficient clothes dryers.
21 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the Ministry has plans to expand the list of eligible products that can be purchased utilising the Climate Vouchers; and (b) whether other energy efficient items, such as clothes dryers, can be included.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The enhanced Climate Friendly Households Programme (CFHP) encourages households to adopt energy- and water-efficient household products. The list of eligible products for purchase using the Climate Vouchers (CVs) was recently expanded on 15 April 2024 from three products to 10 products to include a broader range of items, such as direct current fans and washing machines. We will periodically review the list of products.
Equipment servicing costs, such as that for air conditioners, are not covered under CFHP as these do not meet the objective of CVs, of supporting households to replace less energy efficient equipment with more efficient ones in order to reduce their energy consumption and expenses.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Existence of Private Companies and Eatery Chains that Operate Multiple Stalls at Hawker Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"22 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether private companies or eatery chains can operate multiple hawker stalls under the same name across different hawker centres managed by NEA or socially-conscious enterprise hawker centre operators; and (b) if so, whether the policy on hawker stalls being required to be operated personally by the hawkers themselves is applicable to such companies or chains.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The Member may refer to the oral reply given on 10 March 2025 in response to the related Parliamentary Question on the personal operation of hawker stalls. [Please refer to \"Requirement for Stallholders to Personally Operate Their Hawker Stalls\", Official Report, 10 March 2025, Vol 95, Issue 161, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monitoring Graduate Cohorts for Longer Periods to Track Full-time Permanent Employment Data","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"23 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Education in view of the rising proportion of fresh university graduates who are not in full-time permanent employment (a) whether the Ministry will monitor different graduate cohorts for longer periods to track the proportion that has secured full-time permanent employment; and (b) if not, why not.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: This question has been addressed in the reply to Question Nos 1, 2 and 3 for oral answer on the Order Paper for 7 March 2025. [Please refer to \"Analysis of Decreased Employment in Permanent Jobs for Fresh Graduates in Past Two Years and Measures to Monitor and Boost Employment\", Official Report, 7 March 2025, Vol 95, Issue 160, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Teachers Who Sought Counselling Services","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Education how many teachers have sought counselling services in FY2022 and FY2023, as broken down by (i) the Ministry's in-house counselling services and (ii) the whole-of-Government's counselling hotline, respectively.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The number of teachers who used the Ministry of Education's (MOE's) in-house counselling services averaged about 60 per year in 2022 and 2023. The number of MOE staff across schools and headquarters who used the whole-of-Government's counselling hotline over the same period has consistently been about 90 per year.
In addition to free counselling, teachers have access to resources that support their well-being, including online platforms, like Well‑being@Gov. They can also participate in MOE-organised wellness programmes and connect with designated wellness ambassadors who offer peer support in schools.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proportion of Malay Graduates across Different Age Groups and Efforts to Increase Malay Graduate Numbers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"25 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the current proportion of university graduates among Malays who are aged (i) 25 years and over and (ii) 25 to 34 years; (b) how do these figures compare with figures for the Chinese and Indian communities; (c) whether the Ministry can provide data on university graduation rates by ethnicity across cohorts in each of the last five years; and (d) what more can be done to increase the number of Malays graduating from universities.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: According to the Census of Population 2020, around 11% of the resident Malay population aged 25 years and over had a university degree. This compares to 35% of the resident Chinese population and 41% of the resident Indian population. For those aged between 25 and 34 years, the proportions were 20% for Malays, 66% for Chinese and 50% for Indians.
The Ministry of Education does not actively track university graduation, that is, completion rates by ethnicity. Our approach is to ensure that all students, regardless of ethnicity, receive the appropriate support so that they can maximise their potential throughout their education journey. Accordingly, our autonomous universities admit students based on merit and have various academic and student support initiatives to help their students complete their courses.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Allowing Foster Parents to Tap Foster Children's Child Development Accounts to Pay for Childcare Fees","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether foster parents can tap on the Child Development Account of their foster children to pay for their childcare fees; (b) if not, what is the rationale for not allowing this; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider adjusting the childcare fees for foster children to the more subsidised rate that the foster children's birth parents would have paid based on the birth parents' income tier.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Foster parents receive the monthly fostering allowance ranging from $1,100 to $1,500, which is sized to cover childcare and other out-of-pocket expenses related to caring for their foster child. The Ministry of Social and Family Development also supports foster parents by enrolling the foster child in an Anchor Operator or Partner Operator childcare centre, where foster parents are charged a flat monthly rate of $200 and $150 for full-day and half-day childcare respectively. As such, foster parents do not need to tap into the child's Child Development Account (CDA) funds for this purpose. It is better to retain the CDA funds with the birth parents to support child-raising costs, if and when the child is returned home.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"ComCare Short-to-Medium Term Assistance Households with Per Capita Income above $800","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"27 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Social and Family Development for each year from 2022 to 2024, how many ComCare Short-to-Medium Term Assistance households have a per capita income of above $800.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: From 2022 to 2024, the number of ComCare Short-to-Medium-Term Assistance (SMTA) households with per capita income above $800 were: 1,689 households in 2022; 1,372 households in 2023; and 1,328 households in 2024. These households account for around 6% of the total number of households receiving SMTA each year1.
