Mr Deputy Speaker: Order. I have to inform hon Members that the Address of Thanks agreed to by resolution of this Parliament on 21 April 2023 has been communicated to the President by Mr Speaker on 24 April 2023. Order. Questions for Oral Answer.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Deal with Recent Spike in COE Prices","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"1 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Transport for the 457 Category D temporary motorcycle Certificates of Entitlement (COEs) which had expired between January and March 2023 (a) whether these COEs are concentrated among a few dealers and, if so, who are the top dealers; and (b) whether the Government will consider even more stringent action on motorcycle dealers who may be engaging in speculative bidding, beyond increasing the bid deposit and reducing the validity period of the temporary COEs to include barring such dealers from participating in the bidding.
2 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Transport in light of the record high COE prices (a) whether the Government has a view on the optimal number of private hire cars on the roads; and (b) whether the Government will consider more decisive measures to prevent private hire companies from dominating and driving up COE prices.
3 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Transport (a) what other steps are being considered to moderate COE prices; (b) whether the trend of rising COE prices is triggered by extraneous factors, such as influx of foreign residents into Singapore; and (c) how many cars are there in the bonded warehouse waiting to be put onto the market since January this year.
4 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Transport (a) what are the key factors driving the recent surge in COE prices; and (b) whether there are plans to help those who rely on driving for their livelihoods but have been priced out due to the record high COE prices.
5 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport for each month in the past 12 months, what is the total number of new cars which have been registered by (i) ride hailing or private hire companies and (ii) car leasing companies, as a percentage of the total number of new cars registered.
6 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether the Ministry has done any analysis of its data to ascertain the key causes for the recent spike in COE prices; (b) whether the Government plans to impose a cap on the number of Private Hire Vehicles (PHVs) that a PHV operator can own in their fleet, similar to the cap imposed on taxi companies, to reduce COE prices; and (c) what additional measures is the Government considering to rein in the costs of COEs.
7 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether the high COE prices will further fuel costs increases within the economy; and (b) whether there are plans to review the system to better allocate COEs.
The Senior Minister of State for Transport (Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan) (for the Minister for Transport): Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission for the Minister for Transport to take Question Nos 1 to 7 in the Ministerial Statement later in the Sitting?
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Yes, I give my consent.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Concept of \"Indivisible Security” in Speech on Russia-Ukraine War and Impact on Southeast Asia","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"The following question stood in the name of Mr Vikram Nair –
8 To ask the Minister for Law whether he can elaborate on the concept of “indivisible security” as referenced in his speech entitled “The Russia-Ukraine War and Southeast Asia One Year On: Implications and Outlook” that was delivered on 8 March 2023 at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute workshop.
\tMr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Question No 8.
The Minister for Law (Mr K Shanmugam): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will first start with the point of sovereignty. Self-determination, sovereignty and territorial integrity as well as the non-recourse to the use of force are fundamental principles of international law. These principles are enshrined in the UN Charter, and 193 states are party to the Charter, including Singapore.
Article 1(2) of the UN Charter states that one of the UN’s purposes is “[t]o develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace”.
Article 2(1) provides that the UN is “based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members”.
Article 2(4) provides that all Members “shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state …”.
Article 2(7) provides that “[n]othing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the [UN] to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state …”.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine violates these basic principles of international law, including self-determination, sovereignty, territorial integrity and the non-recourse to use of force. In my speech that Mr Vikram Nair refers to, I think I said four times that the Russian invasion cannot be justified.
Russia has invoked Indivisible Security as among the reasons for the invasion of Ukraine. And as I have said, Indivisible Security cannot give grounds for the Russian invasion. Indivisible Security is not of the same status as self-determination, sovereignty, or territorial integrity and the non-recourse to use of force.
Indivisible Security is, I think, best characterised as a concept that is invoked in international relations. And I pointed out that the concept of Indivisible Security, in some form, has been invoked by both Russia and the United States. But that does not make it a principle of international law. And it is not set out in the UN Charter.
In addition, in my speech, I shared diverse views on how the situation in Ukraine unfolded and the roles of the West, NATO and the Russian Federation. The result is that Ukraine is the unfortunate victim and its people are paying a terrible price.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: No supplementary questions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore's Position on Russian-Ukraine War One Year On","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"9 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) whether remarks on the Russia-Ukraine war by the Minister for Home Affairs at a workshop on 8 March 2023 held at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute represent the views of the Government; and (b) whether there has been any revision to Singapore's position on the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
\tThe Minister for Foreign Affairs (Dr Vivian Balakrishnan): Mr Deputy Speaker, Singapore’s position on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine remains unchanged. We have taken – and we must continue to take – a clear stand that is consistent with our principles and our national interests. In the Ministerial Statement of 28 February 2022 on the \"Situation in Ukraine and Its Implications\", Singapore strongly condemned Russia’s attack on Ukraine. The invasion of a sovereign country is a gross violation of the principles of the UN Charter and of international law.
The sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity of all countries, big and small, must be respected.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
\tMs Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I have three supplementary questions for the Foreign Minister. The first is to ask whether the Foreign Ministry was aware beforehand that the speech on 8 March was going to be delivered by the Minister for Home Affairs. So, the first question is whether the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) knew beforehand that the speech was being given and did MFA know the contents of the speech.
The second question is, earlier, Minister Shanmugam mentioned that Indivisible Security is perhaps a concept in International Relations. So, I would like to ask the Foreign Minister what is the Government's view of such a principle of Indivisible Security.
And last of all, does the Foreign Minister agree that accepting a principle of Indivisible Security is very risky for small countries like Singapore?
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Ms Lim, I am not sure whether you are levelling all your supplementary questions to the Minister for Foreign Affairs or the Minister for Law? Because I think your supplementaries actually cover some of what Minister Shanmugam earlier said. So, can I just be clear as to whom you are asking these questions?
\tMs Sylvia Lim: Deputy Speaker, I am asking them to the Foreign Ministry because I would like to know the Government's view on this and the speech that was given covered foreign affairs. So, I believe that the views of MFA are very important.
\tDr Vivian Balakrishnan: Mr Deputy Speaker, let me state categorically – the statements of the Minister for Law reflect the views of the Government of Singapore. We know generally when each Minister is going to speak, we are aware of that. I must tell you we do not personally check every single line and sentence in our speeches and the speeches can evolve according to the circumstances of the event.
Needless to say, under the principle of collective responsibility, you can take it that, as long as we are in charge, the statements of each Minister reflect the views of the Government.
Mr Deputy Speaker, on Indivisible Security, the Minister for Law has already explained it and I do not think I have got anything further to add.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
\tMs Sylvia Lim: Thank you, Sir. One supplementary question.
Would the Foreign Minister agree that, actually, the Government's statements on Russia's invasion on Ukraine have been consistent all this while and there has never been this attempt to say that the US or NATO has been somewhat contributory to the current state of affairs, which was something that the Minister for Law did say? So, I would like him to confirm that up to now, the Government has not taken this position and this is actually something new in the public domain.
\tDr Vivian Balakrishnan: Mr Deputy Speaker, there is nothing new. Our position has been and will continue to be clear and consistent. I have said that on numerous occasions, not just in this House. Various Ministers have also said this, in various fora outside this House.
I must add that foreign policy is something which we all have to take responsibility for, including the Opposition. I am very glad that in fact, the Opposition, of all parties, has ensured that politics stops at the border. I think I can quite safely say that, on behalf of every single Member in this House, our position remains that it was wrong of Russia, it was a breach of international law and of the principles of the UN Charter for them to launch the invasion of Ukraine.
Having said that, I think we must also be very clear in our minds that there are a diversity of views. And when we are explaining these matters to the general public and to our population, or indeed, even in this House, it is not unreasonable to reflect the diversity of views. But reflecting the diversity of views does not alter our national position, based on a defence of our national interests and the principles which a small, tiny city-state like us must subscribe to.
So, Mr Deputy Speaker, I detect, actually, unanimity in this House, across the partisan divide and I think we should maintain that discipline, that cohesion and that unity.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
\tMs Sylvia Lim: Thank you, Sir. Perhaps one final clarification. Earlier, the Minister said that there is collective responsibility in the Cabinet and that the Law Minister's views reflect the views of the Government. In his speech, he actually said specifically that, in his view, the West and NATO were not uninvolved bystanders who had no role to play in the current situation. So, do I take it that that is the Government's view as well?
\tDr Vivian Balakrishnan: Mr Deputy Speaker, let me again step back and take a strategic look at this. Why have we taken such a categorical stand? We have taken it because of the vulnerabilities of Singapore as a tiny city-state. And history is replete with tragedy and misfortune falling on small countries. As the Minister for Law just explained – both in his speech and reiterated in this House – ultimately, the victim is the smaller country. Ukraine and Ukrainians are paying the ultimate price.
So, our position is clear: that it is wrong, a breach of international law, a flagrant violation of the principles of the UN Charter, the primary victim is the smaller country and it is people who are paying the ultimate price.
If you want to get into a larger debate on foreign policy, then, I would draw your attention to the fact that we are not in Europe. We are in Southeast Asia. As we collectively craft a foreign policy that is both consistent and protects our national interests, I would say that, on a larger strategic stage, we must always be aware.
In fact, if you do not mind, let me recite what I said a year ago: \"The events in Ukraine go to the heart of the fundamental norms of international law and the UN Charter that prohibit the use of force and acts of aggression against another sovereign state. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a clear and gross violation of the international norms, a completely unacceptable precedent. This is an existential issue for us. Ukraine is much smaller than Russia, but it is much bigger than Singapore. A world order based on might is right or where the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, such a world order is profoundly inimicable to the security and survival of small states. And so, we cannot accept one country attacking another without justification, arguing that its independence was a result of historical errors or crazy decisions. Such a rationale would go against internationally recognised legitimacy and the territorial integrity of many countries, including Singapore.\"
So, I think these are matters on which we are all agreed. You can get into the historical details of how a situation unfolded. Our objective in Southeast Asia is not to let a repeat of the European tragedy occur here, in this part of the world. In trying to avoid a parallel of that situation here, I think it is entirely legitimate for us to consider all views, diverse views, opposing views even, on how the situation in Europe came about.
\tI would urge the Member to understand what is at state, understand why we have taken a stand, understand why that stand has to be maintained, upheld and, I hope, shared across the House by all the parties represented here; and also agree that we must not let a repeat of Europe – a continent which unfortunately has been a source of two world wars in the last century – we do not want a repeat of that here.
And finally, remember that a small nation is always vulnerable. And again, to repeat something I have said multiple times here, never let ourselves be a vassal state, a stalking horse, a cat's paw for any other power. Understand that when we get entangled in such matters, the ultimate loser is always the smaller state. I thank the Member for her interest and I am grateful for her support, and I mean that in all sincerity.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Ms Lim, you have asked four or five supplementary questions. I invite you to ask your final one.
\tMs Sylvia Lim: Based on the Minister's last answer, he did not say whether the Government agreed with the Law Minister's view that the West and NATO were not uninvolved bystanders who had no role to play in the current situation. So, do I take it from him that he would rather not go into such historical matters?
The Minister for Law (Mr K Shanmugam): For the Member's understanding, I cleared the speech with the highest levels of the Cabinet.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Dr Vivian Balakrishnan.
\tDr Vivian Balakrishnan: There are things that we discuss. There are things that we – when we are having a forum in Parliament and with the general public, when there is a need to reflect the diversity of views. And I think it was entirely legitimate for the Minister for Law to do so.
Having said that, as the Minister for Foreign Affairs, my first job is to protect the sovereignty, the independence and the territorial integrity of Singapore. And therefore, there may be times when what I say publicly is entirely aimed at achieving that.
I do not wish to have words put into my mouth, or to make public pronouncements beyond what I have already said, to say that beware that small countries do not get caught up in the manoeuvres, the to-ing and fro-ing, and the dangerous, sometimes escalatory, rhetoric or action the superpowers engage in.
And I say it my way, but I believe that my statements are entirely consistent with the rest of my Cabinet colleagues, and we stand and we take collective responsibility for that. I think I have said enough, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I am still absolutely certain that there is unanimity in this House on this matter of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. And I thank the Member for her support. Can I assume I have her support?
\tMs Sylvia Lim: Yes, Sir, we have no reason to disagree with the Government's consistent stand from February last year to now.
\tDr Vivian Balakrishnan: And I am very grateful for that.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Recent Realignment of Roles and Salaries in Social Service Sector","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Social and Family Development arising from the realignment of roles and salaries in the social service sector (a) which specific job role and scope have seen a reduction in their recommended pay; (b) whether staff in these roles will experience a pay cut and, if so, how many are estimated to be affected; (c) whether agencies will consider grandfathering current employees facing a reduced salary; and (d) whether the reduction in salary will make it more challenging to find local workers to fill these positions.
11 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Social and Family Development with regard to the outcome of the 2023 review of job roles and salary guidelines in the social service sector (a) whether any senior care staff have been pegged to a lower job worth as a result of the realignment process; (b) whether potential implications for support care staff in the healthcare sector have been considered in the review; (c) whether a tripartite approach has been considered in the review and, if so, to what extent; and (d) if not, why not.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Eric Chua) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Mr Deputy Speaker, may I take Question Nos 10 and 11 together, please?
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Please proceed.
\tMr Eric Chua: Sector salaries are reviewed regularly to ensure that salaries in Social Service Agencies (SSAs) remain competitive against comparable roles in competing markets. The recent review took into consideration the economic outlook, wage growth in the general market, including healthcare and public service, the contributions of social service professionals, funding sustainability of SSAs and alignment with the Skills Frameworks for Social Service and Healthcare. In particular, the Skills Maps, which outline the range and levels of skills and competencies required for each job role, were developed and validated with representatives from the sector, academia and the Government.
Arising from the review, some job roles were merged or right-sized. These include: one, adjusting the organisation budget ranges for Head of Agency roles; two, merging Executive, Programme Coordinator, Programme Executive and Volunteer Executive into a single Executive role; three, merging Social Worker (Entry) and Social Worker into a single Social Worker role; four, merging Therapist (Degree) and Therapist (Diploma) into a single Therapist role; and five, mapping the Senior Care Staff role to Social Service Assistant job grades, while reclassifying social work associates more appropriately to the Social Work Associate and Senior Social Work Associate roles.
The revised salary ranges for merged job roles provide greater flexibility for SSAs to hire employees at various competency levels and to plan for their progression according to experience and performance. For merged job roles, the starting salary guidelines took reference from the blend of the merged grades and are higher than the starting salaries of the lower merged roles before the review.
As explained in an earlier reply provided by Minister Masagos to a Parliamentary Question (PQ) on 21 April this year, the salaries for the right-sized Senior Care Staff role represent an increase in salaries, once those with competencies and performance at the job level of Social Work Associate are reclassified into the correct job role.
The National Council of Social Service (NCSS) has been supporting SSAs to implement the guidelines and to ensure that employees continue to be remunerated commensurately. Current staff should not have their salaries reduced as a result of the changes to the job roles. SSAs should continue to pay staff competitively, including paying above the guidelines if they are able to do so, in order to attract and retain quality manpower.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. The work in the social service sector is challenging and oftentimes can be emotionally and mentally draining. How often does the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) intend to review the salary adjustments to make the pay more competitive and to attract people to join the sector?
Besides salary adjustments, what else is MSF doing to improve their attractiveness of the sector and is MSF working with the Ministry of Education (MOE) to attract more students into the sector through more industry-relevant course curriculum in tertiary institutions, like the Institute of Technical Education (ITE), polytechnics and our universities?
\t
\tMr Eric Chua: I thank the Member for his supplementary questions. The short and quick answer to his questions is yes. We do work with MOE to go upstream to green-harvest and we do review our salary guidelines annually. I thank the Member for his suggestions.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his reply. May I draw the Senior Parliamentary Secretary's attention to a Facebook post by the Healthcare Services Employees' Union (HSEU) on 15 April 2023?
The President of HSEU stated in this post, and I quote, \"More broadly the review potentially impacts support care staff in the healthcare sector as there is much overlapping similarities in job functions and skillsets...\".
May I also draw the Senior Parliamentary Secretary's attention to the following paragraph in HSEU's Facebook post, \"HSEU was not consulted for this wage review. HSEU reiterates that any review of sectoral wages and remunerations should adopt a tripartite approach.\"
Given this, may I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary if he can help address the second and third parts of my PQ? Firstly, whether potential implications for support care staff in the healthcare sector have been considered in the review. Furthermore, whether a tripartite approach was considered in the review; if so, to what extent and, if not, why not?
\t
\tMr Eric Chua: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Member for his additional supplementary questions. Yes, just to reiterate what I mentioned in my speech, we have consulted the sector, academia and the Government, not the unions this time round. We do note his suggestion that we can possibly involve the unions in future salary reviews.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Ms Denise Phua.
\tMs Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his response. I wanted to clarify MSF's role in facilitating the support of additional wages in the Social Service Agencies, particularly for those which are providing essential services, many of whose salaries for the Chief Executive, Finance and even for IT positions are not supported by MSF or NCSS.
I want to ask if MSF would consider facilitating help agencies, such as NCSS, SG Enable and so forth, to support and fund these positions because these are important and integrative roles. To bring especially multi-million-dollar agencies together, we do need these positions. For funders to support only those services of so-called direct staff will not actually be realistic without these integrative roles.
Mr Eric Chua: I thank the Member Ms Denise Phua for her supplementary question. I think she would also understand that in the social sector, the approach has always been one of many helping hands, where the Government, the corporate sector and the community partners, including Social Service Agencies, all come together to bring something to the table to make sure that, in terms of various aspects of running the social sector – funding, expertise, resources – everyone brings something.
The Government cannot possibly fund all the programmes that are running on the ground and, yes – Sir, I seek your patience in letting me finish my reply – and so, it is in that spirit that we take an approach where many stakeholders come together to bring something to solve the many social problems that we face today.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Thank you, Sir. Could I just ask whether MSF follows up with the SSAs on whether they are able to meet these new salary guidelines and, if so, what percentage of SSAs are able to meet these guidelines?
\tMr Eric Chua: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Mr Louis Ng for his supplementary question. I do not have the numbers right now. If he likes, he may wish to file an additional PQ and we can attend to that. But we do work with NCSS as well as the relevant SSAs if there are cases where, in particular, the actual salaries on the ground do not quite match up to what has been stated in the guidelines.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Don Wee, last supplementary question, please. Do you have a supplementary question?
\tMr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): No. Question No 12, please.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Review Cap of Coverage Per Depositor under Deposit Insurance","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"12 Mr Don Wee asked the Prime Minister (a) with the maximum coverage of up to S$75,000 per depositor per bank under the Deposit Insurance Scheme, what is the current percentage of non-bank depositors covered by the scheme; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider a review of the coverage cap.
13 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Prime Minister (a) what are the lessons from the closure of several US banks due to uninsured depositor runs; (b) whether the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) will consider raising the $75,000 per depositor per bank coverage limit insured by the Singapore Deposit Insurance Corporation; and (c) whether MAS will consider additional bank regulation on top of existing capital adequacy and leverage ratio requirements, such as the reporting of mark-to-market asset losses.
The Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Prime Minister): Mr Deputy Speaker, can I have your permission to take Question Nos 12 and 13 together, please?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Yes, please proceed.
\tMr Alvin Tan: Mr Don Wee and Mr Saktiandi Supaat had asked if the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) will consider reviewing the deposit insurance (DI) coverage limit. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim also raised a related question for the next Sitting. Mr Supaat also asked about lessons from the closure of several US banks due to uninsured depositor runs and whether MAS will consider additional bank regulation on top of existing requirements. My response will cover the questions from all three Members for today's Sitting and the next and, if adequately addressed, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim may wish to withdraw his question.
Let me first make a basic point. DI is not the primary way in which we safeguard the interests of depositors, be they small or large. The recent stresses involving banks abroad remind us that a safe and resilient banking system is underpinned most fundamentally by a combination of pre-emptive safeguards. These include sound regulation, rigorous supervision, proactive cross-border cooperation and effective governance and risk management by the banks themselves.
So, we put a lot of store by these pre-emptive safeguards here in Singapore. They have contributed to MAS' financial sector oversight being assessed to be \"amongst the best globally\" by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) after the most recent Financial Sector Assessment Programme in 2019. DI complements these pre-emptive or ex-ante safeguards by providing a safety net for small depositors if banks were to fail.
International regulatory standard setting bodies, like the Financial Stability Board (FSB) and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS), will be carefully assessing the regulatory and supervisory implications arising from the recent banking stresses. MAS will be working with other regulators in these reviews in developing any needed regulatory responses to enhance the resilience of our banking system.
Our DI scheme aims to protect small depositors. Its adequacy as a safety net can be assessed by looking at the proportion of depositors who are fully insured – in other words, the depositors whose aggregated eligible deposits at a bank are within the DI coverage limit. The DI coverage limit in Singapore was last raised in 2019 from $50,000 to $75,000 per depositor per participating financial institution. At $75,000, it fully insured 91% of depositors covered under the DI Scheme at the time. With deposit growth since then, the percentage of fully insured depositors has fallen slightly to 89%.
Prior to the recent events, MAS had just concluded its latest, but regular review of the DI scheme, including both the DI coverage limit and also ways to ensure the operational efficacy of the DI scheme. MAS aims to present these proposals for public consultation by the end of June.
It is worth noting that we are not doing so in response to the recent stresses among some banks abroad and we should avoid overreacting to these events. Our principal objective should be to ensure that the pre-emptive safeguards, which I described earlier, are in good shape. We will also have to adjust the nominal coverage limit for DI from time to time. However, raising the proportion of deposits that are fully insured or, in other words, to cover larger depositors, is not without costs to banks, which will often ultimately mean costs borne by bank customers themselves. Each adjustment to the DI scheme, hence, has to be carefully considered.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Don Wee.
\tMr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): I thank the Minister of State for his answer. Considering the recent bank failures overseas, what has been the impact on the insurance premiums which members of the Singapore Deposit Insurance Corporation (SDIC) will have to pay?
My second supplementary question is: should Singaporeans be concerned with the recent global failures of some of these banks overseas?
\tMr Alvin Tan: I thank the Member for his supplementary questions. With regard to the impact on premiums, there is no direct impact because the annual DI premiums are computed based on the amount of insured deposits held by banks and, for foreign bank branches, that asset-maintenance ratio, which varies with the amount of eligible assets and eligible pledged assets which they hold in Singapore.
With regard to the Member's second supplementary question, I would like to re-emphasise that the recent events, the bank stresses overseas, have highlighted the need for robust stress testing by banks as well as rigorous supervision by regulators.
Robust stress testing would, of course, help us to highlight any areas of vulnerability of individual banks by incorporating assumptions that are more reflective of a bank's risks. So, that is one. The second is that supervisors also need to assess the rigour as well as the competitiveness of banks' stress testing practices and then, after doing so, take the appropriate actions.
The banks also have to play their part. It is important for them to have robust and comprehensive contingency funding plans to handle liquidity problems as well as a good communication strategy, because these things matter when there are stresses on banks, particularly in times of stress.
So, it is essential that our banks regularly review their operational readiness to tap on available Central Bank liquidity facilities.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
\tMr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. First of all, I would like to declare that I work in a financial institution, in a bank. I have two supplementary questions, Mr Deputy Speaker.
First is in relation to the Minister of State's answer just now. I have a concern with regard to the Minister of State's view and risk assessment in terms of digital bank runs in the future. I think things have evolved significantly since the last FSAP, as the Minister of State mentioned, in 2019. Things have changed in the financial sector and things have evolved in terms of digitalisation in the banking sector. So, what is the Minister of State's view and risk assessment of digital banking runs or, as some people call it, \"bank rush\", in Singapore and in the region?
The second supplementary question, Mr Deputy Speaker, is in regard to raising the DI limit. I am actually mindful of considering the DI limits because it could have cost implications, as the Minister of State mentioned, for the banking sector as well as Singaporeans. If so, what is the cost of this increased DI coverage limit? Is the DI fund adequately sized in terms of the pre-funding? Also, can the Minister of State highlight – typically, in other countries, for example, the UK, it takes seven days for a depositor of a bank to get his or her money cash back. For Singapore, how many days would it take for a depositor to get his money if a bank goes bankrupt?
\tMr Alvin Tan: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Let me go through the different questions one by one.
With regard to the Member's question on digital banks, digital full banks are DI members of SDIC. In the initial restricted phase, they are limited to no more than $75,000 deposit per individual depositor. So, at that level, it will mean that all of the individual's deposits with a digital full bank would be fully covered. Digital wholesale banks are not subject to this cap but they cannot take retail deposits.
On the other question with regard to how fast can you make payments – SDIC's target is to make payments to insured depositors within seven days after the payout is triggered.
On the final question on the increase of the DI coverage limit, the DI scheme members pay regular premiums quite similar to what I explained earlier, to cover these deposits; and a higher coverage limit, of course, will require higher premiums. This adds naturally to the bank's overall costs, which they will have to manage themselves, and then, sometimes also pass on these costs to customers, given that they are commercial enterprises. They might do it through, perhaps, lower deposit rates, higher lending rates or other fees.
But I wanted to go into the final question, which is important, about the size of the DI fund. I would like to assure the Member and Members of this House that the DI fund is adequately sized. It is designed to meet a solvency standard of over 99.9%. What that means is that at this target fund size, the DI fund is able to make DI payments without losses at a confidence interval of 99.9%.
The target fund size is currently calibrated at $690 million and the DI fund has approximately $570 million in total assets and continues to be built up as scheduled, through annual premiums collected by member financial institutions.
The DI fund may also borrow from MAS for payments to insured depositors. But I wanted to quickly come back again to the principle of this: that in a safe, resilient banking system, it is underpinned by a combination of pre-emptive safeguards. I mentioned sound regulation, rigorous supervision, proactive cross-border collaboration, effective governance and the responsibilities of banks themselves.
DI complements these pre-emptive and ex-ante safeguards, by providing a safety net for small depositors, if banks were to fail. So, we will continue to conduct regular reviews. I said that we recently conducted the review prior to the events that happened to look at the DI coverage limits as well as the operational efficacy of the scheme and we will release the proposals to the public for public consultation by the end of June.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Ultra-high Net Worth Individuals and Their Families Who Have Been Granted Singapore Citizenship","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"14 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Home Affairs for each year since 2000 (a) what is the number of ultra-high net worth individuals and their families, with a net worth of at least US$50 million, who have been granted Singapore Citizenship; (b) of which, how many of them obtained Singapore Citizenship after having set up a family office in Singapore; and (c) how many obtained Singapore Citizenship through other avenues.
\tThe Minister for Home Affairs (Mr K Shanmugam): Sir, the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) does not collect information on the wealth or net worth of Singapore Citizenship applicants. That is not a primary criterion for assessment for Singapore Citizenship.
There were recent media reports that said that a researcher based in South Africa had estimated that 3,500 high-net-worth individuals were due to get Singapore Citizenship in 2023. The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) issued a statement on 25 April 2023 stating that the reports were highly misleading and had no credible basis. We do not know how the researcher had arrived at these figures and the grant of Singapore Citizenship for the rest of 2023 has not been decided yet.
After our statement was issued, the researcher wrote to MHA to say that he had been misquoted by the media. He said, and I quote, \"This was simply untrue and not at all what was said in the interview.\" He said he had \"never said anything about citizenship\". He said that he did not track citizenship in his research and that his projection referred to high-net-worth individuals moving to Singapore in general, and most of them may be expatriates and work transfers, that is, not necessarily persons who applied for and became citizens.
As mentioned in MHA's statement on 25 April 2023, having high net worth does not guarantee Singapore Citizenship. Each Singapore Citizenship application is assessed on a broad range of factors, which include the ability to contribute to Singapore, the number of jobs that the applicant or his business may be able to create in Singapore, the special skillset and/or education that the applicant may possess, the applicant's family ties to Singaporeans, the ability to integrate and the commitment to sink roots in Singapore. Different criteria may apply to different applicants, depending on their background and circumstances. For example, an applicant applying as a spouse of a Singapore Citizen will be considered differently from someone applying on the basis of having stayed in Singapore for a period of time and contributed to employment creation in Singapore.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Leong, is there any supplementary question from you? No. Leader of the Opposition.
\tMr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Just a follow-up to the Minister's reply with regard to the researcher who said, as I understood Minister's reply, that it was a media publication that actually misquoted him and it sounds like a very serious case of being misquoted. Can I confirm whether MHA then reached out to the publication to enquire why the piece was eventually published as it was, in view of the sensitivity of this subject?
\tMr K Shanmugam: Sir, I do not keep track of whether my Ministry reaches out to media to find out. What we do know and what is factual, is that we issued a statement categorically rebutting the report, and the person who was supposedly quoted has written to us to say all these things.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Campaign on Need to Bag Trash Thrown Down Rubbish Chutes Post Plastic Bag Levy","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"15 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment in light of the introduction of the plastic bag levy, whether the Ministry will consider working with HDB on a public awareness campaign reminding residents of the need to bag rubbish for disposal in rubbish chutes.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan) (for the Minister of Sustainability and the Environment): The disposable carrier bag charge at supermarkets is intended to be a behavioural nudge to encourage the use of reusables over disposables. The charge will not remove the public's access to disposable bags. Residents should continue the responsible practice of bagging waste before disposal. We have and will continue to offer suggestions on alternatives to disposable carrier bags from supermarkets for bagging waste.
\t\tMr Deputy Speaker: No supplementary questions? Ms Joan Pereira.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Scaling Up Polyclinics' Capacity to Accommodate More Walk-in Patients with Urgent Conditions ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"The following question stood in the name of Ms Joan Pereira –
16 To ask the Minister for Health whether polyclinics can scale up their capacity to accommodate more walk-in patients with urgent medical conditions, such as those experiencing acute or severe pain, and to avoid turning away senior citizens.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Question No 16.
The Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Health): Sir, our polyclinics take in all patients with appointments. As for walk-in patients without appointments, those requiring urgent medical attention will be attended to, those not requiring urgent medical attention may be asked to book an appointment or seek treatment at a nearby general practitioner (GP) clinic.
We are continuing to expand our network of polyclinics. We opened Bukit Panjang, Eunos and Kallang Polyclinics in end 2021 and another two polyclinics in Sembawang and Tampines North are slated to open later this year. Khatib Polyclinic will open in 2024 and Serangoon and Tengah Polyclinics in 2025. At the same time, we will work with GP clinics, which play an important role in treating acute diseases at the primary care level, too.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
\t \tMr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Sir, I share the concern expressed by Member Joan Pereira on the polyclinics and the Senior Minister of State mentioned about Bukit Panjang Polyclinic. We do have situations where residents have not only not been served as a walk-in – they could not get a place for walk-in – but even for online booking, where the night before they could not get a slot. I just want to ask the Senior Minister of State whether the Ministry of Health (MOH) is looking at improving this situation.
Secondly, there is also Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) GP Clinic scheme, which is meant to take some load off the polyclinics. But it seems that is not helping much. May I ask the Senior Minister of State is the Ministry looking at what are the impediments do that? Why is it so? Is there a need to change the scheme or the policy so that it becomes attractive for patients to use the GP clinics as well, and not all going to the polyclinics?
\t
Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank the Member for his questions. On both his questions, he has highlighted the direction in which we are moving, which is for the polyclinics to work in partnership with the GP clinics and family practitioners in the area that they serve. We do want our residents to understand that these are part of a continuum of primary care services.
For the polyclinics, if the patient turns up without an appointment, wants to walk in and if they have an urgent need, they will be attended to. There will be triage, they will be assessed and, if there is an urgent need, they will be attended to. If it is something elective and there are no appointment slots left, the recommendation will be that they seek care electively in a planned way, make an appointment with the GP within the vicinity.
I am not sure whether there are specific details about how the Member feels the CHAS scheme is not helping much. Perhaps if there are specific cases, we could look into that and see how we can assist. In general, we are trying to find ways to help the GPs, the family physicians, as a community, upskill and deliver these types of cares in partnership with the polyclinic teams as well. In general, the GPs and the family physicians are more than willing and able to do so.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Ang Wei Neng.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I would like to ask a supplementary question of the Senior Minister of State. For the residents in the west, especially in the Nanyang ward, they go to Pioneer Polyclinic. They really have difficulties getting appointments online and, even so, when the residents go to the polyclinic early in the morning to queue for the appointment, they cannot get an appointment.
So, my supplementary question is, one: when they queue, if they cannot get an appointment, can they get the next day's appointment? Two, we also understand that most of the polyclinics and the MOH building are in other parts of Singapore, in the north-west part or the western part, and not in the Jurong area. So, how are we going to alleviate the situation at Pioneer Polyclinic?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank the Member for his questions. We will look at his suggestion in terms of the queuing system and the appointment booking process. We are trying very hard to improve the service provision for primary care by both expanding our network of polyclinics, as well as leveraging on the experience and capability of the GP clinics and family physicians that are in the community and that can serve this resident population very well.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
\tMr Saktiandi Supaat: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am asking this supplementary question on behalf of Ms Joan Pereira who is on medical leave. She has a very strong conviction about asking this supplementary question, so I am conveying this question to the Senior Minister of State.
Can the Senior Minister of State consider asking polyclinics to consider prioritising walk-in patients who are seniors? Because Ms Joan Pereira is very particularly interested in making sure our seniors walking in, as well as those with mobility issues, are attended to, given that they may find it challenging to go to the GPs. I think the Senior Minister of State has highlighted it somewhere at the beginning, but I think it is very, very focused on seniors – whether there could be prioritising for them, especially those who are very aged and have mobility issues.
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Ms Joan Pereira and Mr Saktiandi Supaat for asking that question. As I mentioned in my original answer, the walk-in residents, the walk-in patients are triaged and assessed, and part of that assessment will, indeed, be their state of frailty, and their age and their mobility are considered as part of that assessment.
I think the right thing to do is to allow the professional judgement of the clinical team at the site to make the assessment as to the urgency of their needs, rather than set a very arbitrary cut-off in terms of an age, for example, or other factors where actually the key thing is to assess the needs of that patient at that time. And that is, indeed, what the clinical services will do. I thank the Members for their question.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: The final supplementary question. Dr Tan Wu Meng.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): I thank the Senior Minister of State for his answers. A number of my Clementi residents are quite concerned about the implications of the online booking process for polyclinic appointments. Some may be quite elderly, less able to go online, less able to quickly click to secure the appointment when the bookings open. I have residents who tell me that, for some polyclinics, the online slots are used up within half an hour of the online booking starting on some days.
Can I ask the Senior Minister of State whether MOH is looking at the take-up of these online bookings, whether there is a trend towards fewer seniors being able to get these online bookings and whether the seniors are as able to attend the polyclinics as before?
Secondly, can I also ask the Senior Minister of State in the event there are CHAS GP clinics interested in participating in an online booking portal, whether there could be a future pilot project to integrate these GPs into the online booking process as well, if there is interest?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: I thank the Member for his questions. For his first supplementary question, I do not have the data with me about the proportions of seniors that are attending now as compared to historical data. I would be happy to provide it if he would like to file a separate Parliamentary Question. But, in general, as I engage with the polyclinic staff and the clinicians who provide these services, it is quite clear that a very high proportion of their workload is, indeed, the seniors. And so, the senior residents within the geographical area are, indeed, attending, are able to access the services and receive the care from the polyclinic care teams. But as I said, I would be happy to look at the data, specifically, if he would like to file a related question.
On his suggestion about integration of the CHAS GP clinics into an online booking system, it is a suggestion worth studying and we will, indeed, look to see how we can improve access to primary care services for residents.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Factors Considered in Drawing up COMPASS Shortage Occupation List","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"17 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what are the key considerations and matrices used to decide on the Complementarity Assessment Framework (COMPASS) Shortage Occupation List; and (b) how does the Ministry balance between economic needs and ensuring these jobs are available for prospective new entrants, especially those who are still in school.
18 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Manpower with regard to the Complementarity Assessment Framework (COMPASS) Shortage Occupation List (a) how does the Ministry determine if there is a shortage in any particular occupation; (b) whether the Ministry has the expertise to evaluate if there is a shortfall in a specialised skillset and it is unavailable in the local workforce; and (c) how does the Ministry track whether a company has fulfilled its commitment to develop local talents as part of the conditions under the framework.
\tThe Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to address Question Nos 17 and 18 together?
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Yes, please proceed.
\tDr Tan See Leng: Thank you. The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) evaluate occupations for the Complementarity Assessment Framework or COMPASS' Shortage Occupation List (SOL) based on three criteria: the first criterion being the strategic importance of the occupation to Singapore’s economic priorities; second, the degree and nature of labour shortage; and third, the sector’s commitment to developing the local pipeline to address these shortages.
Labour shortages are assessed based on a set of quantitative indicators. We derive this data from MOM's Job Vacancy Survey, as well as data from the MyCareersFuture job portal on job applications and vacancies. We also supplement this with qualitative assessments from the relevant sector agencies, alongside feedback and ground sensing from industry and tripartite partners. Together, this provides a good degree of triangulation. It provides MOM and MTI with a fuller understanding of labour market shortage conditions in the respective industries.
The SOL does not stand alone as a strategy to meet industry demand for skilled professionals. While the SOL helps companies access foreign professionals to plug immediate skills gaps and seize economic opportunities, it must also be complemented by robust efforts by industry to train up and place locals into these well-paying jobs. Hence, there must be clear plans, clear commitments by industry to develop the local pipeline, or else the occupation will not be included in the SOL.
To Mr Liang Eng Hwa’s question on tracking of commitments to develop the local pipeline, MOM and MTI work closely with sector agencies to set commitments around local training as well as employment at the aggregate occupation level. Rather than mandating fixed commitments for each firm, sector agencies have the flexibility to work closely with the firms, industry partners and education and training providers on plans to train and employ more locals with these skills in shortage. We will review that these commitments are met, as a key condition for renewing an occupation on the SOL.
To Mr Desmond Choo’s question on ensuring jobs are available for prospective new entrants, we regularly review the SOL to ensure it remains responsive to changes in the labour market, including taking into account our local graduate pipelines.
MOM and MTI will closely monitor indicators of shortage for each occupation and we will also track local graduate outcomes for the SOL occupations. The SOL will be reset every three years and we intend to adjust it annually to add or remove occupations if there are significant changes in industry demand or supply of skilled workers. This will help us to avoid entrenching dependencies on Employment Pass holders in any occupation.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Desmond Choo.
\tMr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. I have two supplementary questions for the Minister. I thank him for the reassurance that it is a robust system to make sure that locals are not disadvantaged.
\tThe first question is, what is the nexus or how closely does MOM work with the Ministry of Education (MOE) to ensure that the students who are going to the subjects, who are training for the occupations in need, adequately know that there is a strong demand and they will not be dissuaded because more foreigners are coming into those occupations?
The second question is: for the Shortage Occupation List (SOL), will MOM also monitor how the wages change over time and, indeed, if the wages are affected, meaning that they are not growing at the rate compared to other occupations, will MOM then similarly slow down or remove such an occupation from the list?
\t
\tDr Tan See Leng: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Member for his two supplementary questions.
In terms of working with MOE, this will be one of the key impetus in terms of how we draft each one of the lists. The SOL, as I have shared earlier on, will be reviewed regularly to reflect current industry needs and shortages; and of course, in addition to earlier on, the adjustments annually. This will start on a fresh slate every three years so that we do not entrench any particular dependencies in any occupation.
So, we work with MOE in terms of the growth of our local pipeline, including that of university and polytechnic graduates, because the pipeline of these graduate should help us over time to ease the shortages over the medium to long term.
This is also further complemented and supplemented by other mid-career efforts, for instance, like the Career Conversion Programmes that we roll out through WSG and through the NTUC, the company training committees.
We expect that, with time, some of these occupations that are currently on the SOL will be removed, hopefully in the not-too-distant future.
On top of that, we also work with our other sector agencies, such as EDB, because they provide regular industry feedback to the Institutions of Higher Learning (IHLs) about the skills that are in demand, including those needed for occupations on the SOL, so that the IHLs can continue to update their course offerings accordingly.
We are in this state where change is accelerating and there are also significant disruptions to the job landscape. So, we also encourage all of our graduating students to continue to learn new skills upon graduation and to pursue opportunities in growth sectors.
We have also announced earlier on in our Committee of Supply (COS) debates this year about career health, about the add-ons in terms of the career finders to help our workers to continue to seek adjacencies in their upskilling, so that they can get better jobs, better paying jobs.
To the Member's second supplementary question about whether we monitor wage changes over time, indeed, we do, and that is why we have also been calibrating upwards our qualifying salary with regard to the Employment Pass as well as our S Pass minimum qualifying salaries. And that follows a graduated skill depending on the age of the foreign work pass holder. I hope that addresses the Member's concerns.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I have two supplementary questions for the Minister. Is the SOL proactively shared with schools and tertiary institutions so that they can provide career guidance to their students and encourage them to consider these jobs so that they can fill the shortage when they eventually graduate? Or would the Minister say that the SOL should not be used as a basis for career guidance for younger students, including those in secondary school?
\tDr Tan See Leng: I thank Mr Giam for his supplementary questions. As I have shared earlier on, we live in a world where change is accelerating and the pace of disruption is also accelerating. So, on a broad directional guidance to schools, for instance, about our aspirational move into the greening of our economy, into sustainability, into the pivots and the transition into carbon credits, carbon trading and so on, the broad guidance we can continue to share with the schools. As I have said earlier on, we work with the sector agencies to continue to provide insights and inputs to our IHLs so that they can prepare our pipeline of graduates.
I think to the extent of getting to the granularity, our continued encouragement, our continued exhortation to all of our students, regardless of whether they graduate from the ITEs, the polytechnics or the IHLs, would be that they must continue to embrace this constant learning, constant upgrading and constant upskilling because the world we live in today has and will continue to be in this state of constant change. I hope that addresses the Member's question.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Display Bus Stop Codes to Help Commuters Identify Bus Stops in Advance of Arriving","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"19 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether bus shelter address plates can display the bus stop code, instead of the LTA alpha-numeric code, to assist bus passengers in identifying bus stops in advance of arriving at a particular bus stop; and (b) what measures has LTA taken to make navigation easier for bus passengers, including people with disabilities and the less technology-savvy.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Transport (Mr Chee Hong Tat) (for the Minister for Transport): Sir, the bus stop name, alphanumeric code and five-digit code are displayed at the bus stops.
Since 2018, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has fitted all new public buses with the Passenger Information Display System (PIDS), which displays and announces the name of the upcoming bus stop, including references to nearby landmarks or the road.
Other measures to make navigation easier include the installation of tactile ground surface indicators, Braille signages for the visually impaired and murals to assist commuters with dementia. New bus interchanges also have enhanced signages with bigger fonts and brighter lighting for improved readability and better wayfinding.
Besides infrastructure enhancements, the Caring SG Commuters Committee has been promoting a more inclusive and caring commuting culture, to encourage commuters to assist fellow passengers who may require help with navigation.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. And I thank the Senior Minister of State for the answer. I understand that the bus stop codes and names are displayed at the bus stop pole and the bus stop information board. However, the font that is used is relatively small and it is not easily visible to passengers as they are approaching the bus stop. So, it would not give them enough time to be able to press the button to indicate to the bus captain to stop the bus. In fact, the most prominent signage at the bus stop is actually the bus shelter address plate, which is on the top of the bus shelter because the font can be seen from quite a distance away, about 40 metres away at least, in my estimation. So, this will give the commuters a bit more time to prepare to stop, to press the bell to stop the bus.
So, my question to the Senior Minister of State is: can the bus stop name and code be placed on the bus stop bus shelter address plates, instead of what is right now on the bus shelter address plates which is actually not very meaningful to the commuters themselves?
\t
\tMr Chee Hong Tat: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Mr Giam for his suggestion. Certainly, I think we will look at different ways to improve the visibility and how the information is being displayed. I just want to clarify that, today, as he acknowledged, the information – the name, the alphanumeric code and the five-digit code – they are all displayed at the bus stops.
And depending on, from your perspective as a commuter, different people would require the information in different ways and use it differently to help with their navigation. One analogy that I could give is this: it is a little bit like our postal code. If we refer to a particular block, let us say in my area Block 130A Lorong 1 Toa Payoh. It is part of Toa Payoh Crest but it also has a six-digit postal code which is 311130. So, I think both sets of information are useful and they are used for different purposes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reports of Electronic Waste in Green Spaces Like Clementi Forest","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"20 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for National Development (a) since 2021, how many reports have been received of electronic waste in (i) Clementi Forest and (ii) similar green spaces respectively; (b) what is the approach to addressing such electronic waste which may contaminate green environments or harm passers-by; and (c) what is the timeline and potential learning points regarding the removal of the abandoned refrigerator cited in OneService App in 2022 and removed in April 2023.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for National Development (Ms Sim Ann) (for the Minister for National Development): Sir, the illegal dumping of electronic and other waste in a public place is an offence under the Environmental Public Health Act (EPHA). Two instances of feedback on improper disposal of bulky electronic waste in forested areas were received and acted upon by agencies from January 2021 to March 2023. Members of the public should properly dispose of any refuse, including large household items, to minimise harm to the environment.
The OneService App, owned by the Municipal Service Office (MSO), is a platform on which Government agencies receive and respond to public feedback. Some cases require multiple agencies to work together. Lapses in communication and coordination between agencies sometimes occur, as in the case of the refrigerator found on state land in Clementi Forest. The National Parks Board (NParks) was first alerted to the incident in March 2022 through the OneService App and sought to arrange for its removal. Unfortunately, due to a miscommunication between agencies, the removal was not done and the case was closed prematurely. There was also no follow-through to check that the refrigerator had, indeed, been cleared. Upon being notified a second time, in 2023, NParks worked with the National Environment Agency (NEA) to clear the refrigerator on 21 April 2023.
MSO has been working with stakeholder agencies to strengthen interagency coordination and this includes NParks and NEA. We do so through staff training to ensure feedback involving multiple agencies is referred correctly, through the interagency feedback management system. Agencies are also requested to close straightforward cases only when works are completed on the ground. MSO will continue to help our partner agencies in attaining a high level of responsiveness to public feedback.
Clementi Forest is not intended for public recreational use at this point in time. Members of the public are encouraged to visit our many public parks and nature parks, and to keep to the designated trails within these areas for their own safety and to minimise impact to the environment.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: There being no supplementaries, Mr Louis Chua.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Racial Mix Consideration at Annual Primary 1 Registration","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"21 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Education (a) to what extent do primary schools at the annual Primary 1 registration ensure the racial make-up of their students is reflective of Singapore's society; and (b) what measures do schools take to ensure that their students may effectively learn through peer interactions about the lived experiences of different racial and religious groups.
\tThe Second Minister for Education (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Deputy Speaker, the Primary 1 (P1) Registration Framework balances a number of factors, including the convenience of having the younger sibling attend the same school as the older sibling, proximity to home or ties that the parents have with the school. Within this framework, parental choice during the P1 Registration Exercise impacts the social profile of students in our primary schools.
In primary schools, students learn about living in a multicultural society through a range of subjects. In Character and Citizenship Education, students learn about the major cultures in Singapore, as well as ways to relate to people of different races and religions. In Social Studies, students explore the contributions of different racial communities in the past and how Singapore’s past shaped the racial and religious diversity today. Students also learn the importance of respecting and appreciating the different cultures. Schools also celebrate different cultural festivals and organise learning journeys to museums, cultural and heritage sites to develop a better understanding of peers from different races and religions in Singapore.
The Ministry of Education (MOE) also provides opportunities for students to interact with peers from different backgrounds within and across schools, such as through our Co-Curricular Activities.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: No supplementaries. Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Families that have Benefited from Home Ownership Plus Education Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"22 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Social and Family Development to date, how many families have benefited from the Home Ownership Plus Education scheme.
\tThe Minister of State for Social and Family Development (Ms Sun Xueling) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Mr Deputy Speaker, as of 31 December 2022, around 3,400 families have benefited from the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) scheme.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Gan.
\tMr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): I thank the Minister of State for the reply. I just want to understand this programme. So far, what are the things that the families have benefited so far among all these applicants that —
\tMr Deputy Speaker: I think Mr Gan is asking what the families have benefited so far from these programmes. Have I heard you correctly, Mr Gan?
\tMr Gan Thiam Poh: Yes, correct. Thank you.
\t
\tMs Sun Xueling: I thank the Member for his supplementary question. It goes beyond his original question, but I would just like to share, with this opportunity, that the benefits include training incentives, employment incentives, conditional housing grant, utilities grant, education bursaries, mentoring and family support as well as family planning incentives.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Gan.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Thank you. I have a further question. Are there people who actually withdraw from this scheme halfway?
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Minister of State, did you hear that? You did, okay. I was wondering if you are finding it a bit difficult to hear.
\tMs Sun Xueling: I thank the Member for his supplementary question. Again, it goes beyond the Member's original question but I would like to share that, indeed, there are beneficiaries who have exited the scheme.
\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Recent Rise in Rental Prices of Commercial Properties on Singapore’s Competitiveness as Business Destination","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"23 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the recent rise in rental prices of commercial properties have affected Singapore’s competitiveness and attractiveness as a business destination of choice; and (b) whether more can be done to moderate further rental increases.
\tThe Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Ms Low Yen Ling) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Mr Deputy Speaker, globally, inflation has stayed elevated and the cost of doing business, which includes rental prices, has also increased. The rental index of office spaces in Singapore has increased by an average of about 1.35% per annum in the last three years. While rental for office spaces is higher than the pre-pandemic level, it remains below historical peaks in 2008 and 2015. In the same period, the vacancy rate for office spaces has remained stable at around 11% to 13%.
Between 2023 and 2025, more than 530,000 square metres of office space is expected to be completed. This is about 40% higher, compared to the past three years combined, and can help to cater to the demand and moderate rent increases over time. Rental continues to comprise a modest proportion of overall business costs for most sectors in Singapore. The Government will continue to monitor the market. We are committed to ensuring Singapore’s competitiveness and attractiveness as a business destination.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): I thank the Minister of State for the reply. I would like to further ask the Minister of State whether she can share the insights as to how the Government intends to calibrate the supply of commercial spaces. In particular, can she elaborate on the 530,000 square metres of office space that are in the pipleline? Where will this space be located and what kind of businesses would they cater for?
The second question is: the Minister of State mentioned in her reply that rentals form a modest proportion of the business costs for most sectors. I think, to some, it is still quite significant. Can I ask how would the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) ensure that Singapore remains overall competitive to be able to attract investments to Singapore with a rental that is reasonable and affordable to those companies?
\t
Ms Low Yen Ling: Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to thank the Member Mr Liang Eng Hwa for his three supplementary questions. If I heard correctly, there are two parts to the first one. I also wish him a speedy recovery after his ankle operation.
I want to thank him and assure him that the Government keeps a close eye on the cost of doing business and the impact on the economy as well as the impact on Singapore's attractiveness as a business location.
To the first part of his first supplementary question, that is, to moderate the commercial rental prices, Mr Liang and Members will know that the Government has, in the past, implemented various supply-side measures, for example, calibrating sufficient supply to meet longer-term demand through the Government Land Sales (GLS) programme. I will give Members a quick example. Just a few months ago, in December last year, the Government announced a mixed-use site at Jurong Lake District that is potentially yielding about 150,000 square metres of commercial space and that will be released via the confirmed list in June 2023.
In addition, a 30-year lease commercial site in Punggol, potentially yielding about 8,400 square metres of office space as well as a mixed-use site in Woodlands, about 78,000 square metres of commercial space were also made available on the reserve list via the first half of 2023 GLS. I cite all these examples to share and give assurance to the Member that these sites can be triggered by the developers to cater for additional commercial space demands. So, that is one.
And, of course, another important data to look at is the vacancy rate and I cited the figures of 11% to 13%.
If I hear correctly, the second part of the Member's first question is about whether I can give some breakdown to the 530,000 square metres. Sir, I cited earlier that in the next three years, starting from this year, we will see about 530,000 square metres of commercial space being completed and this figure represents 40% higher, compared to the last three years combined.
And to cater to companies in different sectors with different locational preferences, new office spaces will be distributed geographically across the island. I will cite some quick examples.
In the Central Business District (CBD) area, for example, this year, we will see the completion of the IOI Central Boulevard and that will yield 139,000 square metres.
In the city fringe, that includes the Keppel South Central project that will be completed sometime next year and yield about 57,000 square metres.
Outside the CBD area, Punggol Digital District is expected to have an additional 39,000 square metres two years later in 2025.
As other examples, next year, we will see completion of Labrador Tower, 75,000 square metres; next year as well, Paya Lebar Green, 36,000 square metres. Two years later, 2025, Shaw Towers Redevelopment, 44,000 square metres; and two years later as well, Solitaire on Cecil.
So, I just want to give the Member assurance that we are seeing the completion of a combined gross floor area (GFA) of 530,000 square metres over the next three years.
To the Member's second question about Singapore's overall competitiveness, he would have read some of the recent ranking reports, including the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). Today, our city state continues to be one of the most competitive economies of the world and this is attested to by the recent EIU ranking which indicated that Singapore has retained the position of having the world's best business environment for 15 years. But we should not rest on our laurels.
More importantly, I think the point here is that Singapore does not compete on cost alone. Other factors that contribute to our city state's overall competitiveness include a stable political regime, strong rule of law, favourable policy towards foreign investment and trade, good digital and logistic connectivity, a skilled workforce as well as our technological infrastructure. But I want to reassure Mr Liang and all Members that the Government will certainly continue to monitor the market closely and, where needed, calibrate the supply of commercial properties to ensure the stability as well as the sustainability of rentals for business over the medium to long term.
Mr Deputy Speaker: No supplementaries? Dr Tan Wu Meng, next question.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reports of Unauthorised Bank Transaction taking Place despite Absence of Alerts on Customer's Telephone Records","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"24 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Prime Minister (a) whether there are claims filed with the Financial Dispute Resolution Centre which involve an unauthorised bank transaction reportedly taking place and the bank has assessed that the One-Time Password (OTP) SMS messaging was used, but the customer's telephone operator records do not show transmission or receipt of such SMS OTP; and (b) whether there are other avenues available for these customers to seek redress.
The Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (for the Prime Minister): Sir, the scenario Dr Tan described is quite rare: where an unauthorised bank transaction took place and where the bank assessed that the One-Time Password (OTP) SMS messaging was used, but that the customer's telephone operator records did not show transmission to or receipt by the customer of such an SMS OTP. The Singapore Police Force has not received any such report since 2021. The Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre (FIDReC) is aware of two cases since July 2022 where the use or receipt of SMS OTP by the customer is disputed.
When customers suspect that they have fallen for a scam or are alerted by the bank to unauthorised transactions involving their account, they should immediately contact the bank or activate the kill switch that the banks provide to freeze their accounts. They should also report such fraudulent activities to the Police.
MAS expects banks to treat customers fairly in all cases of disputes over unauthorised transactions. The banks must consider, one, whether they have fulfilled their obligations, and two, whether customers have done their part to protect their accounts. Depending on the outcome of the banks’ investigations, they may offer goodwill payment to customers.
Any customer may, if they wish, lodge the dispute with FIDReC for mediation and adjudication. If they are not satisfied with the FIDReC outcome, they can consider seeking legal advice on whether to pursue their case in Court.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): I thank the Minister for his answer. I have got two supplementary questions.
Firstly, what is the process for handling disputes where the bank has assessed, based on their own records, that SMS OTP was used to validate the transaction, especially if the bank says SMS OTP by definition means it was legitimate, yet the customer is able to provide evidence, testimony from the telco that may suggest a different assessment of what happened? Is there a process for having this review besides FIDReC or does the bank have the final say on this question?
Secondly, Mr Deputy Speaker, can I also ask the Minister of State what is being done to prepare not just for the last war on scams but the next one?
A year ago, in February 2022, I asked in Parliament about the risk of emerging deepfake audio and video calls. Since then, there have been potential cases in the United States of deepfake audio voice calls. Can I ask the Minister whether the proposed equitable framework for sharing of losses will look at such emerging risks and will it also consider my previous suggestion on the difference between a customer making a forced error – for example, with a deepfake – versus an unforced error?
\t
\tMr Alvin Tan: Sir, I thank the Member for his two supplementary questions.
Let me take the second one with regard to the rapidly evolving nature of scams and the use of new technologies. We know that the techniques employed by scammers are constantly evolving and also gaining in sophistication with the use of differentiated technologies and this also thus requires a multi-pronged response across our ecosystem to strengthen our collective mechanisms and resilience against scams. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) will continue to work closely with our ecosystem partners, including the banking industry and other Government agencies. For example, MAS is working with banks to allow customers to verify genuine calls from banks. Banks are also exploring expanding the use of biometric technology with liveness test in addition to passwords and OTP as a means of authentication.
Members of the public can also play their part. Please install Scamshield; do not divulge your Internet banking credentials or passwords to anyone; be suspicious of unsolicited messages or calls that you receive and also verify calls received by calling the bank directly on the hotline listed on the official websites or cards.
For the first question, I will refer the Member to my main reply to the Parliamentary Question (PQ).
But for the questions with regard to the equitable sharing of losses, Dr Lim Wee Kiat has filed a PQ on that matter for this Sitting and we will address this issue in response to that PQ.
\tMr Deputy Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam, a very short clarification or supplementary question because we are going to be running out of Question Time very soon.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Just a very quick supplementary question. When is MAS going to require the banks to use more secure methods besides SMS OTP, for example, using the app-based OTPs?
\tMr Alvin Tan: The short answer is that MAS is working with the banks on a variety of authentication measures, including SMS OTP, and they are experimenting with different users as the technology evolves.
\t
Mr Deputy Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. Clarification by the Minister of State Sun Xueling.
[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 of State for Home Affairs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister of State for Home Affairs (Ms Sun Xueling): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to make a clarification.
In response to Mr Louis Ng's supplementary question in Parliament on 21 April 2023, I had mentioned that there may be extenuating circumstances which necessitate the Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) to exercise discretion not to activate an Appropriate Adult (AA) though it has not happened in the past five years.
I should clarify that we do not track the number of instances which necessitate the LEAs to exercise discretion not to activate an AA but these fall into the category of extenuating circumstances as I had mentioned in my main reply. In such instances, authorisation for a statement to be recorded in the absence of an AA is required to be sought from an investigation supervisor. The reason for this is required to be documented in writing. Thank you.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Order. End of clarification. Ministerial Statement. The Minister for Transport.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Meeting the Transport Needs of Singaporeans","subTitle":"Statement by Minister for Transport","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister for Transport (Mr S Iswaran): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Several Members have filed Parliamentary Questions (PQs) on the Certificates of Entitlement (COEs). My Ministerial Statement will address Question Nos 1 to 7 for Oral Answer as well as Question No 25 for a Written Answer in today's Order Paper, as well as related questions that have been filed for subsequent Sittings.
Sir, I would preface my reply to Members' questions with an overview of our land transport system. To be complete, any discussion on COEs must be situated within the broader context of our land transport system of which private cars are but one aspect.
Sir, to meet the transport needs of Singaporeans and enhance our living environment, we must address two key constraints – land and carbon emissions. Roads occupy 12% of our land, compared to around 13% for industry and 15% for housing.
Our land transport system accounts for about 15% of Singapore's total domestic carbon emissions. We must make it much more sustainable as part of the national effort to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. Pre-COVID-19, about 14 million journeys were made every day, across four modes – public transport, point-to-point transport, private vehicles and active mobility. That is the scale of the challenge.
The Government's aim is to build an accessible, inclusive and sustainable land transport system that meets the needs of all Singaporeans.
The best way to achieve this is through mass public transport. It allows the greatest number of people to get to their destinations with the least land take and carbon emissions. Our rail network serves around three million journeys a day and takes up less than 1% of our total surface area. In contrast, roads take up 12% of our land, for seven million journeys. This includes those made by cars, motorcycles, buses as well as private hire cars (PHCs). Compared to driving an internal combustion engine car, taking the train reduces our carbon footprint by 90%.
That is why mass public transport is the core of our transport strategy and our rail network is the backbone of our transport system. Today, seven in 10 households are within a 10-minute walk of one of our 202 Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) and Light Rail Transit (LRT) stations. By the next decade, it will be eight in 10 households. To achieve this, we are building an additional 100 kilometres (km) of rail, almost a 40% increase from our current rail network. By 2035, we will have eight MRT lines and two LRT lines, interconnected and reaching all parts of the island.
As we expand our public transport network, we are also ensuring that it is inclusive, affordable and sustainable. Today, all our MRT stations and bus interchanges, as well as 98% of our bus stops, are barrier-free and the work is ongoing. Public transport, as we have discussed many times in this House, is heavily subsidised. And our public transport fleet will fully comprise cleaner energy models by 2040.
We are also improving first-mile-last-mile connectivity with extensive infrastructure for cyclists and pedestrians. By 2030, the island-wide cycling path network will more than double to about 1,300 km. Through the Land Transport Authority (LTA)'s \"Friendly Streets\" initiative, we will work with the local communities to create more pedestrian-friendly facilities within residential neighbourhoods.
More broadly, LTA and fellow Government agencies are integrating land transport and urban planning strategies to enhance the liveability of our city by bringing jobs closer to homes, developing lifestyle and amenity hubs near transport nodes and making public transport and active mobility convenient for the daily commute.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, given the land and carbon constraints I have highlighted, going \"car-lite\" is a key strategy that our agencies have adopted. With excellent public transport connectivity and active mobility infrastructure, less road and parking spaces are needed for general vehicular traffic. This is the \"car-lite\" future that we envisage as we plan and redevelop our precincts to prioritise pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users and lessen the need for and use of private cars.
Even amongst cars, there is a spectrum of choices. Shared transport, which includes both taxis and PHCs, providing point-to-point (P2P) passenger transport services, complements mass public transport. They provide a useful alternative to car ownership for those who may need access to car-like services, whether chauffeured or self-driving. Today, the P2P sector accounts for around one million daily journeys, up from 800,000 in 2012.
With zero growth in our car population, such shared transport, including car sharing services, allows for a more efficient and inclusive use of our roads, serving the needs of many more Singaporeans, compared to individually-owned private cars.
The total PHC population has averaged around 70,000 since 2019, with some fluctuations due to COVID-19 and the subsequent reopening of Singapore's economy. As a proportion of the total car population, PHCs have remained at around 10% for the past four years. In fact, the period where we saw the fastest growth in PHC numbers was between 2015 and 2017, where they increased from 30,000 to almost 70,000. There was no commensurate upward pressure on COE prices in that period. Conversely, while COE prices have been rising over the past several quarters, demand from PHC companies has, in fact, been moderating.
PHCs are a flexible way to augment the supply of P2P passenger transport, giving commuters more choices while serving a much wider segment of society than private cars. So, we should be careful when making calls about imposing caps, sometimes arbitrarily, on the PHC population.
That said, the PHCs are a relatively new development. The P2P regulatory framework, for example, only commenced in 2017 and COVID-19 has caused some disruption in the market. We are studying this further to ascertain the effect of PHCs and whether there is, in fact, any impact on the market.
On private car ownership, there are encouraging trends, especially amongst our youths. According to a Straits Times survey, the percentage of youths who aspire to own a car has fallen from around 65% in 2016 to around 50% in 2022. More than 75% of the respondents cited ready access to public transport as the reason why they did not aspire to own a car.
Nevertheless, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we do recognise that there is still a desire to own a car. For some, it is a necessity; for others, a useful option; yet others, an aspiration. Hence, it is quite understandable that Members have raised questions on COEs and prices.
COEs are a key feature of our Vehicle Quota System (VQS). The VQS is essential for us to achieve our zero growth rate policy objective for cars and motorcycles. It is the principal tool to manage ownership, as recognised in the 1996 White Paper on creating \"A World Class Land Transport System\".
The VQS fundamentally works through supply and demand forces to efficiently allocate a scarce resource – COEs. The system also incorporates progressivity considerations by having different COE categories. In fact, when the COE system first started in 1990, there were four categories for cars. The number of categories was reduced to the current two in 1999 to address concerns over the relatively small quota supply and resultant volatility as well as limited choices of cars in some categories. Category E (Cat E), which is the Open category, was retained to allow for changing preferences and needs in vehicle types over time.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa has asked if there are plans to review the COE system. On the whole, the system continues to serve our policy objective of efficiently allocating the limited supply of COEs. However, over the years, the Ministry of Transport (MOT) and LTA have made various refinements to the VQS scheme to ensure its relevance and efficacy without forsaking the core policy intent. The power rating criterion of 97 kilowatt (kW) was introduced in 2014 for the mass market Cat A, so that car COE categories are differentiated not just by engine capacity. Last year, as more electric car models became available in Singapore, we increased the power output threshold for Cat A COEs to 110 kilowatt hour (kWh) in order to accommodate mass market electric cars.
On Mr Leong Mun Wai's question, between 2018 and April this year, the median Open Market Value, or OMV, for Cat A cars for each year was just over half of the median OMV for Cat B cars in the same year. In other words, if I can put it the other way, Cat B OMVs in the median is about 75% higher compared to the median in Cat A. So, there is a clear differentiation although it may not be a complete dichotomisation of the market. We will continue to monitor and review the differentiating criteria between Categories A and B as the technology evolves.
Ms Mariam Jafaar and Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked about Cat D COEs for motorcycles. A key feature of the motorcycle market is that dealers bid and hold the temporary COEs (TCOEs) in their own name before transferring it to a motorcycle buyer. This is a deliberate design feature because it provides convenience for buyers who can readily purchase a motorcycle. This is unlike the car market where bids are primarily in the name of the buyer. The prospective car buyers who need immediate access to a car and, in other words, a bid was not submitted in their name, can rely on Cat E COEs where there is some flexibility.
As I explained at my Ministry’s Committee of Supply (COS) debate this year, about 450 Cat D TCOEs that were secured when prices were close to or above $13,000, were subsequently left to expire when COE prices fell. To Ms Mariam Jaafar’s query, the expired TCOEs were held by more than 50 dealers; and of course, those with a bigger market share contributed more, but there is a spread. The TCOE utilisation rates subsequently went back up, with the market correcting when it could not support the prevailing prices. This is what we mean by the market working as intended. In other words, it responds to price signals, upwards or downwards, and then there is a re-allocation.
Nevertheless, to improve allocative efficiency and deter any speculative bidding, we made further moves recently, to increase the bid deposit from $800 to $1,500 and to shorten the TCOE validity period from three months to one month.
Let me now address some of the specific questions raised by various Members about car COE prices.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Ms Joan Pereira asked about the impact of foreigners. I know this is a common query. The proportion of car COEs secured by foreigners remains low and has not changed significantly over the years. As I shared in January this year, from July 2020 to December 2022, on average, less than 3% of car COEs were allocated to foreigners. This number has remained stable.
Another common query – there is no specific PQ on this, but I know it is on many Members' minds and elsewhere – is about multiple-car owning households. In November last year, I had shared with this House that as of 31 October 2022, of the 471,000 households that own cars – and that is about 36% of all households in Singapore – 12% own two cars, and less than 3% own three or more cars. The percentages remain about the same today. In fact, over the past decade, the proportion of multiple-car owning households has been steadily declining from about 19% of households in 2012 to less than 15% today.
I had also, in a response to a PQ earlier in the year, I think by Mr Gerald Giam, pointed out, and it is worth noting and underscoring that these multiple-car owning households reside not just in private residential estates, but also in public housing, including some households that own three or more cars.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked about the effect of car shows and promotions. As the Member would be well aware, consumers make their purchasing decisions based on a myriad of factors. So, it is actually quite difficult to establish a causal relationship between such car shows and promotions with COE prices.
So, what then is the cause of rising COE prices?
Fundamentally, the COE prices reflect demand for a limited supply of COEs. This is further accentuated or exacerbated by the fact that we are now at a trough in the 10-year cycle of COE supply.
Demand in all categories has remained resilient, especially as the economy recovers from post-COVID-19. Incomes have also been rising over the long term. As was observed in Prof Raymond Ong’s article in The Straits Times on 7 May 2023, the ratio of COE prices to median monthly household income has fallen from 11 to one during the previous COE price peak in 2013 to nine is to one today. So, in comparison to median income, the COE price is actually lower – although in absolute terms, the price has risen. And the reason is because household incomes have risen. As household incomes continue to rise in the coming years, coupled with our policy of zero-growth in the car population, we must expect the long-term trajectory for COE prices to be upwards.
COE supply, in turn, is determined primarily by car de-registrations in preceding quarters, which have been relatively low of late. Over the past few months, MOT has made several moves to reduce volatility in quota supply. Instead of just the preceding quarter, we first adopted the average of the preceding two quarters in August last year and now use the moving average of de-registrations in the four preceding quarters to compute COE quotas for the next quarter. These moves have helped to mitigate quarter-on-quarter volatility.
We also expect the COE supply to start increasing substantially in the coming months as more cars reach the 10-year mark. Notwithstanding this, MOT and LTA have studied if there is more that we can do to smoothen the supply of COEs in Categories A and B, while adhering, importantly, to the cap on the overall car population over the 10-year cycle.
Consequently, as a one-off exercise, LTA will bring forward and redistribute the supply from five-year COEs which are due to expire in the next projected supply peak. As these five-year COEs cannot be extended and, therefore, have to be de-registered, LTA will be able to identify the exact number with certainty. This supply will be redistributed over several quarters starting from the next bidding exercise. This move will increase quota supply in the next bidding exercise by about 24% in Cat A and 15% in Cat B. LTA will release more details shortly.
Even as we make this move, I would like to emphasise two points. First, this will help to lessen, but it will not eliminate, volatility in supply. There will still be a degree of supply fluctuation due to historical factors and also broader market conditions. Secondly, the long-term upward trend of COE prices due to rising incomes and zero vehicle population growth will not abate.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as we seek to improve the efficiency of the COE system, with these measures that we have already taken over the years, it is important that we do not lose sight of our goal of becoming a car-lite society with accessible and inclusive transport for all Singaporeans. The COE system helps us to make our transport system more sustainable and our living environment better for all.
As Singapore develops and grows, Singaporeans’ transport needs will continue to evolve and our transport policies must move in tandem while paying heed to our key constraints. The Government is committed to developing the necessary policies and infrastructure to build a car-lite, accessible, inclusive and sustainable transport system to meet the diverse needs of Singaporeans. It is part of our social compact, anchored by the values we hold as a society. Ultimately, our success in realising that vision rests on the commuting choices that every Singaporean makes every day.
Mr Deputy Speaker: We have opportunity for clarifications. Dr Lim Wee Kiak.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Thank you, Sir. I would like to thank the Minister for his Statement. I would like to make two suggestions in terms of the current COE system – and these are not new. These were suggested previously.
First, would MOT consider a pay-as-you-bid system instead of people bidding higher and then paying for the lowest rate? Second, can we disallow financing of COE, which means that when you take a loan, it has to be only the car loan and not the COE? The COE has to be paid in cash.
Mr S Iswaran: Mr Deputy Speaker, if there is one thing I have learnt in my short time in MOT, there is no shortage of creativity in the suggestions made to improve the COE system. I thank the Member for his suggestions.
But if I may, say, first, a pay-as-you-bid system, I understand the motivation behind it. But if I may offer Members the counterpoint – the problem then is you create a great deal of variation in the market. For the same car bought in the same exercise, the value may be quite different because one bids higher and one bids lower.
I do not want to get into a long discussion on this, but from an auction theory perspective and so on, actually the method we use is probably the most efficient. So, I would say that that is not the source of the problem. Let us diagnose this correctly. The issue is not the system or how it is being administered per se. The issue is really around supply and some level of volatility that we are trying to mitigate, as well as where we can or where we discern some need to intervene because of either speculation or some inefficiencies in the market. And that is what we have sought to do.
The second point on financing, I would say I think it is a question that should be put to the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), frankly, or the authorities. But if I may just offer Members this perspective. A COE and the car are indivisible, really. A standalone COE is of little value until it is applied to register a car. So, one needs to look at it in totality first.
Second, if you look at it from the point of view of the cost of buying a car, which then you are seeking to finance, I think most financial institutions will look at it as a whole – the value of the car, the market price, including the COE price. So, that is why the system runs as it is. Again, I want to go back to the point that I am not sure that decoupling the financing is going to be the solution to the current set of concerns that Members have.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh. Sorry, I thought it was your hand. Mr Liang Eng Hwa. Hands look a bit similar from here. My apologies.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): My first question to the Minister is, I think he mentioned that the reason why COE prices are higher is because of high demand and limited supply. But I would like to ask the Minister whether another reason why COE prices may be at this level, this recent wave, is because of the disparity in the purchasing power among the bidders. In other words, there are, in each batch of the COE bidding, more bidders that have higher purchasing power and, therefore, the ability to pay up; and that is where the COE prices are. So, I would like to ask whether that is desirable.
The second question is whether some amount of allocation by balloting, like how we do for housing, can be part of the solution as well.
Mr S Iswaran: I thank Mr Liang for his questions. I am not sure what the Member means by disparity in purchasing power. Because, as I explained earlier, overall, if you look at it over a 10-year cycle, peak to peak, our incomes have risen. And to the extent that cars remain an aspirational product or a necessity, then you must expect that there will be a propensity to want to allocate the budget to buy that and the prices will reflect, to some extent, the trends in incomes as well. That is why I gave the numbers that I did. That is not to say that that is the only factor but, generally, if you compare it to incomes rising and so on, I think that does tell us an important story.
Secondly, I would say that in terms of ownership – I stressed this point and I would like to make it again – we have 470,000 households in Singapore that own cars. That is about 36% to 37% – so, it is a very sizeable proportion of our population base. So, what we have been trying to do is, through a combination of ownership and usage measures, make cars available as widely as possible, but within our zero-growth constraint, which we have imposed for good reasons. And that will continue to be the basis.
The Member's second point was on balloting some amount. I am very sure all the Members here will be able to offer perspectives on it, but let me just deal with this. If we say a proportion of COEs are balloted and the rest are not, then the question is: so, we have a market where you bid and you secure; and then, there is another segment which is by luck of the draw, literally. How do we price that? Do you price it at the same price as the COE in that period? Or do you say no, it is a discounted price. If it is a discounted price, then it is a windfall for the party that gets this, because they will then be able to resell the car with the COE at a higher price because the market clearing price is higher. Then, the question is: what justifies such a ballot, who qualifies and how do we do it?
I am just sharing this with Members because I appreciate the intent behind the suggestion, but I am trying to point out that there are several, quite intractable, second- and third-order issues we will have to deal with. And we will very quickly move from discussing COE prices to wondering why the balloting system is not working. And, indeed, we do have discussions like that in this House as well. So, a balloting system is not a panacea. In fact, it may aggravate the problems, if the concern is around price and unevenness in the market.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Hany Soh.
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I have two clarifications. One is in relation to the COE, whether the Ministry has conducted any public surveys to better understand and discover what are the factors that would persuade more private vehicle owners to switch to public transport.
Another one is in an effort to reduce carbon footprint, what is the ratio of the single- to double-decker buses currently in service and whether LTA has plans to move towards 100% double-decker buses to maximise ridership capacity and, thereby, an effort to reduce the carbon footprint?
Mr S Iswaran: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Member for her questions or clarifications. Factors that will persuade the car owners to switch – there are several and I have talked about some of them. The most important thing that we need to do is to populate the spectrum of commuting choices available to Singaporeans. The more we are able to offer a high-quality public transport system and near-car kind of services, whether it is car sharing, your P2Ps and so on, and if we can also make the first-mile last-mile part of the commute a better one, then I think people who choose to pay the sum that they pay, or the sums that they pay to buy a car, will have reason to take a pause and re-evaluate the choices that they make.
But in the end, every individual is entitled to make their allocative decisions. What we are really trying to do is to make the alternatives as compelling as possible. In fact, you hear this more from people who have lived overseas and come here. I was recently at an American Chamber of Commerce dialogue. And one of the ladies said she came from the US where she was wholly reliant on her car. She was waxing lyrical about our public transport system. Her teenage daughter who studied here, used our public transport system, has since gone to the US for her further studies in Houston. According to her, the daughter laments that the public transport system in the US is not of the same quality and accessibility as here.
So, we do have advocates and I am very keen to get more of such advocates, especially Singaporeans. And we do have. Many Singaporeans have told us that they really like the fact that we have a good public transport system. Of course, there are always areas we can improve.
That is also why I cited the survey – there is a perceptible shift in the preferences of the younger generation of Singaporeans. They are more adept at using technology and some of the solutions already available. As a result, they are less seized with the need to buy a car. In fact, they think there are other ways of using their money. And I say, good for them, in that regard.
Single- to double-decker buses, I do not have the exact numbers. But I will put it this way – the move for sustainability is the thrust of the Member's question. The main way we are seeking to ensure sustainability is through electrification. We have about 6,000 buses in the public bus fleet. And about half of these will be electric by 2030; the other half will be a hybrid solution. So, that is how we are moving.
In terms of single- and double-decker buses, a lot of that is actually a function of capacity planning, based on the routes and the kind of demand. This can vary, depending on how commuter behaviour changes over time.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Hazel Poa.
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Would the Minister consider alternative ways of allocating the vehicle quota based on other factors, instead of just price alone? For example, maybe a point-based system, where apart from the bidding price, we also consider other factors like nationality, and needs-based factors, like families with young children or persons with disability.
Secondly, would the Minister consider, in the same way as we have the Additional Buyers' Stamp Duty (ABSD) for the purchase of second or more residential properties, would the Minister consider an additional levy on additional vehicle purchase?
Mr S Iswaran: The Member has raised a few questions. Let me try and deal with them.
A point-based system – it is really a variation of the idea that Mr Liang Eng Hwa talked about, a ballot. Because in the end, you have got to decide how you would allocate the points, on what basis? And how will that then factor into the final COE allocation? Does that mean that if someone has got more points, then they are entitled to a different price when it comes to the COE? Or does it mean that they go into a different pool? And if they go into a different pool, how do we segment the pools?
So, I think a point-based system has, in a sense, the kind of arbitrariness that we are trying to avoid. We are trying to let the market work itself through. We do have schemes where we help people – for example, those who have special needs or persons with disability who need vehicles for, say, work and so on, we do have schemes to help them with that, including with the COEs and so on.
Those are very targeted measures that we can do, but that is best achieved not by tinkering with the COE allocation system, but by, instead, trying to defray some, if not all, of the cost impact on certain groups.
It is not unlike what we do, for example, for electricity in Singapore. We price electricity fully. We do not subsidise it. We do not say \"first hundred units X, next hundred units Y\". We price it all the same, because every one, from the beginning, is a unit of electricity. But then what we do is that we provide U-Save rebates and so on. So, if we want to help certain categories of people, it is best to do it that way.
Then, the Member makes a point about needs-based. And I am quite sympathetic to her point, because many families say to me: \"Look, I have got children and I need to take them around to enrichment classes on the weekends and so on, and public transport does not quite work for me\". And then, we have others who say: \"Look, I have got elderly parents whom I need to take to hospital or for medical appointments\" and so on. I think if you look at households in Singapore, they will either have children or elderly parents they have to look after and that will probably cover most households in Singapore.
So, everyone has a need that I think we can understand. The real question for us is: do we have the resources and the capacity to meet that need effectively? That is where the challenge lies. I mean, I would be very happy if we had a cornucopia of COEs that we can just dispense at will. But we do not, because of the constraints I have highlighted. And that is why we have to make some tough choices in the allocative sense.
Having said that, we are working on and, in fact, we do have some alternatives, as I have said, for persons with disability and so on, we have got certain targeted measures. Also, car-sharing services, because these allow households to have a car for a few hours to do what they need to do and then come back and leave the car for somebody else to use. So, that actually is a more efficient outcome and, in fact, it would save households a lot more money than buying a car and incurring the depreciation. That is one of the things we are doing and we will do more.
Also, some of the P2P operators, like Grab and so on, they offer chauffeured services where you can do block booking by time. For example, if you want to take your parents to hospital you think it will take you four hours or whatever, you can make those sorts of bookings as well.
So, there are other solutions in place and I would say that that is something we should keep in mind.
As far as the idea of ABSD is concerned, I have already pointed out clearly that the COE price that we see today is not explained by multiple car-owning households. They have actually been quite constant throughout. The question is: what is the problem we are trying to fix here? Because you may come up with the tool, it may be a very popular move, but does it really address the problem at its root?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I would like to thank the Minister for sharing the Statement earlier, especially about the release of the five-year COE supply and also the measures taken by LTA over the past few months about the deposits and all that. It has actually helped, in terms of price recovery and microstructure.
I got two clarifications, Deputy Speaker.
First, in relation to our transition to move away from and finding alternatives to private car ownership, the Minister mentioned just now about enhancing the alternatives of P2Ps, PHCs and taxis going forward. My question is that as we still have Singaporeans aspiring to own cars and we are trying to go car-lite, I think these are the sorts of issues that I am hearing from the Minister's Statement, we are not moving away from them anytime soon – car-lite, zero-growth, we are a very small country and the push is towards public transport. That is clear, Minister.
So, the question is the transition. There is going to be a time transition for people to move away from their aspirations. My question is: if you go towards the holistic approach or to the car-lite strategy and zero-growth, how can we improve our P2P, PHC and taxi services? Because the exasperation of Singaporeans on the ground, if they want to move away from a private car, but they have to wait for taxis and PHCs and these are not there, every single minute when they want to have access to it, 24 hours of the day and at any time, is something that will need to be addressed. That is my first question, Minister.
Second, I would like to get some clarification with regard to the five-year COE supply in terms of the numbers and what is the direction or thought trends going forward beyond the existing three to six months this year and probably into the many years ahead.
Mr S Iswaran: I thank the Member for his questions.
Mr Deputy Speaker, with your permission, just to address one other point about ABSD that was raised. If the Member's intent is that we should have progressivity in the COE system, actually, we already have significant progressivity through the tax system, the ARF system that we have today, in terms of cars. In fact, the Finance Minister announced a whole set of moves to further increase the gradient and the progressivity.
So, I think those who are buying cars are actually going to be paying more and, especially if they are buying higher value cars or more expensive cars, they end up paying a higher amount in taxes as well.
On Mr Saktiandi's points, first, whether we can do more to increase the supply of the P2P, the private hire cars – and we use all these terms interchangeably – and taxis and so on. The bottom line is that we need to try all measures to enhance the availability of car-like – not car-lite – but car-like services. Because what people really value is the flexibility to be able to hop into a car and go to multiple locations in a certain period of time and come back. But it is a waste to have the car sitting in the carpark when you are not using it for hours, when you only need it maybe a few hours in a week. That is the crux of it.
So, we need to find more alternatives and that is what LTA and MOT are working on what we can do in terms of more in the P2P sector and the PHCs. I have a smile on my face because the Member is asking for whether we can do more and have more PHCs. I think I have just heard from others advocating quite the opposite. So, you understand the conundrum, I think.
But the bottom line is, car for car – if I take a car away from private ownership and we put it in the P2P sector – it will benefit more people, at least, as a first principle. Then, there are all the issues we need to deal with in terms of policy.
So, we are working on a whole range of ideas on this, how we can do more. And I accept the Member's point that there is a transition. The transition is not just in terms of going to car-lite, but also because it would take us at least about 10 years more before our MRT system comes to that level where we really have good connectivity in many parts. We already have pretty good connectivity, by the way; but this will take it at least a notch higher and we will be comparable to the best cities in the world.
So, the key thing is to manage the transition. And as I said, it is about populating the choice spectrum, giving people a whole range of options from public transport at one end to private car ownership on the other, and everything in between. I think the more we can populate that choice spectrum and give people the information and the convenience to exercise that choice, then we are on the right path.
On the five-year COE supply, I think the Member's question is how it will be redistributed. And it is not just for one or two quarters because LTA will be releasing more information. Essentially, we have got five-year COEs that will expire probably in about three- or four-years' time and that is when you are really going to know, if you look at the historical cycles, there is going to be a sort of peak-ish. If you go on the basis that everybody who is reaching their 10-year mark is going to de-register, then you are going to be at a peak.
So, that is where LTA is basically extracting the five-year COEs from. And these will be redeployed – in not just this quarter, the next quarter but in the next few quarters at least, leading up to this. Because, essentially, it is, as one of my colleagues put it, a cut-and-fill exercise. You are really trying to smoothen the curve, try and avoid too sharp a gradient and, worse, the volatility, the ups and downs. That is what we are trying to do.
But I want to emphasise again: this is not about therefore expecting prices to ease and that is the measure of success. The objective here is to smoothen the supply, reduce the volatility so that people can then make their choices. I have put out the information and I think car buyers as well as car dealers, based on that, I am sure their behaviour and the next and subsequent bidding rounds will be informed by this data.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Mariam Jaafar.
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): I thank the Minister. I have two clarifications. One is on motorcycle COEs. I think the Minister will know I have spoken on this a number of times, including on 1 March where I asked for more measures to deter speculative bidding. And I think what the Minister mentioned about the main measures suggests that he now recognises that, beyond supply and demand, speculative behaviour by dealers who have the incentives to bid up prices actually is a factor, and especially so, it is amplified in a market where we are talking about a few hundred COEs every month.
And I think what sits with us is that we all feel that it is particularly egregious when the people who bear the brunt of these actions by dealers, are people who are the lowest income workers, students who are holding part-time jobs because they need to earn.
I guess my clarification is, can we do more to close down these loopholes a bit faster? How can we be more responsive? One suggestion could be – I mean $200, $800, $1,500, it is a bit arbitrary. Could we tie the dealer deposits to the size of their bids, to be a bit quicker to rein in speculative bidding? Two, could we allow for individuals to bid, like we have for cars, for motorcycles also? And three, is there a way to provide more transparency on individual dealer bidding practices?
My second clarification is on car COEs this time. The Minister mentioned that they are currently still studying the impact of PHCs on COE prices. So, I want to just clarify, is there no evidence? Does the Minister feel that there is no evidence today that the PHCs are driving up COE prices? I mean the market works, but it is also not a level playing field as we know. They have ways to pass on higher prices and also the ability to convert some of these PHCs into private cars, although, of course, there is a market for that.
So, how can we close down some of these loopholes? Do they actually exist today? How many cars are converted from PHCs to private cars by these platform companies as an option? And can that be closed down as a low-hanging fruit?
Mr S Iswaran: I thank the Member for her questions. First, I want to just be very clear. The Member suggested that the moves we make affirm or confirm that there has been speculative behaviour and that that is what is causing the prices to go up. That is not quite what I said. So, let me just repeat that clearly.
The fact is the market has already been functioning and the way we know that is when the price goes up, as it did in some of the earlier cycles when the COE price for motorcycles went up to $13,000; and subsequently it came down, the market corrected. And how did it correct? Well, those who were left with very expensive COEs realised that they cannot sell the motorcycles with those COEs and they then had to give up the COEs or they forfeited them. And we then have to recycle that into the market.
What happens then is, just to be very clear, before we made the latest move, such as the reduction of the validity period, was that the supply that is forfeited cannot be returned to the market until the next quarter. So, there is a lag of at least 10 to 12 weeks before it goes back. And what we wanted to do was to re-channel quicker. So, we shortened the validity period and then the motorcycle dealers can decide what they want.
Similarly, I do not think – whether it is $800 or $1,500, they are not arbitrary. I beg to differ with the Member.
If you take $1,500, for example, it is something like – well, at least before this recent correction which may or may not be sustained – but it is about 10% or so and it is of a similar order of magnitude to what we have for COEs for cars. So, there is a certain method in it. Why do we exercise restraint and caution in raising the bid deposit? Simply because, precisely what the Member says. If we inadvertently, through our policy moves, because deposits are very high, cause motorcycle prices to rise even further, then it will harm precisely the group that the Member wants to help.
And that is why we have been cautious about the way we have done this. We may not be as fast as some would have liked but I think the yoke of being in Government and in LTA and MOT is that you have to exercise judgement and decide not just what to do but also how much and when. And this is what has eventuated in what we are doing now.
Can there be individual bids? The answer is yes, there can be. But the market practice, in general, is that motorcycle buyers have a preference to just be able to go in and buy in the shops. This is why we have had this arrangement for motorcycle dealers. But there is nothing really that stops us from accommodating this and, in fact, we do already.
On PHCs, is there no evidence of PHCs driving up prices? Well, I would like to draw the Member's attention to what I said in my Ministerial Statement. Basically, in the period, for example, 2015 to 2017, when the PHC population grew from 30,000 to 70,000 or nearly 70,000, so doubling, the impact on COE prices was not particularly discernible. At least I do not recall it. I was not in MOT then, but there were not a lot of questions about it.
By the same token, and conversely, over the last several quarters and years, COE prices have been rising but, actually, PHC demand or the number of COEs PHCs have secured has actually been moderating. So, I do not think you can make an argument ex ante that there is a causality.
So, I understand that we are unhappy when prices go up. But let us not be too quick to conclude what the causes are and, therefore, start fixing problems that may not really be at the root of the issue.
But having said that, I concede the point to the Member that the fact is, it is new and that is why I said what I said in my Statement. PHCs are a relatively new phenomenon and it is a very variegated terrain. It is not just your Grabs; you have got your car-sharing guys, you have got the rental guys who then lease to the drivers and so on. So, there is a whole variety. So, it is important that we understand this correctly before we decide whether there is a need to act because they have an impact that perhaps distorts a market and then, if so, then what are those targeted measures. And that is what MOT and LTA are studying.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I have some quick clarifications pertaining to public transport. In the new fare adjustment formula, how is the productivity contribution quantum of 0.1% derived? Are these all the productivity gains that MOT is expecting the PTOs to achieve and could that be too low an expectation?
Secondly, related to that, how closely does LTA work with the PTO to conceive and implement productivity enhancing measures and how can LTA be sure that the PTOs do not treat the 0.1% productivity contribution as a cost of doing business without significant productivity gains that will reduce costs over the long term and help to stave off future fare hikes?
And lastly, when PTOs rationalise bus services – for example, the removal of bus services 22, 66 and 506 for my residents in Bedok Reservoir in 2022 and 2021, sorry I am not letting go of this – which saves the Government $9.5 million a year in subsidies, how are these cost savings passed to commuters?
Mr S Iswaran: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Member for his persistence and perseverance. Let me try and deal with the issues in turn.
First, the formula – I think it is important to understand that 0.1% is a productivity contribution, but it is a deduction from the fare increase. So, leaving aside, for example, the recent periods when it is 12% or 13% and so on, if you look at in general, let us say you have a year when the fare increases 2%. When I extract 0.1% from you, if the fare increase is 1%, I am extracting 10% from you; 2% is 5%. If it is a 3% increase, then 3.3% and so on. So, it is actually quite a sizeable imposition on the PTOs. It is not a free pass by any means.
The Member's point about whether we are doing more to work with them on productivity and other areas, absolutely. I think this is an important thing. It is a win-win. It is not something where we want LTA to just dictate and be left with it. We see this as a joint endeavour and that is why many of the moves that are being made, in terms of technology, fuel efficiencies and so on, these are all areas that we are working together with the PTOs on.
On the Member's point on rationalising bus services and, when there are savings, how does it get passed through to commuters? So, if I may, like the Member, persevere and persist with my counterpoints, the fact is that we are subsidising bus services a billion dollars a year. We are not recovering costs by any stretch. So, any savings are ploughed back into the system and it just gets distributed at large. But the bottom line is that we are subsidising public transport significantly. A billion dollars for bus, a billion dollars for train, or, if you want to think about it in another way, every journey gets a $1 subsidy. That is not counting those who are on concession passes and those who are buying the concession fares; those who get concession fares and also the concession passes.
So, by all accounts – and I think being very objective – we are making a strong effort to ensure that our public transport system remains affordable. If you look at international comparisons, the answer is we are. And if you look at our own pattern over time, expenditure on public transport, as a percentage of household expenses, actually, over the last 10 years, it has been declining for the quintile, decile, almost all the key metrics that we look at.
So, my point is, we will continue to do our best to keep public transport affordable. There is a significant amount of subsidy. When we get savings, it is basically ploughed back into the system. We cannot do it at the particular service level; it has to be at the aggregated level. But in the end, what really has an impact on the final expenditure incurred by the commuter is the subsidy that the Government gives, and that is not insubstantial.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Vikram Nair.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): I thank the Minister for a very clear explanation on a difficult and emotive topic. I have a few clarifications on this five-year COE being brought forward. The first is: is this just one-off to deal with the current trough or is this going to be a change in approach to how the five-year COEs are dealt with?
The second clarification is that I believe the Minister said they would be re-allocated to Cat A. I just want to clarify, would they be re-allocated according to the expiring category or would they all be re-allocated only to Cat A?
The third clarification is I just wish to make the point that I think it is sensible to smoothen out the supply over the long term. Any measures to help do that would be fair.
Mr S Iswaran: I thank the Member for agreeing with us that this effort to smoothen supply is something that is appropriate. It is a one-off exercise and, specifically, because it is a five-year COE, the time horizon is five years. LTA would not know how many five-year COEs will be expiring more than five years from now. So, what we know is the projection from now to five years from now and the latter part of that period coincides with the peak in the 10-year cycle. It is a very well-defined quantum because we have to bear in mind that the rest of the supply, which is dependent on deregistration, is really variable because it depends on whether people choose to deregister and, therefore, contribute back into the supply, or they may decide they want to renew their COEs. We do not know what will happen and that will then depress.