The Per Capita Household Income benchmark indicates the approximate income level at which households in need could qualify for SMTA but is not meant to be a criterion. Eligibility for SMTA is based on a holistic assessment by the Social Service Offices. For example, a family with household per capita income above the benchmark but having specific needs, such as assistive devices and educational materials for children, can still be granted SMTA.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : In July 2023, the Ministry of Social and Family Development raised ComCare SMTA's per capita income benchmark from $650 to $800; this came into effect on 17 July 2023."],"footNoteQuestions":["27"],"questionNo":"27"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Deviation from Protocol for Reporting of Suspected Child Abuse in Case of Four-year-old Who Died in February 2020","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"28 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Social and Family Development with regard to the death of a four-year-old child in February 2020 from child abuse, why the staff at the preschool which the victim was attending in 2019 did not report the bruises they noticed on the child in accordance with the Early Childhood Development Centres Regulations, and instead alerted the child's mother and her mother's boyfriend that any abuse will referred to the Ministry of Social and Family Development, such that the child was withdrawn from preschool.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The preschool had observed visible injuries on the child and submitted to the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) an incident report prepared by the community worker from its affiliated social service agency. However, the report did not fully describe the severity of the injuries. This resulted in inadequate interventions by the relevant agencies.
The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) has since enhanced protocols to strengthen the child protection ecosystem. This includes requiring preschools to use the Sector-Specific Screening Guide, a standardised assessment tool, to assess the situation and report any child abuse concern to ECDA within 24 hours. If there are concerns about sexual abuse, noticeable injuries or signs of immediate threat to the child's safety, preschools are required to consult the National Anti-Violence and Sexual Harassment Helpline within two hours. To ensure more accurate assessments, preschools are now required to use a diagram to document visible injuries on the child, rather than to rely solely on written descriptions.
The Member may also wish to refer to the MSF's statement on \"Strengthening the Child Protection Ecosystem – Learning from the Past\" published on 8 April 2025 on the MSF's website. It explains how cases of child deaths are reviewed, with a view to identify critical lessons and systematically enhance protocols to strengthen the child protection ecosystem.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Single-parent Families","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Social and Family Development what is the number of single-parent families in 2024, 2019, 2014, 2009 and 2004 in terms of (i) absolute number as well as (ii) percentage of all families.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Currently, such information is captured at the household1 level. This includes household size, number of married couple-based households and number of single-parent resident households2.
The data is available on the Department of Statistics' website at https://tablebuilder.singstat.gov.sg/table/TS/M810651.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : A household refers to (i) a group of two or more persons living together in the same house and sharing common food or other essential arrangements for living; or (ii) a person living alone or a person living with others but having his own food or other essential arrangements for living. Although persons may be living in the same house, they may not be members of the same household.","2 : Resident households refer to households where the household reference person is a Singapore Citizen or Permanent Resident. Single-parent households refer to households whose household reference person is never-married/widowed/divorced/separated and living with children aged below 16 years or never-married children."],"footNoteQuestions":["29"],"questionNo":"29"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Supporting Kindergarten Children with Possible Developmental Needs when Parents Decline Assessment for Early Intervention","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"30 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development how does the Ministry provide support to kindergarten children with possible developmental needs when their parents decline to allow their children to be assessed by a paediatrician to determine the level of Early Intervention support they may require.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Children with possible developmental needs must be formally assessed by a paediatrician to determine the level of Early Intervention (EI) support they need and be referred to suitable EI programmes. The decision for a child to undergo this process ultimately rests with the parent and we strongly encourage parents to allow their children to be assessed and to enrol their child in recommended EI programmes. These programmes are designed to provide the necessary support for both the child and the family.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Warees Halal Limited's Annual Revenue, Expenses and Income","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"31 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Social and Family Development and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) whether the Ministry has data on Warees Halal Limited's yearly (i) revenue, (ii) expenses, and (iii) income from 2020 to 2024; and (b) whether Warees Halal Limited's yearly income is being set aside as reserves, placed into Baitulmal or other channels for community uses.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The audited annual financial statements of Warees Halal Limited, which is a Company Limited by Guarantee, are publicly available and can be purchased from the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority's website.
The treatment of any surplus is governed by its Board of Directors, which decides on the allocation to the company's reserves. The reserves may be used for purposes, such as meeting contingency needs, reinvestment in the company's operations and donations in support of welfare and charitable causes, provided that such donations are consistent with the company's objectives and comply with any applicable legal requirements.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reasons for Withdrawal or Cancellation of Asatizah Recognition Scheme Applications, and Profile of Asatizahs in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"32 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap asked the Minister for Social and Family Development and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) to date, how many applications under the Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS) have been withdrawn or cancelled since the scheme was established; (b) what are the reasons for such cancellations; (c) whether the Ministry has data on the number of Asatizahs under the ARS that are (i) Sunni and (ii) Shia Muslims respectively; and (d) if so, how many.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Since the Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS) was made mandatory in January 2017, 36 asatizah have had their ARS certifications cancelled by the Asatizah Recognition Board. These were due to contraventions of the ARS Code of Ethics, such as ethical misconduct or doctrinal issues.
The majority of our asatizah are Sunni Muslims. There are asatizah who are Shia Muslims and they serve the needs of the Shia community in Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Lifting Age Cap in Matched MediSave Scheme for Individuals Who Can Continue with MediSave Contributions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"33 Ms See Jinli Jean asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry will consider lifting the age cap of the Matched MediSave Scheme for individuals aged 71 and above, as long as these individuals continue contributing part of their income from work to their MediSave accounts; and (b) if not, why not.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Matched MediSave Scheme aims to support Singaporeans, such as homemakers and caregivers, who may not have been able to accumulate MediSave from work to cater to their old age. The scheme is extended to Singaporeans aged 55 to 70 as this group does not benefit as much from the healthcare benefits under the Pioneer Generation and Merdeka Generation Packages and other MediSave top-ups, which are available to seniors aged 71 and above.
We will review the parameters of the scheme closer to the end of the five-year pilot phase and decide if further adjustments need to be made.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Strengthening Public Education on National Insurance Schemes Such As ElderShield and CareShield Life","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"34 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Health, in view of the recent misinformation circulating on social media regarding ElderShield and CareShield Life, (a) what further steps will the Ministry take to strengthen public education and address misinformation about national insurance schemes, particularly among seniors who may be more vulnerable to such messages; and (b) whether there are plans to enhance communication channels to provide timely and accessible clarifications to counter misinformation swiftly.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Ministry of Health (MOH) has been using both digital and traditional media platforms to conduct public education on our national insurance schemes. We customise the messages according to various demographic groups.
In addition, MOH reaches out to seniors through trusted community touchpoints, such as the Agency for Integrated Care and the Silver Generation Office, to explain relevant schemes in a clear and personal manner. We also partner insurers and financial advisors to help Singaporeans improve their understanding of the insurance schemes and support them in making more informed insurance decisions.
Unfortunately, despite everything we do, misinformation and falsehoods will still spread, including via personal messaging platforms. When that happens, MOH will try to put out clarifications through digital and traditional platforms to debunk the misinformation as quickly as possible. We also urge the public to verify information found on the Internet against authoritative sources. All of us have a role to play in stemming the spread of misinformation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Alleged Breaches of Advertising Controls in Healthcare Services Act","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"35 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health since the implementation of the relevant provisions of the Healthcare Services Act (a) how many reports of alleged breaches of the advertising controls under the Act have been received by the Ministry; (b) of these, how many have been referred to the relevant authorities for further action including prosecution; and (c) what percentage of these are for practitioners in the mental health space.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Advertising controls under the Healthcare Services Act 2020 (HCSA) came into force on 26 June 2023 for non-HCSA licensed healthcare service providers and non-registered healthcare professionals. The advertising controls imposes restrictions on them from advertising treatment of diseases or medical conditions.
The restrictions include the use of the title \"Doctor\" by non-registered healthcare professionals in healthcare advertisements. This requirement is not new and was largely ported over from section 4 of the Medicines (Advertisement and Sale) Act 1955.
The Ministry of Health has received and investigated 34 complaints of alleged breaches of the advertising controls and none were against practitioners in the mental health space.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Complaints about Clinical Services Provided by Mental Health Professionals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"36 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health (a) since 2022, how many complaints have been received by the Ministry about the clinical services provided by mental health professionals; (b) what are the main concerns reported; and (c) what steps will be taken to educate the public on avenues for advice and support should they have issues about services rendered by mental health professionals.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Since 2022, the Ministry of Health (MOH) has received less than 20 complaints regarding clinical services provided by mental health professionals. These complaints were mainly about quality of care, professional standards and clinical competency.
Members of the public who wish to provide feedback on the services or conduct of mental health professionals may do so via the respective professional boards or associations. These include the Singapore Medical Council, the Singapore Nursing Board and the Allied Health Professions Council under MOH for occupational therapists, as well as the Social Work Accreditation and Advisory Board under the Ministry of Social and Family Development.