So, the only component that we can deal with, with certainty, is the\tfive-year COE and that certainty is only available on a five-year outlook basis, and that is why we are doing this as a one-off, because it also serves a very important purpose of smoothening the supply from now, especially because now we are more or less in the trough of the 10-year cycle. So, it is a good time to look at how we can do some smoothening and this is the reason we are adopting this. And, yes, the supply will go back to the relevant category.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Just two questions for the Minister for Transport and they are quite narrow, relating to the volatility or trying to manage the volatility in COE prices. So, the first question is: with regard to car loan restrictions, which are now at seven years and at 70% of the selling price, is the Ministry intending to look at the loopholes vis-a-vis these car loan curbs, because it is not uncommon to hear of dealerships offering 100% loans and things of that nature. That is the first question.
The second question pertains to the continuing relevance of the Cat E COE, the open category. Unlike Cat A and Cat B, which we know are tied to car registration numbers, the Cat E COE can be traded for up to three months, if I recall correctly. So, there is a potential speculative vector in Cat E COEs. I would like to know what is MOT's view on the continued relevance of Cat E COEs and whether removing that category altogether can help towards a smoother COE system.
Mr S Iswaran: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and to the Leader of the Opposition. Just to be very clear, we are not talking about volatility in prices. That is not the objective of the exercise. It is volatility in supply. How prices eventuate in the market – as I have discussed and all of us know – is a function of various factors that are taking place. Today, the prices may go down, tomorrow they may go up. We think that the long-term trajectory is upwards for the reasons I have mentioned. Our supply is basically zero growth. So, it is capped. And the demand is a function, among other things, of incomes, and incomes are rising. So, we must be prepared for this.
So, if every time COE prices go up, we approach it as some kind of a new phenomenon, I think we should take pause and understand that these are the fundamentals that we are dealing with. It is a hard choice we have to make. And the decision to have a zero vehicle growth rate is a very hard choice.
But what is the alternative? So, I just want to be very clear. It is not about price volatility, although that, I know, is a political concern. It is about supply volatility and how much we can smoothen that so that the market can function. That is the key thing.
On the point on curbs on car loans, this should be a question answered by MAS. Was there a PQ on this already? Today or? Maybe I will allow my colleague, Alvin Tan, to reply. But let me just say this. Loans are under the purview of MAS and, if it is hire purchase, then I think it is under the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI). But the key point I want to make is that the moves we are making from the MOT and LTA perspectives are really in order to ensure the market functions as we intended and to smoothen the supply and that is why we are going for this.
On the Member's second question on the relevance of Cat E, first, we need to size the thing correctly. Cat E has 10% only. Of Cat A and Cat B, 10% goes into Cat E, alright? So, why do we do that?
Essentially, we have had basically a Cat E component from the very beginning, and why is that important? When you have got these very fixed categories, you need a mechanism, a valve, if you will, that can help redistribute some because preferences may change over time. There may be a greater shift towards Cat A, there may be a greater shift to bigger cars, there may be other kinds of movements. We do not know. So, this really creates a valve in the system. It is a valve that we have actually been progressively throttling down. In fact, in the early days, it was much more – the contribution from the different categories – and today it is 10%. So, it is at a level we, of course, as I have said, with COEs and the system, the Government has always been reviewing and constantly evaluating the relevance of measures. But I am just trying to give the context for the Leader of the Opposition's benefit.
So, it serves an important purpose. I do not think it is a purpose that is irrelevant in today's context by any means and for the foreseeable future. But if there are some other efforts to think about the design of the system, then, at that point, maybe this can be revisited. So, the reason why you cannot say I create a valve but then I restrict its usage. That is why you need the flexibility. If you cannot trade it and apply it to different categories and give them enough time to do that, then you may as well not have the category. So, the design and the features are tied specifically to the intent behind having the category. Alvin, would you like to say something?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister of State Alvin Tan, if you would like to contribute to the debate.
The Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan): Sir, just to build on the Minister's point. There is a PQ by Ms Mariam Jafaar at No 64 on today's Order Paper. So, I will respond for MAS using that PQ. But, primarily, MAS' restrictions on loans that are granted by financial institutions are to encourage borrowers to spend or to borrow prudently.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Members, the Minister gave a 25-minute Statement. I have allowed 20 minutes of clarifications. I know this is an important topic for both sides of the House. I propose to conclude this aspect of the business at the 60th minute mark. So, we have another 10 to 15 minutes. Mr Ang Wei Neng.
Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Thank you, Deputy Speaker, Sir. I thank the Minister for the very comprehensive reply. I have two supplementary questions on the Cat E COE. As what the Minister has said, the contribution of Cat E COE is from 10% of deregistered Cats A, B and C. I want to ask the Minister why do we want to contribute from Cat C where it is mainly used for commercial vehicles and all the Cat E COEs are mainly to register Cat B COE, which means that you are shrinking the Cat C COEs meant for commercial vehicles.
For the second supplementary question, I am very thankful that the Minister is using the COEs expiring in the next five years to reach earlier in the next few quarters. The Minister has said that they will go back to the respective categories. So, I would like to urge the Minister to really distribute more to Cat A COEs because it is a mass market COE, whereas the Cat E COEs always mirror and always register for Cat B COEs.
Mr Deputy Speaker: May I ask Members to keep your clarifications short?
Mr S Iswaran: I thank the Member for his suggestions.
First, why does Cat C also contribute to Cat E? Because Cat E can also be used for Cat C. That it is not the case today does not mean that it would not be the case tomorrow. That is why I am saying that what we have to bear in mind is that the market has its own dynamic. We do not know how things will go. People may decide that they do not like cars, they do not want cars and there may be a need more for commercial vehicles in which your Cat E will end up being used for Cat C.
Or people may shift their preferences to smaller cars because they want to be more environmentally conscious or spend less and so on. And then, your Cat E could potentially go in there.
And, in fact, we do see some of those sorts of behaviours. The point is, you must take from the categories to which the Cat E can apply and that is why we do this.
For motorcycles, for example, we do not do that. This was some years back and the reason is because you do not allow Cat E to be used for motorcycles. So, that sort of takes the motorcycles out of it. But for all the other vehicles, they are in the same class and we put them in that contribution group.
Can we do more? This is already a big move – taking five-year COEs that are expiring in the future and bringing them to the present. That is a one big move. It is a necessary move and we think it will have a salutary impact overall on the system. So, that is why we are doing it.
But we just want to have a situation where we do not make too many arbitrary kind of decisions. So, in response to Mr Vikram Nair's question earlier, I said we will re-allocate on this basis, that Cat A will come back to Cat A, Cat B to Cat B. And based on the numbers and what we can see, it should meet the objective of smoothening supply. There is no need for cross-deployment.
As I said earlier in my Ministerial Statement, for the bidding quarter we are having now, it will increase supply by 24%. I think that is quite substantial. In fact, the five-year COEs that are available for Cat B, we are a lot less and that is why also, consequently, you see a much lower percentage increase of about 15%.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I have two questions for the Minister.
One is the whole discussion here actually is about prices going up too fast, too high and also about equity. When prices go up high, many Singaporeans will not be able to afford. So, one of the grievances that I have also heard from some residents is that the Cat A and Cat B, a lot of the expensive cars are now going down to Cat A. So, as a result, in order to ensure more equity amongst Singaporeans – the lower-income can still buy cars, the cheaper cars – will the Minister consider putting OMV as an additional criterion for classifying Cat A? That is one question.
The second question is that, for the recent phenomenon we have seen in the motorcycle market, it has indicated that the Government does have some leverage on controlling the prices in the motorcycle COE market. With the recent collapse, I think it is a reflection that not enough has been done in the past. Going forward, will the Minister say that the Government will be more careful because the price of a motorcycle is very important for many of our working Singaporeans; so, to be more careful in maybe controlling the prices of the motorcycle COE?
Mr S Iswaran: Mr Deputy Speaker, with your indulgence, can I just understand: so, does the Member think that lowering of the price is good or bad? I mean, I am trying to understand. When the Member said \"be more careful\", what does he mean?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Minister, lowering is good. We will prefer to have a lower price.
Mr S Iswaran: So, if I may just ask one other question while the Member is at the lectern. Because I took considerable pains to explain this. Does the Member agree that if the supply is limited, in fact, capped at zero growth, and incomes are rising, that the almost unavoidable conclusion is that the prices must rise?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Deputy Speaker, to answer the Minister, yes, we agree to many of the things that the Minister has said. For example, we have to control car population; as a result, we require the COE system to allocate the COEs, limited supply.
However, I think the Government should also be careful when prices go up too fast, there will be problems, problem from the aspect of affordability and also from the aspect of equity. So, as a result, the discussion today is actually about that, that prices have gone up too much. Like the motorcycle COE has gone up multiple times over the last two years. So, we prefer a lower price.
Mr S Iswaran: We all prefer lower prices, Mr Leong. Let us be very clear about that. We all want to help the people who buy cars and motorbikes. I do not think you have a monopoly of virtue in that regard. The real question here is, and if I hear you correctly, you accept that the long-term trend in prices must be up. So, now, your point is more about the rate of change and whether that can be something that can be done.
If I can take the Member's second question first. We do not control prices. I want to put that categorically on the table because we are not stipulating the price or even a range. The only thing that the Government is able to do is settle on the supply and if there are any mechanics in the system, whether there are reasons to adjust them. That is what we have been doing. How that flows into the market or works through the market is also dependent on demand, as the Member would know and, finally, the price outcome is how the market settles it.
We know that the Cat D price has come down. But does this mean that this is the new level? I think even if you listen to the industry players, they would advocate that we watch this for a while because whether it is buyers or dealers, they all have to sort of assess the situation and the market will have to find a new equilibrium. Where that is, I cannot say. But what I can say with certainty is that, in the long term, we will see upward price pressure for the fundamental realities we have discussed. So, we do not control prices. Please do not advocate that.
Secondly, Mr Leong makes this political point about higher COE prices mean many Singaporeans cannot afford. So, the sub-text here is that somehow it is foreigners who are buying it – because if Singaporeans cannot afford it, who is buying it? So, that is the Member's implication. I want the Member to be upfront about it because I have taken pains to point out again that the proportion of foreigners buying cars has remained low and stable.
So, yes, what is happening is actually and the correct characterisation may well be that when the COE price goes up, some people will find it more difficult to afford; other people may find it easier to afford. So, there is a re-allocation and distribution going on within our society. And that is one of the things. It is a politically uncomfortable thing but it is a reality. And I would urge the Member to be careful in the way he makes this point; otherwise, we give wrong conclusions and we end up distorting the discussion.
But having said that, if the Member wants to respond to this specifically, please do so.
Mr Deputy Speaker: I think you can carry on, Minister.
Mr S Iswaran: Thank you. The other point that the Member makes is on OMV and whether OMV should be used as a basis for categories.
I had addressed the Member's point in my Ministerial Statement. The median OMV for Cat B is about 70%, 75% more than the median OMV for Cat A. That means actually the market is already quite separated; I mean, you have the separation in terms of value. The next thing is we have achieved this or this is the outcome but the criteria, we are using our objective criteria – engine capacity, power output, what I have described earlier. And our objective has always been to make sure that these criteria are able to accommodate the mass market models in the Cat A, as far as possible. That was one of the reasons for the recent adjustment so that the mass market electric vehicle models could also be captured.
But is there going to be some movement on the margin? Yes. So, you will see, as the Member has put it, some of the more expensive type cars migrating to the Cat A. But by the same token, we also have what are considered generally as mass market cars that are actually in Cat B. Examples will be some of the SUVs like Subaru Impreza and Mitsubishi something or other. Because of their engine capacity, two litres, they are in Cat B.
What I am trying to say is that it is not a clean cut. And the problem with using an OMV, amongst other things, is that the OMV is not something that is objective criteria because there are a lot of other variables. For example, if exchange rates move, the OMV of the car changes. So, how would you account for that?
When we are making these recommendations, let us keep this in mind that there are many moving parts. But the fundamental objective, which is the point that the Member is also driving at, we want to ensure that there is an element of progressivity in our COE system. And that is why we have two categories. And, as I said in my Ministerial Statement, we will continue to look at this and if there is a need to adjust the criteria that divide the two categories, we will look at it. But as of now, there is no compelling reason and, certainly, not to use the OMV.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Leong, insofar as you are going to respond to the Minister's question to you, you are allowed to do so. And then, we will end with the last hand which I see, which is Mr Pritam Singh. And then, we will move on. So, Mr Leong, would you like to respond to the Minister? No clarifications, please. Just your answer to the Minister.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I would like to respond to the Minister's point about whether I am pinpointing foreigners crowding out the Singaporeans in the market. In this instance, about this COE, no. My question is about the equity amongst Singaporeans.
The Minister mentioned that COE prices for the OMV value between Cat A and Cat B, there is a 75% difference. But actually, that may not capture the whole picture. So, anyway, we are just urging the Government to further consider so that under Cat A, the slightly lower-income Singaporeans can still afford the cheaper cars.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister, do you want to respond?
Mr S Iswaran: Maybe after the last clarification.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Very well, after Mr Pritam Singh. Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Just a quick point in response to the remark made by Minister of State Mr Alvin Tan vis-a-vis Mariam Jaafar's question for today's Order Paper. It is directed at the Prime Minister and specifically to MAS on curbs on car loans. As we know and as the Minister has alluded to, we also have car loans which take the form of almost like money lending or quasi-money lending arrangements. You have hire purchase, which comes under MTI.
So, just to confirm whether this would be a whole-of-Government exercise to look at car loans or vehicle loans, including even motorcycle loans, and whether there is any prospect of a review to ensure that the loopholes, with regard to the financing of vehicles, can be further looked at and even tightened, if need be.
Mr Alvin Tan: Mr Deputy Speaker, the short answer is MAS will work with MOT to monitor the situation in the COE market.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister Iswaran, if you can close the business on this subject?
Mr S Iswaran: Yes. I thank Mr Leong for clarifying that he is not making the argument that foreigners are depriving Singaporeans of cars, because he has been known to make that argument in other contexts. So, I wanted to be very sure about it. It is okay. You do not need to pursue the matter.
But having said that, I just want to thank all Members for a very vigorous clarification session. The objective, if I may restate, with your indulgence, Mr Deputy Speaker, is that we need to make sure that all of us in this House and Singaporeans in general understand the fundamental constraints that we are dealing with. We cannot run away from them and those constraints around land, around carbon emissions and what we need to do are something that we will have to grapple with.
Previous Transport Ministers have had to do this, I am doing it, future Transport Ministers will have to do this. But, in the end, they need this House to support and also the broader society because if we do not internalise these constraints, then we are always going to be unhappy with the outcome.
What we do need to do though is then work on all the other options and solutions so that we can make the transport system in Singapore not just car-lite but, as I have said, accessible and inclusive and sustainable. [Applause.]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Order. End of Ministerial Statement. Introduction of Government Bills. Minister of State Alvin Tan.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Bretton Woods Agreements (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Bretton Woods Agreement Act 1966\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Alvin Tan) (on behalf of the Prime Minister); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Online Criminal Harms Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to counter online criminal activity and protect against online harms, and for connected purposes\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Second Minister for Home Affairs (Mrs Josephine Teo), read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament on or after 3 July 2023 and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Family Justice Reform Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister for Law.
The Minister for Law (Mr K Shanmugam): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, “That the Bill be now read a Second time.”
Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a joint Bill by the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) and the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF).
Conceptually, it proposes changes in two areas: one, on the enforcement of maintenance orders; and two, on Court proceedings and procedure in the Family Justice Courts (FJC).
I will speak on the first area and my colleague, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu, will cover the second. Minister of State Sun Xueling will then touch on support for families undergoing divorce from the MSF perspective.
Sir, to better understand the changes proposed in this Bill, I think it is useful, first, to consider the approach to family justice that we take here.
Family disputes are not like other kinds of disputes. They often involve a lot of emotions, psychological wounds and vulnerable parties, particularly children. You contrast that with the usual litigation process which generally pits the parties as adversaries and looks to the past to determine who was right and wrong. If you apply that kind of approach to family disputes, I think the tendency will often be to deepen the rift between the parties and it could overlook the well-being of the children who are caught in the middle.
So, in Singapore, for some time now, we have taken a modified approach to family disputes, focusing on Therapeutic Justice. The approach tries to get the parties to reach a common ground and move on with their lives. The changes we have made over the years reflect this approach.
With your permission, Sir, may I ask that the Clerks of Parliament distribute a handout on some of these changes?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Please do. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Mr K Shanmugam: Members may also access the handout through the SG Parl MP mobile app.
Let me now turn to the Bill, specifically as it relates to the enforcement of maintenance orders. I will explain, one, the need for change; two, the key changes that we are proposing; and three, what we hope to achieve.
Over the years, we have progressively refined the maintenance enforcement framework. This includes introducing new sanctions against maintenance defaulters, such as mandatory financial counselling, community service orders and credit bureau reporting. Nevertheless, we still see a fairly high number of cases of non-compliance with maintenance orders.
Before COVID-19, from 2017 to 2019, there was an annual average of 2,700 applications to enforce maintenance orders. And 15% to 20% of these were repeat applications made within the same year. Some applicants made three to four applications to enforce the same maintenance order within a year.
When you see these numbers, you can understand that behind these numbers, there are also anxiety, frustration, other real-life consequences. Especially for the applicants – they are usually women, struggling with supporting the children, their jobs, while not getting any maintenance. Members have given voice to these concerns before. They include Ms Jessica Tan, Dr Tan Wu Meng and others who spoke about this. Single parents struggling with job stress, caregiving, other responsibilities and they need to take time off work to attend enforcement hearings. Some bring their children to the Court hearings because they do not have alternate care arrangements.
At this point, I think it is useful for me to share the facts relating to two cases, as illustrations.
The first, I will refer to one of the parties as Mdm A. Following her divorce, she had care and control of the parties’ two young children; her ex-husband was ordered to pay child maintenance at $1,500 a month. Two years after the divorce, Mdm A had not received any maintenance payments, though she had taken out enforcement proceedings. She was left to support her two children and elderly parents alone.
This is how she described her frustrations in an email that she sent to me, and I quote: “Monies have to be spent each [time] an individual seeks legal advice; monies that most ex-spouses can ill-afford. Perhaps this is why most give up the fight, because they can no longer afford to pay for another Court hearing and receive another ruling that will not be enforced.”
The second case, I will call the lady Mdm B. Like Mdm A, Mdm B also had care and control of the parties’ two young children, and her ex-husband was ordered to maintain her and the children at $1,500 per month. But for five years, from 2017 to 2022, Mdm B did not receive any payments from her ex-husband, save for a one-time payment of $50, even after she had filed multiple enforcement applications. For his breaches, the ex-husband was sentenced to prison, one to two days each time, but he still did not pay, despite having the means to pay. By 2022, the child maintenance arrears, accumulated over 61 months, was a total of $91,000. So, how did Mdm B cope? She coped single-handedly to support her children through primary school and borrowed from friends and neighbours.
What I have just described for Mdm A and Mdm B is the unfortunate reality for some. It arises because some husbands just refuse to pay and I am referring to those who can pay but would not pay. It is quite separate if they just cannot pay. I will come back to this later.
In the White Paper on Women’s Development, which was issued in 2021, the Government recognised maintenance enforcement as a key challenge for women in vulnerable situations, and the Government committed to simplify and strengthen the enforcement process and minimise the need for repeat applications for enforcement.
If you look at the issues, first, there are limited means of obtaining information on the parties’ assets and means. This makes it difficult to distinguish between respondents who cannot pay maintenance and those who simply refuse to pay because the information is not fully in. And this then often leads to a second problem, which is repeat non-compliance.
For respondents who refuse to pay, the Court may find it difficult to make more targeted enforcement orders because it does not have the full information on their assets and means. When the Court processes provide for applications and getting this information, actually getting it into Court can be a challenge at times.
And for respondents who cannot pay, they just do not have the money and the Courts keep making the orders, they will simply continue to miss maintenance payments, without some other form of intervention. Again, it does not help anyone.
Third, the process can be time-consuming, resource-intensive and difficult to navigate, especially for self-represented parties.
So, under this Bill, what are we trying to do? We are creating a new Maintenance Enforcement Process – I will call it MEP – to address these issues.
The MEP will seek to strengthen deterrence against respondents who refuse to pay; and it will try and facilitate more sustainable outcomes for respondents who genuinely cannot pay and it will try and increase access to justice for applicants, especially those who are self-represented.
A key part of the proposals is the establishment of a new unit of Maintenance Enforcement Officers (MEOs). MEOs will be appointed by the Law Minister and their functions will include the following: one, they can conduct fact-finding on the parties’ financial circumstances; two, they can refer suitable and needy parties to financial assistance and other forms of support; three, they can conduct conciliation sessions and facilitate settlements between the parties; four, they can submit the information gathered from the fact-finding and conciliation sessions to the Court.
With your permission, again, Mr Deputy Speaker, may I ask the Clerks to distribute an infographic, which will set out the workflow of the new MEP?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Yes, please proceed. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Mr K Shanmugam: Members may also access the handout through the SG Parl MP mobile app.
Let me now take Members through some aspects of the MEP.
An application to enforce a maintenance order can be made online. At this stage, the applicant can also directly apply online for financial assistance, allowing such help to be given as early in the process as possible. After this, the parties must submit documents on their financial circumstances to the MEO. That could include payslips, bank statements.
If the information is insufficient, the MEO may seek information from the parties, banks, third parties, some of whom will be prescribed and these would include Central Provident Fund (CPF), Housing and Development Board (HDB), Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS), Singapore Land Authority (SLA), Land Transport Authority (LTA) and the Central Depository (Pte) Limited (CDP).
This is a major step and a game changer. This power will be subject to safeguards, including restrictions on the use of information obtained by MEOs and, in some cases, requiring MEOs to obtain a Court order when seeking information from third parties.
With the MEO’s fact-finding powers, the MEOs and the Court will be better able to distinguish between respondents who cannot pay and those who refuse to pay. For the former, the MEOs will be able to refer them to Social Service Offices for financial assistance and other support.
After the fact-finding is completed, the parties will have to attend conciliation sessions with the MEO, who can recommend solutions and facilitate settlement. The MEO will report to the Court on the parties' financial circumstances and the conciliation sessions.
This will relieve the party asking for maintenance – the wife – from having to take on the burden of getting the facts, spending a lot of money on legal fees and, hopefully, it will also reduce the amount of effort a wife has to put in to get maintenance.
The Court will take into account the MEO's report when deciding on the application. The Court can vary any maintenance order, taking into account the financial position of the parties.
Where the parties have not settled and the Court orders the respondent to pay maintenance, the Court must make what is known as a Show-Payment Order (SPO). The SPO will usually be for a period of six months and it will require the respondent to show to the Court, at specified future intervals, that he or she has made the requisite payments.
When making the SPO, the Court must generally also specify a term of imprisonment that the respondent may be liable for if the respondent breaches the SPO. This continued monitoring, coupled with strong deterrence, should reduce repeated defaults in at least a fair number of cases.
With the information provided by the MEO, the Court will also be better able to make more targeted and effective enforcement orders to recover arrears – for example, an order for attachment of a debt – and can do so without the applicant having to apply separately, or specifically, for such orders.
At the post-hearing stage, the MEP caters for several possible scenarios of default. I will not cover these scenarios and the consequences of default specifically. The details are in the infographic that has been handed out and, of course, in the Bill.
But Members will see that, in general, the consequences for failing to show proof of payment, in accordance with the SPO, are immediate and serious. If a respondent defaults on the SPO with no good cause shown, he may be sentenced to imprisonment.
The MEP also provides a more streamlined process for enforcing maintenance payments, where a respondent defaults on such payments shortly after an SPO expires.
There is one further area of change to the maintenance enforcement process, which is not shown in the infographic. Under the existing law, an applicant who suspects that a respondent intends to dissipate, or has dissipated assets to frustrate the maintenance claim, can apply for an injunction or a clawback order. However, the applicant will likely face evidential difficulties in proving the respondent's intent to dissipate property specifically to frustrate a maintenance order.
To address this, we will create a rebuttable presumption of the respondent's intent to dissipate. Under the proposed changes, this presumption will be raised if the applicant can show an impending or relevant dissipation, depending on whether an injunction or clawback order is sought and that the impending or relevant dissipation, as the case may be, will or did frustrate the enforcement of the maintenance order.
With these changes, the burden is on the respondent to prove that he did not intend to frustrate the maintenance claim. This will, hopefully, deter parties from circumventing maintenance orders through the wilful dissipation of assets.
What do we hope to achieve with these changes? Primarily, three things: one, stronger deterrence against non-compliance with maintenance orders; two, more sustainable maintenance outcomes for families with genuine financial difficulties; and three, easier process for enforcement of maintenance orders when they are not complied with.
Overall, these changes will improve access to justice, especially for self-represented parties, who, as I said earlier, are involved in the vast majority of maintenance enforcement cases.
As Members can empathise, it is difficult to expect parties to move on when maintenance obligations are breached, especially if the breaches occur repeatedly. Such breaches can also spur retaliatory action by the other side and pull both parties further apart.
For example, an applicant with care and control of the children may be tempted to withhold access to them, if the respondent does not make timely maintenance payments. These disputes that linger and spiral long after the divorce proceedings can worsen the anguish for the parties and their children and also take a toll on those around them.
With the MEP, we hope to change a bit of this and make the post-divorce journey slightly easier.
As I conclude, Sir, I would like to thank the FJC judges, Court staff, the Family Bar, academics, our social service partner agencies and other stakeholders for working with us on these reforms. We hope to continue to work with all of these partners to shape our family justice system to achieve more positive outcomes in protecting, restoring and healing families.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Senior Parliamentary Secretary, Rahayu Mahzam.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Law (Ms Rahayu Mahzam): Mr Deputy Speaker, we have come a long way in bringing this vision of the family justice system informed by the principles of Therapeutic Justice to life, but the task of ensuring that our family justice system meets the needs of families is a continuing one.
This Bill represents another step forward in this journey.
Minister Shanmugam has touched upon one key area of reform in the Bill – the new Maintenance Enforcement Process. I will now turn to the other key area of reform this Bill seeks to effect – the enhancement of Court proceedings and procedure in the Family Justice Courts (FJC).
The changes we are making in this area support the ideals outlined earlier in Minister Shanmugam's speech. The amendments will: strengthen protection for children and other vulnerable parties, including victims of family violence; make family proceedings simpler and more efficient, thereby enhancing access to justice for all Court users of the FJC; strengthen Therapeutic Justice elements in FJC proceedings, by giving the Courts the power to manage proceedings in a manner which reduces acrimony and ensures a fair outcome without undue delay, complexity and cost.
Some of the reforms under this area arise out of the recommendations of the Committee to Review and Enhance Reforms in the Family Justice System, or the RERF Committee for short.
The RERF Committee, which consisted of representatives from MSF, MinLaw and FJC, was formed in 2017 and released its recommendations in September 2019. Its recommendations were aimed at, amongst others, further strengthening the Therapeutic Justice elements in the family justice system.
The Government then consulted the public and stakeholders on the RERF Committee's recommendations and has since then been working to implement the recommendations.
For example, MSF announced in 2022 that the Mandatory Co-Parenting Programme will be extended from only parents who disagree on divorce and ancillary matters, to all parents with minor children on the Simplified Track. This will help more parents to focus on making informed decisions that prioritise the well-being of their children in the divorce process.
The Women's Charter was amended in 2022 to empower the Court to make orders to grant the access parent additional access to the child to make up for the access denied; for the care and control parent to compensate the access parent for expenses incurred as a result of the breach of the child access order; and both parties and the child, or any of them, to attend counselling, mediation, therapeutic or educational programmes.
This Bill implements the remaining recommendations of the RERF Committee that require legislative changes.
I will now turn to the key reforms in this Bill which enhance proceedings and procedure in the FJC.
The amendments which I will be speaking about can be grouped into four buckets: one, promoting efficiency in Court proceedings; two, enhancing and clarifying the judge-led approach; three, simplifying Court terminology; and four, other miscellaneous and technical amendments to clarify, enhance and streamline FJC processes.
In its report, the RERF Committee observed that the filing of unnecessary applications in family proceedings prolongs proceedings, promotes acrimony and strains judicial resources. This is a particularly pertinent issue in family proceedings, which are emotionally charged. Such strong emotions can hinder rational thinking and cloud judgement.
There are cases where parties who are caught up in the heat of the litigation resort to taking out unnecessary and unmeritorious applications in Court to vex the other party or to paint the other party in a bad light. Such applications may also be made repeatedly.
For example, one party may make repeated applications against the other party for discovery of documents which have little relevance or evidential value to the issue at hand. Not only are such applications a waste of the parties' time and the Court's resources, but such conduct can harm the relationship of the parties and their family.
The RERF Committee acknowledged that not every case involving the filing of multiple applications is necessarily an abuse of process, and, in any event, the ability to strike out or dismiss an application on the ground of abuse of process should be exercised with caution.
To ensure that unmeritorious applications which detract from important issues are weeded out at an early stage, the Committee recommended that, in appropriate circumstances, the permission of the Court must be sought before a further application can be filed.
The new section 11A of the Family Justice Act will implement the Committee's recommendation. There are two parts to the new section 11A. The first part of section 11A deals with certain applications by a party in relation to an order already made in previous proceedings, for example, an application to vary, suspend or set aside a previous order. For ease of explaining the first part of section 11A, I shall call an application which falls into this category a \"variation application\".
Section 11A provides that where (a) the filing of any variation application or supporting document, or (b) any variation application or supporting document which has been filed by a party, will or is likely to be without merit, having regard to the applicant's past conduct in previous proceedings or has an adverse effect on the welfare of a child, FJC may make, among other things, the following orders: (a)\tan order prohibiting the filing of the variation application or other variation application, or any document in support of such applications, without the permission of the Court; and (b)\tan order that any variation application or any supporting document which has been filed be treated as dismissed or expunged on a specified date, unless the party complies with one or more conditions imposed by the Court by that date.
The second part of section 11A deals with applications in proceedings which are pending before FJC. I shall call an application which falls into this category an \"interlocutory application\".
Section 11A provides that where (a) the filing of any interlocutory application or supporting document, or (b) any interlocutory application or supporting document which has been filed, will, or is likely to: impede the just, expeditious or economical resolution or disposal of the matter; or have an adverse effect on the child's welfare, the FJC may make, among other things, the following orders: (a)\tan order prohibiting the filing of the interlocutory application or any other interlocutory application, or any document in support of such applications, without the permission of the Court; and (b)\tan order that any interlocutory application or any supporting document which has been filed be treated as dismissed or expunged on a specified date, unless the party complies with one or more conditions imposed by the Court by that date.
Section 11A will promote a more efficient resolution of family proceedings and also reduce the acrimony and stresses which may be inflicted on the parties' relationship through the filing of unnecessary applications and documents.
I would like to share the story of Ms C, who has written to us on her family's experiences. Ms C's father and mother are divorced. Ms C has a younger sibling.
As the mother exhibited physical and emotionally abusive behaviour, the Court granted protection orders against the mother after the divorce, in favour of the father and the two children. After the protection orders were granted, over a period of three years, the mother filed close to 15 applications in Court against Ms C, her father and her sibling. This includes more than five applications to revoke the protection orders granted in favour of Ms C, her father and her sibling. In the case of the protection order obtained by Ms C, the mother's applications to revoke the protection order were dismissed.
Ms C conveyed that each of the applications filed has taken a huge emotional toll on her family. With each application filed by her mother, they ended up having to take time off work to spend time on Court proceedings and be subject to the mental stress of facing the mother for an extended period of time.
Applying the new section 11A to Ms C's situation, the Court will be empowered to make an order prohibiting the mother from filing any further applications to revoke the protection orders in favour of Ms C, her father and her sibling without the Court's permission, if the Court is satisfied that the filing of any application to revoke the protection orders will be without merit, having regard to the mother's conduct in past proceedings, including the mother's series of unmeritorious applications to revoke the protection orders in the past.
With greater judicial control over the filing of unnecessary applications, we hope that circumstances where parties like Ms C and her family live in fear of having to be dragged back into proceedings by estranged family members involuntarily will be reduced. Instead, families will be given the space to heal and move on, without having to return to Court repeatedly.
The new powers in section 11A will also help to enhance the efficiency of family proceedings by giving FJC the powers to weed out unmeritorious applications which unnecessarily protract proceedings.
Minister Shanmugam had earlier explained that the judge-led approach was introduced in 2014 to allow FJC to proactively manage the manner in which cases are run in family proceedings. The RERF Committee had recommended that there be greater clarity and guidance to family judges on how the judge-led approach is to be applied.
This Bill will, therefore, clarify and strengthen the judge-led approach through three key provisions. First, providing that judges may make orders of a substantive nature on their own motion. Second, empowering judges to impose restrictions on cross-examination in circumstances prescribed in subsidiary legislation. Third, providing that the Family Justice Rules (FJR) may set out the modes by which a child's wishes may be determined by the Court and this may include judicial interviews. I will explain each provision in turn.
For the first key provision, the RERF Committee recommended that the Court be expressly empowered to make substantive orders on its own motion. The new section 11B of the Family Justice Act will implement the Committee's recommendation.
Family proceedings often involve litigants-in-person or self-represented parties. They may not be aware of the variety of orders or directions available, or which ones are needed to address their particular issues, or which may be made to safeguard the interests and well-being of their children.
In such situations, the new section 11B allows the Court to make the necessary orders to deal with the issues effectively, even if neither party has asked for the order specifically.
For instance, the Court may, in the course of conducting a case conference, make interim access orders to ensure that the child continues to have contact time with a parent until the matter can be resolved through mediation or determined in a formal hearing. The Court may do so even if none of the parties makes an application for an interim access order.
The rules of natural justice will be preserved. The Court's power to make an order of a substantive nature under section 11B may only be exercised if: every person likely to be affected by the order is first given an opportunity to be heard concerning the order; and the Court is satisfied that it is in the interests of justice to make the order.
The second key provision is the new section 11C of the Family Justice Act, which will empower FJC to, on its own motion, or upon the application of any party, make the following orders: an order that cross-examination of a witness be restricted in scope or duration and an order that cross-examination be conducted in any manner prescribed by the FJR.
At present, rule 101A of the FJR already allows the Court to limit the scope and duration of cross-examination, or to disallow direct cross-examination in two situations: (a) a family violence trial in proceedings under Part 7 of the Women's Charter; (b) an application under section 67(1) of the Women's Charter to vary, suspend or revoke a protection order or an expedited order.
The direct cross-examination of a victim of family violence by their alleged perpetrator can expose the victim to significant re-traumatisation. Subjecting the victims to the usual cross-examination may also affect their ability to give clear and cogent evidence in support of their case. After what has happened between them, victims may also find it challenging to effectively cross-examine their alleged perpetrator.
That being said, cross-examination is fundamental in testing and challenging the evidence of a witness and to accurately determine the facts on which the Court decides the matter. A balance, therefore, has to be struck.
The RERF Committee considered the approaches in England and Australia on prohibiting cross-examination in family violence cases and recommended that the Courts should be empowered to restrict cross-examination in specified circumstances. The new section 11C, therefore, provides that the Court may only make the orders restricting cross-examination in circumstances to be prescribed in the FJR, for example, in circumstances where the questioning of a vulnerable witness is or is likely to be unduly intimidating and oppressive.
The Court's powers under the new section 11C will complement its existing powers under the Evidence Act to, among others, forbid any question which appears to the Court to be intended to insult or annoy or appears to be needlessly offensive.
The third key provision in the Bill provides that the FJR may set out the modes by which the wishes of a child may be determined by the Court. The intention is for the prescribed modes to expressly include interviews conducted by a judge with a child, in addition to the variety of other methods which may be used to hear a child's voice, such as through the Child Representatives or an assessment by a mental health professional.
In the context of matrimonial proceedings under the Women's Charter, section 125 of the Women's Charter provides that in deciding in whose custody a child should be placed, the paramount consideration shall be the welfare of the child. Section 125 also specifically requires the Court to have regard to: (a) the wishes of the parents; and (b) the wishes of a child where he or she is of an age to express an independent opinion.
However, section 125 does not provide for the modes by which the child's wishes may be determined. The RERF Committee, in its report, discussed the benefits of judges conducting interviews with children and noted that, in Singapore, there have been cases where judges have conducted interviews with children to reach outcomes that serve the interests of the child.
An example of such a case is AZB v AZC [2016] SGHCF 1. In that case, the High Court Judge interviewed three children between the ages of 11 and 13 in a dispute between their parents on care and control and access arrangements. The Judge noted that there were indications that the children wished to speak with her. The children were mature enough to express their views on matters that impacted their lives. In deciding that it would be in the children's welfare to increase the access time with their mother, the Judge relied on, among other things, the Judge's conversations with the children which corroborated the finding that the children enjoyed access time with their mother.
The Committee mentioned that there has been research highlighting children's wishes to be more involved in the decisions that may affect their lives profoundly and their dissatisfaction with the indirect processes that are available to them. The Committee recommended, therefore, that it should be made clear that the judge-led approach allows for a judge to interview a child.
It should be noted that each case is unique, with different considerations applying to each family and each child. It is not in every case that a judicial interview of children is suitable. In some cases, the Court may assess that it would be more appropriate to appoint a Child Representative, who is a trained professional appointed by the Court to represent the voice of a child and present an objective assessment of care arrangements which are in the child's best interest, or other professional, to hear from the child.
Moving on to the next bucket of reforms, the Bill will amend various pieces of legislation to modernise and simplify nomenclature for family proceedings. For example, \"Plaintiff\" will be replaced by \"Applicant\", \"Defendant\" will be replaced by \"Respondent\" and \"Writ for divorce\" will be replaced by \"originating application for divorce\".
This will be in line with the amendments made to Court terminology in civil Court proceedings under the Courts (Civil and Criminal Justice) Reform Act 2021 and the Rules of Court 2021. In the new Family Justice Rules to be introduced, the simplified terminology will also be adopted. These changes will make it easier for Court users and members of the public to understand family proceedings. This will amplify the existing efforts by the Government and Judiciary to enhance access to justice, especially for persons who cannot afford legal representation, by simplifying Court processes.
The last bucket of reforms relates to various miscellaneous and technical amendments to clarify, enhance and streamline processes in the FJC.
I will elaborate on two of these amendments. First, on mediation and other alternative dispute resolution processes or \"ADR processes\" for short. Currently, the Family Justice Act provides that a Family Court or Youth Court, respectively, may, on its own motion or upon the application of any party, order any party or any child who is the subject of proceedings, to undergo mediation or counselling, or to participate in any family support programme or activity.
The Court also has powers to order a party or child to undergo other ADR processes, or to attend professional clinical or therapeutic intervention sessions. The Bill will clarify in the Family Justice Act that a Family Court or Youth Court has such powers. The Bill will also clarify in legislation the existing powers of the Court to appoint Judicial officers, officers of the FJC or any other persons, such as volunteer lawyers, to conduct mediations or other ADR processes. Amendments will also be made to provide that a Family Court or Youth Court may make the appropriate and necessary orders where a person fails to comply with the Court's orders to attend mediation or other ADR process, such as an order staying proceedings until the orders are complied with.
Second, the Bill will adopt section 43 of the State Courts Act which applies to a District Court, by expressly providing that the Family Court may order that a judgment sum be paid in a lump sum or by instalments, and may order that a judgment be suspended or stayed if the judgment debtor is unable to pay the sum. The amendments will align the position under the Family Justice Act with that in section 43 of the State Courts Act. Depending on the circumstances of the case, in certain situations, instead of incurring time and costs in enforcement or bankruptcy proceedings, it may be more sensible and in the interests of both parties, for the Court to grant a short reprieve to the judgment debtor, or to allow the judgment debtor to pay the judgment creditor by way of instalments. This is especially important in family proceedings where further litigation would put an additional strain on the fractured relationship and adversely impact children involved in the proceedings.
I will not go into details on all the other amendments under the Bill, but Members are free to raise any questions that they may have on those amendments.
To conclude, I would like to express our gratitude to the members of the RERF Committee for their recommendations, and the stakeholders and members of the public who have taken the time to give us feedback on the family justice system. With your feedback and suggestions, we were better able to shape the reforms in this Bill to resolve the real issues faced by families and children in family proceedings and to better protect, restore and heal families and children.
Time will be required and work will need to be put in to operationalise some of the changes in this Bill, including the Maintenance Enforcement Process. We hope you will continue to give us support and feedback, to operationalise the reforms.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister of State, Sun Xueling.
The Minister of State for Social and Family Development (Ms Sun Xueling): Mr Deputy Speaker, MSF has worked closely with MinLaw and FJC on the Family Justice Reform Bill, in particular, the new Maintenance Enforcement Process, or MEP in short. Minister Shanmugam and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu have explained the objective and details of the Bill in their speeches. Let me elaborate on MSF's perspective.
At MSF, our aim is to nurture strong families. That is why we had designated the year 2022 as the Year of Celebrating SG Families and launched \"A Singapore Made for Families 2025\", a national plan to strengthen and support families through all life stages.
The foundation for strong families is laid even before marriage. When a couple contemplates marrying and starting their own family, support is provided through the Marriage Preparation Programmes. As they embark on this new phase of life, they can seek mentoring support from Licensed Solemnisers and community volunteers.
This foundation is continually built on during their marriage, through access to marriage and parenting support programmes organised by Families for Life, or FFL in short. We will be stepping up outreach at the local level via FFL@Community which will be expanded to all towns by 2025.
When friction arises, families can seek help from the Strengthening Families Programme@Family Service Centres, or FAM@FSCs in short. The 10 FAM@FSC Centres island-wide provide counselling services, such as for marital strains or conflict among family members.
Our hope is for families to be able to successfully work through and come through adversity. However, we recognise that some families may come to the point where they begin to contemplate divorce. Our aim is to save the marriage and, apart from family counselling, the Family Assist Portal provides couples with the relevant resources to make an informed decision regarding their marriage. Where divorce is truly inevitable, we seek to foster Therapeutic Justice in the divorce process to bring about healing so that the family can move on.
I had led focus group discussions and engaged over 120 divorcees in 2020 and 2021 to understand the divorce process and the difficult decisions they had to make. Arising from those discussions and the intent to foster Therapeutic Justice, we have introduced several initiatives in recent years.
In January 2022, the Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill was passed in this House. To encourage parents to make informed decisions regarding their divorce that prioritise the well-being of their children, we had made it mandatory for all divorcing parents with minor children to go through a Co-Parenting Programme, or CPP in short.
We had also sought to reduce acrimony in the divorce process and introduced the Divorce by Mutual Agreement (DMA) of the Irretrievable Breakdown of the Marriage as a sixth fact that parties may cite to show that their marriage has irretrievably broken down. The changes to CPP and the introduction of DMA will be brought into force in 2024.
To ensure that children impacted by divorce are supported in navigating this difficult period, we have empowered the Court to advise that minor children attend the Programme for Children. In addition, we have heard the pain of parents who were unable to obtain access to their children as ordered by the Court. We had amended the Women's Charter to introduce a new suite of measures for the enforcement of child access.
Our efforts do not stop there. We are working with FJC on further simplifying the enforcement process so that there is no need to seek leave of Court before an application is made for enforcement. It is within this wider landscape of support for the family that the proposed MEP will come in.
The MEP will facilitate more sustainable maintenance outcomes for parties, allowing parents to both do their part in co-parenting their children and move on from the divorce.
For respondents who genuinely cannot pay, as well as for applicants who face day-to-day difficulties due to non-payment of maintenance, MSF will now be able to provide financial assistance in a more timely manner, where appropriate. Mr Deputy Speaker, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The aim of the amendments is to enable divorcees to better make post-divorce arrangements for the family. This includes ensuring more sustainable maintenance outcomes.
We have seen an average of 2,700 maintenance enforcement applications annually across the years 2017 to 2019. The current maintenance enforcement process, from the perspective of the applicant, can be time- and resource-intensive. For the low-income, this can result in great inconvenience. For low-wage mothers, who already face the stress of caring for their children, having to return to Court to enforce their maintenance order could be the final straw that breaks them.
In addition, the assets of divorcees and their financial situation are often not transparent. This makes it difficult for the judge to determine if the respondent truly cannot afford to pay maintenance, or if the respondent can afford to pay maintenance but is unwilling to do so.
The amendments, therefore, introduce a new Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP). The new process will simplify the process, reduce the number of trips the applicant has to make to Court and reduce the duration of the current maintenance enforcement process.
Under this new process, the Maintenance Enforcement Officer (MEO) will be empowered to ensure more sustainable maintenance outcomes: first, the MEO will be empowered to request for information on the respondent’s financial situation from Government agencies, banks and other agencies.
Second, after obtaining information on the respondent’s financial situation, the MEO will be empowered to make recommendations for parties to reach a reasonable out-of-Court settlement.
Third, the MEO has the power to report the information to the Court, which will support the Court to make maintenance enforcement orders.
For respondents who face difficulties in making their maintenance payments, under certain circumstances, the Court can vary the original maintenance order based on their actual financial situation, without requiring the respondent to submit a formal application.
In addition, previously, should the respondent have attempted to frustrate the maintenance order by dissipating their assets, although the applicant may suspect that the respondent had such an intention, it can be very difficult to prove. The Bill introduces a rebuttable presumption, that is to say, under certain circumstances, as long as the respondent has dissipated their assets, it will be presumed that the respondent has done so with the intention of frustrating the maintenance order.
The MEP complements earlier efforts by MSF to strengthen therapeutic justice in the divorce process, through the 2022 Women’s Charter (Amendment) Bill. The amendments to the Women’s Charter included the extension of the mandatory CPP to all divorcing parents with minor children to better support parents in making informed decisions regarding their divorce that prioritise the well-being of their children, the introduction of the Divorce by Mutual Agreement of the Irretrievable Breakdown of the Marriage to reduce acrimony in the divorce process, and the introduction of a new suite of measures for the enforcement of child access.
(In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, in conceptualising the many enhancements to divorce support, including the MEP, MSF and MinLaw have met and spoken with many groups of stakeholders, including parents who have gone through divorces, law practitioners and social service agencies.
It is clear that we all share the same vision for our families, families that endeavour to put the needs of their family members, their children first, even as they navigate difficult circumstances. It is our hope that parents will prioritise the welfare of their children and work together to cooperatively co-parent their children.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Murali Pillai.
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the aims of the Bill. In my speech, I will touch on just two aspects of the Bill and I will deal with them in turn.