In addition, the Healthcare Services Act regulates the provision of mental health services under licensable healthcare service providers to safeguard patient safety and welfare. The public may also provide feedback on such services to MOH.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Streamlining Experience and Apps for Digital Government Services","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"37 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information what measures are being considered to streamline the overall experience for digital Government services in Singapore, in light of the number of apps pertaining to Government digital services available today, which may be difficult for seniors and the less digitally savvy to navigate.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The Government is committed to ensuring that digital Government services are easy to navigate and use for all citizens, including seniors and the less digitally savvy.
When designing these services, we consider citizens' needs and habits. Citizens may access these services through searching online or via agency-provided links. Some may prefer to use their computers, while some prefer to use apps on their smartphones as they are frequently on the go. Providing different channels facilitates discoverability and ease of access.
Where it makes sense, we will bring together different digital services to make it more convenient for citizens. Examples include LifeSG and HealthHub. However, having too many services on a single app or website can lead to clutter and make it harder to find the right service.
We recognise that, despite our best efforts, there will be citizens who need in-person support and this is why we provide such assistance at Government agencies' physical touchpoints and ServiceSG Centres.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Countering Glamourisation of Criminal Activities Online","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"38 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) what targeted strategies has the Ministry considered to mitigate the glamorisation of criminal activities online, in view of the rise of the \"post-and-boast\" culture on social media platforms; and (b) whether there are plans to collaborate with social media companies to address this issue.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The Government does not condone individuals who post about their criminal activities on social media and seek to glamourise them. Such acts demonstrate a lack of accountability for their actions and disregard for victims of crime.
Under the Code of Practice for Online Safety – Social Media Services (SMSs), designated SMSs with significant reach or impact, such as Facebook, HardwareZone, Instagram, TikTok, X and YouTube, are required to put in place system-level measures to minimise Singapore users' access to harmful content, including content facilitating vice and organised crime. The designated SMSs' own community guidelines prohibit illegal and criminal content on their platforms, and we expect them to enforce these guidelines. The Government will continue to work with designated SMSs to ensure that their community guidelines remain fit-for-purpose and effectively address emerging challenges.
The Police are aware of the \"post-and-boast\" culture on social media and would like to remind members of the public to abide by our laws and not to participate in acts or viral online trends that constitute a criminal offence. Those who break the law will be dealt with firmly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Frequency of Repair of HDB Car Park Gantries and Efforts to Improve Quality and Reliability","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"39 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for National Development with regard to HDB carpark gantries (a) what is the frequency of repair for these gantries; (b) what are the most common problems with these gantries; and (c) what measures will HDB implement to improve on their quality and reliability.
40 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether HDB monitors the serviceability of HDB carpark gantries; and (b) whether the reliability and serviceability of gantries at HDB carparks can be further improved.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Electronic Parking System (EPS) is implemented in most Housing and Development Board (HDB) car parks. HDB engages service providers to manage the EPS car parks to ensure smooth operations and carries out routine monthly maintenance of the EPS equipment.
Common types of systems-related issues include network connectivity issues, barrier malfunctions and power failures. At times, the issues faced by motorists are not EPS-related but because they had insufficient value in their cashcards or faulty In-Vehicle Units.
Each service provider has a 24-hour call centre to assist motorists via the intercom system installed at the entrances and exits of the EPS car parks. If the issue cannot be rectified remotely, service providers are required to respond onsite and resolve system issues within 60 minutes under normal traffic and weather conditions. They are to notify HDB if more time is needed for complex cases.
HDB conducts regular audits on the service providers and reserves the right to impose liquidated damages for failure to meet contractual requirements. HDB will continue to work closely with the service providers to provide motorists with a smooth parking experience.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Feedback for Improvement of Joint Singles Scheme Operator-Run Pilot Project","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"41 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the HDB has received any feedback on areas of improvement for the Joint Singles Scheme Operator-Run pilot; and (b) if so, what feedback has been received.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Joint Singles Scheme Operator-Run (JSS-OR) pilot was launched in December 2021 to improve the experience of single tenants under the Public Rental Scheme. Today, the JSS-OR pilot can provide rental housing for up to 1,000 persons.
Currently, each JSS-OR site comprises a mix of 1-room and 2-room flats, with partitions installed to house two or three persons per flat respectively. The operator of the site matches tenants to their flatmates, steps in to mediate disagreements between tenants and connects them to sources of support, where needed.
The JSS-OR pilot has generally been well-received by tenants. Feedback from tenants and operators thus far include suggestions to: (a) improve the flat design and fittings to facilitate flat-sharing, such as providing separate lighting for each sleeping area; (b) provide more 1-room flats, as more tenants prefer to share a flat with fewer persons; and (c) provide more communal space for operators to hold mediation sessions and activities for tenants.
The Housing and Development Board will continue working with the operators and other stakeholders to improve the JSS-OR pilot for our tenants.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Redevelopment Plans for Retained HDB Flats at Dakota Crescent","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"42 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for National Development whether an update can be provided on the redevelopment plans for the retained HDB flats at Dakota Crescent.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Urban Redevelopment Authority is reviewing the plans for the retained blocks at Dakota Crescent as part of the Draft Master Plan 2025 and will provide an update when completed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Resale Transactions Excluded from HDB's Public InfoWEB and Data.gov.sg platforms and Reasons for Exclusion","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"43 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) in each of the last five years, what is the number of HDB resale transactions that were excluded from HDB's public InfoWEB and data.gov.sg platforms; (b) why were these transactions excluded; and (c) why were 127 resale transactions of SERS replacement flats with less than five years' occupancy between April 2022 and December 2024 excluded from the HDB's public InfoWEB and data.gov.sg platforms when these same transactions were included in the Resale Price Index calculations.
Mr Desmond Lee: Housing and Development Board (HDB) resale flat transactions are conducted on a willing-buyer, willing-seller basis and reflect prevailing market conditions. HDB publishes relevant resale data for transparency to minimise information asymmetry and enable the efficient functioning of the resale market.
Data on the prices of individual resale transactions is published on the HDB InfoWEB and data.gov.sg. This is meant to assist buyers and sellers to make informed decisions when negotiating resale flat prices. Therefore, resale transactions that do not reflect typical market transactions are not published as they are less relevant in helping buyers and sellers in price negotiations.
From 2020 to 2024, about 1,000 to 2,000 transactions a year were not published, out of about 25,000 to 31,000 resale transactions registered annually, or 4% to 6%. These include the 127 transactions involving the resale of Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS) replacement flats mentioned by the Member. These SERS replacement flats have longer remaining leases compared to typical resale flats, making them less relevant as a reference for price negotiations. Other atypical transactions, such as the resale of part-share and resale between related parties, are also not published.
The computation of HDB's Resale Price Index uses a hedonic regression methodology that controls for variations in the remaining leases of the flats that were transacted. Therefore, there is no need to exclude the SERS replacement flats that had longer remaining leases compared to typical resale flats.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Decision on Community Clubs Assigned to Constituencies With No Clubs within Its Boundaries","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"44 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth whether it is the People's Association or its Grassroots Advisers that decide which community club is assigned to a constituency if no community club exists within the boundaries of that constituency.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: The People’s Association's (PA's) mission is to foster social cohesion. It does this through a wide range of programmes, some of which take place at shared community spaces, such as our Community Clubs (CCs), for residents to bond and connect.
PA plans for each CC to serve approximately 15,000 households, or 50,000 residents, as an approximate guide. Where there is no CC within a constituency boundary, PA will assess and decide on suitable alternative arrangements to enable residents to be served by suitable common spaces for social and other activities. This is done in consultation with Grassroots Advisers and Grassroots Leaders as well as other Government agencies and partners, to decide on the arrangement, taking into account a variety of factors.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Continued Employment and Support Services for Migrant Workers with Contracts Terminated Prematurely Due To Redundancy","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"45 Ms See Jinli Jean asked the Minister for Manpower in respect of migrant workers whose contracts have been terminated prematurely because of redundancy (a) since 2021, for the food and beverage sector and other sectors, what proportion of the affected workers have been employed afresh by a different employer without a break in stay in Singapore; and (b) how does the Ministry facilitate placement as well as the provision of support services to such involuntarily unemployed migrant workers, in particular sectors with high churn of businesses.
Dr Tan See Leng: \tThe Ministry of Manpower (MOM) does not track the number of Work Permit Holders (WPHs) who have changed employers without a break in stay in Singapore after being retrenched.
Employers who need to retrench their WPHs can encourage their workers to find new employment through existing job placement services provided by employment agencies and online job portals. This allows experienced WPHs to continue working in the sector and also saves the current employer repatriation costs. MOM will work with the current and prospective employers to facilitate the change in employment.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Promoting Workplace Mentorship across Industries, and Proposal for National Framework for Mentorship","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"46 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Manpower (a) in addition to existing mentorship initiatives, what further plans are in place to promote and support workplace mentorship across different industries in Singapore; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider developing a national framework for mentorship that builds upon current programmes to encourage experienced employees to guide younger employees and help bridge skills gaps in an increasingly complex job market.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Government has several programmes, including mentoring initiatives, to support workers through different career stages. For example, workers who need support in elevating their careers can tap into career guidance services, such as the Workforce Singapore's Volunteer Career Advisors initiative, which allows individuals to seek career advice from industry professionals. Youths who are exploring career options can tap into the Mentoring SG movement to connect with mentors. Aspiring Singaporean corporate leaders can benefit from the mentorship opportunities offered through the Singapore Leaders Network.