The first aspect is the desire for Family Court proceedings to be simpler and to produce fair outcomes without undue delay. One way of doing this is by providing Judges a greater ambit to decide on key matters that protect public interest, as well as the interests of vulnerable parties, such as children.
In this regard, I note that it is proposed in clause 4 of the Bill that the Court be given powers to make an order on its own motion, without application by the parties, so long as every person likely to be affected by the Court's order is given an opportunity to be heard beforehand; and impose restrictions during cross-examination, as it sees fit.
The hon Senior Parliamentary Secretary Ms Rahayu Mahzam took pains to outline the workings of this provision in her speech. As she mentioned, this proposal emanated from a recommendation of the Committee to Review and Enhance Reforms in the Family Justice System, or the RERF Committee, in 2019.
In the report, the RERF Committee explained that a judge-led approach will have, amongst others, the salutary effect of reducing acrimony between parties and avoiding protracted proceedings.
I agree with the rationale outlined by the REFF Committee. Apart from strengthening the Therapeutic Justice element in the family proceedings, reposing such a power with the Court, in my respectful view, may also serve to guard against situations where the husband and wife together agree to post-divorce arrangements that may not be suitable for the children of the marriage, particularly young children who are of school-going age.
Such situations, unfortunately, occur from time to time despite the common wisdom that they should be prioritising the needs of their children. I made this point during the Ministry of National Development (MND) Committee of Supply (COS) debate earlier this year when I spoke on the topic of inclusive public housing.
The hon Minister highlighted in his speech that family disputes are unique because, amongst others, they involve vulnerable children. The interests of vulnerable children may not necessarily be aligned with those of their parents. During the debate, I mentioned that I have come across cases where the husband and wife, for reasons of expediency, decided on arrangements, such as selling their HDB flat early, without having the prospect of securing proper housing arrangements or even considering schooling arrangements for the young children of the marriage.
In these cases, as there was agreement between the parties, the Court proceeded to endorse the parties' agreement on the assumption that the parents have catered for the needs of their young children. It is only after disposing the matrimonial property that the issue of the children's interest not being sufficiently safeguarded came to the fore. In such cases, the parent who has custody of the children may then make an appeal to HDB for urgent accommodation, presenting HDB with a fait accompli. As we all know, such requests are not easily acceded to. In the end, the children suffer from the decisions of their parents.
Even without the involvement of young children, I have seen situations where, post-divorce, one party to the proceedings would apply to HDB for urgent public housing on the basis that the Court had ordered the sale of the matrimonial property, leaving that person without a roof over his or her head.
It seems to me that part of the problem lies with the fact that there exists an information asymmetry between the parties to the divorce proceedings, HDB and the Court. HDB would be in the dark about what the parties represented to the Court about housing arrangements post-divorce. The Court may not know whether the parties' proposed housing arrangement is feasible as HDB's criteria are not cast in stone and it does exercise discretion on a case-by-case basis.
By providing the Court with the power to act on its own motion on substantive matters, it will be in a better position to make a just and equitable decision on the division of matrimonial property that affects the housing arrangements of the parties and their children post-divorce. We will, therefore, be better able to minimise the number of hardship cases involving parties and their children who run the risk of not having any place to stay or stay in less than conducive environments after they have sold their HDB flats pursuant to a Court order.
I would like to ask the hon Senior Parliamentary Secretary how, with the proposed enhancements to Court proceedings and procedure in the FJC, will the problem that I have identified be addressed? Also, I wonder if a protocol among the Court, parties and HDB can be established to resolve the information asymmetry that I have highlighted here.
The second aspect of the Bill that I intend to speak on deals with proposals aimed at facilitating better maintenance outcomes. This is a welcome reform.
The hon Minister in his speech spoke about real life cases involving husbands who could pay but just obstinately refused to pay, forcing the single mothers to bear heavy responsibilities of bringing up their children. As a result, they simply did not have the bandwidth to pursue their ex-husbands to pay maintenance. And these defaulting spouses may even get away with their offending behaviour. And such instances are clearly wrong.
The hon Speaker of Parliament, in his capacity as the Minister for Social and Family Development in 2017, in a Family Justice Forum, said as follows: \"…[M]aintenance issues continue to be an area of concern for some parties, even after the divorce has been finalised. For the parent who requires financial contributions from the other towards the child's upkeep, having to return to Court to enforce a maintenance order can be tedious and frustrating. This is especially so when the other parent has the means to pay but refuses to do so.\"
The hon Minister, in his speech, pointed out that in the 2022 White Paper on Singapore Women's Development, maintenance enforcement reform was advocated as a priority area.
This is precisely the problem that the introduction of the Maintenance Enforcement Officers (MEOs), who will have the powers to obtain more accurate information about the respondents' financial circumstances, is intended to address and I support this move.
MEOs will be able to get directly information from stipulated entities, such as banks, CDP, CPF Board, HDB, IRAS, LTA and SLA.
With this, the MEO will be able to ascertain whether the respondent does not have the capacity to pay or he has the capacity but refuses to pay. Through this, we can have quicker enforcement action against the recalcitrant respondents. This will, in turn, put similarly minded persons, who may think that they could get away with not complying with maintenance Court orders, on notice.
Sir, I support this proposal. The question I have is, why is it proposed that the MEO be an officer appointed by the Executive Branch of the Government instead of the Judiciary?
Currently, under Rule 114B of the Family Justice Rules 2014, the Court has the power to appoint a public officer as a Maintenance Record Officer, the MRO, who is considered as an officer of the Family Justice Court. The MRO has quasi-judicial powers similar to what is being proposed for the MEO. This includes the power to interview parties to the proceedings; and obtain documents and information on the financial circumstances of a party to proceedings from the party directly or from any other person, with the consent of the party. In addition, the MRO may be required to prepare for the Court a written report setting out his opinion on the financial circumstances of the party and whether he is able to pay maintenance. This report may be relied on by the Court as evidence of the matters stated in the report. This also mirrors what the MEO is supposed to do under the proposed maintenance regime.
Given that the MEO is supposed to take over the tasks of the MRO, may I ask why it is proposed that the MEO be an officer of the Executive arm of the Government instead of the Judiciary?
As we all know, our Constitution is based on the separation of powers doctrine. There are three pillars of Government; the judiciary is an independent pillar of the Government.
Here, it is proposed that the MEO act, “subject to the general or special directions of the Minister insofar as the directions are not inconsistent” with the clauses in the Bill under consideration. The Minister may make regulations prescribing fees payable to an MEO. At the same time, it is expressly proposed that the MEO ascertain the facts and circumstances of the case, assist the Court and issue a report that the Court can take cognisance of.
An MRO, on the other hand, is an officer of the Court. Hence, there is less of an issue for an officer of the Court assisting the Court on the same matters. How would public interest be better served by siting this responsibility with the Executive rather than the Judiciary?
I wish to clarify that I support the MEO proposal. I am merely pointing out that, as there is an important shift of responsibility from the Judiciary to the Executive that is being proposed, it is incumbent for the Executive arm of the Government to explain the reason for assuming this responsibility clearly.
I now turn to the ambit of the power to be reposed on MEO with respect to information gathering.
The hon Minister mentioned in his speech about the problem posed by respondents dissipating their assets to third parties and that would frustrate the applicant's endeavour to get paid under maintenance orders. This is one big area of concern and I am glad to note that there is a proposal to reverse the evidential burden so as to alleviate the problems on the part of the applying spouses.
Another area where there could be a significant challenge is where the respondent has assets and properties which are held in the names of proxies. To make headway on such matters, there will be a need to conduct investigations, too. These investigations will include the relationship between the respondent and an identified proxy; the personal and financial background of the proxy; and any financial transactions between the respondent and the proxy. It is, therefore, important to ensure that the MEO has sufficient powers to do all these so as to be able to lift the veil of secrecy between the respondent and his proxy, depending on the case.
Currently, I note that an MEO may avail himself of information from banks and prescribed third parties which I understand refers to specific Government agencies. These bodies may provide information as permitted under regulations which will be enacted sometime in the future. May I ask whether the scope of information that is contemplated to be provided to the MEO is wide enough to deal with inquiries on persons believed to be proxies of the respondents?
I also note that, apart from the “bank” and a “prescribed third party”, the MEO may request the Court for an order that a “third party” provide him with relevant information. May I ask what is the ambit of this “third party”? Does it refer to any other Government agency that is not prescribed? Or does it only refer to any private person, and this may include legal entities, who may have relevant information? May I also confirm that a “third party” may include a person who is believed to be a proxy or has information that may be relevant for investigation into any proxy relationship?
In summary, my first point on the leadership of judges in this process, as well as a whole-of-Government lens in information sharing, speaks to an important point on efficient implementation of justice. My second requires us to clarify a small but not unimportant matter. This clarity will help answer questions about the independence of such officers and to what extent their work requires an arms’ length from the Executive arm.
Sir, we strive to preserve families. This is a point that hon Minister of State Sun Xueling made at the outset of her speech when she said that MSF's aim is to nurture families. But we do not always succeed. It is important that the legislative process works to protect the interests of all parties when marriages dissolve. The ties that bind us, husband to wife, are ties that can be severed by divorce proceedings. But the tie that binds a citizen to his fellow men, and to his country, remains. Our laws must provide for this less intimate, but paradoxically, in this context, more enduring connection, in the pursuit of family justice.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Mr Deputy Speaker, the Family Justice Reform Bill proposes to establish a new Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP), which kicks in when applicants apply to enforce a maintenance order in the event of non-payment by their former spouse. The new MEP will apply to maintenance orders under the Women's Charter, Guardianship of Infants Act, Administration of Muslim Law Act, Maintenance Orders (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act and the Maintenance of Parents Act. I support the intent of this Bill to improve the enforcement process for maintenance payments. I would like to bring up a few brief points regarding the new process.
Mr Deputy Speaker, over the years, many divorced spouses have faced various difficulties in getting their former spouses to make their maintenance payments on time or even at all. Many spouses actually even gave up trying to get their payments.
Under the current system, a common and frustrating experience for many is that former spouses delay or refuse to pay their maintenance for their ex-partners or children and do not pay up until their former partners take up an application in Court to enforce maintenance payments. Frequently, for those who can afford to pay, the payment can even be at the doorstep of the Court room, just before the hearing. On such an occasion, I understand that the applicant does not even get its legal costs paid despite having to take out such application and engaging a lawyer in the process.
And for many who default on their maintenance payments, their former spouses often had to take multiple applications. Many applicants had to take leave from work each time and would even lose income from spending time instructing their lawyers and attending Court hearings. Many, I am told, just gave up after a few tries. They just could not afford the time and efforts. Many prefer to spend the time earning more income to make up for their former spouses’ maintenance payments instead of expending time and efforts in applying repeatedly for enforcement.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister, under the new MEP, how will the new process ensure that such phenomena will not happen or will be minimised. I note that under the new process, if a maintenance order has not been complied with, the applicant will have to make an application, albeit online, and if the Court were to make a Show-Payment Order requiring proof of payment, specifying an imprisonment term for the respondent’s breach of the Show-Payment Order, does that mean that the respondent can pay up after such an application is made for a Show-Payment Order or when he receives such an order?
Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the new requirement of the MEOs having to distinguish between respondents who cannot afford to pay for maintenance due to their financial situation and those who refuse to pay when they can afford to do so. This is important; it will help to deter and weed out those who game the system by refusing to pay until at least an application for enforcement is made.
Next, I note that under clause 89, once a maintenance enforcement application has been made, the MEOs have to prepare and submit a report to the Court. While the said clause allows the MEO to provide an interim report to any party whom the MEO thinks any information in the MEO’s report ought to be brought to the attention of such a party, the Bill does not seem to require the MEO to provide the full report to the applicant, the respondent or both.
This is somewhat unusual in our civil legal processes as documents or evidence to be considered in any proceedings are traditionally required to be disclosed to all parties in the same proceedings. Moreover, it would also be fair to both parties. For example, the applicant should know why the application fails and both parties should know its contents to decide whether it is fair and should be appealed against. If the respondent can afford his maintenance payments, disclosure of such report to the applicant may also deter the respondent from trying to hide his financial status.
I also note that clause 90 allows for redaction. I would like to ask the Minister what is the rationale, if any, for not allowing automatic and full disclosure of the MEO’s report to both parties in an application. I would also like to ask what type of information will likely be redacted from this report or excluded from the interim report if the judge decides that such report should be given to either party.
Mr Deputy Speaker, aside from the concerns I have raised, I support the Bill. I hope that the new MEP will significantly reduce incidents of deliberate and late or non-payment of maintenance.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, no woman enters into marriage expecting it to end in divorce. While divorce is never easy, it can be especially challenging for women who often find themselves struggling to manage their livelihoods while ensuring the well-being of their charges, especially children in their custody or part custody.
When women, especially mothers, go through a divorce, they are often left to manage the household and take care of the children on their own. They need financial stability and independence to rebuild their lives after a divorce. However, for many women, this is easier said than done, especially if their spouses were the sole-breadwinners in their households.
According to the Ministry of Manpower (MOM)'s Labour Force Survey in 2022, there are approximately a quarter of a million women of economic age who are not participating in the workforce due to caregiving responsibilities. These women are often sandwiched, caring for their young children, elderly parents and households, and they find it challenging to balance their caregiving responsibilities with the need to provide for their families financially.
The situation becomes even more complicated for women who are going through a divorce. The circumstances in these women’s lives have not changed, the young are still young, the elderly, elderly, and the infirmed, infirmed. The only thing that has changed is the added complexity of livelihoods and financial stability that our women now have to take care of. It could be a classic case of out of the frying pan into the fire for many women caught in these double binds.
In my work in my constituency and in NTUC’s Women and Family Unit, I often meet women in such double binds, seeking help and support, sometimes with their young children, often in tears and at a loss of what to do, with no jobs, no CPF and no savings. Many a time, their ex-husbands have gone missing and with that, too, all hopes and promise of any maintenance orders due to these women through their divorce settlements.
I sometimes also meet women, who hide their shame of being stuck in an abusive marriage, unable to move on, as they are financially unable to care for themselves and their children and are afraid, if they do indeed get divorced, that their ex-husbands will not fulfil their maintenance orders.
I met Emily – not her real name – many times over the past two years. Initially, Emily’s issues pertained to financial assistance she needed for her four children, the oldest who is just 14 years old when I met them. As we got to know each other better over the months, Emily shared that she had a rocky and high tension marriage with her husband and had thought long and seriously about leaving the marriage. However, she continued being a dutiful wife, taking care of the household, their four children and her in-laws who are both staying with her. She has a part-time job, earning less than $2,000, and this is barely enough to cover her household of eight.
Earlier this year, Emily reached out once again, distraught that her husband had gone missing in action (MIA) and his last known location was in Malaysia. He had abandoned the family, leaving her to take care of the family, the flat mortgage and even his business debts. Emily is seeking a divorce, but is worried that her husband would not pay maintenance and, should the divorce be granted, that she would be forced to sell her marital home, leaving her and her family with no roof over their heads.
Sadly, Emily’s case, or variations of her case, is not unique, and I support the changes of better enforcement of maintenance orders, and I call on the Government, in the execution of the enforcement, a cost-effective and simplified process. I am pleased to note from Minister Shanmugam that the process is now online in the new enforcement process.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I believe that it is our duty as lawmakers to ensure that women who are going through a divorce have access to the support and resources they need to manage their caregiving responsibilities and become financially independent. We must work towards creating a family justice system that is not just fair but enabling for all.
The NTUC's Women and Family Unit is committed to supporting women, including single mothers and divorcees, to return to work. We believe that empowering and enabling women to be financially independent is a very important part of the support network needed, especially after a divorce. Indeed, we have launched with our unionised companies many creative programmes that support our women in transition, the most recent being the CUBack@Work, or CUB programme. This combines a six-week paid flexible training programme with a transition into a flexible work arrangement (FWA) with good salaries and clear career pathways. It is essential that, as a community, we create the right conditions for women to transit into the workforce smoothly and help to retain them in the workforce by recognising the need to balance livelihoods with caregiving responsibilities.
I would like to ask Minister of State Sun Xueling what programmes MSF has looked into to assist our women to rejoin the workforce and the MEO process and if the Labour Movement can be a key partner of these programmes.
In the larger context of family justice, I call upon our Singaporean community – social and business – to come together to enable our sisters to be financially independent, above and beyond the protections of the improvements to this reform Bill. Companies must redesign their jobs such that FWAs become a business and social norm. The Family Courts can consider, in addition to specifying clinical and therapeutic intervention sessions, also job and upskilling workshops to ensure that women have access to the resources and support they need to rebuild their lives. We must equip our women with the means to long-term financial stability, peace of mind in managing their caregiving responsibilities and the choice to return to the workforce. I support the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Mr Deputy Speaker, the aim of the Family Justice Reform Bill is to amend the Family Justice Act, Women's Charter and the Guardianship of Infants Act to, among others, simplify family proceedings and to provide sustainable maintenance outcomes.
I am supportive of this Bill and the efforts to strengthen family Therapeutic Justice. My speech today aims to seek clarifications on certain aspects of the Bill, particularly that relating to providing greater support for both the applicants and respondents to the maintenance enforcement process. At the same time, I will also be speaking on related issues to improve on the education and housing needs of children involved in a divorce.
The new section 85 of the Family Justice Reform Bill enables the MEO to refer and provide information regarding the parties involved to a social service officer. This step comes after the MEO has obtained relevant information from the involved parties and determines that one or more of the parties involved would require financial assistance.
I appreciate the inclusion of such a step in the Maintenance Enforcement Process. As what my hon friend Member of Parlliament Jamus Lim alluded to in his Committee of Supply (COS) speech this year, the dignity of the needy should be retained even while applying for financial assistance. I wonder if the parties referred to a social service officer (SSO) would still need to complete the relevant paperwork and go through a similar application process for financial assistance, had he or she made the application to the SSO separately?
After all, under section 86, the MEO will be empowered to obtain information about the parties' assets and means from stipulated entities, such as certain Government agencies, banks and the Central Depository. Moreover, if the MEO and the Courts already have access to such information, should we do away with the requirement for parties to the maintenance enforcement process to submit documents, such as bank statements, which is detailed in the MEP process workflow?
Such a move would greatly reduce the administrative burden of applicants especially, and reduce the emotional burden faced by the parties involved as they navigate through this patch of troubled waters in their lives.
While the MEP workflow allows for the smooth application of financial assistance, it does not guarantee that each application will yield a successful outcome. Section 81 allows for the Court to \"vary, suspend, discharge, rescind, set aside or revoke the maintenance order.\" This could either be due to an application by either party or a settlement by both parties.
This step comes after the MEO has referred the relevant parties for financial assistance. What then happens if the application of financial assistance for the relevant parties is unsuccessful? Potentially, such a problem would especially impact those whose income exceeds the income threshold for financial assistance but are burdened with a multitude of financial commitments.
Maintenance payments are key for applicants to pay for their living expenses, foot medical bills and repay other arrears and mortgages that they have. Hence, with a reduction or variation in the maintenance order, divorcees would face an additional financial burden and a lower quality of life. This would especially hit the children involved and their caregivers hard.
I propose that the Ministry consider granting additional consideration for, or even guaranteeing a baseline level of financial assistance to parties referred by the MEO during cases pertaining to the enforcement of a maintenance order, especially if it involves a reduced maintenance amount. This would help to ensure that there would be minimal impact on the welfare of the parties involved, increase the efficiency of the MEP and produce sustainable maintenance outcomes.
Clause 12 of the Bill states that the Family Justice Rules can prescribe the mode through which the child's wishes may be determined if the Court wishes to consider it in its ruling. According to the media release, this may include judicial interviews with the child.
In the case of AZB vs AZC [2016], the Family Justice Courts laid out that judicial interviews of children are suitable in the Singaporean context. In the ruling, Justice Debbie Ong also highlighted the difficulties faced when conducting judicial interviews of children, such as there being insufficient time available to build rapport between the judge and child, communication difficulties between the child and the judge, and discomfort towards the Court process by the child.
One recommendation laid out by the Court is that judges should be equipped with the necessary skills to handle judicial interviews with the child, which could be achieved by training judicial staff. This is a move seen in other countries with the common law system, such as Australia, which called for the training of judicial staff back in 1995. Hence, Singapore could also consider adopting a similar approach.
We could consider implementing guidelines, such as to provide an environment that facilitates the process effectively, such as determining the parties present at the meeting, the tone of the meeting and the information briefed to the child. Risks, such as parental interference, could also be mitigated by instructing parents not to ask their children about the interview. These are some of the skills and knowledge that could be imparted to judges as part of a training programme to effectively conduct a judicial interview of a child. This would enable them to communicate with the child to gain a better understanding of their needs, wants and views regarding the matter, which could aid them in their judgment.
The introduction of the Bill provides us with the opportunity to implement these measures, which would ensure that the child's voice is heard loud and clear, especially pertaining to a matter that affects their lives substantially.
Before I conclude, I would also like to make some brief comments on issues outside the ambit of this Bill, relating to the education and housing needs of children involved in a divorce – two of the fundamental rights of a child.
Strengthening the maintenance regime is arguably a key step to ensuring that the basic living needs of children and their caregivers, such as good nutrition, are met. At the same time, administrative procedures and issues that divorcees face could also reopen wounds and cause further trauma. I, thus, believe there is room for us to improve on processes and policies relating to the child's education and housing needs.
On education, I understand that parents who have joint custody of their child need to come to a common agreement on their child's school transfer. The relevant Court order setting out the custody arrangements pertaining to the child will be required at the point of reporting to the current school. The parent who submits the application for the child will be required to produce a signed Letter of Consent from the other parent.
To what extent is this being operationalised and practised in our schools? The reason I am asking is also because in the MOE's step-by-step guide for primary school transfers, it is stated that, and I quote, \"In making this application, I understand that should the other parents/legal guardian have any basis to contest this arrangement in the future, I will resolve this issue with him/her\". It appears that the responsibility to resolve any disputes on transfers is delegated to the parent, with no mention of any Letters of Consent or undertaking required.
When it comes to preschools, are there also similar requirements by the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) for a Letter of Consent before any enrolment or transfer is made? Or could a parent with care and control of the child enrol him or her in a preschool, without the approval of the other parent with joint custody?
On housing, divorcees with shared care and control of their children have an equal right to list the children in their application to buy or rent an HDB flat. However, as an individual is only allowed to be listed in one HDB flat application, the HDB requires divorced parents to come to an agreement before either party lists their child in a flat application. Considering that we are looking at divorcees here, coming to an agreement is often easier said than done.
While one party can form a family nucleus with his or her children, the other party will not be able to. For a young divorcee under the age of 35, for example, he or she will not be able to apply for a flat by themselves under the Singles Scheme and not be able to form a family nucleus with his or her children. This could be especially problematic for some parents facing financial hardship or/and without family support, as it will not be practically possible for this parent to care for his or her child, without a stable place to call home.
Both divorcees and their children would need a roof over their heads. So, I hope our policies can recognise this and ensure that all Singaporeans can have access to housing and not have to worry about basic needs, such as access to shelter, in their divorce.
To conclude, I am supportive of this Bill and I hope the additional suggestions I have made can be considered to alleviate the anxiety and anguish inflicted upon the now broken families and enable those involved to better pick themselves up and restart their lives afresh.
After all, as the Chinese saying goes, \"孩子是无辜的\", the children are innocent. Children of divorced parents are already facing difficult circumstances and are at risk of psychological and other adjustment issues. Let us continue to do all we can to better improve on the welfare of the children involved and minimise potential points of conflict in their growing up years.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Dr Wan Rizal.
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. The Bill aims to bring about a much-needed transformation in our family justice system, focusing on the well-being of our children and families while addressing the challenges faced by parties involved in family disputes.
The pain and anguish faced by families embroiled in disputes are all too familiar to all of us. We may know of residents, friends, family members or even neighbours who have endured the emotional turmoil and financial strain that a lengthy and adversarial legal process can inflict upon families.
We may know of similar scenarios where a single mother had to wait for more than a year to receive maintenance from a former spouse. The delay in receiving maintenance payments places an immense financial burden on the single mother and her innocent children who had to suffer the consequences of this predicament.
One of the most significant features of this Bill is the stronger enforcement of maintenance orders. The Bill proposes measures, such as the automatic deduction of maintenance payments from the defaulting party's wages, bank accounts or CPF.
This bold step will ensure that vulnerable parties, such as children and former spouses, receive the financial support they need in a timely manner. Moreover, the Bill introduces the groundbreaking concept of family hearing, a major stride towards a more streamlined and effective Family Justice system. Family hearings will provide a platform for parties to discuss their disputes in a less adversarial setting and promote amicable resolutions. While the proposed Bill has many advantages, I seek clarification from the Ministry on certain aspects of the Bill.
First, the Bill's provisions for stronger enforcement of maintenance orders are commendable. However, I am concerned about the impact of the new maintenance enforcement process on low-income families. Under the new process, parents who fail to pay maintenance will be subjected to more stringent enforcement measures, including imprisonment. And I am concerned that these measures may be too harsh for the low-income families who are genuinely unable to pay maintenance.
Also, could the Ministry elaborate on the specific measures it plans to implement to ensure compliance and deter non-compliance effectively? Sir, my concern really lies in the children, the idea that a parent is imprisoned may have a profound impact on their development.
Secondly, the introduction of family hearings is a significant change in the way family disputes are being resolved. How does the Ministry plan to ensure that adequate resources, such as skilled mediators and support staff, are available for the efficient functioning of these hearings?
Sir, I have also known of instances where disputes impact the family so much that it triggers mental health issues and necessary intervention may be required. Thus, I am especially concerned for the more complex cases where a certified mental health practitioner may be required and, if so, would provisions be made and how would such arrangements be like? Additionally, what measures will be put in place to address any potential power imbalances between the parties involved in these hearings?
Sir, to conclude, the Family Justice Reform Bill is a testament to our unwavering commitment to the welfare of children and families in our nation. Notwithstanding my concerns earlier, I support this Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, one of the aims of the Family Justice Reform Bill is to facilitate more sustainable maintenance outcomes. I support the Bill.
Beyond amending the legislation to make it easier to enforce maintenance payments, going forward, I would like to call for the Government to consider providing for gender-neutral maintenance. That will be the thrust of my speech today.
How could gender-neutral maintenance payments be operationalised? This should be done by giving the Courts the discretion to order that, in appropriate cases, wives should pay maintenance to ex-husbands even if they are not incapacitated. Such cases could include where the husband earns much less than his ex-wife, or is a stay-home-husband, and has borne the bulk of domestic chores and caregiving.
This is in contrast to the current maintenance regime in the Women’s Charter, which provides that, in a divorce, the Court may order a man to pay maintenance to his ex-wife but may order a woman to pay maintenance to her ex-husband only if he is incapacitated.
I previously raised this issue in the Motion on Singapore Women’s Development in 2022. My hon friend, Aljunied Group Representation Constituency (GRC) Member of Parliament Mr Gerald Giam, has also spoken on this in 2021.
Indeed, there is bipartisan support for awarding maintenance to stay-at-home dads. Hon Members Ms Carrie Tan and Mr Ang Wei Neng raised this issue in the 2022 Parliamentary debate on amendments to the Women’s Charter, and hon Members Mr Seah Kian Peng and Mr Louis Ng also raised this issue in the 2016 Parliamentary debate on amendments to Women’s Charter.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, to elaborate, I call for the Government to consider providing for gender-neutral maintenance for the following reasons.
First, the number of stay-home husbands has been gradually increasing over the years. The Singapore Census Population 2020 showed that the percentage of married households where wives are the sole breadwinners – and I stress, married households – increased from 5.8% in 2010 to 7.4% in 2020. That is not an insignificant number at all. In fact, the Labour Force survey for Singapore in 2022 showed that 10.6% of caregivers outside the labour force are males, whether married or unmarried. Again, this is a not an insignificant minority.
Many stay-at-home husbands, just like stay-at-home wives, have sacrificed their careers and incurred significant opportunity costs to spend years looking after their households and doing unpaid care work, such as raising the children. As a result, stay-at-home husbands may have far less savings as compared to their working wives and may well be financially vulnerable in the event of a divorce. Allowing the Courts to have discretion to award maintenance to such husbands would serve to recognise their care work and unpaid contributions. It would also help to safeguard the financially vulnerable spouse, whether husband or wife, which is, surely, the fundamental purpose of maintenance payments.
Secondly, since the Women’s Charter was first enacted in 1961, women in Singapore have made significant progress. In 2020, 52.5% of married households were dual-income households, an increase from 47.1% in 2010. In 2022, the employment rate of females aged 15 and over was 60.9%, the fourth highest in comparison with OECD developed countries. With a larger proportion of women in the workforce, it could well be the case that women might out-earn men in some dual-income households and, thus, would make economic sense for the husband to take on the bulk of domestic work in a household, depending on the decisions that the husband and wife make in each particular case.
However, the current maintenance regime arguably reinforces traditional gendered household roles where men traditionally are regarded as “breadwinners” and women as “homemakers”, by providing that only incapacitated husbands qualify for maintenance. An Institute of Policy Studies survey of stay-at-home fathers in 2020 showed that many of the respondents, many of these stay-at-home dads, experienced “acute stigma” and family members often directed comments suggesting that they were “mooching” from their wives.
Sir, amending the law to provide for gender-neutral maintenance would help to send the correct message that the contributions of stay-at-home husbands are as valued as the care work done by stay-at-home wives.
Thirdly, many other developed countries allow for men to claim maintenance as well, such as the United Kingdom, Hong Kong, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the USA. And there could be others as well. Let us take a leaf from their books.
In the UK government’s Guide to Spousal Maintenance, it is stated that “Spousal maintenance is a payment that’s paid by a wife or husband to their former spouse as part of their divorce.” The language used in a similar Australian government public resource is similarly gender-neutral and states: “Under the Family Law Act 1975, a person has a responsibility to financially assist their spouse, or former de facto partner, if that person cannot meet their own reasonable expenses from their personal income or assets.”
In section 63 and 64 of New Zealand’s Family Proceedings Act 1980, gender-neutral language is used. For example, “each spouse, civil union partner, or de facto partner is liable to maintain the other spouse, civil union partner, or de facto partner to the extent that such maintenance is necessary to meet the reasonable needs of the other spouse, civil union partner, or de facto partner, where the other spouse, civil union partner, or de facto partner cannot practicably meet the whole or any part of those needs because of any one or more of the circumstances specified in subsection (2).” So, the language is gender neutral. To quote from a court verdict in Ontario, Canada, by Justice Wildman in Hamdy vs Hamdy, just to cite another example \"…gender is, of course, irrelevant in determining spousal support. What is important are the roles assumed in the marriage.\"
In the 2022 debate on amendments to the Women’s Charter, the Minister of State for Social and Family Development responded to calls to provide maintenance to husbands by stating that the purpose of the current regime is to protect parties who tend to be more financially vulnerable post-divorce, that is, women and incapacitated men. I agree with such an aim.
However, this does not stop the Government from extending the safeguards provided by the maintenance regime to another potentially vulnerable group, namely, stay-at-home husbands. Even in a gender-neutral maintenance regime, any maintenance to spouses would be awarded at the Court’s discretion and such a regime should not disadvantage vulnerable women who can still be awarded maintenance.
In summary, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I urge the Government to reconsider making maintenance in cases of divorce gender-neutral.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Hany Soh.
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Deputy Speaker, I would, first, like to declare that I am a practising lawyer and the Chairperson of the Pro Bono SG’s Community Legal Clinics’ Committee as well as a member of the Law Society’s Family Law Practice Committee.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I speak in support of the Family Justice Reform Bill which aims to strengthen Family Therapeutic Justice.
As shared during my speech last year during the debate on the Women’s Charter (Amendment) Bill, divorce is one of the most stressful events in one’s life, according to the Holmes and Rahe Stress Scale, second only to the death of a loved one.
This result does not come as a surprise due to the fear of navigating through many uncertainties. As a result, matters relating to divorce and subsequent related enforcement or variation applications remain as one of the most common topics enquired by applicants for preliminary legal advice at various community legal clinics run across Singapore.
During the course of my legal practice, I have represented clients in matrimonial disputes with a view to resolving matters through what is now commonly known by many as the “Therapeutic Justice” or TJ approach. Many a time, clients and fellow members of the bar have asked, \"What exactly is TJ?\"
To me, in essence, TJ revolves around reducing acrimony in family proceedings, ensuring outcomes are deemed as practical and acceptable to parties involved without undue delays, complexity and unnecessary escalation of costs.
Over the years, there have been ongoing discussions about transitioning family law proceedings towards such less adversarial TJ approach, just as what the hon Presiding Judge of the Family Justice Courts, Justice Debbie Ong, had shared in the Family Justice Work Plan in 2020.
Since then, the Courts and the family practice community have been co-creating a renewed vision of family justice informed by the TJ principles. However, to date, my observation is that the relevant stakeholders still have different interpretations on how a TJ approach ought to be adopted during the Court proceedings. Moreover, some may still be resistant to buy in to this concept.
In order for this vision to come into fruition, it requires the whole ecosystem to embrace the concept, including the Courts, lawyers, counsellors and the parties involved. Together, we must work towards a common defined goal that the resolution of family disputes need not be adversarial but should rather be focused on solutions, such as determining what outcome would be the most reasonable and practical in the best interest of the children after their parents have separated.
To achieve this, both the \"hardware\" and \"heartware\" changes are necessary. Firstly, there should be an increase in manpower and resources at the Family Justice Courts. This will ensure that the Courts are adequately equipped to handle cases in a timely and efficient manner.
Take the incoming Maintenance Enforcement Officers (MEOs), for example. How many of these MEOs will the Courts be expecting for the Ministry to recruit in order to cope with the high volume of maintenance summons applications? Moreover, it seems to me that the workload and job scope of MEOs are expected to be heavy, having the need to deal with not just the parties involved but also third parties like the Government agencies and financial institutions to obtain information on parties’ financial situations and, thereafter, conducting conciliation sessions with parties and reporting these developments to the Court.
Secondly, there must be an emphasis on training and consistency in the management of cases across all judges, counsellors, lawyers and even the upcoming MEOs. Such training should not take place separately. Currently, the family judges undergo specialist curriculum training in multidisciplinary topics, whereas the family lawyers may opt to attend the Family Therapeutic Justice Certification Programme, and counsellors attend family counselling certification programmes respectively.
Training for all of these relevant family justice community personnel should be carried out together, where all can partake in various role-play scenarios and have a better understanding of one another’s positions by putting themselves in one another’s shoes and explore how they can better work together to resolve those supposed acrimonious issues. Hopefully, these changes will gradually help to create an environment where parties involved are more inclined to consider and accept the TJ outcomes.
One of the proposed changes under this Family Justice Reform Bill pertains to enhancing a judge-led approach. In this regard, I wish to seek clarification on whether this would mean a docket system where a specific judge is assigned to a case right from the beginning when a divorce is commenced under the ordinary route to oversee the case through to its conclusion.
To better promote efficiency in Court proceedings, being another objective which this Reform Bill aims to achieve, I would urge all parties involved, including the judge, lawyers and the parties in action to actively work towards reaching a global settlement. In cases involving children, it should be made mandatory under the Court’s Practice Direction for parties to exchange supporting documents at the outset, which would typically only be exchanged either during the mediation or at the ancillary stage.
Additionally, settlement proposals should thereafter be exchanged. If the matter still cannot be settled and has to proceed under the ordinary route, the docketed judge should promptly refer the matter for mediation, with the aim of converting parties to adopt a TJ mindset and work towards a global settlement. Additionally, MSF or the Court should arrange at the earliest opportunity for the children to undergo counselling to better understand and minimise the trauma caused to the young and innocent as a result of their parents’ divorce.
As Mahatma Gandhi once said, \"An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind.\"
The dissolution of a marriage and parting ways with your spouse need not and should not be acrimonious. It is my sincere hope that this approach can be achieved in all cases, particularly those involving children, once the Bill has been passed and implemented. In Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The Family Justice Reform Bill, when it comes into effect, will give the presiding judge more control. Although it is difficult to judge people's family affairs, I am confident that MinLaw and MSF and the Family Justice Court will assure the public how these rights can further reduce unnecessary legal proceedings, alleviate the mental and financial stress faced by the parties in divorce proceedings, improve broken family relationships due to divorce, and minimise the intentional or unintentional psychological harm done to the children by either party during this period.
(In English): In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, notwithstanding the clarifications and suggestions I have raised earlier, I stand in support of this Reform Bill. Strengthening Family Therapeutic Justice presents us with an opportunity to create a more compassionate and effective family law system. By embracing this approach, we can reduce the acrimony, ensure fairer outcomes and prioritise the best interests of our children. Let us all work together towards a future where families can navigate the challenges of separation with dignity, empathy and the welfare of our children at the forefront.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Lim Biow Chuan.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Mr Deputy Speaker, I declare my interest as a lawyer where part of my legal practice involves matrimonial law.
There are two parts of this Bill which I wish to speak on.
Clause 81 – Court Orders on Maintenance enforcement application. Currently, when a complainant applies to Court for enforcement of maintenance, the frustration is always with the possible delays in the receipt of the maintenance.
Delays happen when the respondent does not turn up; the case is then adjourned. The next time the respondent turns up, he applies for adjournment to engage a lawyer. The case is then adjourned again.
Sometimes, the Court sends parties for mediation and the case is adjourned again while parties try to find an amicable solution. If the respondent disputes the claim, the Court will direct parties to prepare their case and more time is taken up.
In the meantime, the complainant suffers because of the time required to attend Court again and again and the failure to receive the maintenance which had been ordered to be paid to the applicant.
Even if the respondent were to eventually make payment of the arrears of maintenance, there is this possibility that he may default in payment again, then the applicant has to start the process all over again.
Thus, there will be times when an applicant may eventually give up on the maintenance application and decide not to enforce the order. This is unfair to an applicant who has been granted the maintenance.
Hence, Sir, I support the amendments to the Women’s Charter to allow the appointment of the Maintenance Enforcement Officers (MEO) in order to have a more sustainable maintenance outcome. The MEOs would then be empowered to carry out investigations on the assets of the respondent and then report to the judge. Without the information given by the MEOs, the applicant who is trying to enforce the maintenance order will have a difficult time trying to check what are the respondent's assets.
In particular, the Courts should be given the powers to act expeditiously and to make interim orders, whenever necessary, to ensure that complainants or applicants who are financially stretched are able to receive the maintenance that they deserve and are entitled to receive; otherwise, the applicant would typically suffer and situations where there are children involved will result in hardship for the family.
Where the MEOs are able to ascertain that the respondent is deliberately refusing to make the maintenance payment, the Court should not hesitate to attach the salary of the respondent or attach his assets in order to enforce the maintenance order. In addition, the Court should consider making an order that the respondent's credit cards be cancelled until the arrears of maintenance are settled.
Where an MEO finds that a respondent’s conduct in refusing to pay the maintenance is contumacious, I would submit that the Court ought to punish the respondent for wasting the time of the applicant, the MEO and the Courts. The respondent should not be able to get away with delaying the maintenance payment just to frustrate the applicant; and then he walks away without consequence once he pays up the arrears.
Sir, I recognise that there may be occasions where a respondent may be unable to make payment of the maintenance because his family circumstances have changed. For example, if he loses his job or, sometimes, if the respondent remarries and has to support another family. In situations like these, I expect that the MEO would recommend a variation of the maintenance order.
May I then ask the Minister how would the Court make a reasonable variation order which can take into account the needs of an applicant who is reliant on the respondent’s maintenance for herself and the children versus the financial needs of the respondent who now has to support another wife and possibly his other children?
May I also ask whether the MEO is able to investigate and deal with cases where a respondent resigns from his job and has no more income as he simply wishes to deny maintenance payable to the applicant? The loss of income in this case is or would be self-induced with the intent of denying the applicant the maintenance which she ought to be entitled to.
How would the Court also deal with situations where a respondent refuses to pay child maintenance because he is denied access or visitation rights to the child? Will the Court be able to deal with such situations even though the application before the Court is an enforcement of maintenance application? Or would the Court require a separate application for enforcement of the access rights?
Sir, the next part of the Bill which I wish to speak on is the enhancement of judge-led approach in considering the wishes of the child.
Sir, in the media release by MinLaw, it was stated that the Bill will provide clarity that where the wishes of the child are to be considered by the Court, the judge may conduct interviews with the child.
The current legal position is that the Court in making decisions about the child may appoint a Child Representative to the Court or the Court can appoint a trained or professional assessor to make recommendations on the child’s custody or access orders. The appointed assessor would then prepare a Social Welfare Report, or a Custody Evaluation Report or an Access Evaluation Report.
The judge may also ascertain the wishes of the child by conducting an interview with the child and there has been case laws on the power of the judge to do so.
However, may I express some reservations about a judge carrying out interviews of the child because a judge is typically an authority in the law. He or she is not a trained child counsellor who can discern whether a child has been coached to express certain views or is under duress to say positive things about one parent just by one interview. Although some judges may have some degree of training in handling children, the reality is that a judge spends more time analysing the law and the facts applicable to the case.
Thus, unless a judge spends a much, much longer period of time talking with and interviewing the child, I do have some reservations whether a judge is able to make a better assessment of the wishes of a child by a simple interview, compared to trained social workers who will be spending more time talking and interacting with the child and observing the expressions of the child.
So, may I ask the Minister to clarify what is the intent of this amendment as the current case law does allow the process. Is it the position of the Government that they prefer that judges carry out the interviews more regularly, as compared to the judge appointing social workers or Child Representative to take care of the child’s interest? At the end of the day, what is important is how to ascertain what is in the best interest of the child. Subject to the above clarifications, Sir, I support the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Family Justice Reform Bill that will help address the issues.
It is certainly helpful to have a new unit of Maintenance Enforcement Officers (MEOs) set up and given the power to obtain information about the parties' assets and means from entities, including banks and Government agencies, such as CPF Board and HDB, to ensure that those who refuse to pay are dealt with more decisively.
The officers are part of a new Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP), which will simplify applications related to non-payment of maintenance orders.
While the MEOs could help distinguish between those who cannot afford to pay maintenance and those who have the financial means but refuse to pay, the officers may face challenges if the parties who could have the ability and capability to derive a better income have, indeed, tried his best to do so and chose not to do so to benefit the applicant.
In addition, the officers would still need to work on the acceptance of medical certification from medical practitioners to determine if the respondent's medical conditions are reasonable to justify lower maintenance payments or exclusion of possible imprisonment order for failure to show proof of payment. Will the officers require the respondent to seek confirmation from only selected medical officers?
In the case of a bankrupt respondent, will the award and repayment of maintenance payments be prioritised against other creditors?
How would the MEO or Court prioritise if the respondent who is the only sole breadwinner and also child who needs to support parents and his income is insufficient to support all, especially if the parents are sick?
I am supportive of the introduction of \"rebuttable presumption\" to address the issue of respondents dissipating assets, such as by spending money or moving it to another account.
With the presumption, the onus is then on the respondent to show that there was no intention to siphon the assets. The applicant must show that this happened less than three years before he or she applied for a clawback order, or that there is an impending move that would frustrate enforcement of the maintenance order. Evidence found by the MEO can be used.
In addition, I hope MEO could assist the Court in deciding on the percentage allocation and distribution of the sale proceeds of the existing flat or property to minimise the housing needs challenges faced by both parties after divorce. Sir, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] As the saying goes, \"Every family has got its own set of problems and it is very difficult for the judge to preside over family affairs\".
I thank MinLaw and MSF as well the Family Justice Court for their effort to push through this Family Justice Reform Bill to focus more on therapeutic justice, so that adversity could be reduced and parties could go through this difficult time of their life and move on.
The presiding judge in divorce cases will have greater controls, including setting restrictions on the cross-examination process in Court to prevent family relations from further disintegrating. Because both parties would try to reveal each other’s faults, the judge would have the power to issue Court orders to protect the interest of the family as well as the children.
For example, if the judge believes that the cross-examination could bring undue stress upon a vulnerable witness, he can set out restrictions on the cross-examination process. The judge could also interview the children in person to understand their wishes and issue a judgment that serves the children’s interest.
This Bill will also improve the efficiency of the family justice process. Without the Court’s approval, parties cannot raise unnecessary requests which will frustrate or delay the justice process or affect the children negatively.
For couples considering divorce, I hope that they could mend their differences at the end of the day and there should not be any grievances overnight. The solution of their dispute still lies in them. I also hope that it will not be worse off.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.20 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 4.00 pm until 4.20 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.20 pm.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair]
[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, this Bill will improve Family Court proceedings by reducing acrimony in divorce proceedings, enhancing the judge-led approach and facilitating enforcement of maintenance orders. I have three points to make.
My first point is on the enhanced Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP), which simplifies the enforcement of maintenance orders.
First, the new section 86 allows the Maintenance Enforcement Officer (MEO) to seek Court orders for banks or prescribed third parties to provide information. Can the Minister share who these prescribed third parties may be?
Second, can the Minister share what are the contemplated timelines that the MEO will seek from the Court for banks and prescribed third parties? Family lawyers have shared with me that banks take time to respond to their requests for information. Can the Minister share if the banks have been consulted on their ability to respond within the contemplated timelines?
Third, the new section 88 allows an MEO to conduct conciliation sessions to help both parties agree on maintenance. Given that conciliation sessions could be used by a party to delay proceedings, can the Minister share whether there is a limit on the number of conciliation sessions that the MEO can conduct? Can the Minister share what are the consequences for a party if they fail to attend or are clearly not participating in good faith on the conciliation?
Fourth, MEOs will be empowered to obtain information from parties and to submit a report to the Court. Can the Minister share what training will be provided to the MEOs to make discovery of the relevant documents and assess the parties’ actual financial positions? Can the Minister elaborate on what the MEO’s report is supposed to set out and whether it will be provided to both parties? Can the Minister also share whether there will be a standard rubric for MEOs to assess parties’ financial positions in preparing the report?
Fifth, the Court may vary the original maintenance orders in the MEP. Applicants may think twice before applying under the MEP if their application may lead to their original maintenance orders being varied. Can the Minister clarify if it is only under exceptional circumstances that the Court will vary the original maintenance orders in the MEP? If so, can the Minister share what factors a Court should take into account before varying the original maintenance orders in the MEP?
My second point is on the attachment of earnings Court orders. These Court orders direct a party’s employer to deduct a portion of maintenance from their salary to make direct payment to the other party. The new section 91H allows the Court to determine what payments to a person are earnings that can be directed for the payment of maintenance. The relevant sections set out obligations relating to the respondent’s employer and employment when an attachment of earnings order is made. Can the Minister clarify whether earnings from freelance or gig economy work can be deemed earnings? If such earnings can be subject to an attachment of earnings order, can the Minister clarify how the obligations relating to traditional employers or employment apply where the respondent is engaged in gig work?
My third point is on financial counselling for couples undergoing divorce. In the public consultation for the RERF Committee’s recommendations, members of the public asked to build up capabilities in financial counselling to help divorcees better manage their new finances. The new section 91(b) makes progress in this area. It provides the Court with powers to order a party to undergo financial counselling as part of maintenance enforcement proceedings.
But counselling works best when it starts earlier, long before divorce applications are even filed. Indeed, the RERF Committee said in its 2019 report that sorting out finances early when a marriage has broken down is important to avoid disputes and distress later.
MSF may be able to identify families at high-risk of divorce through the various social service agencies and FSCs. Can the Minister share how MinLaw and MSF are working together at an upstream stage to help families access financial counselling even before the divorce application is filed?
Also, given that parents with children under 21 years old must undergo the Mandatory Co-Parenting Programme (CPP) before filing for divorce, can Minister of State Sun Xueling share if there are plans to incorporate mandatory financial counselling and planning as part of the CPP?
Can the Minister also clarify where an MEO refers parties for financial assistance after reviewing documents submitted by the parties, will the matter still proceed on to conciliation and hearing? Notwithstanding these clarifications, Sir, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: That would have made a very effective cut in the Committee of Supply Debate. You were under five minutes making all those points. The next speaker, Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Thank you, Sir. I will, therefore, take my own time.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill, which seeks to introduce reforms to make family proceedings simpler, more efficient and to facilitate more sustainable maintenance outcomes. However, I do have a few questions and suggestions.
Sir, I support the Bill’s proposal to enhance the judge-led approach in family proceedings. One of the key amendments to the Women’s Charter will cater to the scenario when the wishes of the child are to be considered by the Court. The Family Justice Rules can set out the mode by which the child’s wishes may be determined, including a judicial interview with the child.
A child’s view is important. However, depending on the age and maturity of the child, the child's views can be easily swayed by other family members or persons with vested interest. I would like to ask the Minister what would be the minimum age of the child that the Court will allow to be interviewed. Should we set clear safeguards in legislation to allow only children who are mature enough to convey their views independently?
Next, I support the proposed enhancements to the Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP), which will help to differentiate between those who are unable to pay maintenance and those who refuse to pay. The two are clearly different and it is, therefore, important that we make a distinction between the two.
I would like to ask what would be the asset or income threshold for those deemed to be unable to pay. Would the threshold be specified in subsidiary legislation? How will the Government ensure that a spouse in an acrimonious divorce case is unable to game the MEP system?
Under the MEP, the existing mediation process will be replaced by a conciliation process undertaken by this newly established unit of Maintenance Enforcement Officers (MEOs). Compared to the current mediation process, MEOs will be accorded powers to actively seek information and recommend practical solutions to the parties involved. I find this useful, but I do have a few questions on the new MEP.
I would like to ask if MEOs will be able to obtain information about assets that are kept outside of Singapore. What kind of training will be provided to MEOs to ensure that they understand and are equipped to apply their new powers? Would it be an offence for a person to refuse to comply with an MEO’s direction to seek financial assistance, just to vex the ex-spouse and not provide any maintenance? I look forward to the Minister's clarifications.
Lastly, while I welcome the efforts to reform the system to facilitate more sustainable maintenance outcomes, we must also be mindful of indirectly creating the unintended consequence where divorce becomes too easy and becomes the first solution or the quick fix which couples in distress turn to.
Sir, where possible, we should strive to save marriages. We must redouble our efforts to strengthen the institution of marriage, so that we have stronger marriages and lower divorce rates. Only by doing so can our children grow up in a strong family nucleus and nurturing family environment.
I have raised in this House various ideas on various occasions on how we can do so, from improving the quality of our marriage preparation programmes, to having more campaigns to help couples reaffirm their marriages at key milestones. I hope that the Government will consider my proposals.
Sir, the reforms under this Bill will help to strengthen Therapeutic Justice elements in the family justice system and help families in distress to heal and move on with their lives. But even as we facilitate more sustainable maintenance outcomes, we must always remember that prevention is better than cure. Let us continue to work, as a whole of society, to strengthen marriages and family ties. Sir, I support the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Ng Ling Ling.
Ms Ng Ling Ling (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Deputy Speaker, data published in 2021 by the Department of Statistics Singapore showed that the general trend of divorce rates is increasing in Singapore, with 7.2 male divorcees for every 1,000 married men, up from 6.3 in 2020; and 6.9 female divorcees up from 6.1 in 2020.
Although Singapore, as a society, is primarily anchored on family-centric values, with the Government and the community at large encouraging marriages and supportive of couples through their marriages, we acknowledge that some marriages may inevitably break down, due to multifaceted factors.
We do need to help couples deal with the fall-out from the break-up of their marriage and help both parties move on with their lives, especially if there are children involved. Therefore, I am very supportive of the introduction of the Family Justice Reform Bill. However, I would like to raise two considerations. One, with regard to the new Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP) and two, on the non-payment of maintenance and how the process could be enhanced to support more applicants, especially the vulnerable ones.
Firstly, the enhanced MEP starts with applicants applying online for enforcement. Like my concerns shared in my previous speech on the Mental Capacity (Amendment) Bill relating to the process of applying for Lasting Power of Attorney, the process for the enforcement of maintenance assumes that all applicants are tech-savvy and will not have any difficulties applying online.
Nevertheless, we know that there will be cases where applicants are not tech-savvy and may be discouraged to submit an online enforcement application because they are unable to do so readily, even if they are facing financial hardship. I wonder if MSF and MinLaw could work together to identify vulnerable individuals, such as low-income single parents, or divorcees with special needs or disabilities, including those due to stroke, that would require more support in their application and enforcement for maintenance.
A suggestion is for MinLaw and MSF to consider empowering Social Service Office (SSO) or social workers with the role to act on behalf of such applicants, in their navigation of the online application and appropriate referral to the Family Justice Court if they are found to require additional attention to expedite enforcement of their maintenance, especially where the welfare of young children is at stake.
Secondly, I would like to raise another consideration with the enforcement of maintenance. In the Bill, amendments are proposed to the Women's Charter in section 71 to empower the Court to make attachment of earning order for maintenance to secure payment of any maintenance from the respondent. Additionally, the Bill added a new section 81 to the Women's Charter to provide directions to the Court on the orders that it may or must make on a maintenance enforcement application, which included a Show-Payment Order and, when breached, the respondent is liable for imprisonment.
Despite these safeguards, there may be instances where respondents continue to act irresponsibly and are defiant to these orders, failing to pay maintenance, especially after one year from the hearing. In such instances, I would like to ask what powers and directions the Courts are vested with to ensure that the maintenance order would be fully enforced within a reasonable stipulated time, for the respondents to be brought to task expediently to reduce hardship on the applicants needing the maintenance.
I would like to cite the example of my resident, Mdm Goh, as one such single mother who needs more help from MSF and MinLaw for enforcing the maintenance from her divorced husband. Mdm Goh came to my Meet-the-People Session some weeks back to seek help on financial assistance. She is a single mother in her early 30s with three young children, aged three to seven.
Following her divorce a couple of years ago, while the Court has ordered her former husband to pay about $1,200 monthly maintenance to her and their three children, he has not done so. Mdm Goh started applying for enforcement but has been stuck for a while as the Court informed her that her former husband has an outstanding warrant of arrest, which renders the enforcement of maintenance not possible until his arrest. He has not been contactable.
Meanwhile, Mdm Goh has been relying on ComCare support, which was reduced recently. While she understands that ComCare assistance is provided only for short to mid-term and she needs to get a job, she has only been able to convince employers to let her work on daily hour-rated jobs because of her need to rush home to care for her young children before and after school or childcare hours, alone. She also has to wrestle with her bankruptcy status due to her former husband using her name against her will for a loan on which he defaulted. Her own parents struggle with mental health challenges and are deemed unsuitable for caregiving of her young children by social workers assisting her.
Mdm Goh has been anxious and desperate. Thankful to SSO's help to my appeal, she is given some ComCare extension while I assist her in finding jobs nearer to her home. Given her unresolved maintenance payments from her former husband, which may never be paid, she may be a genuine single parent who will require ComCare assistance to be maintained at a level for a few more years until her two younger children also enter primary school and when she can hopefully find a full-time job with her ITE qualification.
Mdm Goh's case shows the necessity to emphasise Therapeutic Justice and assistance for vulnerable divorcees, with both MSF and MinLaw coordinating the processes to render needful assistance so that the divorcees and their children do not fall into hardship due to unintended policy gaps. Mr Deputy Speaker, please allow me to say some words in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Deputy Speaker, in recent years, our divorce rate has been on the rise. Therefore, it is extremely important to simplify and strengthen our family justice process. I strongly support the Family Justice Reform Bill jointly drafted by MinLaw and MSF. This will allow marriages to end in a harmonious manner and safeguard the welfare of the children through a therapeutic justice system. I have two suggestions on the Bill which I hope MinLaw and MSF will consider.
First, the family justice process set out in the Bill requires divorcees to apply for maintenance online. I am worried that online applications will deter divorcees who are not tech-savvy and will indirectly affect them and their children's welfare. I hope MinLaw and MSF will work together to identify vulnerable groups who need help, such as low-income divorcees who are single parents, and provide more social assistance to help them claim maintenance effectively. I also hope that MinLaw and MSF can authorise social workers to apply to the Court for alimony on behalf of the divorcee when necessary, such as when the welfare of the children is seriously affected.
Second, I would like to relate the story of my resident, Mdm Goh. In the process of claiming maintenance, the Court issued a warrant of arrest but Mdm Goh's ex-husband was not contactable, hence, the alimony could not be claimed. Mdm Goh had to raise three children on her own and struggled financially because she could not get any maintenance. Her story illustrated the importance of therapeutic justice. I hope that MinLaw and MSF will provide more social assistance in cases, such as Mdm Goh's, and to help them claim maintenance.
(In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, given that most divorces are likely to occur between five and nine years of marriage, the psychological impact towards separation and divorce can be substantial and long-lasting. This is even more so if the couples have young children. Hence, let me conclude my speech by affirming the efforts of MinLaw and MSF in their determination to reform and strengthen Therapeutic Justice elements in the family justice system.
Additionally, I also hope that this Bill will help vulnerable individuals, especially those that may have been through an abusive marriage, to regain themselves swiftly and rebuild their lives. Notwithstanding the considerations that I have raised, Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim.
Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill will introduce the enhanced Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP) to facilitate maintenance outcomes for parties and will put our Judiciary in a good position to strengthen and mete out Therapeutic Justice in the divorce process.
In my law practice, I handle some matrimonial cases on a pro bono basis. One such case was when I was assigned by the Legal Aid Bureau to represent a young mother of four in a divorce proceeding. That case shaped my thinking on how we can and should make it easier for estranged spouses to claim maintenance for their children when divorce occurs. Please allow me to share her story.
Mdm Wati, not her real name, was only 19 years old when she got married and, as such, she was not named as a joint owner of the HDB flat that she lived with her husband because she was not yet 21 years old. Unfortunately, she was in an abusive relationship, suffering under the hands of an abusive husband she once loved. She was a housewife with no other sources of income and was wholly dependent on the sole breadwinner. She endured the strain of the relationship and the pain of the abuse and held on because of her young children. She would have had a fifth child if not for a miscarriage that she suffered after a beating so bad that she was hospitalised for a week. The doctors had to perform a hysterectomy and she can never have another child ever again.
Finally, she mustered enough courage to seek divorce. However, she was faced back then with a system that was cumbersome and daunting for a single mother to navigate. The ex-spouse had sought to kick her and the children out of the matrimonial flat because she was not listed as an owner and refused to agree to any division of assets in her favour. She finally sought help from the Legal Aid Bureau.
She had to go to the Family Court, as it then was, to seek enforcement and variation of maintenance orders to feed her children and, at the same time, sort out her divorce proceedings before the Syariah Court, a Court case that was protracted by the ex-spouse all the way to the appellate stage.
I recalled the maintenance order which, I found, was out of the ordinary. Typically, such orders would set out the amount to be paid for each child or spouse and the bank account details for such sums to be deposited. However, this one had not only the usual quantum and such details, but it also specified exactly what items that this ex-spouse had to purchase for the children, things like baby formula milk, diapers and even to specify the type of necessities – basic stuff like food and educational expenses. What kind of parent must be told and compelled to purchase sustenance for his own children? The ex-spouse had not only protracted proceedings but also taken such acrimonious and unreasonable positions which necessitated such specific orders.
Eventually, the appellate Court held that she had a share and interest in the flat, notwithstanding that she was not listed as an owner. She also received settlement of the outstanding maintenance owed from the ex-spouse, but this was not before enduring a lengthy Court process.
Throughout her ordeal, she almost gave up. She told me that she was fortunate to receive legal aid. Others may not have such fortunate ending.
Mdm Wati's case highlighted to me the need for us to facilitate the maintenance enforcement process for any parent, whether man or woman, to seek what is rightfully their children's and to alleviate some of the burden that they carry after divorce.
It is in this spirit that I stand fully in support of the Bill.
I also welcome the protection of family violence survivors through limited cross-examination in certain circumstances. As raised in previous Parliamentary speeches, I hope that there can be default video conferencing facilities within the Family Justice Court (FJC) for young survivors to give evidence. This is to insulate them from further trauma on the stand. I understand that such infrastructure is already part of MinLaw's plans and I look forward to the implementation in this regard.
I have the following further clarifications and suggestions.
Firstly, on Maintenance Enforcement Officers (MEO), I hope to hear more the plans on recruitment, resourcing and training of such MEOs, especially given the caseload on the Courts and enforcement of not just FJC Court orders but also Syariah Court orders as well. Further, as MEOs encounter members of the public and, to a certain degree, may face hostile respondents or uncooperative third parties, may I ask what are the protection and immunity that will be accorded to MEOs?
Secondly, can the Ministry consider having all such maintenance orders reflected on a searchable database registry that can be accessed on a \"need-to-know\" basis by financial institutions or public agencies? This is to allow would-be public service employers and banks to conduct due diligence for checks on background or credit worthiness.
Thirdly, on claiming for past outstanding maintenance, one clarification that I have received is whether there is a time limitation period to make such claims under the MEP. Typically, as in the story I shared earlier, the victim would have had to endure many years of unpaid maintenance through protracted proceedings. So, not everyone would make a claim immediately upon breach.
Fourthly, in some cases, there are other competing creditors. The usual refrain from the ex-spouse is that he or she had to pay off other loans or financial commitments first. The financial strain on the paying party is real. We need to balance their interests, too. This is especially in cases where the respondent has been declared bankrupt. In most cases, the applicant is unlikely to be able to recover any monies from an insolvent respondent. Hence, in this situation, what are the additional support that can be rendered to both parties?
I understand that the reforms do not change the order of the priorities of an insolvent debtor. In bankruptcy proceedings, if there had been unfair preference or transactions at undervalue, those assets can be clawed back. Hence, I look forward to understanding how the proposed MEP and the current bankruptcy regime will work together.
Lastly, what are the steps that MinLaw, together with MSF, will take to raise awareness of the MEP and render assistance to laypersons who do not know how to navigate the claims and applications? I also hope that the MEP will also apply equally for the enforcement of Syariah Court orders, especially on maintenance-like orders on payment of nafkah iddah and mutaah. In Malay, please, Sir.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] This amendment Bill will help applicants, like ex-spouses, to receive any outstanding maintenance much faster and allow the Courts, through its officers and special office, such as the MEO, to obtain the latest information on the financial status and income of relevant parties. This is a welcome change.
In the past, as I had shared earlier in the case of Mdm Wati, not her real name, the process of receiving her child's maintenance not only took a long time, but it was also mentally exhausting and left her feeling dispirited. When a marriage ends, the couple should separate amicably, because even though they are no longer a family, the family ties and the love between the parents and their children should never cease to exist. I hope, with this new process, we can ensure that the child's maintenance can be provisioned as soon as possible and the responsibility of providing maintenance as a parent can be carried out.
(In English): Sir, notwithstanding my clarifications and suggestions, I stand fully in support of the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Suspension of Standing Orders","subTitle":"Minister of State and Senior Parliamentary Secretary to speak more than once","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Deputy Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move that the proceedings on item No 1 in the Order Paper for today be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 48(3) so far as it is necessary to enable Minister of State Sun Xueling and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam to speak more than once?
In the course of the debate, Members of Parliament have directed queries to both Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam and Minister of State Sun Xueling, who had spoken on behalf of MinLaw and MSF respectively. I wish to move this Motion so that Minister of State Sun Xueling and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam can respond to Members' queries on the specific elements of the Bill and related matters.
Mr Deputy Speaker: I give my consent. Does the Leader of the House have the general assent of hon Members present to so move?
[(proc text) Hon Members indicated assent. (proc text)]
[(proc text) With the consent of Mr Speaker, and the general assent of Members present, question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the proceedings on item No 1 in the Order Paper for today be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 48(3) in respect of Minister of State Sun Xueling and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam speaking more than once.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah] (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Family Justice Reform Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Law (Ms Rahayu Mahzam): Sir, I thank Members for their comments and expressions of support for the Bill. I will address the points raised in relation to the new Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP) and the enhancement of Court proceedings and procedures in the FJC.
I will start with the Members’ questions on the scope of the new MEP.
Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim hopes that the MEP will apply to the enforcement of Syariah Court orders. The MEP will, indeed, apply to orders made by the Syariah Court which, under the Administration of Muslim Law Act, may be treated as maintenance orders made by the Family Court for the purposes of enforcement.
Mr Zhulkarnain also asked about past outstanding maintenance and limitation periods. The Bill does not change the existing position on limitation. Generally, an applicant needs to commence proceedings to enforce arrears within three years from the time that such arrears are due. The applicant will then be able to include those arrears in future enforcement applications if the arrears remain unpaid. If the applicant acts in a timely manner, the respondent cannot circumvent his or her obligations.
On past maintenance arrears, the MEP will, when fully implemented, apply to all maintenance enforcement applications.
Mr Murali Pillai has asked about MEOs being sited under the Executive. The new MEOs will gather evidence and carry out conciliation to help parties reach a sustainable solution. However, if parties do not settle, the Court will still make a final decision, possibly using information and evidence gathered by the MEO. It is, therefore, preferable for the MEOs’ evidence gathering and conciliation roles to be independent of the Court. We have discussed this with the Judiciary, which supported the proposal for the MEOs to be sited within the Executive. AGC’s advice was also sought on the matter.
Mr Louis Ng asked who we intend to prescribe as the third parties from whom MEOs may seek information. In Minister Shanmugam’s opening speech, he listed them: the CDP and Government agencies, such as CPF Board, HDB, IRAS, SLA and LTA.
Mr Melvin Yong asked about information on foreign assets. The Bill does not have extraterritorial effect. The MEOs and the Singapore Courts do not have powers to direct third parties in a foreign jurisdiction to provide information.
Mr Louis Ng also asked about the contemplated timelines to disclose information sought. We have been engaging the banks and third parties that we intend to prescribe and we will work with them to implement the MEP, which would include response timelines.
Mr Murali Pillai also raised the concern that assets may be held in the name of proxies. Mr Pillai also requested for clarification on the ambit of a “third party” under the Bill and whether a third party may be asked to disclose information relating to proxies. The third party may be any person who has relevant information. Thus, if an MEO, in the course of fact-finding, has reason to suspect that the respondent has assets that are held in the name of proxies, the MEO may seek a Court order for a third party to disclose information about the assets. It is for the Court to decide if such information is relevant to the enforcement application.
There are limits to the MEOs’ powers to uncover every fact. It is, ultimately, the primary responsibility of the parties to be forthright about their true financial positions. Furnishing false information, when asked by an MEO, or to the Court, is a criminal offence.
Mr Louis Ng asked about the number of conciliation sessions and the consequences for failing to attend or not participating in good faith. The Bill does not impose a limit on the number of conciliation sessions. We envisage that there will, typically, be two sessions, but the exact number will vary. It is the Court that directs the parties to attend conciliation. Failure to attend is, therefore, contempt of Court.
Further, if the respondent is absent from conciliation, the Court may direct the respondent to attend another conciliation session. The Court may also proceed with the hearing of the application. If the respondent is absent for the hearing of the application, the new Family Justice Rules will allow the Court to proceed to make the appropriate orders, if certain conditions are satisfied. This should also address Ms Ng Ling Ling’s question about her resident whose application got “stuck” because the ex-husband could not be found.
With respect to parties who do not participate in good faith, the parties’ conduct during conciliation will be set out in the MEO’s report to the Court. The Court may take the parties’ conduct into account in making the appropriate orders on the maintenance enforcement application.
Mr Louis Ng asked whether the matter will still proceed to hearing after the MEO refers parties for financial assistance. Financial assistance is not intended to replace the parties’ financial responsibilities to their families, but acts as a safety net for our fellow Singaporeans in need. The matter will, therefore, still proceed for conciliation and hearing after the MEO makes the referral for financial assistance. The MEO will take into account the financial assistance granted, if any, as part of the overall assessment of the financial circumstances of the parties. The Court will also take into consideration information on any financial assistance granted, in deciding on the appropriate orders to be made.
Mr Melvin Yong asked about whether it is an offence for a respondent to refuse financial assistance, despite an MEO's referral. The answer is no. It is open to a respondent to decide whether to accept financial assistance.
I will turn to Mr Louis Ng and Mr Dennis Tan's queries on what the MEO’s report will set out and whether the reports will be provided to both parties.
The MEO’s final report will be provided to both parties and submitted to the Court. It will contain all the information submitted to the MEO in relation to the maintenance enforcement application; matters relating to the conciliation sessions; and any other matters and information as may be prescribed.
In respect of interim reports, the clause which Mr Dennis Tan referred to allows the MEO to provide an interim report to the applicant only, first, to cater for a situation where the MEO needs to inform the applicant of an impending dissipation of assets so that appropriate action can be taken. The intent is for the interim report to eventually be available to both parties in accordance with the rules.
The intention is for the MEO to provide all relevant facts and evidence for the Court’s consideration. The Court may then, if it thinks fit, rely on the MEO’s report to make the appropriate orders against the respondent’s assets, without calling for further evidence. We may prescribe additional matters to be covered in the report, as we learn from the initial phases of implementation.
Mr Dennis Tan has also asked what information may be redacted from the MEO's report. The MEO has broad powers to gather information for the Court from third parties, including information that is ordinarily private and confidential. The MEO reports this to the Court. There may be information gathered by the MEO and in the report that is unnecessary or irrelevant. This power will allow for such information to be redacted to protect the party's interests.
Mr Louis Ng and Mr Melvin Yong also asked whether there is a standard rubric for MEOs to assess the parties’ financial position. Mr Gan Thiam Poh referred to challenges with distinguishing between those who will not pay and cannot pay cases. Both Mr Gan and Mr Lim Biow Chuan cited examples of respondents who have the ability to earn an income or better income but chose not to do so.
There is no fixed formula to determine whether a respondent has the means to pay maintenance. Each case will be assessed on its facts, based on information on the parties’ assets and means.
That being said, the MEOs will be trained and given guidelines on making these assessments. We will work closely with Social Service Officers from MSF to develop these guidelines. Ultimately, it is for the Court to decide whether the respondent cannot pay or refuses to pay, and the appropriate orders to make. The Court will consider the MEO’s report in coming to its decision.
The FJC judges are trained to deal with a wide range of family situations and also have the powers to make orders to address the unique needs of each family. They will also be supported by counsellors and other professionals who will be able to provide therapeutic interventions.
For example, if a respondent is retrenched and has challenges paying maintenance due to the sudden loss of income, the Court may suspend the maintenance order or vary the maintenance amount downwards for a short period of time and make the appropriate directions for the respondent to report back to the Court on a specified date after he or she has had time to look for a new job. The Court may also make an order requiring the respondent to undergo financial counselling with a professional counsellor who will be able to help the respondent explore various options to manage his or her daily expenses and to pay maintenance.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh also suggested that the MEOs may also assist the Court at the stage of division of matrimonial assets. We thank Mr Gan for his suggestion, which we will study.
Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, Mr Louis Ng, Mr Melvin Yong, Dr Wan Rizal and Ms Hany Soh have asked about MEOs’ recruitment, training and resourcing. These are operational details that will be worked through in implementation. Suffice to say that we intend to hire and train a multidisciplinary team, with team members having or being trained and equipped with knowledge and skills in different areas. This will include the skills needed to effectively manage the parties in family proceedings.
We also thank Ms Hany Soh for her suggestion on taking a coordinated approach across the entire family justice ecosystem. We will certainly keep this in mind as we develop the training programmes in a way that strengthens therapeutic justice outcomes.
Mr Zhulkarnain has asked about legal protections for the MEOs. The Bill gives the MEOs protection against personal liability when they exercise their powers or perform their functions or duties, provided they do so in good faith and with reasonable care.
I will now address the questions and comments that Members have raised with respect to the powers of the Court hearing the maintenance enforcement application.
First, on the Court's powers to vary the maintenance orders. Mr Louis Ng expressed concern that the potential for variation may disincentivise some applicants from applying for enforcement. Mr Lim Biow Chuan also asked about variation where the respondent loses his or her job or if he or she has a new family.
The MEP does not change the substantive law in relation to variation of maintenance orders: the test that the respondent has to satisfy remains the same. What the MEP does is to reduce the procedural challenges that parties face in seeking variation. For example, the Court may vary a maintenance order made during matrimonial proceedings only when it is satisfied that: the order was based on any misrepresentation or mistake of fact; or where there has been any material change in circumstances.
The Court will consider all relevant facts and circumstances before deciding whether there has been any change in circumstances warranting a variation of the maintenance order. New financial commitments and loss of job could be relevant considerations. However, the Courts have held that remarriage per se does not affect pre-existing obligations owed to the family from an earlier marriage.
Similarly, when MEOs make recommendations to parties to facilitate an out-of-Court settlement, remarriage and loss of job are but two of the various factors that will be considered. Maintenance orders would not be varied in cases where the respondent has the means to pay the maintenance sum.
In cases where the respondent has genuinely experienced a change in circumstances affecting his or her ability to pay maintenance, the MEP will help the Court make a more accurate assessment of the nature of the change and accordingly make more accurate variation orders where needed. This can be a temporary variation to deal with a temporary change in circumstances, but it leads to a more sustainable outcome for all parties.
On the other hand, if we turn a blind eye to the changed circumstances, respondents will continue to miss maintenance payments time and time again, even if multiple enforcement applications are made and concluded against them. Applicants will spend time and costs on enforcement, only to end up being disappointed each time.
It would be far better for such applicants to receive the appropriate financial assistance and other forms of support, or enter into a more sustainable maintenance arrangement with the respondent. The new MEP facilitates this.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh also asked about the circumstances in which a respondent would not be imprisoned, or lower maintenance amounts ordered, because of his or her medical conditions. These are decisions that are, ultimately, for the Court to make, taking into account all the circumstances of the case.
Where there are disputes of fact, for example, on the medical conditions of the respondent, the MEO may help to gather the relevant facts and evidence, including seeking information from third parties to verify the parties' positions. The Court may also direct the MEOs to conduct further fact-finding, if necessary.
On attachment of earnings orders, Mr Ng asked whether earnings from freelance or gig economy work are earnings that may be attached. \"Earnings\" for the purpose of attachment of earnings orders is defined in the new section 76 of the Women's Charter to refer to wages or salary payable under a contract of service.
Therefore, depending on the way the contractual relationship between the worker and the firm is structured, it may well be that, in some cases, such earnings may fall within the definition of \"earnings\". Attachment of earnings orders work effectively where there is a regular and stable stream of income that can be directed towards the fulfilment of periodical maintenance payments.
They do not work so well where the income is unpredictable, such as for freelancers and contract workers. Including such arrangements may lead to hardship for the parties and administrative challenges for the firms who engage these workers. Hence, attachment of earnings orders will, generally, not be made in respect of income from gig work, which is unstable.
Where incomes are not stable, the family's financial situation is naturally more complicated and it is not always easy to find simple solutions. The MEOs will help parties look at the overall picture and suggest arrangements that are sustainable. Ultimately, regardless of the type of work one does, the respondent must be responsible for fulfilling his or her obligations for maintenance. Even if the attachment of earnings order is not available, there are various other ways to hold them accountable.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Mr Dennis Tan said that respondents who delay paying maintenance to frustrate the complainant should not be allowed to walk away without consequences. The Bill allows for consequences to be imposed on such respondents. For example, the Court may imprison a respondent who has no good reason for failing to pay maintenance on time, even if that respondent pays up after the applicant files the enforcement application.
Further, for a respondent who has not paid maintenance in a timely manner and the parties have not settled, the Court must make a Show-Payment Order for the Respondent to show proof of payment of any future maintenance payable. An imprisonment term may also be specified for the breach of the Show-Payment Order.
Mr Lim also asked about situations where the respondent refuses to pay because he or she is denied access to the child. Being denied access is not grounds for non-compliance with a maintenance order. A parent has a legal duty to maintain a child, whether the child is in his or her custody or not. If the respondent is denied access to the child, he or she may take up an application for the enforcement of the access order.
I will now address some of the other comments made or questions asked in relation to maintenance enforcement.
Mr Zhulkarnain suggested that all maintenance orders be placed on a searchable database registry and that a recalcitrant defaulter can be placed on a blacklist with an alert to the Credit Service Bureau. The Women's Charter already provides for an Applicant who has filed for maintenance enforcement to be able to lodge a report to a designated credit bureau regarding unpaid arrears stated on the order of Court. Applicants will continue to be able to lodge such reports under the new MEP.
Under the new MEP, the MEO may also assist to lodge the arrears report. This may be helpful for applicants who have challenges filing the arrears report on their own.
Mr Gan has also asked whether maintenance payments will be prioritised over other debts. Mr Zhulkarnain has asked for clarification on how the new MEP and the bankruptcy regime will interface with each other. As Mr Zhulkarnain has correctly mentioned, the reforms in this Bill do not change the order of priorities of an insolvent debtor. The reforms also do not change how enforcement proceedings or orders ordinarily interact with the bankruptcy regime.
Mr Zhulkarnain and Mr Gan have also asked what can be done when respondents are declared bankrupt or respondents are struggling financially. Dr Wan Rizal raised concerns of harshness on parties genuinely unable to pay. Mr Zhulkarnain mentioned that for bankrupt respondents, applicants are unlikely to be able to recover any arrears but yet are saddled with the expenses of the children.
This is where the reforms under the MEP may be helpful. The MEOs will be able to verify whether the respondent has genuine financial difficulties. This would include considering, like what Mr Gan said, whether the respondent has genuine responsibilities paying for their children and elderly parents' expenses.
Where the respondent has genuine financial difficulties, the MEOs, where appropriate, may refer the parties to Social Service Offices for financial assistance or other forms of support. Ms Ng Ling Ling and Mr Zhulkarnain asked if there can be more practical help for vulnerable individuals and laypersons applying to enforce their maintenance orders. The new process was designed specifically to reduce the burden on parties, especially Self-represented Persons (SRPs).
Nonetheless, certain litigants may still require more help than others. Today, there are various physical touchpoints where such SRPs can seek help in filing a maintenance enforcement application, such as: the ServiceSG Centres at Our Tampines Hub and One Punggol, the Divorce Support Specialist Centres (DSSAs) and the Singapore Council of Women's Organisations.
We will work with ServiceSG and MSF to ensure that such services continue to be offered even after the new Maintenance Enforcement Process is implemented. Ms Ng's suggestion to train social service officers and social workers to help their vulnerable clients navigate the online application process and make the appropriate referrals, is a good one, which MSF will explore.
We will work together with our partners and stakeholders in the legal and social service sectors to disseminate information on and raise awareness of the MEP.
Mr Zhulkarnain reiterated his support for empowering judges to impose restrictions on cross-examination in prescribed circumstances. He also mentioned video conferencing facilities for young survivors to give evidence. As Mr Zhulkarnain noted – and he would be glad to know – video conferencing facilities for victims of family violence are already available at the FJC today.
The Family Court may permit the giving of evidence through a live video or live television link, in family violence proceedings under the Women's Charter, where certain conditions are satisfied, including where the witness is below the age of 18.
The Court will assess the relevant facts and circumstances of each case to decide if such permission should be given. This includes the suitability of the witness to give evidence via live video or live television link and the nature of the evidence that the witness will be giving.
Apart from arranging for such witnesses to give evidence by video in a separate room in the FJC, the Court may also permit a vulnerable witness to be accompanied by a trained Court volunteer recruited by the Singapore Children's Society, under the Vulnerable Witness Support Programme. The trained volunteer will not only accompany the vulnerable witness during the Court proceedings, but will provide the witness with information about Court processes and procedures, and continue to provide the witness with emotional support after the hearing.
Mr Pillai spoke about ensuring that the housing needs of divorcing parties and children are addressed when the Court decides on the division of the matrimonial flat. The parties are required to provide key information on their HDB property as part of the divorce application.
In deciding the division of the matrimonial assets, the Court does consider the welfare and needs of the children. The Court may also direct parties to seek HDB's views and consider information provided by HDB on, for example, the retention of the matrimonial flat and post-divorce housing options for the divorcing parties and their children.
There are also various support schemes put in place by HDB and MSF to ensure a smooth housing transition for divorcees. To equip parties with the knowledge and skills to make informed decisions regarding the matrimonial property that prioritises the child’s well-being, MSF's Family Assist Portal will provide parties with information on post-divorce housing options.
The Mandatory Co-Parenting Programme, which all divorcing parents with minor children must go through before filing for divorce, will equip and encourage parents to make informed decisions, including on post-divorce housing arrangements, which prioritise the well-being of their children.
The Court can refer divorcing parties to HDB for housing counselling before the divorce is finalised, for them to better understand their post-divorce housing options.
In deciding the division of the matrimonial flat, even when the parties have reached an agreement, the Court does consider the welfare and needs of the children and direct parties to seek HDB's views. The Court may consider information provided by HDB on, for example, the retention of the matrimonial flat and post-divorce housing options for the divorcing parties and their children.
Nevertheless, we thank Mr Pillai for his suggestions and we will continue to study how the process relating to the division of the matrimonial flat may be strengthened to protect the interests of children.
Ms Hany Soh has asked about the docketing system for divorce proceedings on the ordinary track. She also made suggestions on how a global settlement could be facilitated. Whether a contested case is suitable for docketing to designated judges depends on the facts of the case. Generally, high conflict cases and cases involving highly contentious issues on the custody, care and control of children, are docketed. As far as possible, docketing is done in the earlier stages of proceedings to allow a single judge to take charge of the case.
Presently, almost all contested cases are referred to mediation in the early stages of proceedings. Nonetheless, we thank Ms Soh for her suggestions and will certainly continue to study how we can improve therapeutic justice outcomes in all aspects of the divorce process.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan has asked about allowing the FJR to prescribe that judges may conduct interviews with children. Mr Louis Chua has also made suggestions on training family judges to handle children in interviews with them. I mentioned in my opening speech the rationale behind this amendment, including the need for more clarity in the legislation.
I also briefly mentioned that judicial interviews are not the only – nor the preferred – method of ascertaining a child's wishes, but will complement the variety of methods that can be used to hear the child's voice. I would add that family judges do receive specialised training on whether, when and how to interview a child. This training sensitises family judges to the needs of a child, the safety concerns and the potential impact the Court proceedings may have on the child.
Judicial interviews of children may also be conducted in the joint presence of FJC's Court Family Specialists who are proficient in interviewing children. The Court Family Specialist is a trained professional and experienced counsellor, psychologist or social worker from the Counselling and Psychological Services (CAPS), which is the social science arm of the Family Justice Courts.
Mr Melvin Yong asked about the minimum age of children being interviewed. There is no minimum age in legislation. As the ability to communicate can differ across children of the same age, a different approach may be required for each child. The Courts have, however, held that judicial interviews would only be useful where the \"children are mature enough to convey their views independently\". The Women's Charter also provides that the child should be \"of an age to express an independent opinion\". Mr Deputy Speaker, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Family proceedings are unique. They also often involve children, who will be worst affected by strained relationships and fractured family ties.
This is why “Therapeutic Justice” has been given much attention in implementing family proceedings. We want the Court process to nudge the family towards an outcome that is beneficial to all parties. We want to equip families involved with the necessary tools and resources so that they can move on and emerge from adversity. We do not wish to see families getting entangled in acrimonious litigation.
Therefore, this Bill aims to enhance the therapeutic justice elements in the family justice system.
The recommendations in this Bill include:
(a) Strengthening the power of judges to take a proactive approach to the cases before them. This includes allowing them to make certain orders at their own discretion to address any urgent need of the families involved;
(b) Authorising the judge to prohibit the parties involved from submitting additional applications which are unnecessary and have no strong justifications, without the leave of the Court; and
(c) Enabling judges to impose restrictions on cross-examination under certain circumstances, where the questioning of a vulnerable witness may be intimidating or oppressive.
These new reforms will complement some enhancements to the family justice system that have been implemented by MSF and MinLaw, together with the Family Justice Court (FJC), over the years to make family proceedings less acrimonious.
Today, in Parliament, the Family Justice Reform Bill will introduce major changes to the maintenance enforcement process. Over the years, we have progressively refined the maintenance enforcement framework. However, we still see a relatively high number of cases against those who refuse to comply with the maintenance order. We have received feedback on the anxiety, frustration and other real-life impact on the applicant. These changes are intended to address the needs from the feedback.
A new unit of Maintenance Enforcement Officers (MEO) will be set up. Parties no longer need to apply to Court and go through a formal legal process to gather evidence on the assets and means of the parties involved.
MEO will be authorised to obtain the information directly from the parties involved or from designated entities, such as banks, CPF Board, HDB, IRAS, SLA, LTA and CDP. MEO will submit this information to the Court, and the Court can use this information when making a judgment.
The Maintenance Enforcement Process (MEP) will apply to Court orders made by the Singapore Syariah Court which, under the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA), may be treated as maintenance orders made by the Family Court for the purposes of enforcement.
As a result, this will save time as there is no need to attend multiple Court hearings, save money because there is no need to pay legal fees, and reduce hardship as there is no need to prove the asset and the ability of the parties involved for the parties.
It is hoped that this latest reform will help to further strengthen the family justice system by reducing acrimony, pain and suffering of families and the children.
(In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, I will now conclude. The amendments in this Bill will simplify and make family proceedings more efficient. They will also reduce acrimony in family proceedings, strengthening Therapeutic Justice in the family justice system.
With the new MEP strengthening deterrence against respondents who refuse to pay, and facilitating more sustainable maintenance outcomes where respondents cannot pay, it is hoped that situations where children and vulnerable family members are left in financial neglect will be reduced.
We will also continue to work closely with our partners in the legal community and social services, such as the DSSAs, to provide more avenues of support to individuals who may nevertheless find the process challenging.
Where the financial needs of the families who have undergone a breakdown are met in a timely manner, this will go a long way towards helping families to heal and move on from the breakdown of the family unit, in a positive manner. Divorced parents will also be able to better focus on co-parenting in a manner which best protects their children’s interests.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister of State Sun Xueling.
The Minister of State for Social and Family Development (Ms Sun Xueling): Sir, I thank Members for the robust debate, the pertinent issues raised and the support for the Bill.
I would like to begin by reiterating MSF’s commitment to building strong families. Mr Melvin Yong brought up the importance of strengthening marriages and families, thereby reducing the number of families who have to go through the painful process of divorce.
Indeed, this is MSF’s belief, and efforts have been put across all life stages through various Government initiatives to support families through their life journey. Such efforts span supporting families in setting strong foundations in marriage and parenting, in the cost of raising their children, in navigating and overcoming difficulties and in ageing well. These are efforts that we continually build on, and proposals from Members on how we can make further strides in this regard are always welcome.
Members have expressed their concern regarding a family’s ability to move on financially post-divorce. Mr Louis Ng asked about support provided to families early to sort out their finances when a marriage has broken down.
In December 2021, MSF launched the Family Assist portal which supports couples contemplating divorce and provides them with information and services to make informed decisions in the best interest of their children. This includes information on the impact of divorce on finances and housing. A personalised tool will also be launched on the portal soon to help citizens better understand their post-divorce HDB housing options.
Mr Louis Ng also asked if financial counselling can be incorporated into the Co-Parenting Programme. Like I mentioned earlier in my opening speech, we have made it mandatory for all divorcing parents with minor children to go through the Co-Parenting Programme. Today, the Co-Parenting Programme covers practical issues arising from a divorce, including modules on making housing arrangements and managing finances. During the Co-Parenting Programme consultation sessions, counsellors may also refer parties to financial counselling services.
Mr Louis Chua asked about financial assistance for those referred to the SSOs under the maintenance enforcement process. Where possible, we will streamline the sharing of data between the Maintenance Enforcement Process and the SSOs. The details will need to be worked out with the set-up of the new unit of Maintenance Enforcement Officers (MEOs). I would like to assure Members that our SSO officers will assess the applicants' circumstances and needs holistically and assist them accordingly. This includes interim assistance for cases requiring urgent assistance, such as if maintenance is not being paid and has resulted in financial difficulties.
It was heartening to hear from Ms Yeo Wan Ling about the work that NTUC’s Women and Family Unit is doing to support single mothers and divorcees. MSF believes in the importance of caring for and supporting women in such vulnerable situations and had announced several efforts as part of the 2022 White Paper on Singapore Women’s Development. This includes partnerships between the Government and community partners under the Alliance for Action to Strengthen Marriages and Family Relationships.
As an example, MSF's community partner HCSA has updated their portal SPIN which stands for Single Parents Informed, Involved, Included to address questions divorcees may have towards housing and childcare arrangements. MSF is focused on ensuring that childcare arrangements do not exact a burden on single or divorced parents so that they are able to seek employment and provide for themselves and their family members. We welcome partnerships with NTUC's Women and Family Unit to further enable single or divorced parents.
Mr Louis Chua had raised the issue of divorced parents being unable to come to an agreement on their child's educational arrangements and their housing arrangements. We think it best for parents to work out suitable arrangements cooperatively and encourage them to do so outside of the Court system, bearing in mind what would be in their children's best interest.
It is for this reason that we have made it mandatory for all divorcing couples with minor children to go through the Co-Parenting Programme. It is not ideal for parents to seek to rely on Court orders to exhaustively list the decision rights for all matters pertaining to their children.
On the issue of school arrangements, in particular, something as important as a school transfer, parents who have joint custody of their child need to come to a common agreement on the child's school transfer. I hope Members can understand that schools have to be seen to be fair to both parents and it is not ideal for divorced spouses to bring their differences to the school to be the arbiter.
Our housing policies prioritise our limited housing supply for households with the greatest need, such as those that involve children. As such, divorcees with children are a family nucleus and can apply for public housing. For divorcees without children, they can retain their matrimonial flat alone if they are at least 35 years old. If they are below 35 years old, they can retain their flat if they include a family member, such as either of their parents, to form an eligible family nucleus. HDB does allow divorcees below age 35 without children to retain their matrimonial flat on a case-by-case basis.
Mr Leon Perera had asked whether we would consider providing for maintenance for ex-husbands and men. This has been raised on several occasions by various Members of Parliament, including Ms Carrie Tan and Mr Ang Wei Neng.
In 2016, we took a significant step to allow men to apply for maintenance if they were (a) incapacitated before or during the course of the marriage; (b) are unable to earn a livelihood; and (c) are unable to support themselves.
I would also add that the Courts have also refrained from granting higher amounts of maintenance to wives who are able to work, even if they had not worked or stopped working for some years. The Courts' goal is to award reasonable maintenance such that it will meet the financial needs of the wife until such time that she could secure for herself some form of employment and adjust to her post-divorce situation.
I would like to state unequivocally that we fully appreciate the sacrifice that men make when they step away from their careers to become stay-home husbands and acknowledge their efforts towards their families. MSF will continue to study the issue and review if husbands and ex-husbands can apply for maintenance payments.
Queries were also raised by Members regarding support for family violence survivors. I will be introducing the Family Violence (Amendment) Bill tomorrow in this House, which will effect the key recommendations from the Taskforce on Family Violence in tackling family violence.
I would like to close by reiterating that we are committed to ensuring good outcomes for families and their children, even as we support families in navigating their divorce and adjusting to life post-divorce.
The MEP is a big step towards ensuring that families are able to resolve issues surrounding maintenance that may arise post-divorce, in an effective and non-acrimonious way. It is a key piece that we are adding to our comprehensive landscape of marriage and divorce support, to give every family the best possible chance of achieving good outcomes despite the ups and downs in life.
The MEP will take some time to be implemented, as we want to ensure that the right persons are hired to play the key role of MEOs and that the process is set up well. We are confident that when the MEP takes effect, it will make a meaningful difference in terms of ensuring sustainable maintenance payment outcomes for all parties involved.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister for Law Mr K Shanmugam.
The Minister for Law (Mr K Shanmugam): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you. My colleagues Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam and Minister of State Sun Xueling have answered the points raised by Members. I would just end by reiterating my thanks to the various stakeholders in the family justice ecosystem. And with that, Sir, I beg to move.
Mr Deputy Speaker: And there are no clarifications? Alright.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr K Shanmugam]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Second Minister for Home Affairs.
Order. I propose to take a short break. Okay, I will not take a short break and adjournment. Second Minister for Home Affairs.
The Second Minister for Home Affairs (Mrs Josephine Teo): Mr Deputy Speaker, my sincere apologies. Nature does call.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Not at all.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
Sir, this Bill is linked to the next Bill on the Order Paper, the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Bill. May I propose that the debates on both Bills take place together?
Mr Deputy Speaker: Please proceed.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Thank you, Sir. We will still have the Second Reading of the Computer Misuse (Amendment) Bill to comply with the procedural requirements.
Sir, scams have become a global problem. Scammers lurk in every corner and victims are often caught unawares. Many scams go unreported, because victims feel embarrassed or do not believe any good will come of their reporting. But even just counting those that were reported, the amount lost to scams worldwide grew by about 16% from 2020 to over $77 billion in 2021.
In Singapore, the number of scams has also increased sharply. Police reported that scam cases exceeded 31,000 in 2022. This is more than a fivefold increase since 2018. Scam cases are now more than one-and-a-half times that of physical crime. Back in 2018, they were only a quarter.
The amount of money lost to scams is staggering. In 2022 alone, victims lost $660 million. Since 2018, close to $2 billion. Many of us know or have personally heard stories of people who have fallen prey. They include elderly Singaporeans who lost their life savings. Younger Singaporeans are not immune. In fact, more than half of scam victims in 2022 were aged 20 to 39. Victims often lose more than money – they lose peace of mind, sense of well-being, relations with family sometimes become very strained and all of these things bring about great distress.