The Ministry of Manpower will continue to work with the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth to improve outreach and support to workers and employers to grow a national culture of mentoring under the Mentoring SG movement. Employers also play an important part to support employees in their career development through career guidance and mentoring. We encourage more employers and employees to step forward as part of the Mentoring SG movement.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Meeting Healthcare Needs of Older Work Permit Holders","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"47 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Manpower following the removal of the maximum employment period and increased age limit for work permit holders, what plans does the Ministry have to meet the healthcare needs of older work permit holders in light of this new policy shift.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) is committed to ensuring that work permit holders receive adequate healthcare and are supported for different health episodes, including older work permit holders' healthcare needs.
First, to improve work permit holders' access to affordable primary care, employers are required to purchase the Primary Care Plan (PCP) for their work permit holders if they stay in dormitories or work in the Construction, Marine Shipyard and Process sectors. While PCP is optional for other work permit holders, MOM strongly encourages employers to buy PCP as it offers affordable healthcare access to workers and cost certainty to employers. Under PCP, work permit holders pay a low co-payment fee of $2 for each telehealth session and $5 for each in-person consultation session. PCP clinics are conveniently located near where work permit holders stay. PCP also includes an annual basic health screening and covers the primary care management of chronic illnesses, such as diabetes and high cholesterol, detected through the screening.
Second, to ensure adequate coverage for more severe health episodes, employers are required to purchase medical insurance for each work permit holder they employ, with an annual claim limit of at least $60,000 covering inpatient care and day surgery. For workers who are injured while working, the Work Injury Compensation Act covers their medical leave wages, which is calculated based on average monthly earnings and medical expenses, capped at $45,000. The compensation limit for medical expenses will increase to $53,000 from 1 November 2025.
Finally, we strive to keep our workforce, including migrant workers, healthy. MOM works with the Health Promotion Board and tripartite partners to promote workplace programmes that support age-friendly practices like job redesign, enabling older workers to work safely even in manual roles. We also have programmes to raise migrant workers' health literacy and awareness on preventive health. This includes Project MOCCA, which stands for \"Management of Oral and Chronic Conditions and Ailments\", is a preventive health framework that encourages early detection and management of common chronic and oral health conditions among migrant workers. MOM also distributes health materials in their native languages to migrant workers at roadshows, the FWMOMCare app and via dormitory operators.
MOM will continue to review our healthcare initiatives to ensure they remain appropriate for migrant workers, including older work permit holders.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Developing Mandatory Settling-in Programme for Foreign PMETs for Better Local Integration","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"48 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Manpower besides the recently announced Alliance for Action to better integrate foreign professionals into Singapore's workplaces and communities, whether the Ministry will consider developing and implementing a mandatory Settling-in Programme catered to foreign PMETs to help them better integrate locally and understand local social norms.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) launched the Cultural Orientation Programme (COP) as a pilot in December 2023 to familiarise new S Pass holders with working and living in Singapore. The COP pilot is currently voluntary and MOM will be reviewing COP after the pilot ends in 2025. We urge businesses to encourage all their new S Pass holders to attend this programme as part of their onboarding.
Businesses also play an important role in creating opportunities for their foreign employees to interact and bond, both at the workplace setting and beyond. Businesses can tap into the OneWorkplace.sg initiative, which provides resources and tips in building a more integrated workplace.
As part of efforts to improve integration of foreign professionals, managers, executives and technicians, the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth is working through the Alliance for Action on Integration of Foreign Professionals (AfA-IFP) to develop recommendations to: (a) provide stronger support to help foreign professionals integrate at the workplace and the community; and (b) establish stronger human resources practices to develop the competencies to foster integration.
AfA will only complete its work in end-2025.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Addressing Bus Drivers' Needs Given Additional Foreign Worker Quotas","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"49 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Manpower whether he can provide an update in addressing bus driver needs in Singapore with additional foreign worker quotas.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Ministry of Manpower has worked with the Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of Education to provide targeted support for public transport operators and school bus operators to ensure an adequate supply of bus drivers.
Bus driving remains a viable career for Singaporeans. To ensure that bus operators and sector agencies are committed to hiring and retaining locals, the additional foreign worker quotas are provided on a time-limited basis. For example, the Land Transport Authority will continue to work with public bus operators to offer more competitive salary packages and improve the working conditions for bus captains.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"More Leave Days for Technical Workers in Lift and Escalator Industry to Attend Training and Courses","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"50 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether more leave days can be mandated for technical workers in the lift and escalator industry for them to attend relevant training or work-related courses; and (b) in the past three years, how many cases has the Ministry received from lift and escalator technical workers on (i) being compelled to utilise their annual leave days to attend training or courses and (ii) attending training or courses outside normal working hours without fair compensation.
Dr Tan See Leng: Leave provisions are meant to enable employees to meet their personal needs. Separately, employees who are required by their employers to attend training outside of their normal working hours should be paid an allowance based on their hourly rate of pay. Employees who encounter employers who do otherwise are advised to approach the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) for assistance.