Many scams in Singapore have an overseas nexus. We cannot stop the global tide but must do everything we can to try and keep the scammers far from shore. The Bills we are debating today are part of the Government's multi-pronged strategy to fight scams. We have been educating the public so that they are aware of the signs of scam and know what actions they can take to protect themselves.
Members would have seen the public campaign, \"I can ACT against Scams\", or hosted outreach sessions by Police officers in their constituency events involving residents. We have taken proactive measures to prevent scammers from being able to reach victims in the first place. For example, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) has been working with the telcos to block spoofed calls from reaching Singaporeans. Every month, close to 60 million calls are blocked.
We launched the ScamShield app in November 2020, which has been downloaded more than 550,000 times and filtered out more than 7.4 million SMSes that are suspected to be part of a scam. Earlier this Sitting, we tabled the Online Criminal Harms Bill. Among other things, the Online Criminal Harms Bill will help to stop potential scams from taking place, or as soon as they are detected.
We have also made it easier to detect and report scams and follow-up with partners. The Police set up the Anti-Scam Command in 2022 to consolidate expertise and resources in combatting scams. Staff from the major banks are co-located with the Police, so that all the parties can quickly act together to freeze scam-tainted accounts. With the help of our foreign partners, Police brought down 13 scam syndicates in 2022. More than 70 persons based overseas were arrested.
The Bills we are proposing today will add to our suite of anti-scam measures outlined above. We propose to empower the authorities to deal more effectively with money mules and to prevent the abuse of Singpass for scam operations.
First, let me explain the role of money mules. They are individuals who allow criminals to control their bank or other payment accounts. They also include those who use their accounts to receive or transfer monies under the criminals' instructions. Some Members may recall the OCBC phishing scam that occurred between December 2021 and January 2022 – 790 victims fell prey. The total losses amounted to $13.7 million. In this scam, the Police identified more than 120 suspected money mules. More than 120 local bank accounts were used to receive the scam victims' monies.
Why do the scammers need money mules? Scam syndicates typically cultivate a network of money mules to facilitate their crimes or to launder criminal proceeds. The money mules' bank accounts form a web of multiple accounts; scammed monies can be split into different denominations and transferred through these accounts. This process is repeated many times over, so that the monies go through multiple layers of bank accounts, before being transferred out of Singapore into the hands of the syndicate. This tactic of \"layering\" is designed to make it difficult for the authorities to follow the money trail and to get to the perpetrators.
Between 2020 and 2022, scammers exploited more than 38,000 bank accounts to launder their proceeds from local victims. Over the same period, more than 19,000 money mules were investigated by the Police. One big problem for the Police is that with electronic transactions, all these actions that I described earlier happen very quickly, often in a matter of hours.
Another problem is that when interviewed by the Police, most of the money mules claimed they did not know that they were handling illegal funds. They claimed not to have known the identity of the person who instructed them, nor the identity of the bank account holders whom they were receiving funds from or transferring funds to. Many agreed to facilitate these money transfers because they were paid to do so. They claimed that they did not think that they were doing anything illegal and did not know they were dealing with criminal proceeds.
The fact is, however, that their actions caused great harm to scam victims, whose monies have been moved beyond reach, beyond our ability to recover. Besides money mules, the Police have also observed a trend of scam syndicates abusing Singpass to facilitate their criminal activities. For example, syndicates recruit Singpass users with the promise of monetary gain and then use the Singpass accounts to further their schemes.
Scam syndicates who get hold of another person's Singpass credentials can use them to open bank accounts, which are then used to receive and transfer funds obtained through scams. Irresponsible Singpass users have facilitated this by selling or sharing their Singpass credentials, such as their Singpass password and SMS one-time password. Scam syndicates effectively assume the identity of a Singpass user for their criminal activities and exploit the Singpass account to commit criminal activities while hiding their own tracks. As a result, these scam syndicates are extremely difficult to pursue.
Sir, we must do everything we can to prevent scams from harming Singaporeans. This includes recognising the limitations of current laws, which make it difficult to take the money mules to task. It requires the Prosecution to prove that the money mule had knowledge or reasonable grounds to believe that the monies transacted through his bank account are linked to criminal activity. As a result of these difficulties, of the 19,000 money mules investigated by Police from 2020 to 2022, fewer than 250 money mules were eventually prosecuted. Out of 19,000, fewer than 250 ended up being prosecuted.
In the OCBC phishing scam which I mentioned earlier, out of the 120 suspected money mules, only nine could be charged for money mule offences. Think about that, it is fewer than one in 10. Similarly, it has been challenging to prove the wrongful intention of those who give up their Singpass credentials under existing laws like the Computer Misuse Act.
Clearly, there is a gap that has allowed money mules to continue abetting scammers at little cost to themselves. Why should they be deterred if they can evade prosecution by simply claiming ignorance?
The two sets of amendments we are proposing are, therefore, intended to strengthen our collective defence against scams.
First, it sets guardrails on the use of bank and Singpass accounts. Bank account holders and Singpass users must be careful and exercise diligence regarding their bank accounts and Singpass credentials. Our bank accounts and Singpass accounts are for our own use. We should not allow them to be used by another person, especially if we do not know who the other party is or what the transactions are for.
Second, the amendments will empower the Police to act more effectively against those who blatantly ignore these guardrails, and abuse or allow to be abused, their bank accounts and Singpass credentials to perpetrate scams and other crimes.
I will first explain the proposed amendments to the CDSA. Clauses 3 to 6 of the CDSA Bill amend sections 50, 51, 53 and 54 to introduce the offences of rash and negligent money laundering. \"Rash\" and \"negligent\" are not new concepts. They are defined in sections 26(E) and 26(F) of the existing Penal Code and are also applied in the Road Traffic Act.
A person can be liable for rash money laundering if he proceeded to carry out a transaction while he had some suspicions about the transaction, but did not make further enquiries to address those suspicions. A person can be liable for negligent money laundering if he continued with a transaction despite the presence of red flags or suspicious indicators, which would be noticeable by an ordinary, reasonable person.
These changes will allow a money laundering offence to be made out against an individual at a lower level of culpability, compared with the current laws. Which of these offences are made out, if any, will depend on the facts and circumstances of the case. Let me share an example where a money mule can be held liable for a rash money laundering offence.
Person A responds to an online job advertisement seeking to hire an accounts manager. A was told that he would be paid $2,000 a month to receive money using his personal bank account and all he had to do was to transfer sums of more than $100,000 to other bank accounts weekly. That is all the job requires, allowing the bank account to be used for transfer of monies. It is nothing like the kind of work that would justify a monthly salary of $2,000 that we would normally expect.
Despite the exceptional attractiveness of this job, which should have raised suspicions, A did not verify the source of the funds he was receiving, the purpose of the transfers nor the authenticity of his purported employer. Due to the frequency and amount of money transacted, A suspected that the monies could be criminal proceeds, but he chose to carry on without further checks and the money was eventually found to be criminal proceeds from scam victims.
I will also share an example of negligent money laundering.
Person B responded to an online advertisement on a social media platform calling for people to \"rent out\" their bank accounts; it literally used those terms – \"rent out\". B provided the Internet banking login details for his personal bank account to an unknown subject and was paid $800 to let his personal bank account be used by that subject. B did not know what his bank account was used for. B claimed that he did not suspect anything wrong with the arrangement despite receiving this quite easy $800. Investigations found that his bank account was used to receive about $20,000 from a Singaporean victim of a love scam. To an ordinary reasonable person, this offer would have sounded suspicious and really \"too good to be true\".
Sir, the offence of rash money laundering will carry a fine of up to $250,000 or imprisonment of up to five years, or both. The offence of negligent money laundering will carry a fine of up to $150,000 or imprisonment of up to three years, or both.
Based on investigations into scams, the Police have observed conduct common among money mules in facilitating a scam.
Hence, clause 7 of the Bill adds a new section 55A which introduces a new offence of assisting another person to retain benefits from criminal conduct. A money mule can be held liable for this offence if his conduct falls within any of the following four circumstances.
One, the value of the property he dealt with is disproportionate to his known sources of income; or two, he allowed another person, or persons, to access, operate or control his payment account and failed to take reasonable steps to find out the purpose of this arrangement; or three, he received or transferred money using his payment account and failed to take reasonable steps to find out the source or destination of the money; or four, he received money from or transferred money to another person or persons and failed to take reasonable steps to find out that person's identity and physical location.
I will cite an example to illustrate the above offence.
Person C responded to a job advertisement by a company. C is told he will earn $100 a day for using his own bank account to receive money from the company's customers and transfer the money to the company's bank account. All these from a purported employer whom he does not ever meet. As unusual as the job may have sounded, C did not question why he needed to use his personal account to receive and transfer money from the company's customers. He did not take steps to find out where the money was coming from or going to. After all, the effort required of him is quite minimal.
Why do all these details matter then?
Sir, to stop the build-up of such a network of money mules, this new section 55A could render a person like C liable for an offence of assisting another person to retain benefits from criminal conduct.
While clause 7 provides that a person could be liable for an offence under any of the four circumstances I described earlier, clause 7 also provides in the new subsection 55A that it is a defence if the person is able to prove that he did not know and had no reason to believe that the property he had dealt with directly through his account, or indirectly, was criminal proceeds.
The offence of assisting another person to retain benefits from criminal conduct will carry a fine of up to $50,000 or imprisonment of up to three years, or both.
Let me move now to explain the second set of proposed amendments, the amendments to the Computer Misuse Act (CMA).
I mentioned the worrying trend of Singpass users who give away their Singpass credentials, often for money. The actions of such errant Singpass users facilitate scams and other criminal conduct. They undermine Singpass as our national digital identity service which many people have come to depend on for digital transactions.
However, it is challenging to take such errant Singpass users to task. For example, under the CMA today, it must be proven that the Singpass user knowingly disclosed his credentials for wrongful gain or an unlawful purpose, or that it would cause wrongful loss, which is difficult to do.
In one recent case, one Singpass user who had sold his login credentials subsequently pretended to be a victim and came to the Police, claiming that he had been deceived into giving up his Singpass credentials.
It was only through extensive investigations, taking up enormous Police resources, that the Singpass user eventually admitted to have sold his credentials, knowing that his Singpass would be used for criminal activities. The authorities managed to crack this case. But in many others, the Singpass users are uncooperative in investigations and fabricate stories about how their Singpass came to be abused. This situation favours the scammers and it is highly unsatisfactory.
Therefore, clause 4 of the CMA Bill introduces a new offence in the form of a new section 8A in the CMA, to address the conduct of Singpass users who deliberately give their credentials to other persons, which are then used to facilitate criminal activities.
We are concerned with the behaviour of Singpass users who disclose their Singpass passwords or access codes, or who provide any means of accessing their Singpass accounts in situations where the credentials can then be used to facilitate criminal conduct.
In my speech, for ease of reference, I will refer to all of these types of acts collectively as \"disclosing Singpass credentials\".
To combat such behaviour, it will now be an offence for a Singpass user to disclose his Singpass credentials, if he did so knowing, or having reasonable grounds to believe, that the purpose of the disclosure is for any person to commit, or facilitate the commission by any person, of any offence under any written law.
The intent of this change is not to make legitimate users of Singpass fearful of disclosing their credentials. They should, however, be aware that in certain situations, the disclosure could be an offence if, one, the disclosure was carried out for any form of gain; two, the disclosure was carried out with the knowledge it would likely cause wrongful loss to any person; or three, the disclosure was carried out but without reasonable steps being taken to find out the identity and physical location of the person to whom the credentials were disclosed.
These proposed provisions are based on actual situations Police have observed, where individuals have deliberately sold or disclosed their Singpass credentials to criminal syndicates.
The offence of disclosing an individual's own Singpass credentials will carry a fine of up to $10,000 or imprisonment of up to three years, or both.
Again, to be abundantly clear, it is not our intent to criminalise situations where there is a genuine need to share credentials for legitimate transactions. For instance, seniors may, in some situations, need the help of their family members to make Singpass transactions. The new provisions are also not intended to capture persons who were genuinely tricked into giving up their Singpass credentials.
Clause 4 of the CMA Bill also introduces a new offence in the form of a section 8B in the CMA, which criminalises acts of obtaining, retaining or dealing in another person's Singpass credentials. This is to deal with those who purchase Singpass credentials and syndicates which trade the Singpass credentials.
The Bill introduces provisions in section 8B to clarify the scope of this new offence. It is not an offence if an individual obtained or retained another person's Singpass credentials for a legitimate purpose. It is also not an offence if an individual supplied, offered to supply, transmitted or made available the Singpass credentials of another person for a legitimate purpose and the individual did not know or have reason to believe that those credentials will be or are likely to be used to commit an offence.
The offence of obtaining or dealing in Singpass credentials will carry a fine of up to $10,000 or imprisonment of up to three years, or both, for a first offence. For a second or subsequent offence, the penalty will be a fine of up to $20,000 or imprisonment of up to five years, or both.
In addition, clause 5 amends section 13 of the CMA so that the two new offences will apply and our Courts will have jurisdiction over the offences, even if they are committed outside of Singapore.
The nature of scam syndicates is that they operate mostly from overseas. Regardless of where these offences are committed, it is critical for us to prevent conduct that amounts to an abuse of Singpass to facilitate scams and other criminal activities and to protect Singpass as Singapore's national digital identity service.
Mr Deputy Speaker, these two Bills are necessary to strengthen our collective defence against scams. They seek to disrupt the operations of criminals preying on Singaporeans by acting as guardrails for the use of payment accounts and Singpass credentials and allowing Police to better act against money mules and those who abuse Singpass to perpetrate scams and other crimes. Sir, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim.
Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the amendment Bills which will help to further strengthen our vigilance against online scams and enforcement against money mules and abuses of Singpass accounts.
With the increase in instances of reported cases of scams both globally and in Singapore, our fellow Singaporeans are even more susceptible to risks of being scammed and taken advantage of as unwitting money mules.
We have heard from the Minister just now on the facts and figures. In the last two years, Singapore has lost about $1.2 billion to scams. Scam cases are now more than 1.5 times in number, compared to physical crimes.
While we can increase public vigilance and awareness in our defence against scams, we need our legislative framework to remain up to date with technological developments in order to disrupt the operations of scammers, which are increasingly more sophisticated and challenging.
One aspect is the use of money mules as a means to facilitate scams and getting scam proceeds out of Singapore.
Currently, between 2020 and 2022, out of the more than 19,000 money mule cases investigated by the Police, only less than 250 cases were eventually prosecuted, as explained by the hon Minister. These cases involved amounts of more than $440 million. That is almost 20% of the entire scams in terms of quantum.
Money mules are a key part of scammers' operations here in Singapore and I agree that there is a lacuna in the law that needs to be plugged.
Currently, the evidential challenge is to prove that money mules have actual knowledge or intent to facilitate such criminal activities. Further, money mules are currently charged under the Computer Misuse Act for abetting a person to gain access to the bank account without authority. This provision does not seem the most appropriate for the acts committed. Hence, I welcome the changes proposed by the Bill and their direct intervention in this regard.
My firm is part of the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS) acting for accused persons on a pro bono basis and we see some of these cases. From experience, not all alleged money mules fit the typical stereotype of a criminal scammer. Some of them claim or maybe are as much victims of circumstances as the scammed victims themselves.
If I may share a case about one such young accused person that walked through our office doors. Aged 19, he was serving his NS. He saw a job advertisement and responded to it with the intention of working to support his family of seven and supplement the income of the sole breadwinner. He ended up giving up control of his bank account and Singpass to an unknown person in return for payment. He thought this is his income or salary. Easy come, easy go. But it was too good to be true. Call it youthful brashfulness. He faces charges now, accused of being a money mule.
Besides that case, I have also received appeals during my Meet-the-People Sessions from families in Keat Hong who also faced similar situations. Mostly, these money mules were lured by the prospect of job opportunities and some were scammed out of their savings and forced to act as money mules in order to regain some of those monies back. We must ensure that the amendments strike a balance between protecting the public and also meting out the appropriate penalties commensurate to the crime and culpability.
The proposed amendments to the law will place the burden on the accused money mule to prove that he or she had reasonable grounds to believe that the disclosure of his or her Singpass was lawful and to take reasonable steps to ascertain the purpose of the person accessing the account and the source of funds and/or the person's identity in relation to the bank account. I think this is commonsensical. In practice, it is likely that the person will face difficulty to prove otherwise and may be found guilty under the amended provisions. This is despite the fact that he or she may not have had any knowledge as to how the bank account was being used.
There are various offences, such as rash or negligent money laundering, where the accused money mule has a suspicion that the monies could be criminal proceeds but chose not to verify the legitimacy of such funds. If I may ask, what would be the reasonable steps that a person can take to make such verifications? Perhaps, the Ministry can consider forming a public reporting office which provides an avenue through the anti-scam hotline or an enhancement on the ScamShield app for members of the public and those who genuinely intend to make such verifications. This way, a person can just make a call, alert the agencies or banks of such offer or make verifications for such transactions before it is being made. This can come under the suspicious transactions reporting office for AML transactions, something which our ordinary members of the public may not be aware of.
Next, the burden of proof is about to shift, some say, in a drastic manner. I wonder if the Ministry may wish to consider delaying the implementation of the amendments while carrying out public education events as to the seriousness of such offences. Because the advertisements are framed as job advertisements, many young persons or even older ones may not appreciate that. Just by letting another person access their Singpass or bank account, they are committing a serious offence. Or as the Minister mentioned, the disclosing of their Singpass credentials.
In addition, such awareness campaigns should be done in concert with the banks and financial institutions, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and potential employers as well. The risk and dangers of being used as money mules can be amplified through our job seeking portals to alert potential jobseekers of the scams and pitfalls out there.
Lastly, I agree with the amendments under the Computer Misuse Act to protect the use of our Singpass credentials. In this regard, may I also suggest that for vulnerable members of our society, like the elderly and adults with special needs, that any changes or unauthorised access to their Singpass accounts also be notified to their next-of-kin, guardian or adult children.
I raised in this House previously about one of my Keat Hong residents, who is an adult with special needs, and how he was scammed into signing up for various phone lines by scammers and that his elderly parents were helpless to prevent the scam. We need to have a more robust way of protecting the vulnerable groups of our society. Perhaps, the use of data analytics to see the pattern of access by such groups can also help alert or red flag any sudden unathorised access. What are the steps that the Ministry will take to bolster such protection? Perhaps, before any changes to access to such Singpass accounts can be made, there can be a two-factor authentication to be approved by the next-of-kin, guardian or their adult children.
I thank the Minister for clarifying about the cases of sharing Singpass credentials for genuine legitimate purposes and also where the elderly seek help to access their Singpass accounts. So, when I do my house visits and my AICs, the volunteers are quite aware in this regard.
In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we are working and walking in the right direction to stop the scourge of scams in our midst. This does not just affect the elderly but also the young who are looking for jobs and to earn a decent and honest living, and maybe may not have had the full brunt of life experiences before them. Our people's hard-earned money and lifesavings are at risk and at stake and, with that, their hopes and aspirations for a better future. I stand in support of the Bills.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Sir, in the past few years, Members of Parliament have encountered residents whose lives have been devastated by online crimes, such as scams. Not only have these victims lost significant amounts of hard-earned monies or retirement savings, they also lived with the mental anguish and guilt of being gullible enough to fall for such deception. Often, the victims were vulnerable in certain ways and susceptible to exploitation, such as those who live alone and are desperate for friends to chat with, or those searching for a life partner, who then become the victim of a love scam.
Some may blame the victims for being foolish or authors of their own misfortune. But this ignores the fact that we are dealing here with perpetrators who are parts of organised syndicates who appear well-trained to find targets. Their criminal behaviour is truly despicable.
After their ordeals, victims usually report the matter to the Police, hoping that their monies can be recovered or, at the very least, that the perpetrators would be arrested, prosecuted and punished. Due to the organised nature of scams, which are often transnational, Police have the unenviable task of informing victims that their chances of recovering their monies are often slim. Such news to a younger victim is certainly bad news, but at least he or she has the potential to recover from the loss. Such news to a retiree, however, can be crushing.
Scams have become a major crime issue in Singapore, warranting the Police to issue separate scam updates in their annual crime reporting since last year. Sir, I, therefore, support the rationale for the CMA and CDSA (Amendment) Bills. These Bills tighten the net around those who facilitate money laundering, including letting their bank accounts and Singpass accounts be used for fund transfers.
Reducing the opportunities for syndicates to redirect the fruits of crime is a step in the right direction. As to how effective these provisions will be to disrupt the operations of criminal syndicates, only time will tell.
That said, I have three clarifications and concerns about the CDSA (Amendment) Bill.
First, on the difficulties of prosecuting money mules currently. According to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) press release of 18 April 2023, a large number of money mules arrested by Police could not be prosecuted due to difficulties in proving their intent to facilitate criminal activities. It was highlighted that between 2020 and 2022, more than 19,000 money mules were investigated but fewer than 250 cases were eventually prosecuted. I believe the Second Minister stated these statistics earlier as well.
This works out to a prosecution rate of just 1.3%. Could MHA clarify whether the balance 98.7% of cases were all not prosecuted due to the difficulties in proving intention or does this number include non-prosecutions due to other grounds as well?
Secondly, on the likely effect of the proposed amendments to reduce the mental element required to prosecute money mules. Clauses 3 to 6 of the CDSA Bill will amend sections 50, 51, 53 and 54 to criminalise acts of money laundering done unintentionally or unknowingly, if rashness or negligence can be shown. The punishment for such acts of rashness or negligence will be lower than for acts done deliberately or with knowledge.
Coming back to the earlier statistic of not being able to prosecute more than 98% of money mules investigated in the last three years, what is MHA's assessment of how these changes will improve prosecution rates in future?
Finally, on the new CDSA offence of assisting another person to retain the proceeds of crime under the proposed section 55A. It is stated in the explanatory statement to the Bill that the new section 55A is meant to criminalise certain acts that facilitate money laundering \"regardless of a person's mental state\". My concern here is about persons who may be manipulated into letting others use their bank accounts to transfer money.
I encountered one resident recently who told me that her bank account had been frozen by Police as it had apparently been used to make or receive some suspicious funds. I tried asking her how her account got compromised, but she was unable to answer coherently. She appeared, to me at least, to be a person who was easily confused and cognitively impaired, and may have been made use of.
I note that the proposed section 55A(3) and (4) provide a defence to a charge under section 55A if the person did not know or had no reasonable grounds to believe that the funds concerned were the proceeds of crime. Under the law then, a suspected money mule is expected to make some sort of reasoned assessment about the nature of the transaction. How will the authorities approach a case where the suspect appears to be mentally impaired?
Sir, while we certainly want to curtail scams and money laundering, we also need to be fair to suspects who may also be victims themselves.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Janet Ang.
Ms Janet Ang (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to join in this debate. The current situation is very concerning on several counts. Firstly, the increased number of persons being scammed to release their Singpass and/or personal banking credentials and the value involved give cause for grave concern.
Secondly, that Singaporeans are becoming money mules who knowingly participate in the criminal activities involving their Singpass and/or personal banking credentials is even more concerning as it points to potential waning of Singapore's high integrity value system. Maybe I am watching too many Mediacorp programmes, but are we seeing the return of triads, only this time, triads in digital skin?
So, with the amendments to the CDSA and CMA Bills, it will give the appropriate power to the authorities to take action and I hope will also deter persons who think this is easy money to recognise the severity of their actions.
At the same time, we do not want Singaporeans to lose confidence in moving to digital. Digital is here to stay and, in fact, will accelerate and become more pervasive in our lives. So, it becomes even more important for Singaporeans to be digital first, even if not digital only. The Minister has assured us in previous speeches that, for Singapore, we are definitely going to take care of those who are less digitally savvy but it does not mean that we are going to go back to the old ages of totally non-digital just because we have such situations going on.
That said, I do have a few questions for the Minister.
(a) What are the challenges envisaged by the Ministry with regard to enforcement of the law and how does the Ministry intend to address those challenges?
(b) There has been a lot of efforts in driving awareness of importance and responsibility of protecting one's digital identity and digital footprint across the board, from banking access to social media and so on. What else is the Government planning to do to increase the effectiveness of these initiatives and what else needs to be done by the banks, financial services institutions, the community and the rest of Government?
(c) Is the Government considering additional levels of authentication, for example, using biometrics identification, AI-generated questions, to authenticate that the individual using the identification is really who they say they are? It is probably no longer secure enough to use a login with simply a password and a one-time password (OTP). All this, of course, leads to more costs being involved and more steps. But it looks to me that this may be required. So, how is the Government planning to fight this kind of crime?
(d) As this inevitably always involves the banks, the proposed set-up of COSMIC, the FI-to-FI information sharing services platform, which will be debated under the amendment to the Financial Services and Markets Bill will, I believe, be pertinent because everything flows through the banking system. In lieu of COSMIC going online, what data will the Government use to strengthen enforcement of this Bill?
(e) Enforcement of Computer Misuse legislation can be challenging due to several factors, including the rapidly evolving technology. So, how is Singapore planning to keep pace with new forms of cybercrime and methods of committing offences and enable MHA to be able to identify and prosecute perpetrators and the syndicates involved?
(f) With the Internet enabling global communication and transactions as we have seen in past cases, cybercrimes often occur across multiple jurisdictions, making it challenging to identify and prosecute offenders. How does MHA involve INTERPOL and their overseas counterparts to ensure that the Bill can be enforced effectively?
(g) Most important are the poor victims. The victims need to be protected as much as possible and, where possible, the victims are supported as much as possible with recovering the monies that have been scammed. What else beyond the initiatives already in place will the Government be planning to put into action that can help the victims recover as much of the monies that have been scammed? And perhaps a little bit of compassion from the banks would help, because, in fact, in 2021, a very good friend of mine had somebody, her friend who was totally scammed and then the bank locked down all her bank accounts and she was left borrowing money from other friends. So, certainly, we hope that we need to have a little bit of compassion for the victims and ensure that there is a systematic approach to helping them and supporting them. But, of course, the most important help is to tell them not to give away their identity.
So, in conclusion, to overcome these challenges, MHA and Anti-Scam Centre Singapore as well as CSA need to work closely with technology experts, cybersecurity professionals and other stakeholders like the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and the banks as well as international communities to stay abreast of emerging threats and develop effective strategies for preventing and prosecuting computer misuse crimes. This will involve investing in new technology, enhancing international cooperation and improving training and resources for all personnel involved. Notwithstanding my clarifications, Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister Josephine Teo. Would you like to adjourn the debate?
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment of Debate ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Second Minister for Home Affairs (Mrs Josephine Teo): Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move, \"That the debate be now adjourned.\"
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the debate be now adjourned.\" – [Mrs Josephine Teo]. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Resumption of debate, what day?
Mrs Josephine Teo: Tomorrow, Sir.
Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Making Parliament a Fairer Arena for All","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Deputy Speaker: Deputy Leader.
The Deputy Leader of the House (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\"
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise today to discuss how we can build Parliament into a fairer arena for all.
During the debate on the President’s Address, there was much discussion of how Opposition parliamentarians behaved and performed in Parliament. Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong openly called on the Opposition to offer a “serious alternative agenda” and noted that as Singapore develops into a mature democracy, it needs both a serious Government and a serious Opposition. The question then is whether the current Parliamentary structures and processes support the work of a serious Opposition.
Since the last General Election, the Government has taken steps to recognise the Opposition in our Parliament with the appointment of Mr Pritam Singh, the hon Member for Aljunied Group Representation Constituency (GRC) and Leader of the Workers' Party as Leader of the Opposition and the provision of some resources to assist him to discharge his duties.
While the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) supports these moves, we think that these steps are insufficient to recognise the Opposition’s role in our political system. The Government can definitely do more to encourage a serious Opposition that is an integral part of a mature Parliamentary democracy.
Both the Government and the Opposition must play their part. Ministers have discussed at length what the Government wants a serious Opposition to do. Let us also discuss what a serious Government should do to strengthen our Parliamentary system.
I entered Parliament in August 2020. Since then, I have learnt a lot more about the processes and procedures of Parliament and participated in many lively and substantive debates.
Based on my personal experiences, some parliamentary processes may not be the most conducive to facilitate Members of Parliament (MPs), including those from the ruling party, to do their jobs. Allow me to quote three examples here.
Firstly, MPs are supposed to scrutinise the Government and hold it to account to ensure that it is acting in the best interests of Singaporeans, be it legislation, policy or executive action. Many MPs from both sides of the House do not come from a public policy or legal background and may require assistance to do such work.
However, while there is a library in the Parliament and the librarians are very helpful, there is no other research support. In place of that, elected MPs are provided a monthly allowance of $1,300 to hire a Legislative Assistant and $500 for a Secretarial Assistant to assist them. I am sure most Members would agree with me that this is meagre and is completely insufficient to hire even one full-time assistant. Obviously, the Government only wants MPs to be supported by volunteers.
Furthermore, after 1997, only elected MPs are provided an allowance for the purpose of hiring a Legislative Assistant and Secretarial Assistant to support them. The Non-Constituency MPs (NCMPs) and Nominated MPs (NMPs) do not receive such an allowance.
Then Leader of the House, Mr Wong Kan Seng’s justification for the removal of the NCMPs’ support allowances were that the duties of NCMPs were not as heavy and onerous as those of elected MPs, as only elected MPs sit on committees. Today, NCMPs have full voting rights equal to elected MPs and sit on Parliamentary committees. I sit on the Public Petitions Committee and the Parliamentary workload has increased across the board, commensurate with the increasing complexity of our Civil Service and our Parliamentary system.
The second observation: MPs could contribute more meaningfully to debates if the Government provides Ministerial Statements and other speeches to MPs and MPs provide Ministers with drafts of their speeches beforehand. This would be a win-win situation for all as it enables MPs and Ministers to debate on the substantive issues and further the discussion, instead of having to divine whether the questions have been answered by the Ministerial Statement.
The ultimate objective of the debates in this Parliament are to arrive at the best policy for Singaporeans, not to win a Parliamentary debate. In that spirit, I have provided this Adjournment Motion speech to the Speaker and the Leader of the House prior to today’s delivery. I hope this has enabled the Government to prepare a more substantive response to the issues and suggestions that I have raised in this speech.
The third observation: MPs could benefit from more flexibility around time-keeping, especially when it comes to Question Time or the Committee of Supply (COS) debates.
Time-keeping may be important to keep our processes efficient but I think more Parliamentary time should be provided to ensure that every Member who wants to ask a question can do so. This is especially true during the COS, where many Members have been unable to ask supplementary questions because of the guillotine time and billions of dollars of expenditure are just approved like that.
Having more substantive debates on policy would go a long way to enable Singaporeans to become better-informed on public policy and make the Government more accountable.
Flowing from my observations above, I have several suggestions for improvement, which fall into three major groups. The first group is aimed at better supporting MPs in carrying out their legislative duties.
One, the Parliament Secretariat should be given resources to set up a research department. This department should have a Head and several full-time staffers to provide research support for MPs as they scrutinise Bills and policies. I think an appropriate annual starting budget for such a department is around $1 million.
Two, the allowance to hire Legislative Assistants and Secretarial Assistants should be increased and extended to NCMPs and NMPs. It is timely for the Government to review the Legislative Assistant scheme for NCMPs and NMPs, as it had promised to do so in 1997.
Three, the Government is to provide all data requested by Members in the requested format unless there are national security or financial market sensitivity considerations. The Government should not use the risk of such data being misinterpreted or being used for other purposes as justification for not releasing it. Once again, a fair arena for all.
The second group of suggestions is aimed at providing MPs with more time to question the Government and to discharge their duties as legislators.
One, we should introduce an “Opposition hour” during the first day of every Parliamentary Sitting to discuss subjects chosen by the Opposition. These are likely to cover current topics which have the most public interest. This is not new and is done in other Westminster parliaments, such as the UK and Canada. For example, in the UK, the Leader of the Opposition has 17 days where he can select the topics for debate. These debates cover a wide range of issues, from government policy to current events. This also provides a platform for the Opposition to hold the Government to account, challenge its policies and decisions and propose alternative policies or solutions to issues facing the country.
Two, in principle, the question and answer, and clarification time for all debates, including Parliamentary Questions (PQs), Ministerial Statements, Bills and Motions in this House should not end as long as there are new substantive questions from MPs. This would allow for debates to conclude substantively. The Speaker, obviously, would still have the discretion to end the debate if he is of the view that further questions being asked by MPs are not covering new substantive ground.
The third group of recommendations is aimed at strengthening the role of the Opposition in our Parliamentary system.
One, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) should be chaired by an Opposition Member, with Members from all political parties represented on the Committee. The PAC's role is to scrutinise the Government's financial performance and use of public funds. As such, it is important that the PAC is seen as independent and impartial. Many Westminster parliaments ensure this by having an Opposition MP chairing the PAC.
This was also the case in Singapore until 1968 when there were no more Opposition MPs in Parliament. The first PAC Chairman under a People's Action Party (PAP) Government in 1959 was AP Rajah, who was an Independent. The second was Mr Lim Huan Boon, who was from the Barisan Sosialis. As it has been over 40 years since Opposition MPs returned to this House, I believe it is timely to again embrace our Parliamentary convention of having an Opposition Member chairing the PAC.
Two, the Public Petitions Committee (PPC) should also be chaired by an Opposition Member. The PPC plays an important role in providing a platform for citizens to voice their concerns and grievances to the Government. It is, therefore, crucial that the PPC is seen as objective and non-partisan, and having an Opposition Member as a chairperson can help to ensure this. In the UK, there is no rule that the Petitions Committee must be chaired by an Opposition Member, but this is currently the case.
In conclusion, Deputy Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition has, on many occasions, emphasised that the small number of Opposition MPs is far from the one-third necessary to check the PAP's Parliamentary supermajority. What we are asking for is a fair arena for all and access to data and resources.
The Opposition lacks access to the resources of our excellent Civil Service. Handicapped by this lack of resources, alternative policies created by the Opposition will not have the same breadth and depth of the Government's. The PSP echoes the views of the Leader of the Opposition.
I have made many suggestions that will enable us to better discharge our duties as Opposition MPs and NCMPs to Singaporeans. I urge the Government to seriously consider these suggestions.
The Government must pay more attention to discussing serious alternative policies with us and spend less time deflecting and avoiding uncomfortable questions. On our part, we will continue to do our best to discharge our duties as a rational and responsible Opposition party in Parliament.
This House comprises both the Government and the Opposition. If this is to be a first-class Parliament that works amicably and constructively for the good of Singapore, it must be a fair arena for all. Singaporeans deserve better. For country, for people.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Leader of the House.
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Member for his speech and suggestions. I also thank him for providing his speech in advance, a departure from his norm in respect of his more recent Adjournment Motions and Motions, but quite understandable, given his proposal, and well appreciated.
Mr Leong has put forward four proposals. First, to provide additional resources for MPs, NCMPs and NMPs; second, to provide Ministerial speeches in advance and opportunities for Opposition to raise matters; third, more flexibility in time keeping; and fourth, chairmanship of certain Select Committees.
Let me address each of these in turn.
First, on the issue of resources for Members, this is something that we review from time to time. On this, there are two separate points, namely, the difference between the allowances for elected MPs and NCMPs and NMPs; and the quantum of the allowances for hiring Legislative and Secretarial Assistants.
On the first point, NCMPs have the same voting rights as MPs in Parliament, but it is indisputable that their workload is less than that of elected MPs, as they do not have the responsibility for a specific constituency or for dealing with Meet-the-People Session (MPS) cases of residents. As such, in principle, it is reasonable to differentiate between the support the elected MPs and NCMPs receive.
On the second, in terms of the allowances given to elected MPs, whether it be the general allowance or the allowances for hiring a Legislative Assistant and a Secretarial Assistant, we do not differentiate between PAP MPs and Opposition MPs. The amount given to elected PAP MPs and the elected Opposition MPs is exactly the same, which is fair. The PAP backbenchers make do with exactly the same allowances as the elected WP MPs, save for the Leader of the Opposition (LO).
In the case of the LO, having regard to the greater Opposition presence in Parliament after the last General Election and the designation of Mr Singh as \"Leader of the Opposition\" for this Parliament, it was appropriate to allocate more resources to him, given his expanded duties and responsibilities. I also wish to highlight that the LO gets more resources than the PAP backbenchers and the PAP Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) chairpersons. However, this is fair, given his role. This is an example of how we review and adjust according to the circumstances.
Mr Leong has called for a research department to support all MPs, costing $1 million for a start. His justification is that, and I quote, \"many MPs, from both sides of the House, do not come from a public policy or legal background and may require assistance to do such work\".
While many PAP MPs do not come from such backgrounds either, they are not asking for this. They have been able to work within the allowances currently allocated to them. They also often pool their Legislative Assistant allowances to hire full-time Legislative and/or Secretarial Assistants to support two or more MPs. They do not confine themselves to the Legislative Assistant allowance, but often also draw upon their MPs' allowance to top up the sum. It is quite open to Opposition MPs and NCMPs to do the same.
What is of note, however, is that the absence of such research facilities has not, in any way, deterred the PSP from asserting its ability to advance policy positions.
In PSP's 2020 manifesto, they said that the Government's response to the economy was, I quote, \"a patchwork of policy tweaks without addressing the fundamental factors affecting Singaporeans\" and what was needed was \"a paradigm shift\" and to \"look for workable alternative solutions going forward\". They said, and I quote again, \"Progress Singapore Party's manifesto offers a better alternative to the current problems that we are facing as a nation\" and their manifesto refers to various economic, social and political policies.
Today, though, Mr Leong espouses the view that \"The Opposition lacks access to the resources of our excellent Civil Service. Handicapped by this lack of resources, alternative policies created by the Opposition will not have the same breadth and depth of the Government's.\" That was his statement earlier.
There is a marked contrast between the statements in PSP's manifesto and Mr Leong's statements in Parliament today.
We do have an excellent Civil Service. However, Mr Leong's assertion misses the point. The Civil Service works with the elected government of the day. Ultimately, it is the Ministers who decide on the Government's agenda and set the major direction of policies being implemented. These policies are not presented by the Civil Service fully formed, with all the Ministers having to do is simply read out the policy speech in Parliament. Ministers provide political guidance to the Civil Service to deliver results and the Ministers have to take responsibility for the same. If Mr Leong needs more information, he can obtain those through PQs and during COS cuts; and he has done so.
At the end of the day, the key to better debate in Parliament lies in understanding the main issues at hand, acknowledging our fundamental realities and constraints and taking not just the easy decisions but also the hard ones. It is not through making unending requests for ever more detailed data, which are then used as an alibi for not offering more constructive ideas or better alternative policies during debates.
In reality, we actually provide more data than most countries. During the last session of Parliament, more than 7,000 PQs were filed and most answers would have involved the provision of data in some form or another. Mr Leong says the Government must provide data in whatever format MPs want. I ask Mr Leong and Members to bear in mind that data collation, as well as slicing and dicing it in different ways and the need to check the data thereafter, costs time, money and effort. We will lean forward to provide what is reasonable and practicable, but we cannot fulfil every whim. Minister Tan See Leng explained this at an earlier Sitting.
Next, Mr Leong requests that Ministers provide their speeches to MPs in advance. In exchange, he proposed MPs provide \"drafts\" only of their speeches beforehand. Mr Leong says this enables substantive debate.
The reality is that the system is designed such that MPs can always engage and debate the Ministers, irrespective of when the Minister's speech is delivered.
The Budget Statement is delivered at least a week before the Budget debate and COS, so, MPs have ample opportunity to think through their speeches and cuts. Bills are introduced during prior Sittings, except in cases of urgency, which are rare. Hence, in general, MPs have about a month to go through the Bill, which forms the basis of the Minister's Second Reading speech.
Ministerial Statements are generally of two kinds. First, those with strong public interest, where multiple PQs have been filed and those addressing important matters which have to be dealt with expeditiously and at short notice or are not suitable to be dealt with under other mechanisms. MPs can seek clarifications from the Minister on the Ministerial Statement. Policy speeches delivered outside of Parliament, which are publicly reported, Members would have enough time to go through these and raise issues in Parliament.
In most of these situations, MPs have more than ample opportunity to engage the Ministers on their speeches through a wide array of mechanisms: PQs, supplementary questions, Motions, Bills, Adjournment Motions, clarifications and COS cuts. In fact, if anything, the advantage is with the MPs, because most of these mechanisms are not time-bound. MPs may deploy these days, weeks, months and sometimes even years after the Minister's speech was delivered, as Mr Leong himself has done, for example, on manpower issues.
Of course, there may be instances where notice is not possible, for example, when the Minister is responding in the course of an ongoing debate or market-sensitive matters, such as tax announcements. But what is possible is to ensure that there is enough time for MPs to digest what has been said, respond and then have an informed substantive debate. This, the Parliamentary procedure allows.
For this same reason, there is no need to have an \"Opposition hour\". This is because every Sitting is an opportunity for MPs, whether PAP or Opposition, to raise topics of their choice and to hold the Government to account, challenge policies and decisions and propose alternative policies through these mechanisms. They can do this through PQs, moving full Motions for debates, as NMPs are doing at this Sitting, or moving Adjournment Motions, as Mr Leong is doing today. This is already taking place.
Mr Leong's next proposal is, in effect, that there should be unlimited time for PQs and COS cuts. While I can understand why, from his point of view he would like that, this would not be a good idea. It would be the surest way of triggering Parkinson's Law – the adage that work will expand to fill the time allotted for its completion.
We have already seen that happen with PQs. The time for PQs has increased considerably, given more Sittings. However, instead of allowing us to deal with more PQs, it has resulted in more, and often repetitive, supplementary questions on the same topic.
Where flexibility is required, Mr Speaker has exercised his discretion to allow it, examples being the extension of time to enable supplementary questions on HDB's Ethnic Integration Policy and on Keppel Offshore & Marine.
Parliament time is finite and questions and debates cannot go on without end. Setting time limits ensures that questions stay focused, answers stay on point and more can be accomplished.
In fact, in the UK Parliament, Question Time is only one hour per Sitting day, inclusive of Prime Minister's Questions and they have 650 MPs!
Finally, Mr Leong has called for the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and the Public Petitions Committee (PPC) to be chaired by an Opposition MP, on the basis that doing so will ensure that they are independent, impartial, objective and non-partisan.
Let us reflect for a moment and ask if we really think that would be the case.
The better solution is the one that we already have in place under the rules. The PAC and the PPC are Standing Select Committees. A select committee is a committee of Parliament. The Standing Orders (SOs) provide that the composition of each standing select committee should reflect the balance between the Government benches and the Opposition benches in Parliament. And if you think about it for a moment, that is fair – because it reflects the proportion of Government and Opposition MPs.
The SOs provide that the Speaker chairs the PPC, which is, again, fair because he chairs the whole Parliament – a position to which he was elected by Parliament at the beginning of the term. And the Parliament which elected him was, in turn, elected by the people, who also decided the proportion of PAP MPs and Opposition MPs. Speaker appoints the Chair of the PAC, an authority conferred on him by Parliament through the Standing Orders, and that is also fair because it gives flexibility to choose an appropriate Chair having regard to the technical content involved.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I will just take half a minute more to complete.
Hence, the chairmanship of the select committees is drawn from the authority of the people and we should respect that. In any case, Opposition Members serve on the select committees and are entitled to ask questions and argue issues fully. There is no reason to think that they have not done their job properly.
In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, the rules afford more than enough opportunity for MPs, Opposition or otherwise, to hold the Government to account, raise queries and debate matters. The real issue is how to do this effectively. The answer lies not in changing the rules, but rather, for MPs to develop the skills of listening, using the existing rules more effectively, to make a contribution to the debate and show that they are deserving of the trust that voters have placed in them.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Leong, I am afraid that pursuant to Standing Order 2(8)(b), the debate concludes after 30 minutes. You had 20 minutes for your speech and the Minister replied, using up the full 30-minute complement.
Order, the time allowed for the proceedings has expired. I adjourn the House pursuant to the Standing Order.
I wish to inform hon Members that the Sitting tomorrow will commence at 11.00 am. Order, order.
Adjourned accordingly at 6.52 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":"Semakau Landfill's Current Utilisation and Estimated Remaining Capacity","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"25 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what is the current utilisation of Semakau Landfill; and (b) what is its estimated remaining capacity by number of tonnes of waste.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: As indicated in the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment’s replies to recent Parliamentary Questions, at current waste disposal rates, Semakau Landfill is expected to run out of space by 2035. There are ongoing efforts to extend the lifespan of the landfill well beyond 2035, including regulatory measures on key waste streams, research and development, public outreach and engagement. We will provide an update at a suitable time when we have greater certainty of our plans.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Balloting Scheme for Singaporean Muslims to Perform Haj Pilgrimage","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"26 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Social and Family Development and Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) whether the limited balloting scheme has reduced the waiting time for Singaporean Muslims to perform the Haj pilgrimage; (b) if so, by how much; and (c) whether this scheme prioritises first-time Haj pilgrim applicants.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: This year, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) allocates 900 places for Singaporean pilgrims to perform the Haj. The existing Advance Haj Registration System (ARHS) allocates these 900 official Haj quota to pilgrims.
In addition, KSA also has the discretion to allocate additional places to each country. In past years, KSA granted additional Haj places to Singapore very close to the departure date of the first batch of pilgrims. Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS) officers would then reach out to applicants who were in the queue to fill up these additional Haj places within three working days. During the allocation process, MUIS noted that a significant number of applicants in the queue were not prepared to perform the Haj at such short notice.
Learning from this experience, MUIS has developed the Limited Balloting Scheme to allocate the often very large number of additional Haj places within a short period in a fair and transparent manner. Under this scheme, Haj registrants who are able to commit to the Haj pilgrimage even with short notice can submit their application to ballot for a place. The balloting will be done through a computer-generated randomised algorithm. The Limited Balloting Scheme will be implemented when MUIS receives updates on the additional Haj places from KSA for future Haj seasons, where there is a need to allocate a large number of places at very short notice. It will not be applied this year.
With better utilisation of both the official and additional Haj places, we hope to eventually ease the backlog of Haj registrants and thus reduce the overall waiting time for pilgrims to perform the Haj. However, this depends on the official and additional Haj places granted by KSA. Other countries have also adopted balloting as a way to allocate Haj places.
The Limited Balloting Scheme will only be offered to prospective first-time Haj pilgrims who have been in the AHRS queue for more than five years. Applicants who performed their Haj previously are not eligible to register for the additional places offered through this balloting exercise.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trend in Number of Seniors Living Alone and Staying Reclusive and Unconnected","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"27 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the trend in relation to the number of seniors aged 60 and above who live alone in Singapore; (b) what is the frequency of visits or checks on such seniors (i) under the Ministry’s Eldercare Centre service model, (ii) by Silver Generation Ambassadors or (iii) through other Government initiatives; and (c) whether the Government is monitoring the number of seniors who choose to stay reclusive and unconnected with the community.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The number of residents aged 65 and above who live alone in Singapore is rising, from 58,000 in 2018 to 79,000 in 2022. This number is expected to continue to increase as our population ages and average household size decreases.
The Silver Generation Office under the Agency for Integrated Care identifies seniors with needs or are at-risk, such as those who are living alone or are frailer. Silver Generation Ambassadors will visit them once a year and connect them with the relevant support or services.
As for seniors identified to require social support, they are referred to the Active Ageing Centres (AACs) which provide a suite of services, including active ageing programmes, referral to care services and health-related initiatives. AAC befrienders reach out to them typically at least once a month.
Other agencies, such as volunteers from the People’s Association and grassroots organisations or SG Cares Volunteer Centres under the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth, will also reach out to seniors who may need assistance and befriending.
Indeed, there will be seniors who decline assistance and choose to remain reclusive. Our experience is that if community partners continue to try to build trust and rapport, through check-ins and visits, we can eventually persuade them to take up care and support services when ready.
Ageing in communities will be a major national initiative under the Forward Singapore exercise. We will step up, expand and deepen our efforts in this area. Details will be announced later in the year when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"More Resources to Support Provision of Medical Escort Services for Elderly from Lower-income Households","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"28 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry can provide additional dedicated resources and funding for social service agencies to scale up hiring and training capabilities to support the provision of medical escort services for the elderly from lower-income households who need help to move around and have no caregiver or whose caregiver is unable to provide support because of their own health and physical condition.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Ministry of Health provides funding for Medical Escort and Transport (MET) services which help frail seniors to attend medical appointments if they are unable to do so independently. MET capacity is generally sufficient, though with our ageing population, we will need more in the future.
Hence, the Government provides grants to community care organisations, social service agencies and professionals, such as the Community Silver Trust and the Professional Capability Grant, for capability building. Providers can also tap on manpower recruitment and training initiatives under the Agency for Integrated Care. These include courses relating to safe management of seniors with mobility needs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Options for Students Requiring Long-term In-patient Care for Physical or Mental Health Issues","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"29 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Education what are the options available for students who require long-term in-patient care for physical or mental health issues to continue with their schooling and education, even as they are residing in hospitals or other healthcare institutions.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Students who require long-term care for physical or mental health issues vary in terms of the support they need.
Schools work with the families of these students and healthcare professionals to support them where appropriate and transit them back to school when they are ready. For example, teachers and peers may keep in touch with these students through voice or video calls. Schools may facilitate access to learning resources and provide support for learning and socio-emotional well-being to ease their transition back to school when ready.
The Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board (SEAB) also works with schools to provide support for these students if they are sitting for the national examinations. If the students are assessed to be medically fit but are unable to take the papers in an examination venue, SEAB can arrange for these students to sit for their papers in the hospital. If their physical conditions require additional arrangements, such as extra time, these students can apply for appropriate Access Arrangements through their schools.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Timeline for Introduction of Anti-discrimination Law","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"30 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what are the remaining issues to be sorted out before the Government will introduce the anti-discrimination law announced by the Prime Minister at the National Day Rally in 2021; and (b) when is the draft law expected to be circulated for public review.\n
Dr Tan See Leng: The Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness released its interim recommendations in February this year. We thank the public for providing feedback. The Committee is considering the feedback received.
The Committee targets to complete its deliberations and release its final recommendations in the second half of this year. Thereafter, drafting of the legislation will commence and we aim for that to be ready in the second half of 2024.
31 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Defence (a) what is the significance to regional security with the Singapore and China joint military exercise held from 28 April to 1 May 2023; and (b) whether there are plans for further deepening of military ties.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: Military exercises between the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) are in accordance with the enhanced Agreement on Defence Exchanges and Security Cooperation (ADESC) signed between Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen and then-Chinese State Councilor and Minister for National Defense General Wei Fenghe in 2019. These agreements which we have with many other countries reflect our approach in defence diplomacy, which is to build a network of good defence ties.
The recently concluded naval exercise – Exercise Maritime Cooperation – is one of two bilateral exercises that the SAF conducts with the PLA. An exercise between our two armies – Exercise Cooperation – is also scheduled to take place this year. This year’s exercises mark a resumption following a pause due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
As part of the enhanced ADESC, our defence establishments and militaries also agreed to engage in regular dialogues, academic exchanges and cross-attendance in each other’s multilateral conferences.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Additional Annual Subsidies for Outpatient MRI Scans for Retired or Low-income Citizens","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"32 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for Health in view of the high cost of MRI scans, whether the Ministry will consider providing additional annual subsidies on top of the existing $300 MediSave funding for outpatient MRI scans, specifically for retired or low-income citizens.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans are needed for diagnosing conditions, such as tumours and inflammation. The more common MRI scans cost around $1,000 per scan.
To make scans more affordable, the Ministry of Health (MOH) provides means-tested subsidies of up to 70% to patients at public Specialist Outpatient Clinics. Pioneer and Merdeka Generation seniors get additional subsidies covering 50% or 25% off their remaining bill respectively.
In addition to subsidies, patients can offset their remaining bill by tapping on their MediSave for up to $300 per year for outpatient diagnostic scans, including MRI scans. Seniors aged 60 and above can withdraw an additional $300 per year from MediSave for MRI scans under the Flexi-MediSave scheme. Taken together, Pioneer and Merdeka Generation seniors would likely incur low, if not, zero out-of-pocket payments at public Specialist Outpatient Clinics.
Patients who still face difficulties coping with their bills can approach Medical Social Workers to apply for financial assistance, such as MediFund. MOH commits that no one will be denied basic healthcare due to inability to pay. We will continually review our healthcare financing framework to ensure that healthcare remains affordable and accessible to the population.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Revamp Format of GCE \"A\" Level H1 General Paper Examination","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"33 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Education whether there are plans to revamp the format of GCE \"A\" Level H1 General Paper examination from a single sitting consisting of one essay response paper and one comprehension paper to a series of continuous assessments of essays and comprehension papers, so as to remove the single-exam day risk that may unfairly penalise students affected by adverse events on the examination day.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The mode and format of assessment depend on the purpose of the assessment and the learning outcomes to be assessed. Factors, such as the nature of the subject, appropriateness of the assessment mode in eliciting evidence of students’ mastery in the subject, as well as the impact on students’ assessment load, would need to be considered.
National examinations like the \"A\" levels are designed to elicit evidence of students’ attainment of learning outcomes for various subjects at the end of study. There are different assessment modes appropriate for the range of subjects, and the current approach for General Paper remains professionally sound and valid.
For students who miss some papers or sit for a paper under adverse circumstances in the national examination, there are provisions for them to apply for special consideration. Such provisions ensure that no student will be disadvantaged in their examination performance by adverse circumstances.
It is important to approach national assessment with the right mindset, without which, unhealthy stress will come with any examination format – be it continuous, cumulative or episodic. Together with parents, we must help our students to see assessment as an opportunity to learn and grow, and support them in developing the ability to manage the pressures that they face. It is neither realistic nor desirable to shield our children from all the stresses in their lives.
Ultimately, a student’s performance in an examination is just a checkpoint in the education journey. It does not and will not define the student’s future or self-worth.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Attempts to Circumvent Law on Cross-border Movements of Physical Currency and Bearer Negotiable Instruments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"34 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether the Ministry has detected attempts to circumvent the law on cross border movements of physical currency and bearer negotiable instruments under the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992 with the use of high value goods instead of physical currency and bearer negotiable instruments.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Cross Border Cash Reporting Regime (CBCRR) under the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act 1992 is part of the anti-money laundering regime in Singapore.
Under the CBCRR, travellers arriving or departing Singapore are required to report any movement of physical currency and bearer negotiable instruments exceeding S$20,000 or its equivalent in a foreign currency.
This CBCRR reporting requirement does not extend to goods.
In the past three years, for cases of money laundering that were investigated, we have not detected money laundering involving the cross-border movement of high value goods by travellers to circumvent the CBCRR reporting requirement.
Besides CBCRR, our anti-money laundering regime includes reporting requirements for suspicious transactions. Entities and individuals, such as banks, gemstone dealers and precious metal dealers, who, in the course of their trade, profession, business or employment, suspect that any property is linked to criminal conduct, must lodge a suspicious transaction report with the Suspicious Transaction Reporting Office.
In addition, Singapore has built strong international partnerships to tackle money laundering, including through information sharing with our foreign counterparts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Loss by Government Agencies from Insolvency of Building and Infrastructure Contractors since COVID-19","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"35 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance from the commencement of the COVID-19 pandemic (a) what is the aggregate loss arising from the premature termination of building and infrastructural contracts issued by Government bodies and statutory bodies due to the insolvency of contracting counterparties, including the re-issuance of contracts for remaining work to other parties at higher unit prices; and (b) what steps are being taken to minimise such losses.
Mr Lawrence Wong: About 2% of Government construction contracts have been prematurely terminated due to contractor insolvency since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. For these contracts, which involve essential infrastructure and building projects, Government agencies have taken steps to minimise the costs incurred. In total, an additional $450 million was required to secure the services of replacement contractors to complete the remaining works.
The new contractors were selected based on competitive bids, which were assessed against prevailing market rates. Where possible, agencies negotiated with replacement contractors to further lower the prices. As part of contractual terms, the agencies had also called on the performance bonds of the insolvent contractors to offset some of the cost increases.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Replicating Parts of Korean Employment Permit Scheme in Recruitment of Low-wage Bangladeshi Migrant Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"36 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Ministry will study the feasibility of replicating elements of the Korean Employment Permit Scheme in the recruitment of low-wage Bangladeshi migrant workers to regulate and improve oversight over parts of the recruitment process that are prone to exploitation and which may lead to overly high recruitment fees.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) had previously studied South Korea’s Employment Permit Scheme and found it unsuitable, given the higher number of migrant workers in Singapore. This was previously addressed in MOM’s Committee of Supply debate in 2018. Foreign workers entering South Korea are also reported to face waiting times of one to two years.
MOM does recognise that migrant workers may face high recruitment fees from intermediaries in their home countries. We have introduced legislation to limit the recruitment fees paid by migrant workers to employment agencies operating in Singapore. However, we have no legal jurisdiction to influence the recruitment fees incurred in their home countries.
This is a complex issue that is not easily addressed, but we are open to and are exploring approaches that can help reduce the dependence of migrant workers on intermediaries in their home countries and, hence, recruitment fees. One idea we are considering is to facilitate direct recruitment channels for returning workers as they are more familiar with our employment laws and may be less dependent on intermediaries. This is still at an early stage of consideration.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Abuse of Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty by Joint Owners of HDB Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"37 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development since the Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty (ABSD) was introduced, how many joint owners of HDB flats have been found to have falsely filed for divorce to decouple their property to avoid paying the ABSD on the purchase of a second property.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Court has to be satisfied that there are valid statutory grounds before granting a divorce.
No Housing and Development Board (HDB) flat owners have been found to have falsely filed for divorce to decouple their HDB flat ownership for the purpose of avoiding payment of the Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty on the next property purchase.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Key Performance Indicators Tracked for Effectiveness of Courses in Upskilling Workers for Shortage Occupation List","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Education what are the key performance indicators tracked by the Ministry in terms of (i) the employability of disrupted workers after attending a funded training programme, (ii) the time taken to find employment and (iii) the availability and effectiveness of courses that upskill workers to enter occupations in the Shortage Occupation List.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) supports a wide range of training programmes for workers across ages and career stages. For disrupted workers, SSG offers train-and-place programmes that provide industry-oriented training coupled with job placement support. These were ramped up during the COVID-19 pandemic in the form of SGUnited Skills and SGUnited Pathway Programmes – Company Training to support jobseekers impacted by the pandemic. Over 26,000 Singaporeans and Permanent Residents participated in these programmes as of end-March 2022. Around 64% of those aged below 40 and 56% of those aged 40 and above found employment within six months of course completion.
With the recovery of the economy, SSG has transited the SGUnited programmes to the SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme (SCTP), officially launched in April 2022 as the steady-state Train-and-Place programme for mid-career individuals. SCTP courses are developed in sectors with good hiring opportunities, in consultation with sector agencies and industry.
To ensure that continuing education and training programmes meet the needs of companies and individuals, SSG works closely with sector agencies and industry partners, and monitors labour market data, such as job postings by employers. This helps SSG to identify manpower needs and skills gaps, anticipate emerging skills demand and evolving job roles, and develop relevant programmes to address these needs. This includes areas of skills gaps reflected in the Shortage Occupation List, which captures occupations that require highly specialised skills currently lacking in the local workforce.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Percentage of Resolved and Repeated Feedback on Second-hand Smoke in Homes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"40 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment for each year in the past five years (a) what percentage of feedback on second-hand smoke in homes is resolved; and (b) what percentage of feedback on second-hand smoke in homes is repeated feedback.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Based on the National Environment Agency's feedback data between 2018 and 2021 on smoking in homes, most of the feedback cases did not recur after advisories had been issued to residents in the surrounding units. Fewer than 10% of feedback providers gave further feedback on smoking in homes within a year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress on Construction of New Serangoon Polyclinic","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"41 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether an update can be provided on the progress of the new Serangoon Polyclinic located at the junction of Upper Serangoon Road and Serangoon Central that is currently under construction; and (b) specifically, when can the polyclinic start operating and serve residents living in that vicinity.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Serangoon Polyclinic is currently undergoing construction and is on track to open by 2025.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Disclosure of Information by Companies on Carbon Emissions, Use of Renewable Energy and Climate Change Measures","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"42 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Government will review how it can better regulate the provision or disclosure of companies’ business information on (i) the use of or investment in renewable energy alternatives and (ii) any impact arising from its business activities relating to emissions, biodiversity, carbon footprint and climate change, in order to encourage a clearer focus in these areas and allow better transparency for investors to assess companies for investment decisions based on sustainability.
Mr Lawrence Wong: As climate action gains momentum worldwide, the Government recognises that investors are increasingly calling for comparable and credible disclosures to assess companies’ climate performance.
Since 2016, Singapore Exchange (SGX) has required listed issuers to publish sustainability reports, or to explain if they did not do so. Starting this year, climate-related reporting in accordance with the recommendations by the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures is progressively being made mandatory for listed issuers in industries most affected by climate change, such as energy and agriculture. These issuers will need to make disclosures, such as the impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on their businesses, and performance against emission reduction targets, if any. These disclosures will help investors better understand the impact of climate change on the issuers.
In June 2022, the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority and SGX Regulation set up the Sustainability Reporting Advisory Committee, comprising representatives from various industries and academia, to recommend an implementation roadmap on climate reporting for Singapore-incorporated companies, beyond those listed on SGX. The committee’s work is underway and its recommendations will undergo public consultation later this year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Differentiating CareersFinder to Fulfil Workers' Needs and Improve Jobseekers' Experience","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the relationship between “career health” efforts, Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) and Jobs Transformation Maps (JTMs); (b) how can CareersFinder be differentiated and improved upon from existing initiatives, such as MyCareersFuture and MySkillsFuture; (c) how does CareersFinder fulfil the needs of our workers; and (d) whether CareersFinder will tap on partnerships with private entities to improve jobseekers' experience.
Dr Tan See Leng: Career health has three broad aspects. First, being aware of opportunities in the labour market and how to seize them. Second, taking proactive and purposeful actions towards one’s career goals and keeping up one’s employment resilience. Third, being able to bounce back from setbacks. Better career health is key to helping our workers move up the career ladder, stay employable or switch to a new job that better matches their skills and interests. The Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs), Jobs Transformation Maps (JTMs) and CareersFinder are some examples of how we will help Singaporeans improve their career health.
The ITMs and JTMs support the first aspect of career health in improving awareness of opportunities in the labour market and how to seize them. They would be used to guide employers and workers to prepare themselves for the future economy, such as showing them what are the necessary skills for future job roles and how to acquire these skills.
CareersFinder will build upon the ITMs and JTMs by empowering all individuals to take charge of their career health through personalised jobs and skills insights and enabling users to better plan for their upskilling and career needs. The beta version of CareersFinder will be launched as a new add-on feature on MyCareersFuture (MCF) in Q32023 and will also be made accessible via the MySkillsFuture (MySF) portal later on. As a personalised jobs and skills recommender, CareersFinder aims to provide a more seamless user experience for individuals looking to upskill or make a career switch to progress in their careers. Using data on job transitions and skills similarity in the labour market, CareersFinder helps individuals identify new job opportunities available on MCF that align with their profiles, and recommends suitable training programmes offered on MySF to help users achieve their career goals.
Hence, CareersFinder will complement rather than compete with existing jobs and skills portals, such as MCF and MySF, by improving the experience of users searching for jobs and training courses. This is a response to feedback from users that they sometimes explore job opportunities and skills upgrading at the same time. CareersFinder will become more powerful with more data. We will continue to enhance it over time to make it more responsive to individuals’ needs.
We are looking to partner private entities who are keen to use the recommendation algorithm to support job matching. They can also add value by building their own products and services based on CareersFinder to better serve their clients.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reasons for not Pressing Charges against Mr Liew Kai Lung Karl under Section 177 of Penal Code","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"44 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Law (a) what are the reasons for not pressing charges against Mr Liew Kai Lung Karl under section 177 of the Penal Code for furnishing false information to a public servant and section 193 of the Penal Code for giving false evidence, as announced by the Police on 4 November 2020; and (b) whether he will ask the Attorney-General to make the reasons public.
Mr K Shanmugam: In November 2020, the Prosecution preferred two charges against Mr Liew under sections 177 and 193 of the Penal Code. These charges were for furnishing false information to the Police and giving false evidence in judicial proceedings, respectively. Mr Liew eventually pleaded guilty in March 2023 to an amended charge under section 182 of the Penal Code for giving a false statement in Court, instead of under section 193 of the Penal Code. The other charge against him under section 177 of the Penal Code for giving false information to the Police was taken into consideration for the purposes of sentencing.
Members will be aware that it is normal for the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) to proceed on amended charges – in this case, the section 182 charge – as well as to take other charges into consideration for the purposes of sentencing when an individual elects to plead guilty. This is regularly done; in fact, it is the norm in cases involving a plea of guilt.
On this, I should highlight that the Member’s statement that the Prosecution did not press charges under section 177 of the Penal Code against Mr Liew is not accurate. It gives the impression that the charge was not before the Court or was otherwise withdrawn. The charge was, in fact, taken into consideration, meaning it would be considered for the purposes of sentencing.
There was, therefore, nothing exceptional about how this case was dealt with.
As for the Member’s suggestion that the Attorney-General make the reasons public, I should clarify that the Attorney-General had recused himself from this case. This was disclosed to the House previously.
It was the AGC which decided to prefer charges against Mr Liew in the first place, and they carefully considered the facts. In assessing the charges to proceed on and to take into consideration in a plea of guilt, factors which are generally taken into account by the AGC include the strength of the Prosecution’s case, the accused person’s level of cooperation with the investigation authorities and any relevant personal mitigating circumstances.
In Mr Liew’s case, the Prosecution considered these same general factors in deciding to accede to the representations made by Mr Liew’s lawyers and accept the guilty plea by Mr Liew.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effectiveness of Extended Heightened Safety Period in Reducing Workplace Accidents and Injuries","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"45 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the extended Heightened Safety Period has been effective in reducing workplace accidents and injuries; and (b) whether there are plans to further extend the Heightened Safety Period which is set to end on 31 May 2023.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Heightened Safety Period (HSP) was introduced in September 2022 following an increase in workplace fatalities. Penalties for safety lapses were raised and greater accountability was placed on senior management. The HSP measures have helped to reduce the incidence of workplace fatalities.
The Ministry of Manpower will share more details of the impact of HSP at the upcoming launch of the National Workplace Safety and Health Campaign on 23 May 2023.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Grassroots Advisors and People's Association's Roles in Explaining Government Policies and Decisions on Use of Venues","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"46 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what types of activities are undertaken by the grassroots advisors (GRAs) to explain Government policies to the people; (b) what is the legislative provision that mandates the role for the People’s Association (PA) to explain Government policies; and (c) what proportion of the PA’s overall budget is devoted to this function.
47 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth what are the impediments to having civil servants from the People’s Association, as well as other agencies, communicate and explain Government policy, as compared with having a grassroots adviser to do so.
48 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what are the standards applied to decide whether an activity held in People’s Association (PA) controlled events or venues are being used for partisan purposes by any political party; and (b) what are the channels for recourse should any member of the public be concerned about PA events or venues being misused for partisan purposes.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: The People's Association (PA) was established on 1 July 1960 pursuant to the People’s Association Act 1960, a year after Singapore attained self-government. Those were turbulent and uncertain times, and PA was set up to strengthen the link between the Government and the people and to build strong and cohesive communities across Singapore. Sixty-three years later, PA’s mission remains the same: connect Government to people; people to people; and bring all Singaporeans together, regardless of race, language, religion.
The PA’s role, then and now, remains: to foster racial harmony and strengthen social cohesion, to promote active citizenry and civic responsibility, and to serve as the bridge between the people and the Government. This means that as a Government Statutory Board, PA would communicate and explain Government policies to residents, help them understand and navigate the various policy details and processes and, at the same time, relay public feedback and sentiments to the Government so that Government policies can continue to be refined to better address the needs of Singaporeans.
Another way to describe PA’s role is in terms of a concept in sociology – “social capital”. It refers to the network of relations in a community and the set of values animating that community, which allows all the individuals in that community to work together effectively to achieve a common purpose. From its conception in 1960, our founding fathers saw PA as at once the catalyst to deepen our social capital and the glue that strengthens the network of relations that makes us “one people”.
How do we know the PA has succeeded in its mission? An organisation with such a far-reaching and far-ranging mission is always a work-in-progress. But I think it has succeeded in its mission substantially – and there is no better proof of that than in how Singaporeans came together during the COVID-19 pandemic. PA was not the only agency which contributed to strengthening and deepening our social capital – the Singapore Armed Forces and the Housing and Development Board, to mention just a couple, were also crucial – but it is its raison d’etre.
Ms He Ting Ru asked if there are any impediments to having civil servants from PA or other agencies communicate and explain Government policy, compared to a grassroots adviser doing so. Government agencies do communicate their respective policies to the public and engage key stakeholders to explain the policy considerations. The PA officers are themselves civil servants. But they, like other civil servants, also rely on PA’s grassroots networks for last-mile delivery and communications – this could be through informal chats with citizens at house visits or community activities, or structured dialogues on Government policies.
Over the years, PA has built an extensive grassroots movement, its staff and volunteers interacting with residents through community activities, celebrating key milestones in their lives, such as parenthood and significant national events, such as SG50. Some of the grassroots leaders have served since PA’s early founding years and have established a deep familiarity and rapport with the residents that cannot be replicated by civil servants in other Government agencies. An agency, one of whose roles is to establish people-to-people links, cannot be relying solely on civil servants to nurture these networks of relations that so enrich our communities.
Grassroots Advisers (GRAs) augment PA with their extensive networks and grassroots experience. They guide the PA Grassroots Organisations (GROs) in their engagement and outreach efforts by walking the ground with grassroots leaders and volunteers to understand citizens’ concerns and gather feedback, explaining Government programmes and initiatives, and overseeing the last-mile delivery of the Government’s programmes. Therefore, the GRAs must be able to share the Government’s vision and objectives, explain policies from conceptualisation to implementation and are familiar with the concerns of the community.
I hope the Workers’ Party joins me in recognising the value PA brings to our community and the good that PA staff and volunteers do, in tirelessly serving all residents, regardless of whether the constituency is Opposition or ruling party.
I have seen first-hand how professional and dedicated PA staff and volunteers are in serving their community. This was especially pronounced during the pandemic, when PA staff and volunteers gave their all to aid, comfort and serve our fellow Singaporeans, especially seniors and the vulnerable among us. It would do them a great disservice to suggest that they do this for partisan purposes.
If I could just give an example: Members from both sides of the House have highlighted how the digitalisation of Government services may end up excluding the less tech-savvy segments of our population. The Government recognised this and tapped on PA’s wide network to reach out to every last resident in the constituencies. Take the Community Development Council (CDC) vouchers, for instance. Those without smartphones or who needed a bit more help could simply drop by a Community Centre, be it Joo Chiat or Hougang, to get assistance from PA staff. During the Committee of Supply debates this year, Member of Parliament Gerald Giam even asked for more ServiceSG centres to be set up – in every neighbourhood – to assist seniors with Government digital services. Such ServiceSG centres are, in fact, being set up, in collaboration with PA.
Mr Leon Perera asked about the proportion of PA’s budget used for activities undertaken by GRAs to explain Government policies to the people. To put matters in context, PA’s resources are used to provide programmes for all residents, ranging from recreational, educational to social purposes. These include community events to bring residents of different backgrounds together; outreach efforts to communicate, explain and get feedback on Government policies; and last-mile delivery of Government programmes and policies. For example, during the COVID-19 period, PA worked with the Ministry of Health to raise awareness, explain and assist in the implementation of the vaccination programme. For Budget, dialogues are organised to explain the various policies and schemes. A more recent exercise would be the ongoing Forward Singapore conversations, where PA, with the strong support of the GRAs, grassroots leaders and staff, organised multiple engagements reaching out to Singaporeans to review and refresh our social compact.
The overall budget allocated to PA supports GROs in reaching out to the community and deepening resident engagement; all the above that have been mentioned; as well as to construct and operate PA facilities, including community clubs. There is no specific proportion of budget allocated for activities related to explaining Government policies, as the overall PA budget is to achieve the objectives of PA.
Finally, I would like to emphasise again that PA does not conduct any activity with any political party. It serves the Government of the day, as with any Government agency. PA does not allow its events or venues to be used for partisan purposes by any political party and serves all Singaporeans, regardless of their political leanings.
Like all other Government agencies, members of the public can send in their feedback and enquiries on any matters related to PA, such as service quality or facilities, through its public feedback channels by phone or online feedback form. The feedback channels can be found on PA's corporate website (www.pa.gov.sg).
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Framework for Equitable Sharing of Losses between Scam Victims and Financial Institutions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"50 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Prime Minister whether he can provide an update on the progress of the framework for equitable sharing of losses between scam victims and financial institutions.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): The Government has been working to develop a clear framework to mitigate losses by victims of phishing scams where customers are deceived into revealing their account credentials to scammers impersonating legitimate entities. This builds on the work done last year by the Payments Council chaired by the Monetary Authority of Singapore on a framework for the equitable sharing of losses due to phishing scams that involve financial institutions (FIs).
Our aim is to strengthen the roles and accountabilities of the key parties who can mitigate the risk of phishing scams and to preserve confidence in digital payments in Singapore. This includes making clear the duties of FIs and telecommunications companies (telcos) in particular, and the responsibility of customers themselves to be vigilant against scams.
The Government has been in discussion with telcos, who play a key role in the SMS infrastructure, with a view to including them in the framework, besides the FIs. We are also studying the roles of other entities in the digital payments ecosystem and whether they should, eventually, also be brought within the framework.
The development of the framework has taken some time. It entails defining clearly the type of scams that should be covered by this shared responsibility framework, as there is otherwise a wide range of scam typologies. It also involves deciding on the specific duties and actions expected of banks and telcos so as to provide adequate safeguards against phishing scams without making digital payments cumbersome for customers, as well as defining the responsibilities of customers. Further, the framework will establish the appropriate mechanisms for sharing losses amongst these parties when scams occur and duties are breached.
The Government has been engaging closely with industry stakeholders on this framework and will continue doing so. We aim to issue a public consultation paper in the third quarter of this year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"HDB Rental Flat Tenants in Arrears and Reasons","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"51 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many months on average does it take before HDB officers contact the errant tenant on their public rental flat arrears; and (b) what process is undertaken by HDB to understand the reasons behind the arrears.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) takes a compassionate approach towards public rental tenants in arrears.
When tenants default on their rents, HDB will send SMS and letter reminders in the first two months and encourage tenants to approach HDB if they face difficulties paying their rent. From the third month onwards, HDB officers will reach out to tenants through other channels, such as phone calls and house visits, to better understand their individual circumstances.
HDB has various assistance measures in place to support public rental tenants in arrears. For those in financial difficulties, HDB can reduce their rents and allow them to pay off their arrears in instalments. Besides actively advising and guiding tenants, HDB can also refer tenants to Social Service Offices, Family Service Centres or other social service agencies for financial and social assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measuring Effectiveness of EnterpriseSG Grants on Employees' Wellness Post-Project Implementation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"52 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the EnterpriseSG grants, such as the Enterprise Development Grant (EDG) and the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG), will include a survey on employees’ well-being before and after the implementation of the project as a specific indicator to measure potential improvement of employees’ wellness.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: As the purpose of Enterprise Singapore's grants, such as the Enterprise Development Grant and the Productivity Solutions Grant, is to support companies in capability building, enterprise transformation and improving productivity, we do not conduct surveys on employee well-being.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans for Wet Market in Braddell Heights Constituency after Expiry of Lease to Private Operator","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"53 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for National Development what are the plans for the only wet market in Braddell Heights constituency located at 267 Serangoon Avenue 3 after the cessation of its lease to a private operator next year.
Mr Desmond Lee: Similar to other leasehold properties, the wet market will return to \tHousing and Development Board (HDB) upon lease expiry in October 2024.
To avoid service disruption to residents and ensure a smooth transition to tenancy, HDB will be offering the existing private operator an interim tenancy of one year upon lease expiry. The private operator will be required to retain the existing market stallholders and maintain their rents.
Thereafter, HDB intends to let out the premises on the standard three-year tenancy term. The premises will be tendered out via the Price-Quality Method, in which proposals will be evaluated on both the tender price and the quality of the proposals. This will allow HDB to select an operator who can best serve the residents’ needs and keep the area vibrant. HDB is also open to explore alternative proposals for the space to meet the evolving needs of residents, such as converting excess or vacant spaces into other uses. HDB is in the process of engaging local stakeholders, including the current operator and grassroots leaders, on this.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Response to Advanced Medical Directive and Advanced Care Plan","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"57 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Health (a) how many Singaporeans have signed their Advanced Medical Directive (AMD) and Advanced Care Plan (ACP) in the last five years; (b) whether the Ministry has a target percentage of older Singaporeans to complete these documentations; and (c) whether there are any further plans to increase the awareness of and encourage a higher completion rate of AMD and ACP among the population.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: In the last five years, 23,700 Singaporeans have signed their Advanced Medical Directive (AMD) and 26,500 have made their Advance Care Plan (ACP).
We encourage all Singaporeans to discuss their healthcare preferences with their loved ones and healthcare providers and document them through the ACP and AMD, so that their wishes can be honoured when they are unable to express them. We will amplify these messages through a nationwide campaign to be launched in the later part of this year. It will include roadshows, media and publicity efforts and a digital campaign on the importance of planning ahead and how to do so.
To encourage uptake, we also launched the My Legacy portal in 2020, which serves as a one-stop portal for the public on end-of-life issues. We will continue to make it easier for Singaporeans to plan ahead.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Hours Worked by Immigration Officers Per Shift at Woodlands and Tuas Checkpoints","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"58 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Home Affairs for each year in the past five years, what are the (i) mean and (ii) median number of hours an ICA officer has worked for each shift at the Woodlands and Tuas checkpoints respectively.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) officers at the land checkpoints are placed on a four-day shift cycle. Officers would work a 12-hour day shift, followed by a 12-hour night shift, and then take two days of rest. Under this shift pattern, ICA officers would work up to 42 hours per week, without including overtime work. The four-day shift cycle was introduced at Tuas Checkpoint and Woodlands Checkpoint in April 2021 and August 2021 respectively.
Checkpoint officers may be scheduled for overtime work during peak periods, for example, school holidays, festive periods and long weekends. In the past five years from 2018 to 2022, officers at Tuas Checkpoint and Woodlands Checkpoint had performed an average of nine and 12 hours of overtime per month respectively.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Ensure Sufficient Singaporean Bus Drivers for All Categories of Passengers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"59 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether there are sufficient existing Singaporean bus drivers to handle all categories of bus passengers, such as students, workers and local or foreign tourists; and (b) if not, what are the Government’s plans to ensure that there will be sufficient bus drivers all round.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Government is cognisant that some bus service operators are feeling manpower tightness as the reopening of our economy has led to an increase in demand for bus drivers.
To attract and retain a core of local bus drivers in public transport, for instance, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) works closely with the public transport operators to ensure there are sufficient bus drivers to meet our needs. Public transport operators have introduced various initiatives, such as wage increases, flexible work arrangements and sign-on bonuses. LTA and the operators also work closely with the National Transport Workers’ Union to enhance the attractiveness of bus driver jobs.
The Government also complements our supply of local bus drivers with foreign bus drivers where necessary. The Ministry of Manpower is working closely with Ministry of Education, Ministry of Transport and LTA to provide targeted support for public transport operators and school bus operators with additional foreign worker quotas on a time-limited basis.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Profile of Influenza Patients and Adequacy of Vaccine Supply","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"60 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) of the influenza cases in the past year, what is the breakdown by age of the patients, especially among seniors aged 65 and above; (b) what is the percentage of these cases that have developed severe conditions; (c) what is the influenza vaccination uptake rate among seniors in 2022; and (d) whether there is an adequate supply of influenza vaccines.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Ministry of Health does not have detailed data on influenza cases per year. In the first four months of 2023, a total of 68 influenza-associated severe cases, including seven deaths, has been reported.
Based on the National Population Health Survey 2021, about 32.4% of Singapore residents aged 65 to 74 had received influenza vaccination in the preceding 12 months. Adults who are at a higher risk of developing severe influenza infection and complications, namely, all persons aged 65 and above and younger persons with underlying illnesses, are strongly recommended to go for influenza vaccination.
There has been no shortage of supply of influenza vaccines.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Transportation of Workers in Rear Decks of Lorries","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"61 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Transport (a) in which year was the Ministry first aware that key authorised lorry suppliers in Singapore agree that from a road safety perspective, it will be ideal for lorries not to carry any passengers in their rear decks; and (b) how has the Ministry factored this information into its policymaking on transportation of workers.
Mr S Iswaran: I note that the Member has asked several Parliamentary Questions on this issue in recent years. We share his underlying concern for the safety of our workers.
As explained in previous Parliamentary replies, from a road safety perspective, it would be ideal for lorries not to carry any passengers in their rear decks. However, there are significant practical and operational considerations. This is why practices are varied internationally. For example, to our knowledge, countries, such as Thailand, as well as several jurisdictions in countries, such as Canada and the United States of America, allow for passengers to be ferried in the rear deck of goods vehicles travelling on roads, albeit with safety precautions and some restrictions.
In Singapore, we have taken a multi-pronged approach to tackling this issue through a working committee comprising the Land Transport Authority, Ministry of Manpower, Traffic Police and the Building Construction Authority. The Committee engages and works closely with the key stakeholders, including lorry suppliers and companies, especially small and medium enterprises, to study measures to enhance safety for their workers. This is a continuing effort which the Government has undertaken over the years, taking into consideration the latest developments. Arising from this process, we have progressively implemented various measures to improve worker safety, including the requirement for all lorries ferrying passengers to be fitted with rain covers and the driver of the lorry to have worked no more than 12 hours that day.
We will continue to study further measures to improve the safety of workers being transported.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Mortgages Refinanced and Measures to Help Singapore Home Owners Facing Sudden Spike in Interest Rates","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"62 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Prime Minister (a) how many Singapore home owners refinanced their home mortgage loans in the past 12 months; (b) what is the average increase in monthly home mortgage payments (i) in absolute terms, (ii) as a percentage of monthly income; and (c) whether the Government is considering any measures to help Singapore home owners with the sudden spike in interest rates.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): Close to 27,000 home owners with a mortgage from financial institutions (FIs) refinanced their mortgages in the 12 months from March 2022 to February 2023. These refinanced mortgages account for 6% of the total number of outstanding mortgage loans.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has estimated that the increase in mortgage payments for these borrowers was approximately $240 on average, or about 2% of their monthly income. The average monthly income of the 27,000 home owners who refinanced their loans had increased by about 10% over the last three years. This would have helped cushion the increase in their mortgage payments.
Most borrowers have been generally prudent and, hence, are able to cope with the rise in mortgage payments. MAS’ move in September 2022 to raise the interest rate used to calculate the total debt servicing ratio has also helped to encourage prudent borrowing.
MAS, however, encourages the small number of borrowers who face repayment difficulties to approach their lenders early. For Housing and Development Board home owners facing difficulties, Government agencies have implemented various measures to help them service their housing loans. The Member may wish to refer to the written answer by the Minister for National Development to a similar question posed in March this year for more details on these measures, and the recent speech by the Minister for Finance at the Debate on the President’s Address for more information on measures for Singaporeans who need support. [Please refer to \"Impact of Higher Interest Rate on HDB Mortgage Rates and Loan Repayments\", Official Report, 20 March 2023, Vol 95, Issue 93, 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":"Abuse against Security Officers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"63 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the number of abuse cases against security officers in the first four months of 2023; (b) whether there has been an increase in the number of such abuse cases over the past five years; and (c) how does the Ministry intend to send a strong message that abuse of security officers is unacceptable.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) takes a very serious view of abuse and harassment of security officers. This is why we amended the Private Security Industry Act (PSIA) in October 2021 to enhance protections for security officers, with penalties pegged higher than if they were committed against general members of the public. These amendments have been in force since May 2022.
On average, there were about 23 abuse or harassment cases reported each month in the first three months of 2023.
This is higher than the average of 13 reported cases per month between 2018 and 2021, before the PSIA was amended. Anecdotally, there is higher awareness among security officers of the protections afforded to them. This has encouraged the officers, their employers and the Union of Security Employees to come forward to report incidents of abuse or harassment.
Cases of harassment and abuse against security officers will continue to be treated seriously and the Police will investigate egregious cases. MHA will also work with our tripartite partners to reinforce the message that security officers should be treated with respect and the abuse of security officers will not be condoned. Perpetrators must know that security officers have both the protection of the law and the fullest support of the industry.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Curbs on Car Loans from Record High COE Prices","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"64 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Prime Minister whether MAS is considering curbs on car loans in light of the record high COE prices.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS)’s restrictions on motor vehicle loans granted by financial institutions are principally to encourage households to borrow prudently.
The latest data shows that very few borrowers default on their motor vehicle loans granted by financial institutions, which provide the majority of such loans. The non-performing loan ratio for motor vehicles has remained at less than 0.1% in the fourth quarter of 2022. MAS will, however, continue to work with the Ministry of Transport in monitoring the situation in the Certificate of Entitlement (COE) market.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of HDB Flats Built under Design, Build and Sell Scheme Sold for More Than $1 Million","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"65 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development to-date, how many HDB flats that have been sold for more than $1 million were flats built under the Design, Build and Sell Scheme.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS) was introduced in 2005 to give flat buyers more choice by allowing private developers to design and build some public flats. Land sales for DBSS have been suspended since 2012.
To-date, up to the first quarter of 2023, 229 DBSS flats have been sold in the open market for $1 million or more.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Gaming Revenue from Integrated Resorts","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"66 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Government has data on the amount of gaming revenue generated by each of the Integrated Resorts in the past three years; and (b) whether the Government tracks the breakdown according to gaming revenue received from Singapore Citizens, Permanent Residents and foreigners, respectively.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The amount of gaming revenue of each Integrated Resort is publicly available in the annual reports of Las Vegas Sands Corporation and Genting Singapore, parent companies of the Integrated Resorts. We do not track the breakdown of gaming revenue received from Singapore Citizens, Permanent Residents and foreigners.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Days of Childcare Leave to be Granted","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Prime Minister whether the number of days for childcare leave can be granted in proportion to the number of children such that parents with three or more children are given additional days.
Ms Indranee Rajah (for the Prime Minister): Much has been done over the years to enhance parental leave to better support the caregiving needs of parents with young children. From 1 January 2024, we will double the Government-Paid Paternity Leave from two to four weeks for eligible working fathers. We will also double Unpaid Infant Care Leave for each parent in the child’s first two years, from the current six days per year to 12 days per year. These will give parents more time to bond with and care for their newborn, or to settle caregiving arrangements.
Any enhancements to childcare leave, including according more leave to parents with more children, will need to balance the caregiving needs of parents with the manpower and operational needs of employers. Beyond legislated leave provisions, it is more important and sustainable for employers to provide a family-friendly work environment to help parents manage both their work and caregiving responsibilities.
The Tripartite Standards on Flexible Work Arrangements (FWAs) and on Unpaid Leave for Unexpected Care Needs, were introduced in 2017 and 2018 respectively. Companies that adopt these standards are recognised as progressive employers that provide additional support for employees’ personal or caregiving responsibilities. The tripartite partners have also been looking into ways to better support employers in implementing FWAs. These include providing resources, such as implementation guides and training, to better equip employers to implement FWAs effectively and sustainably.
To encourage wider adoption of FWAs, the tripartite partners are developing a set of Tripartite Guidelines by 2024 that will require employers to put in place proper processes to fairly consider and respond to employees’ FWA requests. The Government will continue to work closely with the other tripartite partners to promote family-friendly workplace practices, so as to better support working parents in their caregiving needs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criminal Database to Prevent Convicted Dishonest or Corrupt Persons from Working in Financial Sector","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Prime Minister (b) what measures are there to prevent persons who have been found to be dishonest or corrupt by the Courts from working in the financial sector; and (b) whether the Ministry has a criminal database against which financial institutions can check to avoid hiring such persons for the protection of their clients.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) expects financial institutions (FIs) to recruit and retain persons who are fit and proper to conduct regulated financial activities and hold key roles in FIs. FIs are required to establish policies and processes to ensure this. This includes doing reference checks and verifying the person’s past employment records, regulatory status and disciplinary and criminal history, if any.
MAS has also been issuing prohibition orders (POs) to persons who have been convicted of offences involving dishonesty. MAS notifies all FIs when a person has been issued a PO and publishes such POs on the MAS website. While a PO is in effect, FIs are prohibited from employing the person who has been issued the PO to perform the specified regulated activities. Since July 2017 to the close of 2022, MAS has issued a total of 73 POs.
MAS’ current powers to issue POs are generally limited to persons carrying out regulated activities in the financial sector. These powers will be expanded when the Financial Services and Markets Act comes into effect. Under the Act, MAS will also be able to issue a PO to any person who is not fit and proper to perform key roles, activities and functions in the financial sector, including those seeking to join the sector.
A person with a past record of dishonesty or with a previous PO is not automatically deemed as not being fit and proper. FIs have to assess a person’s fitness and propriety holistically, in considering if the person is fit for the role. MAS has allowed persons with past records of dishonesty to enter the financial industry, having considered the seriousness and circumstances of the person’s past record, the time that has elapsed since the offence, the responsibilities to be assumed and the controls put in place by the FI to monitor the person’s conduct. In each case, MAS carefully weighs the need to protect financial services users against giving reformed individuals a second chance.
MAS does not maintain a database of all persons convicted by the Courts of offences involving dishonesty. Criminal records are private and confidential information kept by the Police.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Protect Public Officers against Unsubstantiated Defamatory Accusations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Prime Minister (a) what recourse and support are available to public officers who in the course of their duties are subjected to unsubstantiated defamatory accusations via (i) the media, (ii) emails, including mass emails, and (iii) instant messaging applications; and (b) whether such support includes (i) assistance with clearing the officer's name, (ii) counselling and (iii) mental wellness support.
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister): The Public Service is committed to providing a safe workplace for all public officers and has zero tolerance towards acts of abuse, harassment and any type of anti-social behaviour towards public officers who are carrying out their duties.
Any complaints against public officers will be taken seriously and investigated objectively. If it is established that the complaint is unsubstantiated, the Public Service will clarify and set the facts right via appropriate channels. Agencies may take the decision to inform the officer to disengage from the complainant. Once disengaged, unless new evidence is provided, the officer is also not expected to take further action if the complainant subsequently writes in again with the same accusations or information.
There are provisions under the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) that protect public officers from indecent, threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour or communication, including making abusive comments about and doxxing a public officer in social media. In serious cases, Police reports can be filed and criminal sanctions under POHA may be taken against the complainants.
In addition, there are existing policies and processes in place, for example, grievance handling procedure, whistle-blowing policy, for public officers to report wrongdoing and allegations concerning themselves or their fellow colleagues to their supervisors as well as their Heads of Agencies.
To support the mental well-being of affected public officers, in addition to counselling and support from their supervisors, there is a service-wide Counselling Hotline that provides professional counselling support to public officers. There is also a network of Wellness Ambassadors in every agency who are trained to provide basic mental and emotional support for fellow public officers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Revenues from Income Tax on Net Annual Value of Residential Properties","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance for the income tax on the Net Annual Value (NAV) of residential properties which tax has been removed with effect from Year of Assessment 2010 and based on Year of Assessment 2009, what is the respective breakdown for (i) the amount of tax revenues derived from this tax, (ii) the number and proportion of residential properties that have been subjected to this tax and (iii) the 25th percentile, median and 75th percentile of the NAVs for properties that have been subjected to this tax.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The removal of income tax on the Net Annual Value (NAV) of residential properties was done as part of a broader move to raise property tax rates and make them more progressive, so that properties with higher annual values are taxed at higher rates. We are unable to provide the requested information on the breakdown of revenue collected from the income tax on NAV as it was abolished almost 15 years ago.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Lower Property Tax for Retirees or Persons Suffering Drop in Income","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether property tax can be lowered in the event that the property owners have retired or have had a decrease in income.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Property tax (PT) is a tax on property ownership and is our principal means of taxing wealth.
The Government is committed to supporting retirees. We do so, not by lowering PT rates for residential properties owned by retirees, but by supporting our seniors in other ways. For example, through the Assurance Package (AP), seniors living in private properties can receive AP Cash, AP MediSave and the Cost-of-Living Special Payment. Retirees living in private properties are also eligible to apply for subsidies under the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS).
Property owners facing financial hardship, such as due to a loss of income, and have difficulty paying their PT bills can contact the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore for assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Conditions for Changing $1 Million Threshold for Businesses' Liability for GST Registration","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Government intends to change the limit of $1 million before businesses are liable for GST registration; and (b) what conditions will determine a change in this policy.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The current Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration threshold of $1 million was put in place when the GST system was introduced in 1994. In designing the GST system, we decided to go with a single rate tax with as few exemptions as possible for specific goods or services. But we decided to set the registration threshold at $1 million, thereby exempting many small and medium enterprises (SMEs), especially the hawkers and retail shops in our Housing and Development Board neighbourhoods. It would have been difficult for such entities to collect the GST as they would have to incur additional costs to comply with the GST accounting and collection requirements. Such costs would then likely be passed on to consumers who buy many of their daily necessities from these neighbourhood shops.