Employers can tap on the Workfare Skills Support (WSS) Scheme to defray their opportunity cost of sending workers for training. Under WSS, employers who send eligible lower-wage workers for selected courses, which include Progressive Wage Model training requirements within the lift and escalator sector, may receive absentee payroll of up to 95% of the trainee's basic hourly salary, capped at $13 per hour.
In the past three years, MOM has not received any complaint of lift and escalator technical workers being compelled to use their annual leave days to attend training or courses, or to attend training or courses outside normal working hours without fair compensation.
MOM will continue to work closely with employers and other stakeholders to support the training and career development of workers, including those in the lift and escalator industry.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Workers Performing Night or Rotating Shift Work, and Those Affected By Shift Work Sleep Disorder","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"51 Ms See Jinli Jean asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry has data on the proportion of resident and migrant workforce who perform night shift or rotating shift work since 2021; (b) if so, what proportions of such workers are impacted by Shift Work Sleep Disorder (SWSD); (c) whether the Ministry has recourse for an employer's lack of prevention measures to protect such workers from SWSD; and (d) whether the Ministry will consider tracking and intervening where poor workplace practices leading to SWSD are found.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Ministry of Manpower's (MOM's) surveys in 2022 and 2024 found that around 8% of full-time resident and non-resident employees performed shift work1. However, as Shift Work Sleep Disorder is not listed in the International Labour Organization's guidelines and not legislated in most jurisdictions, including Singapore, we do not track the numbers.
There are several factors that affect sleep, with varying impact across individuals. These factors include prolonged work shifts without adequate breaks and rest, as well as non-work factors, such as lifestyle choices2. Hence, both employers and employees should do their part to prevent Shift Work Sleep Disorder. Employers should mitigate risk factors in their work processes, such as scheduling shifts, to allow for sufficient rest between shifts. Employees can also adopt general good sleep practices, such as planning their caffeine intake and using heavy curtains to block daytime light when sleeping.
MOM supports employers in introducing measures to mitigate the safety and health risks of shift work. For example, MOM has worked with tripartite and industry partners to develop the Fitness for Work Tripartite Guide for Process and Terminal Operations Shift Personnel in the Oil, Petrochemical and Chemical Industries. Its recommendations, such as how to implement fatigue risk management systems, provide job accommodations and design work environments to enhance worker alertness, can be applied to other industries with shift work.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Source: Conditions of Employment Survey, Manpower Research and Statistics Department, MOM.","2 : Including non-work-related factors, such as obesity, excessive dietary caffeine intake, obstructive sleep apnoea and environmental noise."],"footNoteQuestions":["51"],"questionNo":"51"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Jobseekers Assisted by WSG who Secured Employment through Direct Job-matching and Evaluating Effectiveness of Career Coaches","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"52 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what percentage of the 56,000 jobseekers placed by Workforce Singapore (WSG) in 2024 secured employment through direct job-matching efforts facilitated by WSG and its partners, as opposed to finding their jobs independently; (b) what proportion of job seekers assisted by WSG or its partners secure employment within six months of receiving career-matching services; and (c) what specific key performance indicators does WSG use to evaluate the effectiveness of career coaches in helping job seekers secure job placements.
Dr Tan See Leng: The 56,000 jobseekers secured employment in 2024 after benefitting from Workforce Singapore's (WSG's) programmes and services. WSG and/or its partners as well as the jobseekers' own efforts contributed to the successful outcome of securing employment.
Among jobseekers who received career matching services from WSG and its partners in 2023, about six in 10 secured employment within six months. This is a key performance indicator used by WSG to evaluate the effectiveness of its career matching services in helping jobseekers to secure jobs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monitoring Noise Levels along LRT Tracks and Building Noise Barriers to Alleviate Disruptions to Residents","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"53 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether LTA monitors the noise level of LRT track maintenance along all LRT systems; (b) if so, whether LTA will share the average noise level during maintenance operations; and (c) whether LTA will consider building noise barriers, whether permanent or temporary, to alleviate any disruptive noise levels during LRT maintenance periods.
54 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether LTA monitors the noise level of LRT travelling along all LRT systems; (b) if so, whether LTA will share the average noise level for passing trains; and (c) whether LTA will consider building permanent noise barriers to alleviate disruptive noise from passing LRT trains on nearby residential blocks.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Our Light Rail Transit (LRT) systems are designed to operate closer to residential developments. LRT trains run on rubber tyres along concrete guideways and, hence, produce less noise compared to Mass Rapid Transit trains. The noise generated by LRT trains passing near residential estates is within the National Environment Agency's (NEA's) guidelines.