However, businesses below the threshold can register for GST voluntarily. In fact, around 70% of businesses that newly register for GST today do so voluntarily, even though their turnover falls below the threshold.
The $1 million threshold has kept the compliance burden of our GST system light, while providing flexibility for businesses to voluntarily register. We will continue to assess the appropriateness of this threshold as part of our regular policy reviews.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plugging Revenue Leakage in Goods and Services Tax Act 1993 in View of Recent Court Decision","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Ministry will consider new legislation to plug the revenue leakage gap in the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act 1993, in view of the recent Court decision in Herbalife International Singapore Pte Ltd vs Comptroller of Goods and Services Tax.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The Goods and Services Tax (GST) is a tax on domestic consumption of goods and services. It is chargeable on the value of supply, whether the consideration received is monetary or non-monetary. Where a discount is given on a supply, GST is generally chargeable on the discounted price. However, if the discount is granted on the condition that the customer meets certain obligations imposed, which results in tangible goods or services being provided to the seller, this is a form of non-monetary consideration paid for the supply. For example, a seller may supply goods to a buyer at a discount from the retail price in exchange for the buyer’s provision of advertising or marketing services to the seller. In such instances, GST should be charged on the full retail price.
The issue in the case of Herbalife International Singapore Pte Ltd vs Comptroller of Goods and Services Tax is whether GST should be charged on the discounted or full price of products sold by Herbalife International Singapore Pte Ltd (Herbalife) to its members.
The Comptroller of GST had argued that GST should be charged on the full price of the products, and the Goods and Services Tax Board of Review had earlier ruled in favour of the Comptroller.
The High Court subsequently ruled in favour of Herbalife upon its appeal, based on the specific facts of the case. The Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore is studying the judgment before deciding on its next steps.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Convictions and Penalties for Harassment or Abuse of Public Healthcare Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Home Affairs for each year in the past five years, of the number of cases of harassment or abuse of public healthcare workers while on duty where convictions are secured (a) what is the average and median amount of fines imposed; and (b) what is the average and median length of imprisonment imposed.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Police do not track the average and median sentences of convicted cases.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures for Early Detection and Intervention to Arrest Trend of Students Abusing Cannabis","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Mr Derrick Goh asked the Minister for Home Affairs in view of the worrying trend of youths abusing cannabis, whether the Ministry will consider introducing the new saliva test kits, which are easy-to-use and non-invasive, for use in schools to help with earlier detection and intervention of at-risk students.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) does not run drug screening programmes at schools.
It does, however, actively engage schools and other stakeholders, such as parents and youth leaders, to provide them with anti-drug resources, including information toolkits and helplines. These aid them to identify and help youths who may exhibit early signs of drug abuse.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Use of Technologies in Drug Trafficking Activity and Agencies' Ability to Combat Its Proliferation in Digital Sphere","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Mr Derrick Goh asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the Ministry’s assessment of the state as well as the impact of the use of technologies, such as social media and cryptocurrency payments, to facilitate drug activity; and (b) whether there are plans to boost the capabilities of CNB and other agencies for their continued effectiveness in combating the proliferation of drugs in the digital sphere.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) is aware of the trend of drug traffickers exploiting social media, Internet communications and cryptocurrency payment platforms to facilitate drug trafficking.
To address this, CNB actively cooperates with social network services, e-commerce businesses, Internet service providers and technology companies to detect and prevent the advertising of controlled drugs on such platforms. Drug activity facilitated by such closed communication platforms is a significant challenge and, unless the platforms cooperate, the challenges will continue to grow.
CNB continues to conduct operations against syndicates and persons who use social media to facilitate their drug trafficking activities. For example, CNB conducted a series of operations from 18 to 19 April 2023 targeted at drug transactions conducted through specific applications. A total of eight suspected drug traffickers and 26 abusers were arrested and an assortment of drugs, including 228 grammes of cannabis, was seized.
Further, the Ministry of Home Affairs will be introducing the Online Criminal Harms Bill this year to deal with online activities which constitute a crime in Singapore. For instance, the Bill will provide the levers to require online services to disable access by Singapore persons to illegal content constituting a drug-related offence.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extending Reach of Drug Consumption Offence to Include Other Singapore Residents","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Mr Derrick Goh asked the Minister for Home Affairs in view of the trend of permissive attitudes towards drugs globally and the rebound of overseas travel post-pandemic (a) what is the rationale for applying the extraterritorial reach of the drug consumption offence to only Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents, as per section 8A of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1973; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider extending this to other Singapore residents, such as those on Long-Term Visit Pass or Dependant's Pass.
Mr K Shanmugam: Section 8A of the Misuse of Drugs Act was introduced in 1998 to apply extraterritorial jurisdiction to Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents who consume drugs overseas. As explained by the then-Minister for Home Affairs in the Second Reading of the Bill, this is to deter individuals who have permanent residency in Singapore from circumventing our drug laws by going overseas to feed their addiction. If they develop drug addictions, this will cause us many downstream criminal and social problems.
For now, we do not think there is a need to extend extraterritorial reach to foreigners holding work passes or other immigration facilities, such as the Long-Term Visit Pass or Student Pass, given their more transient stay in Singapore. If they are found to be abusing drugs, we can easily, and do, revoke their pass and deport them.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Traffic Accidents Involving Minors and Measures to Enhance Their Road Safety Awareness","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) in each of the last five years, what is the number of traffic accidents involving (i) children aged six and below, (ii) children between seven and 12 years old and (iii) young people between 13 and 17 years old; and (b) whether and how road safety awareness can be further enhanced for minors, both inside and outside of school premises.
Mr K Shanmugam: The number of traffic accidents involving young victims in each of the last five years is shown in the Table below.
The Traffic Police, Land Transport Authority and Singapore Road Safety Council have implemented various initiatives to strengthen road safety awareness among children. These were shared in our reply to a question filed by the Member for the Sitting on 30 November 2022. [Please refer to \"Traffic Accidents Involving Children Aged 18 and Below\", Official Report, 30 November 2022, Vol 95, Issue 78, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Retention, Disposal or Deletion of Negative Results from Quick Drug-testing Saliva Tests","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether CNB retains any information or data obtained from the administration of quick drug-testing saliva tests where the outcome is negative; (b) if yes, what is the length of such retention; and (c) what is the disposal or deletion process.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) administers the saliva test as an on-site screening tool. Where the results are positive, the suspect will be subjected to confirmatory tests, such as a urine test. The saliva test results are not used as the basis for prosecution or for committing a person for rehabilitation.
The results of saliva tests, both positive and negative outcomes, are retained as they may be relevant in subsequent investigations.
For avoidance of doubt, CNB does not retain the test kit containing the person’s saliva, if it is a negative result. It is disposed of immediately after the test.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cases of Injury and Death of Motorcyclists and Pillion Riders in First Quarter of 2023","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Home Affairs for the first four months of 2023 (a) how many motorcyclists and their pillion riders have been (i) injured or (ii) died from road traffic accidents; (b) whether there has been an uptick of such cases as compared to the corresponding period last year; and (c) if so, what steps are being taken to raise awareness of this fact amongst road users as well as to arrest the problem.
Mr K Shanmugam: Between January and March 2023, 898 motorcyclists and 119 pillion riders suffered injuries from road traffic accidents. Nineteen motorcyclists and two pillion riders died. The figures for April 2023 are still being compiled.
These figures are a slight increase from the corresponding period in 2022. However, they are comparable to pre-pandemic figures.
The Traffic Police, Land Transport Authority and Singapore Road Safety Council have implemented various initiatives to strengthen road safety awareness among motorcyclists and other road users. These were shared in Police’s Annual News Release on the Road Traffic Situation on 14 February 2023.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Video-recording of Statements from Witnesses and Suspects","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) for what kinds of offences have statements been video-recorded from witnesses and suspects during investigations by law enforcement agencies since video-recording was introduced in 2018; (b) what has been the impact of video-recorded statements in achieving positive outcomes, such as reducing allegations of involuntariness of statements; and (c) whether the Ministry will expand the categories of offences for which video-recording of statements will be required.\n
Mr K Shanmugam: The Member may wish to refer to past replies to Parliamentary Questions on the categories of offences for which video recording of interview (VRI) is conducted. In fact, we addressed this most recently in March 2023. [Please refer to \"Offences and Cases where Video Recording of Interviews are Used\", Official Report, 1 March 2023, Vol 95, Issue 89, Written Answers to Questions section.] We will expand VRI to more categories of offences in future.
We currently do not conduct video recording for interviews with witnesses.
VRI has, indeed, been useful in providing an objective account of the interview, capturing non-verbal cues, such as the interviewee’s demeanour and expressions. However, it is not possible to state conclusively whether VRI has reduced allegations of statements not being made voluntarily because each case is different. In cases where such allegations are raised, VRI allows the Courts to take the interviewee’s demeanour into account in determining the admissibility or weight to be accorded to the interviewee’s statement.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Victim Impact Statements Tendered in Court and Offences Covered","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Law in the last two years (a) what is the number and percentage of criminal cases prosecuted where victim impact statements (VIS) have been tendered in Court; and (b) what are the categories of offences for which VIS have been so used.
Mr K Shanmugam: The use of victim impact statements (VIS) in criminal cases is not specifically tracked and involves manual reviewing of the data. Based on the data reviewed, from 2021 to 2022, a VIS was tendered in (a) 13 State Court cases involving one or more sexual offences; and (b) 14 High Court cases involving one or more sexual offences.
VIS has generally been used in sexual assault cases as well as severe cases of violence, especially those involving the abuse of vulnerable victims, such as children, or where serious hurt was caused.
The submission of a VIS is not the only way in which evidence of the impact of the offence on the victim is put before the Court. As previously stated in a 2021 reply, the impact of the offence on the victim would typically be evident from the evidence put before the Court, including the account of the victim and other witnesses, as well as medical and psychological reports. [Please refer to “Victim Impact Statement Adduced by Prosecution to Address Sentencing Court in Sexual Offences Cases in Past Five Years and Plans to Review Criminal Sentencing for Sexual Offences”, Official Report, 4 January 2021, Vol 95, 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":"Impact of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Locating Wafer Fabrication Plant in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Government is actively pursuing Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) to locate a 12-inch wafer fabrication plant in Singapore instead of Europe through the use of incentives; (b) if so, when will the outcome be finalised; (c) what is the expected total value of the incentives and subsidies to TSMC; and (d) what is the expected impact to GDP, employment and tax revenues.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Government does not disclose information on any potential investor or project.
18 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) since 2004, how many persons have been granted permanent residency under the Global Investor Programme; (b) what is the total amount of Assets Under Management invested under the Global Investor Programme (GIP); (c) how many GIP funds have been set up to date; and (d) how many of such GIP funds have returned less than 70% of the original investment capital to the investees upon the funds’ expiry.
19 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Minister for Trade and Industry since 2004, what is the estimated number of (i) jobs and (ii) total business spending created by Options A and B of the Global Investor Programme respectively.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: We had shared in Parliament on 23 February 2023 (i) the number of individuals accorded permanent residency through the Global Investor Programme (GIP), and (ii) the investment, total business expenditure figures and jobs generated by GIP investors via the more than 40 approved funds under the scheme. [Please refer to \"Individuals who have Leveraged on Global Investor Programme to Qualify for Permanent Residency\", Official Report, 23 February 2023, Vol 95, Issue 85, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
We do not actively track the investment returns to the individual funds.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Utilisation Rate for Implemented Free Trade Agreements Signed with Trading Partners","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Trade and Industry what is the utilisation rate for each of the 27 implemented Free Trade Agreements that Singapore has signed with these trading partners.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Ministry had previously provided data on total tariff savings from our network of 27 Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) in the reply to Question No 59 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 8 November 2022. [Please refer to \"Free Trade Agreement with Most Trade Benefits and Minimised Imported Costs and Inflationary Pressures\", Official Report, 8 November 2022, Vol 95, Issue 74, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
It is not meaningful to compare tariff savings across FTAs. In addition to tariff savings, there are other benefits of FTAs which cannot be readily quantified. These include elements that facilitate a more conducive business environment, such as stronger intellectual property and investment protection, increased transparency of regulations and trade facilitation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Frequency of Bus Service 801 and Inaccurate Arrival Timings on Display Board","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Mr Derrick Goh asked the Minister for Transport in view of reports by Nee Soon Link residents that the bus arrival timings display board at Yishun Integrated Transport Hub shows longer wait times for Bus Service 801 compared to the frequency reflected in LTA's MyTransport.SG (a) whether LTA has now improved the frequency and services for Bus 801; (b) if so, what are the reasons for the discrepancies; and (c) if not, when will the discrepancies be resolved.\n
Mr S Iswaran: In response to higher ridership in Yishun Town, peak-period intervals for Service 801 were reduced from 12 to eight minutes in October 2022.
The bus arrival timings displayed on the panels at bus interchanges and on the MyTransport.SG app are both based on the same Bus Estimated Time of Arrival (ETA) system. When bus operators adjust the departure timing for a particular service, there may be a time lag before the updated information is shown on the bus interchange panels and the MyTransport.SG app. Hence, it is possible for the app and display panels to momentarily show different arrival times.
To further enhance the information flow, the Land Transport Authority is working with Tower Transit Singapore to connect its bus trip dispatch system with the ETA system by end-May 2023.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Infrastructural Initiatives with Malaysia to Allow Cross-border Travel for Singapore's Electric Vehicles","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"
22 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Transport whether there are any infrastructural initiatives to partner Malaysia in allowing cross-border travel for Singapore’s electric vehicles.
Mr S Iswaran: Today, electric vehicle (EV) drivers from Singapore can charge their cars in Malaysia at various locations, such as shopping malls and petrol stations, along the North-South highway. Some EV charging operators have even integrated their charging networks such that payment for charging in both countries can be done on the same application.
The Government is working with Malaysia to further facilitate cross-border charging of EVs, including coordinating standards to enhance inter-operability.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Payment of ERP Charges for Public Buses on Designated Bus Routes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"
23 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether public buses are required to pay Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) charges while travelling on their designated bus routes; (b) whether LTA reimburses public transport operators for these charges; and (c) what is the total amount in ERP paid by public transport operators in each of the last three years.
Mr S Iswaran: Public buses pay Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) charges. These are borne by the public transport operators (PTOs) as part of their operating costs.
The total amounts of ERP paid by the PTOs in the last three years are $1,910,847 in 2020, $153,231 in 2021, and $399,829 in 2022.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Feasibility Study on New MRT Line Serving North and North-east Regions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"
24 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Transport whether he can provide an update on the feasibility study commissioned for a new MRT line serving the north and north-east regions, which is separate from the North-South Line (NSL) and Thomson-East Coast Line (TEL) and running through Sengkang West, as announced in the Land Transport Master Plan 2040.
Mr S Iswaran: Rail projects are major and complex public investments. A comprehensive range of factors is assessed before any decision is made to build a new rail line, including existing and future land use developments along the corridor, existing public transport options and engineering considerations. Studies by the Land Transport Authority are ongoing and updates will be provided when ready.
25 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Transport in view of escalating prices of the Certificates of Entitlement for motor vehicles, whether the Ministry will consider imposing additional taxes or levies on foreigners who purchase cars in Singapore.
Mr S Iswaran: I have addressed this question in my Ministerial Statement on Parliamentary Question Nos 1 to 7 at the 8 May 2023 Parliament Sitting. [Please refer to \"Meeting the Transport Needs of Singaporeans\", Official Report, 8 May 2023, Vol 95, Issue 102, Ministerial Statements section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monitoring and Regulating Use of Plastic in Packaging","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment how is the use of plastic packaging monitored and regulated so as to minimise the overuse of plastic for packaging of products.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Under the Resource Sustainability Act, producers of packaged products, as well as retailers, such as supermarkets, with an annual turnover of more than $10 million are required to report their annual packaging use and their plans to reduce, reuse or recycle packaging to the National Environment Agency (NEA). This raises companies’ awareness of the amount of packaging materials consumed, including plastic packaging, and the potential to reduce waste. It also lays the foundation for an Extended Producer Responsibility scheme for packaging waste eventually.
To complement this, the Packaging Partnership Programme (PPP), an industry capability-building programme launched in 2021 by the Singapore Manufacturing Federation in partnership with NEA, supports companies in adopting sustainable packaging practices. The PPP initiatives have benefited more than 1,100 companies through the exchange of best practices in sustainable packaging.
The Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment and NEA will continue to look at more ways to encourage companies to reduce their packaging.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Collection of Free Blooboxes and Plans to Encourage Recycling in Households","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"27 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what is the number of free Blooboxes that have been collected as at 30 April 2023; (b) what does the Ministry intend to do with the balance Blooboxes that are not collected; and (c) how will the Ministry continue to encourage recycling in households when the current distribution exercise ends.
28 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what measures are being taken to increase the adoption of Bloobox among Singapore households, considering that only one in five households have collected the box so far; and (b) how the Ministry plans to strengthen public education and awareness campaigns to encourage more households to participate in such recycling initiatives.\n\n
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: These questions will be addressed with similar Parliamentary Questions on the Bloobox at the Parliament Sitting on 9 May 2023. [Please refer to \"Collection Rate of \"Bloobox\" for Recycling Campaign\", Official Report, 9 May 2023, Vol 95, Issue 103, 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":"Plans to Extend Project Wolbachia to Sites with High Aedes Aegypti Mosquito Population","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether NEA plans to extend Project Wolbachia in the coming months to more sites, especially in areas where a high Aedes aegypti mosquito population has been detected.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The National Environment Agency (NEA) has been taking a calibrated approach in implementing the Project Wolbachia pilot as the technology is nascent. Each phase of the pilot is designed with clear objectives and builds on the learnings from earlier phases, including the impact on the mosquito population, such as the dynamics between the Wolbachia-Aedes mosquitoes and wild-type mosquitoes, and dengue cases.
Last year, NEA expanded the project to eight additional sites as part of a multi-site field study to understand the impact of the technology on dengue transmission in different local environments. Thus far, Project Wolbachia has covered more than 300,000 households, or about 30% of all HDB blocks and 9% of all landed homes across Singapore, benefiting one million residents.
NEA will continue to rigorously evaluate Wolbachia technology and work with commercial partners and international experts to calibrate the increase in Wolbachia-Aedes mosquito production and release capacity as we work towards expanding to more sites in the coming years.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Findings in Report on Transparent Recycling Bin Pilots and Follow-up Plans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"30 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment referring to the Report on Transparent Recycling Bin Pilots published on 6 April 2023 (a) why are contamination rates higher in Bedok than in Bukit Batok; (b) whether the Ministry will expand the pilots to include a wider range of resident profiles over a longer time period; (c) whether the Ministry will test segregated transparent bins in areas with high pedestrian footfall; and (d) whether similar studies have been done overseas and what can Singapore learn from such studies.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The findings from the pilots are inconclusive and do not provide further insight into the differences in contamination rates at each location.
Although there have been similar studies in other countries, such as Greece and the United States of America, on reducing contamination, it is not feasible to make a fair comparison. Different countries have different waste collection methodologies and control measures. Hence, solutions that work overseas may not be applicable to our local context.
We have implemented and are working on various initiatives to recover cleaner waste streams to raise recycling rates and reduce contamination rates. These include Extended Producer Responsibility schemes for e-waste and beverage containers to segregate recyclables. We have also required large food waste producers to segregate, treat and report food waste generated. As such, the Ministry has no immediate plans to expand the transparent recycling bin pilots.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Non-compliance with Safety Guidelines on Wearing of Mask or Spit Guard in Food Preparation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"31 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment in light that 43 food operators were warned after their staff were found not wearing a mask or a spit guard while preparing food (a) what additional steps will the Ministry take to improve public awareness about the importance of adhering to food safety guidelines and the consequences of non-compliance; and (b) how does the Ministry plan to support food operators in ensuring that their staff are properly trained and equipped to follow food safety guidelines.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The requirement for food handlers to wear a mask or spit guard has been in place since April 2020. Following the easing of national COVID-19 mask-wearing requirements in August 2022, the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) has conducted multiple industry engagements and issued repeated advisories through media statements and posters to remind food establishment operators of this food safety requirement and to raise public awareness. SFA’s publicity on enforcement action serves as further reminders to licensees on their responsibilities.
All food handlers in retail food establishments are required to pass the Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ) Food Safety Course Level 1 as part of licensing requirements. From 1 July 2023, this requirement will be extended to non-retail food establishments. Food handlers are also required to renew their food safety training certification periodically through attending refresher courses. To support the training of food handlers, SFA has approved 79 training providers for the WSQ Food Safety Course Level 1 to ensure that training courses are readily available. SkillsFuture Singapore also offers course subsidies to eligible individuals and small and medium enterprises sending their employees for WSQ Food Safety Courses.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures against Harassment by Students and Parents on Teaching Staff in Schools and Tertiary Institutions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"32 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry has a specific policy and programmes to alleviate harassment by students and parents on teaching staff across all our schools and tertiary institutions, including Special Education (SPED) schools.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Our students do best when educators in our schools and Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) and parents work hand in hand to support them in their learning. There should be mutual respect across students, parents and staff so that our educators and school/IHL staff can do their jobs more effectively. As a proactive approach, our schools and IHLs seek to build positive relationships among staff, students and their parents.
We assure the Member that harassment of staff by parents or students is not common. Nevertheless, in our schools and IHLs, there are clear policies to manage any incidents of harassment, including escalation procedures and measures to protect our educators and staff and send a strong message that such behaviour is unacceptable. In extreme situations where staff feel harassed or their safety is threatened, measures include calling the Police for assistance and using legal levers, such as the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA), to protect staff from further harassment. Under POHA, where the victim of harassment is a public servant or a public service worker who was performing his or her duty, the offender is liable for enhanced penalties of an imprisonment term of up to 12 months, compared to six months for other victims, a fine of up to $5,000, or both. In addition, there are support structures, such as counselling, to provide support and care for our staff affected by harassment.
IHL students also undergo compulsory modules on respectful behaviour and anti-harassment and are expected to abide by the respective IHL’s Code of Conduct, which stipulates that disrespectful behaviour and harassment are a disciplinary offence.
Special Education (SPED) schools also have standard operating procedures aligned to the Human Resource policies of their parent Social Services Agency (SSA), to guide staff when they need to report and manage cases of harassment, should there be any. SSAs that run SPED schools also have processes on how SSA headquarters and/or school management members can step in to support teachers when interactions with parents and students become too challenging.
We call on students, parents as well as educators and staff to treat one another with mutual respect so that, together, we can achieve the best possible outcomes for the students we all care deeply about.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Aligning Character and Citizenship Education Curriculum with Model in UN Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"33 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry has considered amending the Character and Citizenship Education curriculum to be aligned with the social model of disability as outlined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; and (b) if not, why not.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Singapore’s approach to enabling persons with disabilities in our national roadmaps to build an inclusive society, the Enabling Masterplans, is substantively aligned with the social model of disability in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). In developing our policies and laws, we seek to remove societal barriers in our local context that could hinder persons with disabilities from leading fulfilling lives.
In line with this approach, the Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) curriculum develops students to be empathetic, sensitive and respectful to all, including those with Special Education Needs (SEN) or disabilities. Beyond the classroom, this is reinforced through community service and Values in Action learning experiences.
Students from General Education and Special Education (SPED) schools also have opportunities to learn, play and work together through co-curricular activities, sports and other curricular programmes. The partnerships help students to develop the sensitivity and awareness towards the thoughts, feelings and behaviours of those who are different from them. These partnerships also enhance staff capacity through professional exchange and sharing of good practices on building an inclusive culture in school.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Lower Qualifying Age for SkillsFuture Mid-career Enhanced Subsidy","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"34 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Education whether there are plans for the qualifying age for the SkillsFuture Mid-Career Enhanced Subsidy to be lowered from 40 to 35 to help more Singaporeans with career pivots that are happening earlier and more frequently.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Government’s current priority is to better assist Singaporeans aged 40 and above who are in greater need of reskilling and upskilling, by providing them with higher subsidies of up to 90% of the course fees for the Ministry of Education/SkillsFuture Singapore programmes.
Younger Singaporeans who undergo training can still enjoy subsidies of up to 70% of the course fees, without the Mid-Career Enhanced Subsidy. Out-of-pocket course fees can be further defrayed through the individual’s SkillsFuture Credit. This allows those in their 30s who wish to make a career pivot to participate in SSG’s SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme with limited cash outlay.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Share Resources from Gifted Education Programme (GEP) with Non-GEP Classes and Teachers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"35 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Education (a) whether there are plans to make resources from the Gifted Education Programme (GEP) available to non-GEP classes where appropriate and when requested by non-GEP teachers; and (b) whether non-GEP teachers across all schools may incorporate elements of the GEP resources and methodology for their non-GEP classes where appropriate.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Learning resources used in the Gifted Education Programme (GEP), where appropriate, are made available to non-GEP teachers to be adapted in class. Non-GEP teachers also have access to professional development opportunities where pedagogical approaches similar to those used in the GEP are shared for their use in non-GEP classrooms.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Special Educational Needs Students Studying in Mainstream Schools and Support Available","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"36 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Education (a) how many students with Special Educational Needs (SENs) are studying in mainstream schools due to being ineligible for Special Education schools; (b) what support is available if such students struggle to cope and find private schools unaffordable; and (c) whether a minimum ratio of Allied Educators in mainstream schools with expertise to work with SEN students will be established.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Ministry of Education (MOE) is committed to supporting all students with Special Educational Needs (SEN) in quality educational settings that best meet their needs. As of December 2022, there were about 35,500 students with reported SEN. Of these, 80% were supported in mainstream schools. The remaining 20% have moderate to severe SEN and, therefore, were supported in Government-funded Special Education (SPED) schools. There are 24 Government-funded SPED schools and, by the 2030s, there will be 28 schools. MOE can assist students with moderate to severe SEN to be placed in a suitable SPED school that can better support their learning needs.
In mainstream schools, support for students with SEN is provided through inclusive classroom practices by all teachers, guided by key personnel overseeing the Case Management Team, alongside Teachers trained in Special Needs (TSNs) and dedicated SEN officers, previously known as Allied Educators specialising in Learning and Behavioural Support. Each primary school has two SEN officers, and each secondary school has one SEN officer. Additional SEN officers are deployed to schools with higher needs. MOE has increased the number of SEN officers from around 450 in 2017 to over 660 in 2022.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Inclusion in Prenatal Classes of Lessons on Use of Infant Car Seats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"37 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Health (a) whether restructured hospitals can include in the prenatal classes lessons on how to use infant car seats and the importance of such car seats; and (b) if not, why not.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Car seats come in a variety of makes and set-ups and, hence, public hospitals may not be able to practically advise parents-to-be on how to select a car seat and teach them how to install it, in the context of a prenatal class. Further, not every parent-to-be attends prenatal classes.
In order to reach a wider audience, resources on the importance of infant car seats and car safety guidelines have been made available in HealthHub, as well on public hospitals’ websites. Parents-to-be are also reminded about the importance of infant care seats during their pre-delivery preparation at public hospitals and are encouraged to bring along an infant care seat for their newborn at discharge.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of Rare Disease Fund and Legislation to Support Citizen Patients Requiring Expensive Drug Treatments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"38 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Health how is the Ministry reviewing the Rare Disease Fund and legislation to put in place an appropriate financing scheme to support citizens with rare diseases who require expensive drug treatments.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Every year, a small number of patients are unfortunately afflicted with rare diseases. While treatments may be available for some rare diseases, they are often highly expensive. The Rare Disease Fund (RDF) was established in 2019 as a charity fund to provide financial support to Singapore Citizens requiring such treatments. It is managed by the RDF Committee, which comprises community representatives and is advised by a panel of medical experts. Eligible donations to RDF attract three-for-one Government matching and a tax deduction of 2.5 times the qualifying donation amount.
Given the high cost of treatments and limited funds, RDF’s support is currently focused on rare diseases that are life-threatening and treatments that are required by the patients on a lifelong basis. Nonetheless, the Ministry of Health (MOH) recognises that with technological advancement, more novel and expensive treatments may become suitable for rare disease patients. MOH is currently working with the RDF committee to explore the coverage of some of such treatments, where appropriate.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Credibility and Adoption of AI-based Diagnostic Solutions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"39 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry has explored the credibility of AI-based diagnostic solutions; and (b) if so, what are the regulatory considerations that will be most important if there are more widespread adoption of such technologies.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Artificial intelligence (AI) is ubiquitous and being used in healthcare in Singapore. For example, it is used in JARVISDHL, a programme by SingHealth and NUS to prevent diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia. It is the engine for SELENA+ (Singapore Eye LEsioN Analyzer plus) to diagnose diabetic retinopathy. It is also used for diagnosis and management of cardiovascular and chronic diseases. It is deployed in health apps for preventive care, as well as in pharmaceutical research.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) is open to the use of AI technologies in healthcare where they are proven to be safe, clinically efficacious and cost-effective. With the rapid advancement of AI technology, we believe many treatments using AI will emerge. The challenge is to embrace and encourage them, while ensuring the safe adoption and deployment of AI in healthcare. To do so, we have progressively put in place safeguards over the past few years.
The MOH’s AI in Healthcare Guidelines guide AI Medical Device (AI-MD) developers and implementers on the good practices they should adopt in rolling out such clinical services to patients.
The Health Sciences Authority regulates multiple aspects of AI-MD development as part of its medical device registration process to ensure the quality, safety and efficacy of AI-MDs and requires continued post-market surveillance to ensure continued real-world effectiveness.
MOH will be issuing an AI Governance Framework for healthcare that recommends detailed development and implementation-level good practices, such as risk prompts to help identify risks, and controls for risk mitigation.
The Bioethics Advisory Committee has also issued a draft advisory report and recommendations on the ethical use of big data and AI in human biomedical research on 2 May 2023 for public consultation.
MOH will continue to study international best practices, consolidate and develop our AI governance framework.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Directive Requiring Asymptomatic Healthcare Workers Tested Positive for COVID-19 to Return to Work","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"40 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry has issued any standing directive or is aware of hospitals that have done so internally, which permits or requires asymptomatic healthcare workers who have tested positive for COVID-19 to return to work.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: With COVID-19 being regarded as an endemic disease, it should be treated similarly as other infectious diseases.
Hence, healthcare workers who are unwell should rest at home and be granted sick leave. For individuals who feel well but have tested positive for COVID-19, they are not required by law to self-isolate. Instead, they can work from home if possible, or return to work on-site with the necessary precautions, such as redeployment to non-patient facing areas.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"System to Collate Feedback from Town Councils on Maintenance Crews' Work on Lifts at HDB Blocks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"41 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether HDB has in place a system to collate feedback from Town Councils on the quality of maintenance crews' work on lifts at HDB blocks installed and maintained by lift contractors under HDB contracts; and (b) whether such inputs are used by HDB to gauge the suitability of lift contractors to be issued contracts for installation of lifts for future HDB projects to ensure a high standard of maintenance of installed lifts during their lifecycles.
Mr Desmond Lee: All lifts in the Housing and Development Board (HDB) estates are monitored by the Tele-Monitoring System (TMS) which collects data from lifts and alerts the lift contractors in the event of a fault or breakdown. The quality of the lift maintenance crews’ work is reflected in the lift fault rate, which is computed based on the number of faults captured in the TMS and user-reported faults. Lower quality maintenance works would result in higher lift fault rates.
In HDB’s tenders for supply and installation of new lifts, the lift fault rate is one of the evaluation criteria. Tenderers with a higher lift fault rate will be given a lower score during the evaluation. Lift maintenance contracts in tenders also have built-in levers to ensure quality maintenance of installed lifts by lift maintenance contractors.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Ethnic Integration Policy-related Appeals Acceded to in 2022 by Ethnicity","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"42 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for National Development of the 128 Ethnic Integration Policy-related appeals that HDB acceded to in 2022, what is the breakdown of appellants by ethnicity.
Mr Desmond Lee: In 2022, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) received 411 Ethnic Integration Policy-related appeals from flat owners. HDB acceded to 128 appeals (correct as at 21 March 2023), of which, the breakdown by ethnicity is as follows:
a)\t92 from flat owners of Indian/Other race;
b)\t29 from Malay flat owners; and
c) seven from Chinese flat owners.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Fixed Timeframe for Coffee Shop Operators to Find Replacement Halal Food Stalls","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"43 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry has considered (i) implementing a fixed timeframe within which coffee shop operators are required to replace their sole halal food stall with another halal vendor once the original vendor ceases to operate and (ii) imposing stricter penalties against coffee shop operators who fail to do so, beyond not renewing their leases in the future; and (b) if not, why not.
Mr Desmond Lee: Since 2005, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) coffee shop operators are required under their tenancy agreements to have at least one halal stall. Should the halal stall operator cease operations, the coffee shop operator is required to find a replacement within the current tenancy period. It is in the interest of the operator to find a replacement as soon as possible, to minimise loss of revenue arising from the vacant stall.
If the operator fails to find a replacement, HDB may decide not to renew the tenancy or, as a last resort, terminate the tenancy. However, before taking such action, HDB will discuss and work with existing operators to resolve the issue or to allow operators more time to adjust or find a replacement.
Stricter penalties, as suggested by the Member’s question, might not be the best strategy for bringing about the desired outcome of halal food availability. The Ministry of National Development and HDB are concerned about residents’ needs and have also been listening to the feedback of coffee shop operators. Some have found it difficult to secure replacement stalls due to lower demand in certain areas or strong competition from other options nearby.
Hence, we are prepared to consider alternative approaches. We will engage the industry for feedback and work with them to co-create solutions for maintaining good availability of halal cooked food in HDB coffee shops.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Appeals to Singapore Institute of Surveyors and Valuers to Review Valuations for HDB Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"44 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry has data for each of the last 10 years on (i) the number of appeals that were made to the Singapore Institute of Surveyors and Valuers (SISV) to review the valuation conducted by a valuer for an HDB flat and (ii) the number of SISV appeals that resulted in a revaluation of such HDB flats.
Mr Desmond Lee: In the last 10 years, the number of appeals made by resale flat buyers to the Singapore Institute of Surveyors and Valuers (SISV) on the valuations of their resale flats and the outcomes are tabulated below.
45 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for National Development whether he can provide an update on the progress of upgrading the unit electrical power supply from 30 amps to 40 amps under HDB’s Electrical Load Upgrading Programme for the HDB blocks in Bukit Batok that are built in the 1980s and 1990s.
Mr Desmond Lee: Under the Electrical Load Upgrading Programme (ELUP), the Housing and Development Board (HDB) will upgrade the unit electrical power supply from 30 amps to 40 amps for about 1,500 older HDB blocks. HDB targets to complete ELUP by 2030.
There are about 50 HDB blocks in Bukit Batok that are eligible for upgrading under ELUP. The ELUP design consultants are currently conducting site feasibility studies and developing detailed design proposals.
HDB will engage the relevant stakeholders, including grassroots leaders and residents, once the design and upgrading plans are ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Recycling Bins to Complement Rubbish Bins in Public Parks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"46 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for National Development whether NParks will consider introducing recycling bins to complement the rubbish bins in all public parks which are run by NParks so as to reduce the amount of recyclable waste which are currently thrown into rubbish bins.
Mr Desmond Lee: The National Parks Board (NParks) has already introduced recycling bins in some parks and gardens, such as HortPark, Jurong Lake Gardens and the Singapore Botanic Gardens. NParks and the National Environment Agency will explore further measures to encourage recycling in other public parks.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Timelines for Public Consultation on Enhanced Community Disputes Management Framework","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"47 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what are the timelines for public consultation in 2023 on the enhanced Community Disputes Management Framework to tackle neighbourhood disputes; and (b) with the necessary modifications, whether any part of this framework can be used for neighbour disputes in private estates.\n
48 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth whether he can (i) elaborate on the cross-agency collaboration efforts that will be implemented to address noise issues between neighbours and (ii) provide details on the criteria that will be used to determine whether such a noise dispute is classified as \"serious\" and necessitates the intervention of the dedicated unit that was recently announced during the Ministry’s Committee of Supply debate.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: The Community Dispute Management Framework (CDMF) promotes neighbourliness and encourages residents to engage with one another in the first instance when disputes arise. As much as possible, it is best that disputes are resolved amicably at an early stage, before they become intransigent or intractable. Residents can also seek help from grassroots leaders to facilitate communications or attempt formal mediation at the Community Mediation Centre with a trained mediator.
We have previously announced the enhancements at this year’s Committee of Supply. They comprise various measures, including putting in place stronger laws to address serious neighbour disputes, including mandating mediation where applicable, improving the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunal (CDRT) processes to give faster and more effective relief and piloting a team of dedicated personnel to facilitate dispute resolution.
The majority of community disputes involve neighbourhood noise. These are often complex and subjective issues for which the setting of clearer social norms plays a pivotal role. The Community Advisory Panel on Neighbourhood Noise (CAP) has established a set of community norms to manage noise and foster harmonious living, including an understanding of what kinds of noise are acceptable or unacceptable in the residential setting. Since receiving CAP’s recommendations, the Municipal Services Office (MSO) has been working with partners to promote the proposed community norms and engaging relevant stakeholders on the proposed recommendations.
Whilst a substantial majority of neighbourhood noise feedback occurs in the Housing and Development Board estates today, private estate residents can also avail themselves of various features of the proposed CDMF, such as mandatory mediation and an enhanced CDRT framework, in the appropriate cases. We will also consider the extent to which any other enhancements to the framework can eventually also benefit residents in private estates, with adjustments as may be appropriate. We should add that CDMF should not take away from the community’s capacity to resolve disputes. Hence, the new pilot unit leveraging stronger laws will focus mainly on intervening in serious disputes. What qualifies as serious will be considered on a case-by-case basis, having regard to the context and circumstances in which the dispute has arisen.
A public consultation is estimated to take place within the next few months and will elaborate on these proposed criteria and enhancements. Members and the public are welcome to share feedback when the public consultation is launched.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reports of Misuse of People's Association Events or Venues and Outcome of Investigations","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"49 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether there have been reports received by the Ministry and its agencies, including the People’s Association and its associated groups, on misuse of People’s Association events or venues which deviate from the original intent; (b) if so, how many investigations have been conducted on these reports in each of the last five years; and (c) what is the breakdown of the outcome of such investigations.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: The People’s Association (PA) offers a wide range of facilities and services to cater to different needs, as well as provide common spaces for people to connect and build new friendships through a variety of activities. Members of the public are welcome to book the community facilities for their social and recreational activities but are required to state the purpose of their booking on the application form. These forms state that community facilities should not be used for any religious, political and/or unlawful purposes.
Should there be any reports of alleged misuse which come to PA’s attention, PA will investigate and take such action as may be appropriate.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Mitigate Effects of Shortage Occupation List on Reliance on Foreign Labour","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"50 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what are the Ministry's plans to mitigate any effect the Shortage Occupation List may have in entrenching Singapore's reliance on foreign labour or depressing wages for Singaporeans in such occupations; and (b) for how many years does the Government expect these occupations to remain on the Shortage Occupation List.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Shortage Occupation List (SOL) is designed to complement efforts to develop the pipeline of local professionals. Enabling companies to access foreign professionals for shortage occupations allows these companies to grow their business and create new opportunities. Part of the criteria before an occupation is placed on the SOL is not just whether there is a shortage of such local workers, but also what plans there are by the industry and companies to train and place locals into these jobs.
As these occupations are facing shortages, salaries are competitive and will not depress wages for Singaporeans. In any case, foreign professionals filling SOL occupations will still need to meet the prevailing Employment Pass (EP) qualifying salary. The EP qualifying salary is benchmarked against the top one-third of local professionals, managers, executives and technicians.
SOL will be reviewed every three years. Occupations will be re-assessed based on whether the occupation remains in shortage at that point in time and whether commitments to develop the local pipeline have been achieved.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Average Recruitment Fees Paid by Low-wage Migrant Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"51 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry collects data on the average recruitment fees paid by low-wage migrant workers; (b) if so, what are the average recruitment fees paid by such workers from (i) Bangladesh, (ii) India, (iii) China and (iv) the Philippines; and (c) how does this compare with the recruitment fees paid by comparable migrant workers working in other major migrant labour receiving countries.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) does not track the average recruitment fees paid by migrant workers, as the bulk of fees are incurred in their home countries and are difficult to ascertain. However, based on MOM’s ad hoc interviews with migrant workers conducted in 2019, they typically incur S$2,000 to S$10,000 in fees to work in Singapore. This depends on factors, such as the economic conditions and the extent of intermediary involvement in the recruitment process in their home countries.
We do not collect data on recruitment fees paid by comparable migrant workers working in other countries.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress of Initiatives to Improve Female Labour Force Participation Rate","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"52 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Manpower whether he can provide an update on the initiatives and their progress to improve female labour force participation rate over the last five years.
Dr Tan See Leng: We have made good progress in raising our female Labour Force Participation Rate (LFPR) over the past five years. LFPR for women aged 25 to 64 has increased from 74.8% in 2018 to 78.6% in 2021, which is higher than countries, such as Canada and the United Kingdom. As laid out in the White Paper on Singapore Women’s Development, we will continue to improve female LFPR through a few key initiatives.
First, we continue to encourage the adoption of flexible work arrangements (FWAs), such as staggered working hours, part-time work and telecommuting. FWAs help caregivers better balance work and caregiving responsibilities. We have seen good progress in the provision of FWAs by employers; the proportion of employers offering at least one formal FWA has significantly increased from 53% in 2018 to 91% in 2021.
The tripartite partners will give this a further push, by introducing a set of Tripartite Guidelines on FWAs by 2024. The guidelines aim to make requesting for FWAs a workplace norm, by requiring employers to put in place proper processes to fairly consider and respond to employees’ requests for FWAs. We will also continue to support employers with training and tools to implement FWAs effectively and sustainably. We are heartened that some employers, Human Resources (HR) professionals and employees have already come together to co-create FWA tools, through the Alliance for Action on Work-Life Harmony.
Second, we continue to support women who have taken a break from their careers and need more support to return to work. They can tap on the full range of programmes and services offered by Workforce Singapore (WSG). Over the last three years, WSG and the National Trades Union Congress' Employment and Employability Institute (NTUC’s e2i) have placed more than 83,000 women jobseekers across its programmes and services. This represents around 47% of all jobseekers placed by WSG and NTUC’s e2i, similar to the share of women in the labour force. In June 2022, WSG launched the herCareer initiative, a new, focused effort to support women who are re-entering the workforce. The herCareer initiative includes employment facilitation programmes and services that support women jobseekers and walk-in interviews to meet with hiring employers on the spot.
Third, we will continue to support women with caregiving responsibilities to participate in the workforce with peace of mind. Since 2012, we have more than doubled full-day preschool capacity to over 200,000 places today. We enhanced means-tested preschool subsidies so that more families pay less for preschool. Working mothers are also granted additional tax relief. To support those who are working and need to take care of elderly family members at home, we have expanded caregiving options that families can tap on.
We will also strengthen efforts to ensure that all workers, including women, are treated fairly at the workplace. The recommendations in the interim report released by the Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness will prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, legislate the requirement for employers to put in place grievance handling processes, and provide legislated protection against retaliation for those who report workplace discrimination and harassment.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"CPF Members Aged 55 and Above with Outstanding Mortgage Payments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"53 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the current percentage of CPF members aged 55 and above with outstanding mortgage payments; and (b) what is the average mortgage amount per month, broken down by (i) those who do not meet the Basic Retirement Sum (BRS), (ii) those who do meet the BRS but not the Full Retirement Sum (FRS) and (iii) those who do meet the FRS respectively.
54 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Manpower for CPF members who (i) do not meet the Basic Retirement Sum (BRS), (ii) meet the BRS but not the Full Retirement Sum (FRS) and (iii) meet the FRS (a) what is the percentage of CPF members aged 63 and above with outstanding mortgage payments; and (b) what is the average monthly mortgage amount.
Dr Tan See Leng: As the average mortgage instalments may be skewed by a relatively small group of members with higher mortgage instalments, it may be more representative to look at the median instead.
Of members aged 55 and above who had not attained the cohort Basic Retirement Sum (BRS), 6.5% were using their Central Provident Fund (CPF) to service monthly mortgage instalments with median amount of $380 in CPF savings used for mortgage instalment. Of members aged 55 and above who had attained cohort BRS but set aside less than the cohort Full Retirement Sum (FRS), 10.5% were using their CPF to service monthly mortgage instalments with median amount of $700 in CPF savings used for mortgage instalment. Of members aged 55 and above who had set aside the cohort FRS or more, 7.4% were using their CPF to service monthly mortgage instalments with median amount of $1,000 in CPF savings used for mortgage instalment.
Of members aged 63 and above who had not attained the cohort BRS, 2.5% were using their CPF to service monthly mortgage instalments with median amount of $330 in CPF savings used for mortgage instalment. Of members aged 63 and above who had attained the cohort BRS but set aside less than the cohort FRS, 4.2% were using their CPF to service monthly mortgage instalments with median amount of $590 in CPF savings used for mortgage instalment. Of members aged 63 and above who had set aside the cohort FRS or more, 1.8% were using their CPF to service monthly mortgage instalments with median amount of $900 in CPF savings used for mortgage instalment.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : All data is accurate as of December 2022.","2 : The BRS provides members with lifelong payouts that cover a basic level of retirement expenses. Thus, attainment of the BRS is the relevant indicator for basic retirement adequacy. Those who prefer a higher payout can choose to set aside more CPF savings to the amount of the FRS instead of maintaining only the BRS in their Retirement Account if they own property."],"footNoteQuestions":["53","54"],"questionNo":"53-54"}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":5571,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Sun Xueling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20230508/vernacular-Sun Xueling Family Justice 8May2023_Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Sun Xueling Family Justice 8May2023_Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5572,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Hany Soh","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20230508/vernacular-Hany Soh Family Justice 8May2023 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Hany Soh Family Justice 8May2023 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5573,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Gan Thiam Poh","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20230508/vernacular-Gan Thiam Poh Family Justice 8May2023-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Gan Thiam Poh Family Justice 8May2023-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5574,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Ng Ling Ling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20230508/vernacular-Ng Ling Ling Family Justice 8May2023 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Ng Ling Ling Family Justice 8May2023 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5575,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20230508/vernacular-8 May 2023 - Mr Zhul Rahim - Family Justice Reform Bill.pdf","fileName":"8 May 2023 - Mr Zhul Rahim - Family Justice Reform Bill.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5576,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Rahayu Mahzam","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20230508/vernacular-8 May 2023 - SPS Rahayu - Family Justice Reform Bill.pdf","fileName":"8 May 2023 - SPS Rahayu - Family Justice Reform Bill.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}