For temporary LRT maintenance works, including works being carried out overnight during engineering hours, the Land Transport Authority will put in place the necessary noise mitigation measures, such as noise blankets, to keep the noise levels within NEA's guidelines.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Distribution of Terminal 5 and Supporting Infrastructure's Development Costs amongst Government and Other Stakeholders","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"55 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Transport what is the estimated distribution of the costs for developing Changi Airport Terminal 5 and supporting infrastructure in Changi East between (i) the Government; (ii) passengers; (iii) airlines; and (iv) Changi Airport Group.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: A majority of the cost for Changi Airport Terminal 5 and its supporting infrastructure will be funded by the Government, as the benefits from a well-connected airport accrue to the wider economy and society and not only to the aviation system. The remaining costs will be funded by the Changi Airport Group using its reserves, future surpluses and borrowings, and by airlines and passengers through airport charges and levies.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Fitting Vehicles with Mandatory Speed Limiters Similar to Initiatives in European Union and Northern Ireland","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"56 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry will consider requiring vehicles to be fitted with mandatory speed limiters similar to the recent initiative implemented in the European Union and Northern Ireland.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The initiative implemented in the European Union (EU) and Northern Ireland requires all newly registered vehicles to be equipped with an Intelligent Speed Assistance system. This is different from the speed limiters we require some heavy goods vehicles to have installed in Singapore.
The EU authorities are studying the effectiveness and reliability of these technologies, as more of such systems are installed in new vehicles.
The Land Transport Authority will continue to monitor and evaluate the EU authorities' assessments as part of the effort to improve road safety.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extent of Battery Degradation in Electric Taxis and PHVs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"57 Ms See Jinli Jean asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether the Ministry will study the state of battery degradation in electric taxis and private-hire vehicles (PHVs) and the impact on the adoption of electric vehicles in the point-to-point transport sector as part of the Singapore Green Plan 2030; (b) whether early adopters of electric taxis and PHVs since 2021 have reported significant battery degradation after three years of standard use; and (c) if so, whether additional support can be provided to them.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Battery health in electric vehicles (EVs) is influenced by several factors, including battery chemistry, usage profile and charging profile. Different EV models may have different types of batteries which have different degradation rates. Taxi operators and private hire car (PHC) fleet owners are, hence, best placed to decide which EV models meet their commercial and operational needs. Fleet owners will also have a better understanding of the usage and charging patterns of their vehicles, which can also affect battery degradation. In addition, most motor dealers provide warranty for the traction battery should the battery state of health degrade below a certain threshold.
Electric taxis and PHCs purchased after 1 January 2021 would have received a subsidy under the EV Early Adoption Incentive and Enhanced Vehicular Emissions Scheme, as with all other electric cars. At this point, there are no plans for further subsidies for electric taxis and PHCs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress of Lift Installation for Four Pedestrian Overhead Bridges along Hougang Avenue 3","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"58 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Transport (a) which precisely are the four pedestrian overhead bridges along Hougang Avenue 3 that the Ministry had in 2023 indicated will be given priority for the installation of passenger lifts; and (b) whether there is an update on the time frame for the installation works.\n
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The pedestrian overhead bridges along Hougang Avenue 3 near Blocks 101, 172, 241 and 248 have been prioritised for lift retrofitting under the current phase of the Land Transport Authority's lift retrofitting programme, which focuses on locations that will benefit a larger number of seniors. Construction works for this phase of lift retrofitting works are scheduled to take place progressively from the fourth quarter of 2025.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Incentives for Taxi Drivers to Continue Offering Street-hail Services to Cater to Seniors","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"59 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Transport (a) what collaborative efforts has the Ministry undertaken with taxi operators to ensure that street-hail taxi services remain a viable option for seniors; and (b) whether Ministry is aware of any incentives or support systems in place to encourage taxi drivers to continue offering street-hail services for seniors.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Only taxis are allowed to provide street-hail services. Hence, it is important to have an adequate supply of taxis to meet the demand for street-hail services, including for seniors.
The Land Transport Authority (LTA) is introducing measures to improve the commercial viability of taxis by reducing the regulatory differences between taxis and private hire cars. As part of the measures announced under the point-to-point transport (P2P) review, taxi operators will be allowed to sell taxis more than three years old and register used vehicles as taxis. These provide taxi operators with more flexibility to manage their fleet size and operating costs. Previously announced measures, such as the extension of taxis' statutory lifespan, will also help to reduce operating costs and moderate rental costs for drivers. We have also reduced the course fees and duration for the taxi driver's vocational licence curriculum. Together, these measures aim to encourage greater growth in the taxi fleet and attract more individuals to become taxi drivers, which can increase street-hail availability.
Beyond street-hail services, LTA is also exploring ways to meet the needs of senior commuters via ride-hail services. We will introduce the P2P Inclusivity Co-funding Grant later this year to provide co-funding for ride-hail operators to develop solutions that improve the accessibility of their services.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":6591,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Don Wee","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20250408/vernacular-Don Wee AML 8 April 2025_Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Don Wee AML 8 April 2025_Chinese.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}